Re: Last Call Comments

Hi Alan,

Thank you for your comments (last June) on the TPE Last Call Working Draft.

While we know your objections are strongly felt, they are ones that you have raised several times previously and were resolved by the group. It is the opinion of the chairs and editors that your comments do not raise new issues that need to be resolved in the TPE text.

(1) The definition of party and context has been resolved by the group; you do not put forward a proposal to remedy any perceived uncertainty in those terms.

(2) The issue of defaults and when a browser may signal DNT:1 is already addressed is Section 4 of the TPE; no new information and no proposal has been presented to re-open this long-discussed issue.

(3) The issue of authenticating DNT signals has also been addressed; as part of the Last Call review process, we additionally considered Shane Wiley’s proposal to require identification of the party setting a DNT signal within the header; this proposal was rejected by the group.

See also: TPE Last Call comments, re: validation of user signals (issue-260)
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking-comments/2015Jun/0008.html

(4) What sorts of companies benefit from DNT is beyond the scope of the working group. The definition of tracking has been settled, and no new information and no proposal has been presented to re-open the issue.

Please let us know whether these explanations resolve your concerns.

Thanks,
Nick Doty, W3C
(for Tracking Protection Working Group Co-Chairs: Carl, Justin and Matthias)