- From: JC Cannon <jccannon@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 00:00:18 +0000
- To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Tracking Protection Working Group WG <public-tracking@w3.org>
This sounds odd to me as well. I thought DNT:0 was the same as no header. JC Twitter -----Original Message----- From: David Singer [mailto:singer@apple.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 3:58 PM To: Tracking Protection Working Group WG Subject: Re: Request to close ISSUE-78 On Dec 20, 2011, at 12:50 , Kevin Smith wrote: > I see. So, if we stick to this definition, clearly no DNT header does NOT mean the same thing as DNT:0 because DNT:0 actually means DNT is turned on. However, if DNT:0 means DNT is on, but there is a local exception... It's a little odd to have a 'protocol' where the default behavior indicated by the absence of the header cannot be explicitly signaled in the header. Generally, it's possible to say "I want default behavior" explicitly. It's odd enough to notice, but not (IMHO) serious enough to add a value (-1?) to say "whatever, default behavior, please". David Singer Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Wednesday, 21 December 2011 00:00:59 UTC