Re: Priorities

Justin, 

I think that those who want to define tracking should join the global 
considerations work where we have to define what DNT:0 means. Once we 
know what DNT:0 means, DNT:1 is the absence thereof with the limitations 
as defined. 

Note that a limitation of the semantics to only collecting personal data 
over multiple sites "by definition" would kill the EU solution without 
buying anything to anyone as the "multiple sites" is done by the 
first/third party definition. 

 -- Rigo

On Wednesday 05 December 2012 11:35:15 Justin Brookman wrote:
> Finally, I continue to think that focusing on defining tracking is a 
> distraction.  We've already defined it in writing the compliance 
> document.  If people really want to define tracking (which is not an 
> operational word in the compliance document), we have two options:
> (1)  tracking is "engaging in data collection, use, or retention in
> violation of this standard" or (2) tracking is "the collection and
> retention of data across multiple parties' web domains in a form such
> that it can be attributed to a specific user or device."  If we go
> for the second option, we would need to rename the effort "Limit Web
> Tracking" which perhaps is more forthright anyway.  There are
> revisions that should be made to the other operative definitions such
> as collection, though I ultimately believe these should not be
> controversial.

Received on Thursday, 6 December 2012 10:21:33 UTC