W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > February 2012

Re: Deciding Exceptions (ISSUE-23, ISSUE-24, ISSUE-25, ISSUE-31, ISSUE-34, ISSUE-49)

From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:20:56 +0100
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>
Message-ID: <2374196.edJvoC0KGp@hegel>
On Tuesday 07 February 2012 18:29:45 Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> You defined collection as merely receiving the information.  The user is
> sending the information across the network.  Therefore, the third party
> will collect it regardless of our protocol.  Retention, however, can be
> limited in such a way that the user's browsing history cannot be discovered
> from the data retained for frequency capping.  Is that sufficient?  If not,
> why?

Wasn't that the first suggestion Ninja made in Brussels when confronted with 
this issue? She said 24-48 hours. Let's discuss that...

We could resolve by having 2 options: Either have a client-side storage 
solution under the user's control OR the service has a shorter retention time 
and will not be able to maintain the capping over an entire campaign of 
several month.

That sets the incentives to explore the client-side solutions under user 
control without forcing people to it.

Rigo
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2012 11:23:45 UTC

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