- From: Sid Stamm <sid@mozilla.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 18:22:28 -0700
- To: JC Cannon <jccannon@microsoft.com>
- CC: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
So I guess it's not that black and white. Let me clarify a bit... On 3/15/2012 5:02 PM, Sid Stamm wrote: > I can get behind this. Function without tracking when logged in. By this I mean "Function without recording my activity when logged-in." > I wonder, are there cases where function is exactly tracking (when logged > in)? And by this I mean "Are there cases where the function provided absolutely requires and is only recording my activity before I interact with the third party (for sites where I'm logged in)? I'm talking about function that immediately benefits the user in the context of the first party." -Sid > > -Sid > > On 3/15/2012 4:46 PM, JC Cannon wrote: >> Now we just need to get the others to agree. :) >> >> JC >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Rigo Wenning [mailto:rigo@w3.org] >> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 2:39 AM >> To: public-tracking@w3.org >> Cc: JC Cannon >> Subject: Re: Logged-In Exception (ISSUE-65) >> >> JC, >> >> On Wednesday 14 March 2012 16:28:27 JC Cannon wrote: >>> Specific scenario: User logs into FB and navigates to CNN.com to read an >>> article. The user is able to see the FB friends that liked the article. >>> However, FB should not log the fact that the user has viewed the article or >>> even gone to CNN unless the user clicks on the FB Like button. >>> >>> If feel this type of behavior would be expected and I personally like this >>> type of feature. >> >> This was the point I was trying to make in my earlier email (and use case). >> How come we agree on things? :) >> >> Rigo >> >> >> >
Received on Friday, 16 March 2012 01:22:58 UTC