- From: Chris Mejia <elementslifestylegroup@hotmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 16:02:29 -0700
- To: Nick Doty <npdoty@w3.org>
- CC: "public-tracking-comments@w3.org" <public-tracking-comments@w3.org>
Dear Nick, No, they do not adequately resolve my concerns. But I resigned from the group some time ago, when I realized the process was rigged to a predetermined outcome of a few players. I wish you all the best personally, but this thing that's been created by the W3C has nothing meaningful to do with privacy. Sincerely, Chris Mejia > On Jul 12, 2015, at 2:27 PM, "Nick Doty" <npdoty@w3.org> wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > Thank you for your comments (last June) on the TPE Last Call Working Draft. > > (1) The requirements on when user agents may send DNT:1 signals on behalf of a user as detailed in Section 4 of the TPE. The group previously rejected providing more detailed requirements; you do not provide new information or a proposal to cause us to reopen this issue. We revisited this issue during the Last Call process in considering a proposal to require information about the DNT setting party within the DNT field, but that proposal was rejected by the group. > > See also: TPE Last Call comments, re: validation of user signals (issue-260) > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking-comments/2015Jun/0008.html > > (2) The decision to define tracking and context in the TPE was previously resolved by the group; you do not provide new information to justify reopening this long-discussed issue. > > (3) The working group previously resolved to include support for the exception mechanism as a mandatory element of the TPE. > > Please let us know whether these explanations resolve your concerns. > > Thanks, > Nick Doty, W3C > (for Tracking Protection Working Group Co-Chairs: Carl, Justin and Matthias)
Received on Sunday, 12 July 2015 23:02:58 UTC