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

ISSUE-111 - requestSiteSpecificTrackingException

From: Kevin Smith <kevsmith@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 14:33:42 -0700
To: "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>, "Tom Lowenthal (tom@mozilla.com)" <tom@mozilla.com>
Message-ID: <6E120BECD1FFF142BC26B61F4D994CF307C4311D13@nambx07.corp.adobe.com>

At the bottom is the current definition of the requestSpecificTrackingException() method for reference.  For the record, I am personally against a scenario where we the user is presented a list of 3rd parties, because I do not think that works for anyone (user, browser, or site).  However, if we do want to support this scenario, it seems like we need at least the following information for each 3rd party:

·         Company Name (not handled)- A list of the actual 3rd party companies.  The browser does not need to know this, but the user does.  A list of tracking URLs (that most likely do not have company name anywhere in them) is completely inconsumable.  I do not believe it is represented anywhere in the current API call unless the arrayOfDomainStrings array is supposed to be an associative array with the companies as the key

·         Request URL (arrayOfDomainStrings)– The URLs to which the actual requests will be made.  This is the list the browser needs in order to know who gets which header.  Keep in mind there will often be multiple URLs per 3rd party.

·         3rd Party Description (Not Handled - detailURL??) – a simple company name (ie DoubleClick) will not be worth much to users.  They need to know what the company does and how the 1st party uses this 3rd party

·         Link to the 3rd Party to learn more (Not Handled - detail URL??) - this list will be difficult for the 1st party to maintain unless the location is standardized.  Could lead to a lot of 404s.

So, after thinking it through, I think if we change the arrayOfDomainNames to an associative array of the form (arrayOfDomainNames[Example 3rd Party] = ‘tracking.example3rdparty.com’) or something similar, it could work.  However, I think this highlights that the possibility of this being even somewhat useful to an end user greatly depends on the content at the detailURL.


interface NavigatorDoNotTrack {

    void requestSiteSpecificTrackingException<http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html#widl-NavigatorDoNotTrack-requestSiteSpecificTrackingException-void-sequence-DOMString--arrayOfDomainStrings-TrackingResponseCallback-callback--siteName--explanationString--detailURI> (sequence<DOMString> arrayOfDomainStrings, TrackingResponseCallback<http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html#idl-def-TrackingResponseCallback> callback, optional  siteName, optional  explanationString, optional  detailURI);


6.4.1 Methods
Called by a page to request or confirm a site-specific tracking exception.






















Return type: void


Kevin Smith
Engineering Manager

385.221.1288 (tel)

550 E Timpanogos Cir
Orem, UT, 84097

(image/png attachment: image001.png)

Received on Wednesday, 28 March 2012 22:57:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:47 UTC