- 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>
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