Re: Next 2 calls canceled (Oct 09 and Oct 16)

Purpose Level Preference - Simple Use Case #1:

User visits publisher.com and is presented with an interstitial dialogue
providing details about the data collection and use activities that will
occur if they proceed to use the website.  Within that dialogue there are a
list of five ad tech partners - each with two check-boxes below them - one
for "Interest Based Advertising" and one for "Cross-Device Mapping" (and
each of these have a "?" that when hovered over / clicked explains these
activities in more detail).

<Site Intro>
<Site Data Collection and Use Activities>
<Ad Tech Partner 1>
    <Purpose 1: IBA>
    <Purpose 2: CDM>
<Ad Tech Partner 2>
    <Purpose 1: IBA>
    <Purpose 2: CDM>
<Ad Tech Partner...N>
    <Purpose N...>

User provides consent to all parties for all purposes and proceeds to enter
site.

Site-Wide UGEs are entered for each Ad Tech Partner.  In each UGE, the
Purpose Array is populated with a 1 and 2 ([1,2]) to represent the purposes
that have been granted by the user.

On the 1st page of publisher.com the user lands on, there is an ad call
from Ad Tech Partner 1.

The JS Ad Call from Ad Tech Partner 1 queries the DNT value for it's domain
on publisher.com and retrieves both the DNT:0 value as well as their
consent purposes - in this case [1,2] which they know map to IBA and CDM.

** NOTE - this would be further explained as well at Ad Tech Partner 1's
WKL (well-known location) describing their DNT implementation.

- Shane


On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 12:26 AM, Rob van Eijk <rob@blaeu.com> wrote:

> Interesting, although I am a bit worried about the impact on the planning.
>
> It seems to me that purpose and otherParties would have been reinforcing
> eachother. It would be great to clarify with an example how third parties
> and purpose would work in practice,
>
> Rob
>
> -----Original message-----
> *From:* Shane M Wiley
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 10 2017, 3:27 am
> *To:* Mike O'Neill
> *Cc:* Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation); public-tracking@w3.org;
> Shane Wiley
> *Subject:* Re: Next 2 calls canceled (Oct 09 and Oct 16)
>
> Submitted:  https://github.com/w3c/dnt/issues/60
>
> - Shane
>
> On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 9:09 AM, Shane M Wiley <wileys@oath.com> wrote:
>
>> Working on it now - will have it out by days end (apologies - attending a
>> wedding across the coast last week so I'm a bit behind).
>>
>> - Shane
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Mike O'Neill <
>> michael.oneill@baycloud.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Is this an issue posted recently? I see nothing on the list.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) [mailto:mts-std@schunter.org
>>> ]
>>> Sent: 08 October 2017 16:25
>>> To: public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org) <
>>> public-tracking@w3.org>
>>> Subject: Next 2 calls canceled (Oct 09 and Oct 16)
>>>
>>> Hi Folks,
>>>
>>> I will be travelling for 2 weeks. I suggest to cancel the call tomorrow
>>> (Oct 08) and the week afterwards (Oct 16).
>>> Sorry for the short notice.
>>>
>>> In the subsequent call, I would like to discuss the issue Shane raised.
>>> Shane: Could you outline your usage/requirements/issue in the github
>>> issue tracker?
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> matthias
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - Shane
>>
>> Shane Wiley
>> VP, Privacy
>> Oath: A Verizon Company
>>
>
>
>
> --
> - Shane
>
> Shane Wiley
> VP, Privacy
> Oath: A Verizon Company
>
>


-- 
- Shane

Shane Wiley
VP, Privacy
Oath: A Verizon Company