- From: (unknown charset) Matthias Schunter <mts@zurich.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:23:00 +0200
- To: (unknown charset) public-tracking@w3.org
Hi! An important agreement at our Boston workshop was that first parties need to 'somehow' limit their data exchange for users which have DNT turned on. The term Jonathan used was 'silo-ing' potential tracking data. Technically, without such a requirement, any party (including 3rd) would be permitted to collect any data via the first party, which would permit arbitrary data collecting and tracking. I personally believe this would not meet user expectations. Regards, matthias On 10/27/2011 7:36 AM, Aleecia M. McDonald wrote: > Hi Carmen, > > You are correct that it is not resolved what (if anything) first parties will need to do to comply. You are also correct that there has been quite a lot of prior discussion in this area, and strawman documents reflect the general direction of those discussions. > > Most links to information for the working group are available from the main page, http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/ There you can find links to: > > - The archive of this mailing list, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/ > - The issue and action tracker, http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/ > When you know specific issues you are interested in, you can find them here (look for the link on the far right for "all") and see a summary of every mailing list discussion that mentions that issue by number. > - Minutes from prior meetings > > There are also a number of working group members who have worked on Do Not Track in prior contexts, or refer to what Do Not Track was intended to solve. This is interesting and useful history, but the W3C working group may choose to go in new directions. For example, we are not likely to go with the very early plan of having users register for DNT. :-) > > Aleecia > > On Oct 26, 2011, at 7:22 AM, Carmen Balber wrote: > >> As a newcomer I missed your initial discussions, so I'm hoping someone can >> help fill me in on something I noticed in the Tracking Preference Expression >> strawman doc, and to a lesser extent the Compliance doc: Both presume that >> DNT would apply only to 3rd parties, or that tracking is defined to include >> only cross-site tracking. >> >> For example, in the Tracking Preference Expression Introduction: "... we >> need a mechanism for the user to express their own preference regarding >> cross-site tracking that is both simple to configure and efficient when >> implemented. Likewise, since some Web sites may be dependent on the revenue >> obtained from targeted advertising and unwilling (or unable) to permit use >> of their content without cross-site data collection, we need a mechanism for >> sites to alert the user to those requirements and allow the user to >> opt-back-in to tracking for specific sites." >> >> And in the same document, 4. Expressing a Tracking Preference - "When a user >> has configured a tracking preference, that preference needs to be expressed >> to all mechanisms that might perform or initiate tracking by third parties, >> including sites that the user agent communicates with via HTTP, scripts that >> can extend behavior on pages, and plug-ins or extensions that might be >> installed and activated for various media types." >> >> Isn't the question of limiting the definition of tracking to cross-site >> tracking still open as Issue 5 - the definition? >> >> Has the question of whether DNT would apply to 1st parties as well as 3rd >> parties been discussed and resolved, and if so is that discussion reflected >> anywhere? >> >> Many thanks, >> Carmen >> -- >> Carmen Balber >> Washington Director >> Consumer Watchdog >> 413 E. Capitol St. SE, 1st Floor >> Washington, D.C 20003 >> p:(202) 629-3043 >> http://www.consumerwatchdog.org >> >> On 10/25/11 1:11 AM, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I have been trying to get the TPE spec into reasonable shape for review >>> as a straw-man document. It is still missing a couple of legs, but >>> it would be best if you could review the parts that are in place before >>> the teleconference on Wednesday. >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html >>> >>> Please note that it is the nature of straw-man documents that they do not >>> represent working group consensus by any stretch of the imagination. >>> It is intended to push forward in areas that I think we might actually >>> have consensus, if I'm lucky, and take mild steps forward in areas >>> where we clearly don't. >>> >>> The parts that I have yet to add are the ones we have discussed most, >>> namely the responses to DNT. My goal is to have that in the document, >>> as a set of alternatives, before we freeze it on Thursday, but please >>> don't wait until then to review the other parts of the document. >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Roy T. Fielding <http://roy.gbiv.com/> >>> Principal Scientist, Adobe Systems <http://adobe.com/enterprise> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > -- Dr. Matthias Schunter, MBA IBM Research - Zurich, Switzerland Ph. +41 (44) 724-8329, schunter(at)acm.org PGP 989A A3ED 21A1 9EF2 B005 8374 BE0E E10D VCard: http://www.schunter.org/schunter.vcf
Received on Thursday, 27 October 2011 07:24:11 UTC