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

Re: ACTION-211 Draft text on how user agents must obtain consent to turn on a DNT signal

From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 18:05:24 +0200
To: "Dobbs, Brooks" <brooks.dobbs@kbmg.com>
Cc: Kevin Smith <kevsmith@adobe.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>, Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>, Peter Cranstone <peter.cranstone@gmail.com>, Justin Brookman <justin@cdt.org>
Message-ID: <2094681.fgbJ9Nj9kW@hegel.sophia.w3.org>
Brooks, 

On Thursday 14 June 2012 09:39:16 Dobbs, Brooks wrote:
> > trouble is that IE 10 is not non-compliant for all possible
> > cases. There are tools that are non-compliant for all
> > possible cases.
> I am not sure I agree with that statement.  If IE10's compliance
> job is to communicate user preference in a manner that is
> discernable to a server, when does it achieve this end? 

Our problem is precisely that we have no way to know whether a DNT:1 
reflects a user intent. But this cuts both ways. From a bit-counting 
perspective, the header is a preference that is discernible by a 
server. So we have no additional guidance by that phrase.

> As has
> been pointed out, IE makes it impossible to discern between a
> DNT:1 that is or is not an expressed user preference.

You conclude without assumption :) We argue what to do in case we 
have a protocol violation. I suggest NACK and some suggest to send 
"I hate a certain browser". For the sake of decency, I would prefer 
the simple message as suggested by David Singer here:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-
tracking/2012Jun/0158.html

Going beyond would likely trigger more concerns and meta-troubles in 
the process downstream. 

BTW, I was at the OBA meeting in Brussels and Madelin explicitly 
supported the idea of having a user choice menu during 
download/installation/first start-up If we would all agree on this, 
that could be a way out of the trenches. 

I maintain that the system is not complete if the exception 
mechanism doesn't work. Again, this is also a way to say no.

Has anybody an idea whether IE10 will support the exception 
mechanism? 

Rigo
Received on Thursday, 14 June 2012 16:06:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:30 UTC