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

Re: DNT:0 and API

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 06:25:30 -0700
Cc: public-tracking@w3.org, Mike O'Neill <michael.oneill@baycloud.com>
Message-id: <012B30EE-C847-4077-A74B-142967A09233@apple.com>
To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>

On Sep 18, 2012, at 1:11 , Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org> wrote:

> But David, 
> 
> peu importe whether you come with no header or "unset". The granting 
> of the exception has to be communicated back. And you can only do 
> that by having the UA send DNT:0 that the server can log to satisfy 
> the DPA audit and his own CYA.
> 
> So if Browsers now refuse to implement DNT:0,

who ever said that?

> the entire thing goes 
> down the drain. Without DNT:0, DNT is not a communication mechanism 
> anymore.

But this is a strawman.  Please, the question and decision were about a MANDATE of a GLOBAL preference, that's all.

> All that remains is a privacy fart exhaling DNT:1 headers 
> and servers that comply regardless with some specification that cuts 
> the most obvious erroneous trends.
> 
> Or am I misunderstanding? (I hope so) 

yes

> 
> Rigo 
> 
> On Monday 17 September 2012 14:07:17 David Singer wrote:
>> I think this is possible today, though it's the first I recall
>> thinking about it.  The site would detect a visit with no DNT
>> header, and asks you for an exception (and then the usual
>> exception processing goes on).
>> 
>> I guess if a site wants to do this, it should work, and we should
>> make sure nothing has been written that implies the
>> converse.  Unless there is a snag I ain't seeing.

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Tuesday, 18 September 2012 13:26:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:34 UTC