- From: Mark Lizar <info@smartspecies.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:28:03 +0100
- To: public-privacy@w3.org
- Message-Id: <96247930-A0C5-4E59-AA54-3723FDF60D3F@smartspecies.com>
This is interesting.. Here is some snippits. form this article, 'Standards group to bar IE10 from claiming 'Do Not Track' compliance' http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9227881/Standards_group_to_bar_IE10_from_claiming_Do_Not_Track_compliance Isn't DNT by default an obviously appropriate privacy by design choice? - Mark Here are some snippits. ************************* "On Wednesday, the W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) standards organization reached a compromise on some aspects of "Do Not Track," the browser feature that signals whether a user wants online advertisers and websites to track his or her movements. The new draft of the standard, which may be months from passing in final form, explicitly bars browsers from setting Do Not Track (DNT) on by default." snip "An ordinary user agent MUST NOT send a Tracking Preference signal without a user's explicit consent," the draft reads ( download PDF http://tinyurl.com/6p5evwt ). That seemed squarely aimed at Microsoft. "But the W3C group that's been hammering out DNT disagreed, and said flatly that while Microsoft is perfectly free to do what it wants, it cannot call IE10 DNT compliant if it continues down its on-by-default road." snip "We don't have agreement on what the ramifications are. Can ad networks ignore a tracking request from IE10?" Mayer said. "Google and Yahoo and Adobe said they should be able to ignore the header from IE10, but Mozilla and Apple have said that ad networks should not ignore it." Microsoft was not available for comment on the W3C draft specification that would bar it from advertising IE10 as compliant with DNT.
Received on Monday, 11 June 2012 14:43:10 UTC