- From: Ronan Heffernan <ronansan@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 13:16:35 -0400
- To: "Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation)" <mts-std@schunter.org>
- Cc: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAHyiW9LfPQV8BzjM=agex=j4AodVZhNyU+iEP7XLsdwTp-V5WQ@mail.gmail.com>
Matthias, We discussed real-time feedback of out-of-band consent, and that is not going to work in many applications. To move the determination of OOBC into the real-time interaction with the User Agents would take a prohibitive amount of time with large panels and widely-distributed server infrastructure. In some cases that relevant information has not even been collected from panel members to make the determination until some hours after the interaction. --ronan On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) < mts-std@schunter.org> wrote: > Hi Team, > > > my summary of our discussion at the face2face on "Out of Band Consent". > > Loosely speaking, out of band consent is > - a state where a site believes that it has sufficient permissions that > allow > it to track a user even if a user has sent a DNT;1 preference > - this belief is caused by mechanisms that are not part of this spec > (e.g., obtaining a preference via the exception API is not considered > out of band). > > The current TPE spec handles out of band consent as follows: > - The spec does not say how a site may or may not obtain out of band > consent > - The spec requires that a site who wants to act on out of band consent > sends a signal "C" that is defined in the TPE spec as follows: > *"Consent*: The designated resource believes it has received prior > consent for tracking this user, user agent, or > device, perhaps via some mechanism not defined by this specification, > and that prior consent overrides the tracking preference expressed by this > protocol." > - The spec allows a site to publish an URL "control" via its well-known > resource where a user is permitted to manage consent. > - The user agents are free to use this information ("C" signal and URL) as > they deem most appropriate for their user group. > We do not mandate specific UA behavior. > > My impression from our discussion in the room was that everyone is OK with > this approach. > I will re-confirm this using an "OK to close" email in order to move us > towards closing ISSUE-152. > > Feel free to provide feedback or corrections in case I overlooked anything. > > > Regards, > matthias > > >
Received on Monday, 18 March 2013 17:17:23 UTC