W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > January 2014

Re: Agenda for January 15

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 09:44:32 -0800
Cc: Tracking Protection Working Group <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-id: <414E0A9D-FE9B-4A4E-A5D5-989263D04661@apple.com>
To: Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl>
I am sorry Walter, I simply don’t understand.

I am saying, if you write a browser or other UA, that accepts plugins or other add-ons, whose DNT header can be affected by those plug-ins or add-ons, you need to engineer the way that they work so that the rules are followed.  There are many ways to do this.

We are entirely within the end-system ‘house’ here;  we have not stepped into a garden, walled or not.

On Jan 14, 2014, at 12:11 , Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl> wrote:

> On 14/01/2014 20:55, David Singer wrote:
> 
>> I have not heard from Brad yet, but I think we should have an option that reads:
>> 
>> "A user-agent that permits an extension or plug-in to configure or inject a DNT header is jointly responsible, with the plug-in or extension, for ensuring that the rules are followed.”
>> 
>> Indeed, I think that this might reach amicable consensus. (We would leave the existing ban on network intermediaries, and manage plug-ons or add-ins this way.)
> 
> This may work in walled-garden scenarios, but not in an open source
> world. I would very strongly object to such an outcome.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Walter
> 

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Wednesday, 15 January 2014 17:45:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:41:42 UTC