W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > October 2014

Issue-148 meaning of DNT:0

From: Mike O'Neill <michael.oneill@baycloud.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 14:46:14 +0100
To: "'Nicholas Doty'" <npdoty@w3.org>, "'Tracking Protection Working Group'" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Cc: "Jonathan Mayer" <jmayer@stanford.edu>
Message-ID: <087501cfe2fe$3b68d3d0$b23a7b70$@baycloud.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

The current text talks about a personalised experience but consent may have been given for data collection, e.g. by an analytics provider or for a survey panel, that does not affect content or change the web experience.
I agree with Jonathon’s proposal that it should simply indicate consent to the processing explained when a UGE was granted, but this does not cover the general preference case.
I would like to propose this as a friendly amendment to his proposal:
A DNT: 0 signal in a request indicates a user’s explicit agreement to their personal data being collected and processed as explained at the time consent was given. If the DNT: 0 signal can only indicate a user’s general preference this recommendation places no restriction on the data collected.
Mike
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nicholas Doty [mailto:npdoty@w3.org]
> Sent: 07 October 2014 19:19
> To: Tracking Protection Working Group
> Subject: Agenda for October 8 TPWG call
>
> *** gpg4o | Unknown Signature from 40203EE90BBAB306 1 2 01 1412705969 9
> ***
>
> Reminder, call for objections on audience measurement closes on Thursday,
> October 9.
>
> Thanks,
> Nick (for the chairs)
>
> AGENDA:
> ----------------------------------
> Confirmation of scribe. Volunteers welcome!
> Offline-caller-identification.
> ----------------------------------
> --- Issues for this Call ---
>
> 1. TPE Last Call Comments
>
> We'll look through additional issues and some proposed responses.
>
> On a previous call, it was mentioned that we might want further comments on
> https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/262 - guidance
> regarding server responses and timing
>
> 2. Compliance issues (if we have time)
>
> ISSUE-203:
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Tracking_Third_Part
> y_Compliance
>
> Security and auditing
> ISSUE-24: http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Security
> ISSUE-235:
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Remove_auditable_
> security_requirement
>
> ISSUE-148: http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_DNT_0
>
> 3. AOB
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (MingW32)
Comment: Using gpg4o v3.3.26.5094 - http://www.gpg4o.com/
Charset: utf-8

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUNUAlAAoJEHMxUy4uXm2J0ScH/0DcV6UcNzEFve2rb/AsUvO2
8HFLcK4/LXq97R0fESy6XuOOLWfJ9rXxJwAO8bXeYH3a75mLI093jY70rTT/p73f
nyO1G7g1l69Is/Y1ZtZzzg2jdnxMtGoOP51rR7re3Hvn3HqRGQfiRKppfr+1c/Hd
Rcr4Sxp3Mz4LzRnoUUu7hlbyWjV+BXaKQsxc5Ef7qv9hKHGrvHvlvr4oqkgYaV2h
PhDlynzbIaeikghlPySDxpllulFiefKO2yMHOvkHMVlCOT07JWQPgZhIMjaBmtBa
cHPhKEhz2llZgRAd6A05M3b/ROcDJuqVO9ws6yGUu8gi9/ID2C5+NGDUf4YnzKk=
=GtAf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Received on Wednesday, 8 October 2014 13:47:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:45:24 UTC