- From: Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org>
- Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:34:11 -0400
- To: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>
- Cc: Nicholas Doty <npdoty@w3.org>, "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
- Message-id: <6A36DDCA-D9D9-4A49-8241-111D5CAC11CA@democraticmedia.org>
Alan: Users should expect that their online data used for append products will not be incorporated into the targeting profile. Databrokers may be able to provide offline and public data as a separate product. But under DNT: 1, online tracking data should not be gathered or used. DNT should foster better privacy practices in the real-time targeting data environment. Jeffrey Chester Center for Digital Democracy 1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Suite 550 Washington, DC 20009 www.democraticmedia.org www.digitalads.org 202-986-2220 On Mar 27, 2013, at 10:20 AM, Alan Chapell wrote: > 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 14:35:06 UTC