W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > September 2012

Re: ACTION-253 ISSUE: 119 and ACTION 208 ISSUE-148 Response signal for "not tracking" and definition for DNT:0

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 17:32:16 -0700
Cc: "Amy Colando (LCA)" <acolando@microsoft.com>, Nicholas Doty <npdoty@w3.org>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-id: <21E8B788-6715-4F9E-9273-599A9A250060@apple.com>
To: David Wainberg <david@networkadvertising.org>

On Sep 13, 2012, at 17:27 , David Wainberg <david@networkadvertising.org> wrote:

> On 9/13/12 8:02 PM, David Singer wrote:
>> On Sep 13, 2012, at 16:42 , David Wainberg <david@networkadvertising.org> wrote:
>>> These is where I get confused. Are we talking about data collection or use? Do you mean those sites would say they collect no data whatsoever? Or would they be saying they may collect some data but do not engage in the permitted uses? 
>> ah, OK.  I am guessing that it would have to be mostly about collection, sure.  Otherwise, as you say, if they collect a lot of data which could be worked into tracking data, then we're into       permitted uses.
>> In most protocols, 'not implementing' is usually a sign of something not being relevant.  The problem is, in this case, it's impossible to tell the difference between an 'innocuous' site and a site that does, in fact, engage in tracking, but hasn't yet implemented the protocol.  Honestly, having high schools add even a simple well-known-resource or/and a server config so that they statically serve a header is more than one would normally ask, but I can't think of any other way right now for these 'simple' sites that don't bother even to accumulate the data that might be worked into tracking data, to say so.
>> Having said all that, we probably have bigger fish to fry.
> Not to harp on this; I agree about the fish and the size thereof, but I get really confused on this. It feels like we shift back and forth depending on context. Is data a result of tracking, or is it that the data can become tracking data when processed or used in certain ways?

I think that to claim you're not in the cake-making business, you'd need not to have flour, eggs, and so on, at your disposal.  Otherwise, it's a much more nuanced call;  yes, officer, it's true I had all the ingredients, but honest, I never thought someone would come and make cupcakes with them. :-(

> To your point about distinguishing sites, I'm not sure high schools could say whether they accumulate the data that might be worked into tracking data, since we have not specified what data that is. The best they could do is state, along the lines of Nick's suggestion, that they claim no permitted uses.

Well, permitted uses apply to 3rd parties, and some of these sites are built as 'expected to be 1st parties'.  Perhaps it would work to say "Even if used in a 3rd party context, would not need to claim any permitted uses to be compliant?"

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.

Received on Friday, 14 September 2012 00:32:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:39:00 UTC