W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > October 2011

Re: Comments on tracking-compliance.html

From: Ninja Marnau <nmarnau@datenschutzzentrum.de>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 17:57:36 +0200
Message-ID: <4EA82DF0.8070506@datenschutzzentrum.de>
To: public-tracking@w3.org
I also agree. while reading the document I was somewhat confused with 
the terms "behavioral tracking" and "tracking". Though issue 3.4 defines 
behavioral tracking, we call it "tracking" in the same issue ("these are 
examples of tracking:").

I don't mind using a different term to "tracking", which might be 
misleading (I refer to the discussion about issue 5). But we should 
stick with this term throughout the document.


Am 26.10.2011 16:43, schrieb Justin Brookman:
>> I think "behavioral tracking" needs to be notably different from just
>> "tracking" in order to justify using a different term. Based on my own
>> understanding of the terms and the draft, I find it difficult to argue
>> the terms are notably different. If you consider more traditional cases
>> of tracking, like a hunter may do in the woods in winter, it's hard to
>> imagine data the hunter may obtain that's not based on behavior. It may
>> be okay to use the term "behavioral tracking", but the document would
>> have to explain more clearly how "behavioral tracking" is a very special
>> form of "tracking".
> I think I agree with this?  I don't care whether what we call it,
> "tracking" or "behavioral tracking" --- we should just pick a term and
> then define it to make clear that the spec applies to the the collection
> of passively-transmitted .url data (and whatever else we decide is in
> scope) instead of following deer in the woods.


Ninja Marnau
mail: NMarnau@datenschutzzentrum.de - http://www.datenschutzzentrum.de
Telefon: +49 431/988-1285, Fax +49 431/988-1223
Unabhaengiges Landeszentrum fuer Datenschutz Schleswig-Holstein
Independent Centre for Privacy Protection Schleswig-Holstein
Received on Wednesday, 26 October 2011 15:56:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:41 UTC