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

RE: ISSUE-187 - some thoughts on using javascript

From: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:49:14 -0800
To: Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <63294A1959410048A33AEE161379C8027484B81BE4@SP2-EX07VS02.ds.corp.yahoo.com>
Walter,

The User Agent developers in the Working Group have already suggested they will not build a UI here and Industry has already suggested they would not support DNT if they feel a UI does not provide a fair and balanced experience to the user.  The proposal from Adrian (and to some degree I now believe, Ian) has such strong support broadly across the Working Group due to these issues.

I agree the user experience will be slightly different across Servers (including the need to remain accessible) but I believe that is the RIGHT outcome as each Server has a different value proposition, user experience, and intake flow than other sites so it makes sense this be different.

- Shane

-----Original Message-----
From: Walter van Holst [mailto:walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl] 
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2012 9:59 AM
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Subject: ISSUE-187 - some thoughts on using javascript

During yesterday's call either my poor command of the English language or the equally poor service of Skype caused me not to make any sense on this issue, so I'll do it by e-mail.

After having put some thought in it, I am not in favour of using JavaScript for granting exceptions/permissions for overriding DNT:1 and for several reasons:

Consistency:

- The general expression is already done through HTTP headers, so why not have specific expression through HTTP too?
- Presentation to the user will be site-specific, which does not provide a consistent user experience.

Accessibility:

- It puts more of a burden for sites who implement DNT to retain accessibility (e.g. ADA-requirements) while the UA can take care of this in one go anyway. Smoothness of a few implemenations compared to thousands.

User control:

- It will be much harder for users to automate responses to requests for exceptions/permissions that use a Turing-complete language and will therefore come in all forms and shapes.

So basically, I would prefer to have this done at the HTTP and not the HTML level. If we insist on using JavaScript/ECMAscript then I would prefer the standard to contain normative language for mandatory identifiers for such requests that make them machine-recognisable (my use of the term machine-readable during yesterday's call was in error and caused confusion) and allow for automated responses.

Regards,

  Walter


Received on Thursday, 8 November 2012 17:49:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:38 UTC