global considerations

I think there is some confusion here.  The purpose of the global
considerations group is to describe how our defined protocol
can be applied within various local regions (i.e., document the
global considerations) and provide feedback regarding the holes
discovered as a result of that investigation so that our defined
protocol can be improved for wider applicability.  If you happen
to come up with a set of things that are necessary to communicate
in a DNT:0 in order to be useful in Europe, that's great feedback,
but the global considerations group is not going to define DNT:0
on its own, by any stretch of the imagination, nor is it going
to define "tracking" in a way that is specific to each region.
Those are responsibilities of the WG as a whole.

....Roy


On Dec 6, 2012, at 11:21 AM, Rigo Wenning wrote:

> 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

Received on Thursday, 6 December 2012 14:40:37 UTC