- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 23:57:52 -0700
- To: ifette@google.com
- Cc: Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>, "public-tracking@w3.org Group WG" <public-tracking@w3.org>
On Oct 30, 2011, at 11:38 PM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) wrote: > In short, none of the above solutions seems workable from my viewpoint. I agree. I also don't think that any of them are necessary. If a website wishes to distinguish between resources that act as a third party and resources that act as a first party, then it can use different URIs for them (just as they normally do). I don't think we need to worry about accidental or deliberate transclusion by an unrelated website, which would turn the first party resource into a theoretical third-party resource. If any cross-site tracking occurs in that situation, it will be the fault of the unrelated website. ....Roy
Received on Monday, 31 October 2011 06:58:21 UTC