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

Re: DNT: Agenda for Call March 6 (deux)

From: Aleecia M. McDonald <aleecia@aleecia.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 14:47:20 +0100
Cc: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-Id: <98641929-2937-4CE1-9135-F057AEF745B7@aleecia.com>
To: Lauren Gelman <gelman@blurryedge.com>

On Mar 5, 2013, at 11:33 PM, Lauren Gelman <gelman@blurryedge.com> wrote:

> (Frankly, I am not sure I think that people or businesses with a facebook page *should* be joint First parties. Is there any research to show that is what FB user's expectations are?)

To the best of my knowledge no one has looked at the question you raise directly.

I looked at something related in 2011 with an online study (Track Gap: Policy Implications of User Expectations for the 'Do Not Track' Internet Privacy Feature.) We showed a screenshot of a page and asked users to identify which portions of the page were first party, third party, or neither. We asked about visiting a site *without* clicking content. There is nothing to answers your question of whether clicking a Facebook Like button means users think of FB as a first party. It only answers that without clicking, most do not think FB is a first party (64% said not a first party if logged in to FB, 93% said not a first party if not logged in.)

The TPWG went to an interaction model and were just debating the final wording. Adrian has pushed back on that, quite late in the game, on the tech side. Whatever we do needs to be harmonized across both documents. If we really are going to mirror cookie domains, we run into issues we have not addressed. Some of these can potentially be addressed with an array listing servers that are, and are not, part of the domain. So far we do not have the "and are not" part covered, and would need to, I believe.

	Aleecia
Received on Monday, 11 March 2013 13:47:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:45:07 UTC