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

Re: transitivity of DNT exceptions

From: Rob van Eijk <rob@blaeu.com>
Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 13:46:04 +0200
Message-ID: <4FAA58FC.1010306@blaeu.com>
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Hi Nick,

I would like to coin the term inheritance instead of transitivity. I 
believe an object oriented approach to exceptions, like object oriented 
programming, is worth exploring. The relation between exceptions gives 
rise to hierarchy.

Rob

On 9-5-2012 7:44, Nicholas Doty wrote:
> After some discussion of transitivity of exceptions on last week's call and some follow-up with Matthias, it sounds like there might be interest in specific exceptions (that might help with EU or other jurisdictions) for top-level third parties. For example, maybe a large site could more easily specify the ad networks or exchanges it works with in requesting an exception (such that those domains receive a DNT:0 opt-in signal) and then all further re-directs would also be excepted, because the further third-parties aren't using the data for any additional purposes (via some version of our Outsourcing exception, and perhaps fitting an EU "data processor" definition).
>
> Does this sound workable for interpretations of EU law? For site or browser implementers?
>
> Do we see other definitions of "transitivity of exceptions" that would be useful? Browsers could, for example, send DNT:0 to all resources that are re-directed from a request that was initiated with DNT:0, but that sounds both annoying to implement (for browser plug-ins, for example) and sometimes specifically not the intent of an exception (URL re-direction services, maybe).
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>
> (This isn't meant to duplicate Ian's action-194, though maybe it will be related.)
>
Received on Wednesday, 9 May 2012 11:46:33 UTC

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