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

Re: explicit-explicit exception pairs

From: Nicholas Doty <npdoty@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 19:13:51 -0700
Cc: Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>, Tom Lowenthal <tom@mozilla.com>, public-tracking@w3.org
Message-Id: <63EA37CA-0E78-4807-B2F3-DD8D0021A3FE@w3.org>
To: ifette@google.com
On Apr 30, 2012, at 6:24 PM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) wrote:

> Yes. My assumption was that if DNT only had site-wide exceptions, it would be trivial for you to know if everything on your site was covered by a site-wide exception. If instead users can pick and choose, then you know either "i have no exception and should ask if i want one" / "i have a site-wide exception" / "i have no clue, some part of me has an exception but whether that's sufficient for me or not I don't know so now I have to poll, and for privacy maybe I don't even get to poll for specific things so who knows". The latter necessitates polling as you can't reasonably list all the third parties that have exceptions in the request headers.

Whether or not the JavaScript API allows tracking exception requests with a list of origins, users may have configured their browsers to send DNT:0 to some origins and DNT:1 to others.

Whether or not the JavaScript API allows tracking exception requests with a list of origins, we can design a capability to make it easy for a publisher to know if they have a site-wide exception (that is, that all their third parties will receive DNT:0). We've heard suggestions of a JavaScript list or a DNT:2 or DNT:10 header. I think we have postponed ISSUE-111 for that issue, although I think we don't need to postpone it, since it's independent of the question we're discussing now.

Thanks,
Nick
Received on Wednesday, 2 May 2012 02:14:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:28 UTC