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

Re: DNT:1 and "data append"

From: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:20:40 -0400
To: Nicholas Doty <npdoty@w3.org>
CC: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CD786E02.2DE0B%achapell@chapellassociates.com>
Yes, the DNT HTTP header is an expression about an online transaction.
When DNT is enacted, an online transaction can't be tailored by a profile.
Whether that profile was derived from 1) a URL string across multiple
website visits or 2) an offline database should not matter. A User seeking
not to be tracked while online is unlikely to be able to make such
distinctions - and neither should we.




On 3/27/13 1:26 AM, "Nicholas Doty" <npdoty@w3.org> wrote:

>On Mar 25, 2013, at 12:34 PM, Alan Chapell
><achapell@chapellassociates.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks David. Perhaps this will help clarify where some of the confusion
>> lay. In any event, I look forward to discussing further on Wednesday.
>> 
>> On 3/21/13 3:16 PM, "David Singer" <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> I remain somewhat puzzled by this discussion.  Let's see if I can
>>>explain
>>> my puzzlement, and maybe the answers will help shed light.
>>> 
>>> DNT is an expression about privacy in an online transaction (between a
>>> user and their user-agent, and a server, over HTTP or similar
>>>protocols).
>> 
>> I recognize that this is the position of some in the group.
>
>Is there disagreement on this part of David's summary? The DNT HTTP
>header is quite directly an expression about a particular online
>transaction. The group agreed very early on to make the expression apply
>to that particular request (which an HTTP header is well-suited for) and
>not to imply, for example, retroactive deletion.
>
>> It's worth
>> noting that this is not how DNT is described in the charter. The charter
>> describes DNT as a "preference expression mechanism ("Do Not Track") and
>> technologies for selectively allowing or blocking tracking elements."
>> 
>> I note that we have chosen not to define tracking or "tracking elements"
>> in this working group, which may be a reason for some of the confusion.
>
>To provide some context, the text in the charter "selectively allowing or
>blocking tracking elements" referred to formats for determining white and
>black listing for blocking purposes; we did some early work on the
>Tracking Selection Lists specification, working from a submission from
>Microsoft. The group has subsequently decided to stop work on those
>deliverables, with the preference for not working on formats that would
>enable blocking.
>
>While "Do Not Track" in the press or in the terms of some companies has
>been used to refer to almost any privacy or blocking measure, we have
>used it here (and the charter follows this convention) to refer to the
>preference expression mechanism -- where you express the preference "Do
>Not Track" -- and not to blocking mechanisms, even though lists for
>selectively blocking HTTP requests were also in scope of the Tracking
>Protection Working Group.
>
>Hope this provides some clarity,
>Nick
>
Received on Wednesday, 27 March 2013 14:21:19 UTC

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