- From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:44:39 +0100
- To: public-tracking@w3.org
- Cc: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
Shane, you have to criticize Roy for this one. You stumbled upon his language and I haven't made a change to this particular paragraph. You're addressing a different issue: If two channels of communication resulted in conflicting statements about the user's tracking preference, which will prevail?. I think we should discuss that on a different email subject. I will see if I find something relevant in tracker and respond to it. Best, Rigo On Monday 05 March 2012 04:48:15 Shane Wiley wrote: > > In the circumstance of "site-specific user preferences or third-party > registration services" I believe we would consider these out-of-band user > consent structures and therefore the language around "when no explicit > preference is expressed via this protocol" is an incorrect statement as > even WITH a preference expressed via this protocol, the out-of-band user > consent would trump. > > I would recommend you remove the last portion of the sentence starting with > "when". > > Result: > ""Likewise, servers might make use of other preference information outside > the scope of this protocol, such as site-specific user preferences or > third-party registration services, to inform or adjust their behavior."
Received on Monday, 5 March 2012 13:45:12 UTC