RE: cross-site tracking (was diff of TPE editing since the FPWD)


In either direction we will need to define Tracking or Cross-Site Tracking, so the requirement is there in either direction and each comes with ambiguity (I could argue the broader term "Tracking" comes with more ambiguity than "Cross-Site Tracking" which is more specific).  As cross-site tracking is closest to the intended goal, we should start from there.

- Shane

-----Original Message-----
From: David Singer [] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 6:12 PM
To: ( (
Subject: Re: cross-site tracking (was diff of TPE editing since the FPWD)

I think the phrase 'cross-site tracking' is open to a wide variety of interpretations, some (many) of which some (many) people might object to.

I think we should write the document talking about 'tracking' and defining what is allowed and what is not.  If that fits what some people think of as 'cross site tracking' that's fine.

Examples of meanings: cross-site tracking might mean... 
1 when data is collected by a third party about user activity on a separate (first party) site
2 when a single third party collects data about the same user on many first party sites (and links the records)
3 when data collected by multiple parties is amalgamated and correlated, resulting in a set of linked records for each user

I think if we only restrict (3), that's not what we're expected to do, and I would object.  I think we're actually talking closer to 1.

Nonetheless, I think the phrase is more worrying than helpful.  Let's define the rules, syntax, semantics, and so on, around 'tracking', and let the world decide how they want to think about it.

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.

Received on Thursday, 12 January 2012 06:27:07 UTC