- From: Ronan Heffernan <ronansan@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 06:35:46 -0400
- To: "Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation)" <mts-std@schunter.org>
- Cc: Tracking Protection Working Group WG <public-tracking@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAHyiW9LeNoSYV75kX4_20aGtQ3Dr4VSc2C=pNo8StGHyW+buGg@mail.gmail.com>
I have some text almost ready on this issue (nothing that hasn't been discussed before, just consolidated). I was using "L" for "Later"-determination, but "P" would be fine by me. --ronan On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 5:15 AM, Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) < mts-std@schunter.org> wrote: > Hi Rob, > > > thanks for the feedback! > > I believe that out of band consent goes beyond the pixel-problem and > audience measurement. > > Could you further clarify your concern? Would you like to > (a) Disallow out-of-band consent altogether? > (b) Disallow out-of-band consent that cannot be retrieved in real-time? > (c) Disallow DNT for pixels? > (d) somethine else? > > btw: Pixels can talk DNT (request and response headers are included). They > only cannot trigger the JS-based exception API. > > > Regards, > matthias > > > > On 23/04/2013 10:07, Rob van Eijk wrote: > >> >> Counterproposal: Silence i.e. no text. >> >> OOBC for panel members and the problem of the pixels not being able to >> talk DNT is an innovation problem for audience measurement industry. Making >> the problem go away by not calling it a problem under DNT anymore is not >> acceptable for me and probably more privacy advocates. >> >> Rob >> >> Roy T. Fielding schreef op 2013-04-23 08:03: >> >>> Bah, resend with a fixed subject ... >>> >>> I think this is related to ISSUE-195, but really should have been >>> raised as a separate issue. >>> >>> There was a long discussion about a new tracking status for systems >>> that only track by consent but do not actually determine consent >>> during request time, originally requested by Alex and more recently >>> by Ronan. Unfortunately, the discussion kept going in the weeds, >>> at least partly because people mistook the request as an expansion >>> on the existing consent (C) response. >>> >>> So, I have written a proposal within the editors' draft as a new >>> option with a TSV of P for potential consent. >>> >>> ....Roy >>> >>> Begin forwarded message: >>> >>> Resent-From: public-tracking-commit@w3.org >>>> From: "CVS User rfieldin" <cvsmail@w3.org> >>>> Subject: CVS WWW/2011/tracking-protection/**drafts >>>> Date: April 22, 2013 4:11:49 PM PDT >>>> To: public-tracking-commit@w3.org >>>> Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/**E1UUPtl-0006gx-Ok@gil.w3.org<http://www.w3.org/mid/E1UUPtl-0006gx-Ok@gil.w3.org> >>>> > >>>> >>>> Update of /w3ccvs/WWW/2011/tracking-**protection/drafts >>>> In directory gil:/tmp/cvs-serv25723/drafts >>>> >>>> Modified Files: >>>> tracking-dnt.html >>>> Log Message: >>>> ISSUE-195: Add a TSV option for potential consent (P) to address >>>> Ronan's use case >>>> >>>> --- /w3ccvs/WWW/2011/tracking-**protection/drafts/tracking-**dnt.html >>>> 2013/04/22 21:28:40 1.201 >>>> +++ /w3ccvs/WWW/2011/tracking-**protection/drafts/tracking-**dnt.html >>>> 2013/04/22 23:11:49 1.202 >>>> @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ >>>> wgPublicList: "public-tracking", >>>> wgPatentURI: "http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-**impl/49311/status<http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/49311/status> >>>> ", >>>> issueBase: "http://www.w3.org/2011/**tracking-protection/track/** >>>> issues/ <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/>", >>>> - noIDLSectionTitle: true, >>>> + noIDLSectionTitle: true >>>> }; >>>> </script> >>>> <link rel="stylesheet" href="additional.css" type="text/css" >>>> media="screen" title="custom formatting for TPWG editors"> >>>> @@ -544,8 +544,10 @@ >>>> <dfn>TSV</dfn> = "1" ; "1" — first-party >>>> / "3" ; "3" — third-party >>>> / %x43 ; "C" - consent >>>> + / %x50 ; "P" - potential consent >>>> / %x44 ; "D" - disregarding >>>> / %x4E ; "N" - none >>>> + / %x50 ; "P" - potential consent >>>> / %x55 ; "U" - updated >>>> / %x58 ; "X" - dynamic >>>> / ( "!" [testv] ) ; "!" - non-compliant >>>> @@ -660,6 +662,42 @@ >>>> </p> >>>> </section> >>>> >>>> + <section id='TSV-P' class="option"> >>>> + <h4>Potential Consent (P)</h4> >>>> + <p> >>>> + A tracking status value of <dfn>P</dfn> means that the >>>> origin >>>> + server does not know, in real-time, whether it has >>>> received prior >>>> + consent for tracking this user, user agent, or device, but >>>> + promises not to use any <code>DNT:1</code> data until such >>>> consent >>>> + has been determined, and further promises to de-identify >>>> within >>>> + forty-eight hours any <code>DNT:1</code> data received for >>>> which >>>> + such consent has not been received. >>>> + </p> >>>> + <p> >>>> + Since this status value does not itself indicate whether a >>>> + specific request is tracked, an origin server that sends a >>>> + <code>P</code> tracking status value MUST provide an >>>> + <code><a>edit</a></code> member in the corresponding >>>> tracking >>>> + status representation that links to a resource for >>>> obtaining >>>> + consent status. >>>> + </p> >>>> + <p> >>>> + The <code>P</code> tracking status value is specifically >>>> meant to >>>> + address audience survey systems for which determining >>>> consent at >>>> + the time of a request is either impractical, due to legacy >>>> systems >>>> + not being able to keep up with Web traffic, or potentially >>>> "gamed" >>>> + by first party sites if they can determine which of their >>>> users >>>> + have consented. It cannot be used for the sake of >>>> personalization >>>> + unless consent is determined at the time of a request, in >>>> which >>>> + case the <code><a>C</a></code> tracking status is >>>> preferred. >>>> + </p> >>>> + <p class="issue" data-number="195" title="Flows and signals >>>> for handling out of band consent"> >>>> + <b>[OPEN]</b> The <code><a>P</a></code> tracking status >>>> + value indicates a special case of general data collection >>>> which >>>> + is then trimmed to exclude those without out of band >>>> consent. >>>> + </p> >>>> + </section> >>>> + >>>> <section id='TSV-D' class="option"> >>>> <h4>Disregarding (D)</h4> >>>> <p> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> > >
Received on Tuesday, 23 April 2013 10:36:34 UTC