W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > June 2013

Re: action-407 proposed language - Section 5, User Preferences

From: Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 10:23:37 -0700
To: Chris Mejia <chris.mejia@iab.net>
Cc: W3C DNT Working Group Mailing List <public-tracking@w3.org>, Alan Chapell - Chapell Associates <achapell@chapellassociates.com>, Mike Zaneis <mike@iab.net>, Nicholas "Nick" Doty - W3C <npdoty@w3.org>, Lou Mastria - DAA <lou@aboutads.info>, Marc Groman - NAI <mgroman@networkadvertising.org>
Message-ID: <214EC7750F8F463F83885A42A86EACED@gmail.com>
Chris,  

Alan provided a clarification.  (Thanks!)  My aim is solely to constructively clarify the text's meaning.  Since the provisions use standards language, not rules language, examples are essential to a shared understanding.

Best,
Jonathan


On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Chris Mejia wrote:

> Jonathan,
>  
> I don't see where it is vague, so perhaps you can clarify your particular concern about vagueness?    
>  
> And, I'm inviting you to work on this with us… constructively.  It's a draft proposal to the working group, of which you are a member.  We are working on this together, no?  
>  
> Thanks,  
>  
> Chris  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> Chris Mejia | Digital Supply Chain Solutions | Ad Technology Group | Interactive Advertising Bureau – IAB  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> From: Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu (mailto:jmayer@stanford.edu)>
> Date: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 11:41 AM
> To: Chris Mejia - IAB <chris.mejia@iab.net (mailto:chris.mejia@iab.net)>
> Cc: W3C DNT Working Group Mailing List <public-tracking@w3.org (mailto:public-tracking@w3.org)>, Alan Chapell - Chapell Associates <achapell@chapellassociates.com (mailto:achapell@chapellassociates.com)>, Mike Zaneis - IAB <mike@iab.net (mailto:mike@iab.net)>, "Nicholas \"Nick\" Doty - W3C" <npdoty@w3.org (mailto:npdoty@w3.org)>, Lou Mastria - DAA <lou@aboutads.info (mailto:lou@aboutads.info)>, Marc Groman - NAI <mgroman@networkadvertising.org (mailto:mgroman@networkadvertising.org)>
> Subject: Re: action-407 proposed language - Section 5, User Preferences
>  
> Chris,  
>  
> This is your text proposal.  I'm not going to interpret it for you.  
>  
> If the language is vague in its application to one of the most common and controversial implementations, that seems like a substantial drawback.  
>  
> Jonathan  
>  
>  
> On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Chris Mejia wrote:
>  
> > Jonathan,
> >  
> > If you believe that to be the case, please feel free to submit your use-case analysis for IE10 in context of this text.  I think that might be useful, so we may examine how this proposed text might be interpreted.  
> >  
> > Chris  
> >  
> >  
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > Chris Mejia | Digital Supply Chain Solutions | Ad Technology Group | Interactive Advertising Bureau - IAB | chris.mejia@iab.net (mailto:chris.mejia@iab.net)
> >  
> >  
> >  
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > From: Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu (mailto:jmayer@stanford.edu)>
> > Date: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 11:30 AM
> > To: Chris Mejia - IAB <chris.mejia@iab.net (mailto:chris.mejia@iab.net)>
> > Cc: W3C DNT Working Group Mailing List <public-tracking@w3.org (mailto:public-tracking@w3.org)>, Alan Chapell - Chapell Associates <achapell@chapellassociates.com (mailto:achapell@chapellassociates.com)>, Mike Zaneis - IAB <mike@iab.net (mailto:mike@iab.net)>, "Nicholas \"Nick\" Doty - W3C" <npdoty@w3.org (mailto:npdoty@w3.org)>, Lou Mastria - DAA <lou@aboutads.info (mailto:lou@aboutads.info)>, Marc Groman - NAI <mgroman@networkadvertising.org (mailto:mgroman@networkadvertising.org)>
> > Subject: Re: action-407 proposed language - Section 5, User Preferences
> >  
> > Chris,  
> >  
> > Would Internet Explorer 10 be in compliance with this language?  
> >  
> > Thanks,  
> > Jonathan
> >  
> >  
> > On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Chris Mejia wrote:
> >  
> > > Alan Chapell and I worked on this, per our "homework" assignment on the working group call 2-weeks ago.  Here's our proposal below.  Please note that I'm not crazy about 5.1.4, the "G flag" idea, but Alan had support for this idea from folks he's worked with, so we are leaving it in for further discussion.
> > >  
> > >  
> > >  
> > > C. Mejia  
> > >  
> > > ---  
> > >  
> > > 5. User Preferences  
> > > Any agent or program that sets or alters a user’s tracking preference expression MUST obtain express and informed consent from the individual user before setting or altering the setting of controls that affect the user’s tracking preference expression. The controls MUST communicate the individual user's preference in accordance with the [TRACKING-DNT (http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-compliance.html#bib-TRACKING-DNT)] recommendation.
> > >   
> > > 5.1 Tracking Preference Choices. User agents or programs that set or alter tracking preference expression choices for users (the “agent” or “agents”) MUST follow the following user interface guidelines:
> > > 1.     The agent must be the party responsible for determining the user experience by which a tracking preference is controlled;
> > > 2.      The agent MUST ensure that tracking preference choices are communicated to users clearly and accurately and are shown at the time and place the tracking preference choice is made available to a user or altered;
> > > 3.      The agent SHOULD ensure that the tracking preference choices accurately describe the parties to whom DNT applies and SHOULD make available explanatory text to provide more detailed information about DNT’s operational effects on the user.
> > > 4.     Agents that don’t meet the criteria listed in 5.1.3 MUST include a flag "G" that signals that a Agent is unable to comply with these guidelines.  
> > >   
> > > 5.2 Tracking Preference Exception. Agents or programs offering tracking preference expression choices to users, or that alter the tracking preference expression of a user(s), MUST comply with these user interface guidelines:
> > > 1.     web sites are responsible for determining the user experience by which a tracking exception is controlled;
> > > 2.      sites offering tracking exceptions MUST ensure that tracking exception choices are communicated to users clearly and accurately and shown at the time and place the tracking preference exception is made available to a user;
> > > 3.      sites SHOULD ensure that the tracking preference choices accurately describe the parties to whom DNT applies and SHOULD make available explanatory text to provide more detailed information about DNT functionality.
> > >   
> > >  
> > >  
> > >  
> > >  
> > >  
> >  
> >  
>  
Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2013 17:24:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:39:41 UTC