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

RE: ISSUE-5: Consensus definition of "tracking" for the intro?

From: Mike O'Neill <michael.oneill@baycloud.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 21:24:41 -0000
To: "'Roy T. Fielding'" <fielding@gbiv.com>
Cc: "David Singer" <singer@apple.com>, <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <069901cedb36$9b75ab20$d2610160$@baycloud.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


> It isn't necessary to think about tracking in terms of identifiers.
> The mechanism is irrelevant to what the user is requesting. 

In order to track, the user or their traces need to be recognised. Faces, footprints and cookie ids are all identifiers. Tracking is impossible without them and they are intrinsic. The user wants the activity to stop so they do not want anyone to keep a record of their identifiers (in general).


>Yes, that is "retention, use, or sharing of data derived from that activity outside the context in which it occurred."

But the various data items to be combined  exist simultaneously within a context. Is it the derivation "outside the context" of the data or the sharing/retention/use of it which is not being permitted?



Mike


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (MingW32)
Comment: Using gpg4o v3.1.107.3564 - http://www.gpg4o.de/
Charset: utf-8

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSerOYAAoJEHMxUy4uXm2JLTgH/3vCL3fJkNf8z7AzhrfQyrIJ
yBkkrr1dNoYX80apDwnKHg7ioLl4a4xT1Lqqgn8U/dDnPD8hIfWiSMIxk5Cd7sHv
2kE2SowyBWAGh3KwvH4r7za0dgRdICKXKzWZarA/0i9tSSTXZ5QvQ4wECIUPmEfy
tBWQMSPVX1QxfZmFB76NJf9L/HPtxreflkeKOZmsjL2cKMx8nq0onFfIIUe9pMMe
J8ReI1JVBO9U8iQoEpY3fN0s4eUPGv/UDxpo+B6yWEyBnWkGUJEeNxy7WI09I69U
Zu9kdL1r7INELoopKZZd8Z9d/k+NNAmn2faPNy99s7vw2ewHkwaj8HgHmjY3kpo=
=tvgE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Wednesday, 6 November 2013 21:25:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:45:20 UTC