Re: 'not tracking', amendment to the change proposal

On Jul 3, 2013, at 0:13 , Mike O'Neill <michael.oneill@baycloud.com> wrote:

> David,
> 
> I agree, and "tracking data" is more technology neutral than my text on
> fingerprinting and identifier duration. We should still explicitly rule out
> fingerprinting

but data associated with a fingerprint would fail test (1) or (2), wouldn't it?

> and encourage short duration identifiers for permitted uses
> in some explanatory non-normative text.

you can't possibly claim simultaneously any permitted use, and be 'absolutely not tracking'.  You can't even retain log files (raw data permission). can you explain?


> 
> Mike
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Singer [mailto:singer@apple.com] 
> Sent: 03 July 2013 01:08
> To: public-tracking@w3.org List
> Subject: 'not tracking', amendment to the change proposal
> 
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_No_Tracking
> 
> problem:
> 
> Though I doubt many sites will want to or be able to claim this state, I
> don't see a problem in defining it (it is at worst harmless), but I don't
> think the definition works.
> 
> 
> proposal:
> 
> A party may claim that it is not tracking, if it does not retain tracking
> data after the network transaction is complete.  Retaining tracking data
> includes:
> 
> 1) Retention by the server of data that falls into the definition of
> tracking data.
> 
> 2) Causing the user-agent to retain data, such as cookies,  that contains or
> can be linked to tracking data.
> 
> Note that tracking data applies to data after a transaction is complete; the
> site may use in-transaction data for the purposes of satisfying the
> transaction.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Singer
> Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
> 
> 
> 

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.

Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 16:59:15 UTC