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

Batch Closing of TPE-related ISSUEs: ISSUE-171, ISSUE-116, ISSUE-138, ISSUE-173, ISSUE-160

From: Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) <mts-std@schunter.org>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 14:56:39 +0100
Message-ID: <5097C597.3010708@schunter.org>
To: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Hi Folks,

enclosed are some issues that I believe to be resolved and that can be 
closed (and/or an action to include the text into the spec can be 
triggered).
If you disagree, drop me a line and we discuss these issues is more detail.

Regards,
matthias

-------------------------------------------------------------
How to handle multi-domains  (ISSUE-171)
http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/171

On these issues IMHO the status is as follows:
- For multi-domains, we agreed that no explicit API should be included 
due to risks of mis-use.
- Shane Wiley has proposed an approach how to allow multi-site 
exceptions without an explicit API:
    http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/314
   Text: 
http://www.w3.org/mid/63294A1959410048A33AEE161379C8027484803519%2540SP2-EX07VS02.ds.corp.yahoo.com

---------------------------------------------------------------
ISSUE-116: How can we build a JS DOM property which doesn't allow inline 
JS to receive mixed signals?
http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/116

Nick proposed to "The diff included below (also attached) would update 
the draft to move the JS doNotTrack property to window (from navigator) 
and remove the requestDNTStatus( ) method (which would now be redundant). "
http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/318

I suggest to implement this change and close ISSUE-116

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ISSUE-138: Web-Wide Exception Well Known URI
http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/138

Question was how a site without HTML can trigger exceptions (e.g. a tracking pixel).

Nick has written non-normative text
  https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/319

Please drop me a line if you do not agree with Nicks text.

----------------------------------------------------
ISSUE-173: The TPE uses "top-level domain" in a sense that is not the normal meaning
http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/173

David Singer has performed the corresponding edits.
Drop me a line if this is not OK.

------------------------------

  ISSUE-160 -- Do we
     need an API that will tell a host what its current exception
     status is?

http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/160

Status:
- Section 6.6 contains a proposed API that will be retained in the updated API proposal
- Suggest to close this issue
Received on Monday, 5 November 2012 13:57:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:37 UTC