Re: June Change Proposal, tracking

Hi Roy,

I've moved ISSUE-5 to the Compliance June product; I believe that existing issue closely tracks the topic of this change. 

I've set up a wiki page for this proposal: http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Tracking_Definition
The wiki page also has the text from the editors' draft, for comparison.

I'm not sure I caught your explanation during the call today, but one interpretation of this text would also suggest changes to the party, first party and third party definitions to instead use "contexts", and perhaps a re-writing of the first and third-party compliance sections. Is that your intention with this proposal?

Thanks,
Nick

On Jun 26, 2013, at 5:38 AM, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:

> This is ISSUE-5
> 
> The June draft has a definition of tracking that is not consistent
> with the rest of our protocol, nor with what the user is asking us
> to turn off when sending DNT:1.
> 
> Existing text in Sec 2.8:
> ============================
> Tracking is the retention or use, after a network interaction is complete, of data records that are, or can be, associated with a specific user, user agent, or device.
> ============================
> 
> 
> Replacement:
> ============================
> Tracking is the act of following a particular user's browsing activity across multiple distinct contexts, via the collection or retention of data that can associate a given request to a particular user, user agent, or device, and the retention, use, or sharing of data that has been collected, derived, or learned from such tracking outside the current context. For the purposes of this definition, a context is a set of resources that share the same data controller and a common branding, such that a user would expect that data supplied to one of the resources is available to all of the others within the same context.
> ============================
> 
> ....Roy
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 26 June 2013 23:57:58 UTC