  RE: action-317, discussion of the service-provider flag and
the same-party resource & issue-112  From: Mike O'Neill
<michael.oneill@baycloud.com> Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 16:28:18
-0000 To: "'David Singer'" <singer@apple.com> Cc: <public-
tracking@w3.org>, "Nicholas Doty" <npdoty@w3.org> Message-ID:
<002001cdce4e$8b980860$a2c81920$@baycloud.com>  I agree that
there needs to be something in the protocol so that service
providers can declare themselves or be declared. Because they
are acting as a data processor for the 1st party (i.e. have a
contractual agreement with them), and so in some jurisdictions
can be free to use UUIDs, I think they should be declared as
such by the first party.   The best place to do this is the
tracking resource because it does not rely on retaining logs.
I do not get the point about non-disclosure, because the third-
party elements are plainly embedded. If the resource  responds
with a Tk1, when they are accessed in a third-party context,
they are declaring themselves as either bona