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

RE: Action 93

From: JC Cannon <jccannon@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 17:14:53 +0000
To: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>, Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org>, "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <DB4282D9ADFE2A4EA9D1C0FB54BC3BD76E4DC45A@TK5EX14MBXC139.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

Your proposals doesn't feel practical if requesting an exemption within the body of a web page. Would an interstitial with a brief description be acceptable with a link to the more complete description of data collection and usage?


-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Chapell [mailto:achapell@chapellassociates.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 6:31 AM
To: Jeffrey Chester; public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)
Subject: Re: Action 93

Thanks Jeff - This is certainly a step in the right direction. I'd like to
propose my own text for consideration.

When seeking exemption when DNT:1 is sent sites should communicate those
requests clearly, accurately and in line with consumer protection law(s)
in the jurisdiction(s) in which they operate.


Alan Chapell
Chapell & Associates
917 318 8440

On 2/22/12 9:16 AM, "Jeffrey Chester" <jeff@democraticmedia.org> wrote:

>> When seeking exemption when DNT:1 is sent, a site must disclose on the
>>first screen an accurate summary of their data tracking practices.  It
>>should succinctly and accurately explain how a user will be tracked on
>>the site, and what data may be shared or used by third parties.  The
>>site should not rely on privacy statement that requires the user to
>>travel to another page.  Sites seeking an exemption should engage in
>>additional disclosure when seeking a user exemption from DNT:1
Received on Wednesday, 22 February 2012 17:15:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:38:34 UTC