- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 23:24:59 -0700
- To: "public-tracking@w3.org WG" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Since the first-party vs third-party issues will now be moved to the compliance spec, I have removed them from the TPE spec. Below is the HTML section in case someone would like to paste it into the compliance spec. ....Roy <section id='1-3-party'> <h2>Determining 1st vs 3rd Party Role</h2> <p> There is nothing in HTTP that distinguishes requests made to first-party sites versus requests made to third-party sites. However, a browser knows which requests are directed by the user (making them first-party) and which requests are automatic or scripted subrequests to a site other than the first-party. Should we attempt to communicate that distinction in the DNT protocol or depend on origin servers using different URI patterns to distinguish their third-party resources? </p> <p class='issue'><a href="http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/60">ISSUE-60</a>: Will a recipient know if it itself is a 1st or 3rd party?</p> <p class='issue'><a href="http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/77">ISSUE-77</a>: How does a website determine if it is a first or third party and should this be included in the protocol?</p> <p> Likewise, a piece of content might be retrieved from a site as a first-party resource request or be embedded within the context of an <code>iframe</code> as a third-party subrequest. Should we attempt to have the browser communicate that context to any scripts or subrequests within the embedded content? </p> <p class='issue'><a href="http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/62">ISSUE-62</a>: The browser or embedding site could send an architectural signal to an embedded iframe so it knows it's in a 3rd-party context</p> </section>
Received on Tuesday, 1 November 2011 06:26:30 UTC