Re: TPE Last Call Working Draft Comments

Dear Nick,

No, they do not adequately resolve my concerns. But I resigned from the group some time ago, when I realized the process was rigged to a predetermined outcome of a few players. I wish you all the best personally, but this thing that's been created by the W3C has nothing meaningful to do with privacy.

Sincerely,

Chris Mejia

> On Jul 12, 2015, at 2:27 PM, "Nick Doty" <npdoty@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Chris,
> 
> Thank you for your comments (last June) on the TPE Last Call Working Draft.
> 
> (1)  The requirements on when user agents may send DNT:1 signals on behalf of a user as detailed in Section 4 of the TPE. The group previously rejected providing more detailed requirements; you do not provide new information or a proposal to cause us to reopen this issue. We revisited this issue during the Last Call process in considering a proposal to require information about the DNT setting party within the DNT field, but that 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
> 
> (2) The decision to define tracking and context in the TPE was previously resolved by the group; you do not provide new information to justify reopening this long-discussed issue.
> 
> (3)  The working group previously resolved to include support for the exception mechanism as a mandatory element of the TPE.
> 
> 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)

Received on Sunday, 12 July 2015 23:02:58 UTC