W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > February 2012

RE: ISSUE-106: Responses on cached objects

From: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 11:15:56 -0800
To: Matthias Schunter <mts@zurich.ibm.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <63294A1959410048A33AEE161379C8023D0C8AC81C@SP2-EX07VS02.ds.corp.yahoo.com>
Matthias,

I believe this follows the same proposed text you provided several weeks ago.

Response headers SHOULD be optional with the clear understanding both user agents and users will assume a site without response headers does NOT support DNT and will react accordingly (perhaps not using that site).

- Shane

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthias Schunter [mailto:mts@zurich.ibm.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 6:01 AM
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Subject: ISSUE-106: Responses on cached objects

Hi!


My view on ISSUE-106:
- During Brussels I discovered that cached objects can be used for
tracking
- Saying "cached resources imply 'no tracking' does not do the job

Reasoning: If receiving a cached object (with http indication that it
can be cached) without a DNT response, then the user cannot
distinguish whether a site does not implement DNT (and may use this
URL for tracking) or whether a site follows DNT and implies 'no tracking'

Consequence: DNT response headers should be required for cached
objects. Whatever language we decide to use for the header in general
(should vs must; see ISSUE-121) should also apply for cached objects.


Opinions?


Regards,
matthias


Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2012 19:18:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:44 UTC