- From: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 09:13:06 -0700
- To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
- CC: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, John Simpson <john@consumerwatchdog.org>, "Aleecia M. McDonald" <aleecia@aleecia.com>
Rigo, It's easy for the W3C to purge logs after 6 weeks as you don't monetize online activities. If anything, I'd be curious why it isn't even less. Your organizational funds (and your paycheck) come from membership fees and donations. :-) - Shane -----Original Message----- From: Rigo Wenning [mailto:rigo@w3.org] Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 9:04 AM To: public-tracking@w3.org Cc: Roy T. Fielding; John Simpson; Aleecia M. McDonald Subject: Re: ISSUE-5: definition of tracking Roy, whether you exclude access logs from the initial definitions or whether you cover them by permitted uses is just a matter of taste. So please do not use the definition for the access log argument. The real question on access logs is the time of non-anonymized retention. W3C anonymizes logs as a matter of policy after 6 weeks. This also helps with exuberant subpoenae. We can (and should IMHO) discuss this explicitly instead of complicating the definition. Rigo On Wednesday 05 September 2012 01:55:58 Roy T. Fielding wrote: > The effect would be that simply retaining an access log would not > count as tracking unless it was used to track. > > I also used words that align with the compliance definitions > (interaction instead of transaction) and slightly broadened what is > allowed to include session cookies (e.g., shopping carts).
Received on Wednesday, 5 September 2012 16:13:50 UTC