public-tracking@w3.org from September 2011 by date

Friday, 30 September 2011

• Re: Deliverables to be edited Re: Agenda for 2011-09-28 TPWG call Nicholas Doty

Thursday, 29 September 2011

• Deliverables to be edited Re: Agenda for 2011-09-28 TPWG call Karl Dubost
• Re: Agenda for 2011-09-28 TPWG call Nicholas Doty

Tuesday, 27 September 2011

• Re: Agenda for 2011-09-28 TPWG call Nicholas Doty

Monday, 26 September 2011

• Agenda for 2011-09-28 TPWG call Aleecia M. McDonald
• Re: Facebook tracking Francis Larkin

Sunday, 25 September 2011

• Re: Facebook tracking Aleecia M. McDonald
• Facebook tracking Karl Dubost

Friday, 23 September 2011

• tracking-ISSUE-88: different rules for impression of and interaction with 3rd-party ads/content [Tracking Preference Expression Definitions and Compliance] Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker

Thursday, 22 September 2011

• Re: ISSUE-23 and ISSUE-34 (exemption for analytics and exemption for aggregate analytics) Peter Eckersley
• ISSUE-87: Should there be an option for the server to respond with "I don't know what my policy is" Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-86: Do we have general extensibility capability for header response? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-85: DOM property and its access generally and specifically to web apps Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-84: Do we need a JavaScript API / DOM property for client-side js access to Do Not Track status? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-83: How do you opt out if already opted in? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-82: Should the DNT header be extensible with additional parameters? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-81: Do we need a response at all from server? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-80: Instead of responding with a Link: header URI, does it make sense to use a well-known location for this policy? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-79: Should a server respond if a user sent DNT:0? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-78: What is the difference between absence of DNT header and DNT = 0? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-77: How does a website determine if a first or third party and should this be included in the protocol? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-76: Should a server echo the DNT header to confirm receipt? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-75: How co companies claim exemptions and is that technical or not? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-74: Are surveys out of scope? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-73: In order for analytics or other contracting to count as first-party: by contract, by technical silo, both silo and contract Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-72: Basic principle: independent use as an agent of a first party Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-71: Does DNT also affect past collection or use of past collection of info? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-70: Does a past HTTP request with DNT set affect future HTTP requests? (expiration) Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-69: Should the spec say anything about minimal notice? (ie. don't bury in a privacy policy) Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-68: Should there be functionality for syncing preferences about tracking across different browsers? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-67: Should opt-back-in be stored on the client side? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-66: Can user be allowed to consent to both third party and first party to override general DNT? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-65: How does logged in and logged out state work Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-64: How does preference management work with DNT Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-63: Should there be a popup dialog or something like that which should override DNT? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-62: The browser or embedding site could send an architectural signal to an embedded iframe so it knows it's in a 3rd-party context Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-61: A site could publish a list of the other domains that are associated with them Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-60: Will a recipient know if it itself is a 1st or 3rd party? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-59: Should the first party be informed about whether the user has sent a DNT header to third parties on their site? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-58: What if DNT is explicitly set to 0 and an opt-out cookie is present? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-57: What if an opt-out cookie exists but an "opt back in" out-of-band is present? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-56: What if DNT is unspecified and an opt-out cookie is present? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-55: What is relationship between behavioral advertising and tracking, subset, different items? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-54: Can first party provide targeting based on registration information even while sending DNT Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-53: How should opt-out cookie and DNT signal interact? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-52: What if conflict between opt-out cookie and DNT? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-51: Should 1st party have any response to DNT signal Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• AW: updated agenda for tomorrow Frank.Wagner@telekom.de
• ISSUE-50: Are DNT headers sent to first parties? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• More details for tomorrow AM Matthias Schunter
• Re: ISSUE-27: "opt back in" Nicholas Doty
• ISSUE-49: Third party as first party - is a third party that collects data on behalf of the first party treated the same way as the first party? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker

