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

RE: f2f wrap up & next steps

From: Kevin Kiley <kevin.kiley@3pmobile.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 19:45:02 +0000
To: "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
CC: "achapell@chapellassociates.com" <achapell@chapellassociates.com>, "aleecia@aleecia.com" <aleecia@aleecia.com>, "mike@iab.net" <mike@iab.net>, "mgroman@networkadvertising.org" <mgroman@networkadvertising.org>, "david@networkadvertising.org" <david@networkadvertising.org>, "gelman@blurryedge.com" <gelman@blurryedge.com>, Kevin Kiley <kevin.kiley@3pmobile.com>
Message-ID: <B400AD156CAF3E4680360A8988DCC9752C2796FC@MBX022-E1-NJ-6.exch022.domain.local>
Well, since there haven't been any significant messages appearing here in public

( for those of us who are trying to 'follow along' and don't have the resources

to make long trips ) for FOUR DAYS now then I suppose this is a legitimate discussion

to have while we 'wait for published revisions' of the documents.



Aleecia was right to say...



"I believe we will be far enough along for many potential early adopters to begin

their work on implementations without risk of redoing major work".



That's a fact.



Of course it's not 'finished' yet... but it's most certainly far enough along

( and has been for quite some time ) to see where it's going and what

is going to need to happen ( code wise ) to be compliant.



I have Mobile Browsers for FIVE different Mobile Operating Systems.

They have been capable of sending 'DNT=whatever' since before this Working

Group was even chartered. I have also already written both mod_dnt.so for Apache

( Both 1.3 and 2.x series ) AND a generic mod_dnt.php for people who will

NOT be able to install any Server modules because they don't 'own' their Server.



I am in no way even pretending to say either our FIVE Mobile Browsers,

( or our mod_dnt Server modules ) are ready to claim 'compliance' with anything.



That would be absurd...



...but I think you fail to grasp the situation.



This DNT thing has been going on for quite some time. It's been all over the press

and even politicians are going on teevee and talking about it... and if you aren't

aware that it is 'coming' then you have been living under a rock.



No one wants to be 'late to the party'. They want to get the dog-work coding

they are going to need 'ready to go' as soon as possible. Making it all compliant

is the goal, of course, but Aleecia was right to say 'You can start coding now

and you won't have any MAJOR rewrites to do'.



It's going to change ( mostly just policy decisions, not technical ones )...

but from a coder's viewpoint... it's pretty much there.



Mozilla thought so almost a year and a half ago ( on February 8, 2011 ) when FF 4.0b11

went public... and all the other client vendors then had to 'keep up with the Jones'.



Is Mozilla even remotely 'compliant' with the full spec at this point?



No way... but every version of their FireFox product they have shipped since FF 4.0b11

has been capable of sending the DNT=1 signal and Servers everywhere have been looking

down the barrel of that gun for the same (long) time now.



Ditto for all the other major Browser vendors... who then had to do the same thing or

look like they were 'behind the 8-ball'.



If you want to blame someone for this public 'move to support' long before there

is really anything to 'support'... blame them.



If the 'exception compliance' procedure(s) become clear ( When? ) and explicit/explicit is

ever ruled on ( When? ) and a DNT:2 ( or 3 or 4? ) request scenario MIGHT get involved...

then there is nothing else to know for full client-side implementation/compliance.



Full speed ahead, folks.



Let's put the pedal to the metal and 'get 'er dun'.



The Whole World Is Watching ( this ).



Regards

Kevin
Received on Wednesday, 27 June 2012 19:45:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:31 UTC