W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > October 2011

Re: [ISSUE-81, ACTION-13] Response Header Format

From: Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 17:13:59 -0400
Message-Id: <D0917227-AA36-43B7-916B-47F137DF4E17@opera.com>
Cc: Matthias Schunter <mts@zurich.ibm.com>, public-tracking@w3.org
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
About who is supposed to be using DNT.

Le 28 oct. 2011 à 16:09, Roy T. Fielding a écrit :
> It would be true if we expected everyone to be browsing with DNT and verification on.  We don't expect that.

Well, this is not our concerns sincerely. That it becomes 
a massive success or not is out of our reach and should not 
be part of our design process.

> In other words, the ultra-paranoid
> mode or the regulators checking for deployment/compliance.

I do not think, the word "ultra-paranoid" is appropriate in the 
context of our work. Users may choose different type of data 
sharing for different sites and not necessary uniformly.

> Hence, sending a link back on every single request is far more expensive than
> a few privacy-enabled browsers sending extra requests when they want to ensure
> their own preferences are being honored.

The HTTP header size is not anymore the expensive part on the Web. 
The HTTP request is. Any kind of additional resources we have to fetch 
is more latency and more opportunities to break the user experience. 
Even more so, if there is a dependency of the type "fetch these other 
resources if this first one was appropriate."

Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/
Developer Relations & Tools, Opera Software
Received on Friday, 28 October 2011 21:14:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:38:26 UTC