Wednesday, 21 September 2011

• updated agenda for tomorrow Aleecia M. McDonald
• ISSUE-48: Response from the server could both acknowledge receipt of a value and (separately) whether the server will honor it Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-47: Should the response from the server point to a URI of a policy (or an existing protocol) rather than a single bit in the protocol? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-46: Enable users to do more granular blocking based on whether the site responds honoring Do Not Track Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-45: Companies making public commitments with a "regulatory hook" for US legal purposes Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-44: Ability to measure/detect who is honoring Do Not Track at a technical level Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-43: Sites should be able to let the user know their options when they arrive with Do Not Track Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-42: Feedback to the user from the browser when Do Not Track is turned on Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-41: Consistent way to discuss tracking with users (terminology matters!) Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-40: Enable Do Not Track just for a session, rather than being stored Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-39: Tracking of geographic data (however it's determined, or used) Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-38: Granularity for different people who share a device or browser Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-37: Granularity could be as complex as something P3P-style, based on business types and uses Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-36: Should DNT opt-outs distinguish between behavioral targeting and other personalization? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-35: How will DNT interact with existing opt-out programs (industry self-reg, other)? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-34: Possible exemption for aggregate analytics Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-33: Complexity of user choice (are exemptions exposed to users?) Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-32: Sharing of data between entities via cookie syncing / identity brokering Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-31: Minimization -- to what extent will minimization be required for use of a particular exemption? (conditional exemptions) Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-30: Will Do Not Track apply to offline aggregating or selling of data? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-29: Tracking that may be required by law enforcement Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-28: Exception for mandatory legal process Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-27: Mechanism to revoke Do Not Track for specific entities (maybe I really like Google), "opt back in" Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-26: Providing data to 3rd-party widgets -- does that imply consent? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-25: Possible exemption for research purposes Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-24: Possible exemption for fraud detection and defense Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-23: Possible exemption for analytics Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-22: Still have "operational use" of data (auditing of where ads are shown, impression tracking, etc.) Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-21: Enable external audit of DNT compliance Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-20: Different types of data, what counts as PII, and what definition of PII Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-19: Data collection / Data use (3rd party) Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-18: Collection definition (not sure I said the prefix before?) Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-17: Data use by 1st Party Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-16: What does it mean to collect data? (caching, logging, storage, retention, accumulation, profile etc.) Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-15: What special treatment should there be for children's data? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-14: How does what we talk about with 1st/3rd party relate to European law about data collector vs data processor? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-13: What are the requirements for DNT on apps/native software in addition to browsers? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-12: How does tracking require relation to unique identities, pseudonyms, etc.? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-11: Document a longer list of use cases -- what's going on today Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-10: What is a first party? As an example, CBS and C|Net are the same company but visually distinct websites/brand, is this a first party relationship? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• RE: URL Filter List file format Adrian Bateman
• ISSUE-9: Understand all the different first- and third-party cases. Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-8: How do we enhance transparency and consumer awareness? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-7: What types of tracking exists, and what are the use cases for these types of tracking? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-6: What are the underlying concerns? Why are we doing this / what are people afraid of? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-5: What is the definition of tracking? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-4: What is the default? Is this an opt-in or an opt-out? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• Re: 1st Tracking Protection WG F2F - Cambridge, USA - 21-22 September 2011 Ninja Marnau
• ISSUE-3: What is the granularity of the choice we expect users to make? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-2: What is the meaning of DNT (Do Not Track) header? Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• ISSUE-1: Example issue to be closed, so people can see what an issue looks like. Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker
• f2f for remote attendees Nicholas Doty
• Welcome to Matthias, co-chair Aleecia M. McDonald

Tuesday, 20 September 2011

• URL Filter List file format Karl Dubost
• Opera URL Filter API Karl Dubost
• Re: Comments on Web Tracking Protection W3C Member Submission 24 February 2011 Karl Dubost

Monday, 19 September 2011

• RE: Comments on Web Tracking Protection W3C Member Submission 24 February 2011 Adrian Bateman
• RE: Comments on Web Tracking Protection W3C Member Submission 24 February 2011 Shane Wiley
• RE: Comments on Web Tracking Protection W3C Member Submission 24 February 2011 Adrian Bateman
• Comments on Web Tracking Protection W3C Member Submission 24 February 2011 Karl Dubost
• [Minutes] Tracking Protection WG Teleconference 14 & 16 September 2011 Karl Dubost

Sunday, 18 September 2011

• Re: [proposal] Template for communicating our issues Matthias Schunter

Saturday, 17 September 2011

• [proposal] Template for communicating our issues Karl Dubost

Friday, 16 September 2011

• Further input document suggestions Hodges, Jeff
• Re: 1st Tracking Protection WG F2F - Cambridge, USA - 21-22 September 2011 Aleecia M. McDonald
• Re: 1st Tracking Protection WG F2F - Cambridge, USA - 21-22 September 2011 Thomas Roessler
• Re: 1st Tracking Protection WG F2F - Cambridge, USA - 21-22 September 2011 Karl Dubost

Thursday, 15 September 2011

• A few input document suggestions Jonathan Mayer
• 1st Tracking Protection WG F2F - Cambridge, USA - 21-22 September 2011 Karl Dubost

Wednesday, 14 September 2011

• Overflow call: 16 September at 8 am Pacific / 11 am Eastern / 17:00 Central European Aleecia M. McDonald

Tuesday, 13 September 2011

• Re: Conference call invitation: 14 September at 8 am Pacific / 11 am Eastern / 17:00 Central European Bjoern Hoehrmann
• quick test, ignore Thomas Roessler
• Conference call invitation: 14 September at 8 am Pacific / 11 am Eastern / 17:00 Central European Aleecia M. McDonald
• Welcome to the mailing list Aleecia M. McDonald

Last message date: Friday, 30 September 2011 01:48:02 UTC