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

RE: Alternative Text for DNT: 0 (ACTION-209, ISSUE-148)

From: JC Cannon <jccannon@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 19:52:22 +0000
To: Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BB17D596C94A854E9EE4171D33BBCC81B335EB@TK5EX14MBXC125.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

The text, “it MUST clearly explain those practices” seems a bit vague. How about “it MUST explain why it is making the request”? I don’t feel explaining all practices within a request is practical. A “Learn more” link would be more practical.


From: Jonathan Mayer [mailto:jmayer@stanford.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 10:44 AM
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Subject: Alternative Text for DNT: 0 (ACTION-209, ISSUE-148)


i. In General

A DNT: 0 exception allows a website to conduct specific practices that are otherwise prohibited by this specification.

ii. Explanation Requirement

When a website requests a DNT: 0 exception, it MUST clearly explain those practices to the user.

iii. Multiple Semantics

If a website maintains multiple semantics for DNT: 0, it is responsible for associating the proper semantic with a user agent.  If a website cannot determine the semantics associated with a DNT: 0 exception, it may not rely on the exception.

Non-Normative Discussion:

i. Legal Implications

This specification does not take a position on whether the DNT: 0 exception mechanism is sufficient to satisfy any legal requirements.

Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2012 19:53:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:51 UTC