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

Re: DNT:1 and "data append"

From: Chris Mejia <chris.mejia@iab.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:22:49 +0000
To: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <7311AB05D142B6489F20AFA8DDAECAE8C4B3FEC4@IAB-NYC-EX1.IAB.local>
Alan, thank you for identifying the underlying problem with most of our discussions (disagreements, puzzlements, etc) in this working group:  when looking at the same piece of fruit, half the group is talking about oranges, the other half is talking about pineapplesó again, same piece of fruit, different ideas about what that piece fruit really is.  Until we all agree to the definitions of key terms in the spec's charter (and elsewhere), we'll never reach consensus.  Colleagues, that's spec building 101: FIRST, agree to what it is you are solving for.  THEN, solve.  Or would we rather spend another 2-years trying to solve for an ever-moving target of understandings?

Here's our homework:

Definition of tracking = x
Definition of tracking elements = y

Solve for x and y, share with group.  Co-chairs, help group find consensus for x and y before allowing any other work, so we can move forward productively TOGETHER.

Thanks All,

Chris

P.S.  I do this kind of work for a livingó I lead working groups that build technical specs for industry.  The specs are built by industry working groups that most often consist of competing companies and interests.  I know that my method and order of method for consensus building works. How about we give it a try?

Chris Mejia | Digital Supply Chain Solutions | Ad Technology Group | Interactive Advertising Bureau - IAB



On 3/25/13 12:34 PM, "Alan Chapell" <achapell@chapellassociates.com<mailto: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<mailto: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. 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.

A tracking element could be what is traditionally defined as Online
Behavioral Advertising (OBA) by industry groups such as the DAA. A
tracking element could also include the collection of research panel data,
or (as some have argued) online ad serving data so long as it otherwise
meets certain criteria as agreed upon in the group.

It stands to reason that offline collected data that is used by sites to
customize advertising and content could be considered tracking elements.

Treating offline collected data differently from online collected data
places the onus upon Users to parse very subtle distinctions as they
struggle to understand what turning on DNT really gets them. It also
creates a significant loophole in the DNT standard as I've noted in
previous posts.

Alan
Received on Wednesday, 27 March 2013 15:24:16 UTC

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