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

Re: ACTION-415 Provide text proposal regarding limitations on using a Potential Consent signal

From: Ronan Heffernan <ronansan@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 06:39:27 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHyiW9KXVG_-RA8-eQEjPKqdopTdiJ2Hc5=0NqeKd_fhZXM6Qw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation)" <mts-std@schunter.org>
Cc: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Matthias,
  We also need ID cookies, but we need them for many reasons, including
auditing frequency capping compliance and reporting on frequency, not just
for detecting OOBC.  By the way, I would not call the short retention a
"permitted use"; it is a "permitted retention" only.  No "use" of the data
is granted by this section.

--ronan


On Thursday, June 13, 2013, Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) wrote:

>  Hi Ronan,
>
> Quick question: Do you only need a change in collection/retention time to
> 48h
> or would you also require to set a ID cookie?
> (i.e., loosely speaking "acting like DNT;0" for 48h and then cleaning up)?
>
> In the latter case (also 48h permission to set cookies), I would need to
> change the proposed text for this permitted use.
>
>
Received on Thursday, 13 June 2013 10:39:54 UTC

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