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

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

From: Shane M Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 16:44:06 +0000
To: Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <DCCF036E573F0142BD90964789F720E3141AB7D0@GQ1-MB01-02.y.corp.yahoo.com>
Walter,

I believe SAME-PARTY works as well from a technical (TPE) perspective.  It takes me just as much work to update a list on a web page as it does in an xml resource file so we'd likely do both (human readable vs. machine readable).

- Shane

-----Original Message-----
From: Walter van Holst [mailto:walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 12:06 PM
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Subject: Re: ISSUE-5: Consensus definition of "tracking" for the intro?

On 16/10/2013 17:52, Shane M Wiley wrote:

> I likewise echo the positive feelings.
> 
> On your first point, I understand there is capacity to cover a broader 
> scope but would recommend we limit v1 to "browsing activity".
> This is the lion share of the issue at hand and I believe builds a 
> good launching point for becoming more granular over time.

While I agree with browsers as our first and foremost priority, I'd rather have the standard worded in such a way that it does not exclude other UAs a priori. So yes, we already have a lot of work to dowith the browser alone and should not bother overly much with other UAs, just let's have a standard that is a robust starting point for future conversations on other types of UAs.

> On the second point, it's still my hope we can agree on the "easily 
> discoverable" approach to sharing affiliate relationships.  I agree 
> that contractual relationships are not the appropriate path here and 
> we should instead focus on firm concepts of legal ownership and 
> control (and common privacy policies) to effectuate a 1st party 
> relationship.

I was going to ask David Wainberg as well, but I really would like to know why nobody on the industry side of the table is pushing harder for SAME-PARTY for this purpose. Why not use that?

Regards,

 Walter
Received on Wednesday, 16 October 2013 16:45:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:45:19 UTC