- From: イアンフェッティ <ifette@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 13:07:07 -0800
- To: "Aleecia M. McDonald" <aleecia@aleecia.com>
- Cc: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org) (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAF4kx8d0F=0U34pCk1xPRgw9VhU2AGnmZdYp0cX9mjc8ECe4Yw@mail.gmail.com>
Aleecia, there was proposed text as an alternative to ISSUE-97/ACTION/196. See my work on ACTION-303 and proposals on that thread. http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/303 In particular, I am not satisfied with redirects being treated as third parties and would object to that concept. -Ian On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 12:04 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-2accepting 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 21:07:38 UTC