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

Re: tracking-ISSUE-149: Compliance section for user agents [Tracking Definitions and Compliance]

From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 18:35:20 +0200
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Cc: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Message-ID: <3034783.2NvPgSygsQ@hegel.sophia.w3.org>

On Wednesday 30 May 2012 17:00:54 David Singer wrote:
> > Third, while we have documented DNT as being on / off / unset, do we
> > want to write that as a requirement for user agents? User interface is
> > out of scope by charter, but we could require user agents to offer all
> > three options. Currently we only state all three are possible values
> > (which we do document well.)
> Unless DNT:0 means something other than no DNT, for server behavior, I
> think the user only needs to be asked "DNT with that, sir?".  DNT:0 is an
> artefact of the way that exceptions (user-granted) work, not a third
> choice.  I hope.

I would hope so too. I could imagine a requirement on user agents that they 
can only be compliant if they can not only spawn headers but also react on 
the exception mechanism, meaning that a server is able to get an exception. 
I fear that the anti-virus tools don't do that and just send headers. This 
is excluding the choice we want to enable. 

Received on Friday, 1 June 2012 16:35:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:50 UTC