- From: Vinay Goel <vigoel@adobe.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 12:54:02 -0800
- To: "Aleecia M. McDonald" <aleecia@aleecia.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org) (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Hi Aleecia, For issue-97, and I apologize in advance if this is being dealt with elsewhere, I thought we haven't yet come to consensus on whether a service provider is a third party, the same party as the first party, or referenced to as a service provider. If its not resolved yet and if we take your proposal to adopt 3.5.2 Option 2 in which case a service provider is different than a third party, in both those examples, I have problems calling the URL shortening services third parties when they may actually be service providers. I get the intent of the author to want to call a URL shortening service a 3rd party if they have their own use of the data. But, in these non-normative examples, it doesn't say that the shortening services have their own use. -Vinay On 11/9/12 3:04 PM, "Aleecia M. McDonald" <aleecia@aleecia.com> wrote: >Here are places we might have straight-forward decisions. If there are no >responses within a week (that is, by Friday 16 November,) we will adopt >the proposals below. > > >For issue-97 (Re-direction, shortened URLs, click analytics -- what kind >of tracking is this?) with action-196, we have text with no counter >proposal. Unless someone volunteers to take an action to write opposing >text, we will close this with the action-196 text. > PROPOSED: We adopt the text from action-196, >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Jun/0106.html > >For issue-60 (Will a recipient know if it itself is a 1st or 3rd party?) >we had a meeting of the minds >(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Apr/0129.html) >but did not close the issue. We have support for 3.5.2 Option 2, >http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-compliance.html >#def-first-third-parties-opt-2, with one of the authors of 3.5.1 Option >1, >http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-compliance.html >#def-first-third-parties-opt-2 accepting Option 2. There was no sustained >objection against Option 2 at that time. Let us find out if there is >remaining disagreement. > PROPOSED: We adopt 3.5.2 Option 2, >http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-compliance.html >#def-first-third-parties-opt-2 > >For action-306, we have a proposed definition with accompanying >non-normative examples > PROPOSED: We adopt the text from action-306 to define declared data, to >be added to the definitions in the Compliance document, >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Oct/0296.html > PROPOSED: We look for volunteers to take an action to write text >explaining when and how declared data is relevant (See the note in >6.1.2.3, >http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-compliance.html >#first-party-data) to address issue-64 > > Aleecia
Received on Friday, 9 November 2012 20:54:40 UTC