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

Re: ACTION-98: Bring input on ISSUE-111 to the group; otherwise it's closed

From: Nicholas Doty <npdoty@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 19:56:45 -0800
Cc: Tracking Protection Working Group WG <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-Id: <A544EF19-AB11-4CFF-A946-B0E5EC689219@w3.org>
To: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>, Matthias Schunter <mts@zurich.ibm.com>
Sorry, I missed this message during the post-Brussels travel. Matthias proposes we close this because of the response discussion, but I think this is actually an issue about the request header rather than the response header/tracking response status.

I would propose an alternate to Shane's text below, that we remain with just DNT:0 and DNT:1. (I believe the current draft text would satisfy this.)

<non-normative>
Publishers may determine whether site-specific exceptions are available for their site via the JavaScript API defined in Section 6. User agents may not know on initiating a request whether any site-specific exceptions will apply, for example. Publishers can use client-side JavaScript to check the DNT value, check for the presence of functionality to request site-specific tracking exceptions and call client-side methods to confirm exceptions. Users and their agents need not broadcast the possible presence of an exception with every HTTP request.

Thanks,
Nick

On Jan 30, 2012, at 8:42 PM, Shane Wiley wrote:

> Description:
> Should the user agent send a different DNT value to a first party site if there exist site-specific exceptions for that first party? (e.g. DNT:2 implies "I have Do Not Track enabled but grant permissions to some third parties while browsing this domain", DNT:3 implies "I grant you a web-wide tracking exception")
>  
> Response:
> <non-normative>
> To better arm Publishers with the ability to distinguish between users who have a general DNT signal activated (DNT:1) and those who have also provided for a Site Specific Exception for their site, it would helpful for a different signal to be provided in the later case.  This approach will help reduce site-specific exception list queries, as well as, allow for a cleaner site-specific exception process on “first use” scenarios.
>  
> <normative>
> Where available, User Agents SHOULD provide 1st parties with a distinguishing signal to alert them that Site-Specific Exceptions exist for the 1st party.  If a User Agent supports this functionality, it must reply with a DNT:2 signal when appropriate.
Received on Wednesday, 22 February 2012 03:56:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:45 UTC