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

Re: Consolidated Proposal for Definition of Collect

From: Vinay Goel <vigoel@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 11:49:38 -0700
To: Shane M Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
CC: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Lee Tien <tien@eff.org>
Message-ID: <CE96CB54.6CF2%vigoel@adobe.com>
Hi Shane,

My change proposal (nor this consolidated change proposal) effect the editor’s draft of ‘retain’.  David submitted a change proposal for retain, but I believe will retract that proposal.  So, I believe the only two remaining alternatives for ‘retain’ are Lee’s proposal and the Editor’s draft.

David felt strongly to leave the idea of retention within the definition of collect because he didn’t want a company to have collected data if it actually wasn’t trying to collect data but was sent the data as part of the HTTP transaction and subsequently dumped the data.  David — did I get your point right?


From: Shane M Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com<mailto:wileys@yahoo-inc.com>>
Date: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 at 2:33 PM
To: Vinay Goel <vigoel@adobe.com<mailto:vigoel@adobe.com>>, "public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org> (public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>)" <public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>>
Cc: David Singer <singer@apple.com<mailto:singer@apple.com>>, Lee Tien <tien@eff.org<mailto:tien@eff.org>>
Subject: RE: Consolidated Proposal for Definition of Collect


I generally supportive but it seems odd to define the concept of “collection” through the lens of “retention” (retain) in that those were expected to be different definitions.

- Shane

From: Vinay Goel [mailto:vigoel@adobe.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 11:15 AM
To: public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org> (public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>)
Cc: David Singer; Lee Tien
Subject: Consolidated Proposal for Definition of Collect

Hi Working Group,

David S, Lee and I have been trying to consolidate our change proposals over the definition of ‘collect’.  We felt we were initially close with our different proposals, and after a few emails, we are all comfortable with the following language:

"A party collects data if it receives data within a network interaction and either shares that data with another party or retains that data after the network interaction is complete."

This language is dependent on having a definition of network interaction (Issue-228).  With that, I believe we are all comfortable removing our initial change proposals for collect  I believe this removes David’s change proposal around ‘retain’, but it does not effect Lee’s.  Lee’s change proposal for ‘retains’ is the only alternative text to the Editor’s draft.  I also believe that this encompasses Jonathan’s proposal (but have not verified that with him).  David/Lee — let me know if I got that wrong.

I’m going to work with Lee, Amy and Chris P to see if we can combine some of the change proposals around ‘share’.

Received on Wednesday, 30 October 2013 18:50:09 UTC

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