- From: Brett Error <brett@adobe.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 09:07:23 -0700
- To: "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
I disagree. I have yet to find a consumer that would consider a first party tracking them on a single site to not be "tracking". -----Original Message----- From: public-tracking-request@w3.org [mailto:public-tracking-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Aleecia M. McDonald Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 12:37 AM To: public-tracking@w3.org Subject: Re: ISSUE-5: What is the definition of tracking? On Oct 12, 2011, at 5:17 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > The Working Group cannot define "tracking" without additional > modifiers in a manner that is inconsistent with typical english usage. > "This user arrived on this page and then moved on to that page" is a > statement that cannot be made if the user's movements around the site are not tracked. While I will join in mourning the geekification of English, I think the idea that "tracking" (and, more usefully as Roy offers, DNT) does not match a dictionary definition seems not to pose a problem. Between words like cookies, spam, the web, and private browsing not actually being private, I think computer jargon is well established. I am trying to hear from folks who thinking tracking is something other than data flowing between two sites. On calls and in Boston I had the impression there are such views in the group. But if all is silence, perhaps I was mistaken, or perhaps they have been persuaded otherwise. Aleecia
Received on Thursday, 13 October 2011 16:09:08 UTC