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

Re: Discussion of Issue-5 (definition of tracking), and a new CP

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 01:00:45 -0700
Cc: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Justin Brookman <jbrookman@cdt.org>, Heather West <heatherwest@google.com>, "(public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-Id: <C30FC8B7-822A-40FC-A5C9-FE424A55788C@gbiv.com>
To: Nicholas Doty <npdoty@w3.org>
On Oct 9, 2013, at 12:00 AM, Nicholas Doty wrote:

> I have tried to clean up the wiki page for this issue, with some help from Roy and Rob (thanks, guys!). We have 5 numbered proposals (including David's "no change" below), and then I've put next to each other links to the ED and April 30 WD text for reference.

>  http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Tracking_Definition
> Roy (and Justin/Heather), would you accept as a friendly amendment to your version of the April 30th WD text that we change from "attributable to" to "associated with"? I think that would match the language we've generally been using and I don't think it changes the intended meaning.

Actually, no, attributable is the correct word to use there unless
there is a bunch of other words to limit what associates.

Absolutely anything can be associated with anything else.  I can
associate the color blue with Nick.  Hence, saying that any data
which can be associated with a user is tracking data is the same
as saying that all data is tracking data.

Note that the way I use "data that can associate" in proposal (1)
is okay, but could also be changed to "data that can attribute".

Received on Wednesday, 9 October 2013 08:01:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:40:00 UTC