- From: Matthias Schunter <mts-std@schunter.org>
- Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 08:56:18 +0200
- To: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <50387712.30308@schunter.org>
Hi Team, the information I've extracted from the discussion stream looks as follows: - ISSUE 112 (How are subdomains handled) should not be closed The following Issue is not affected by this batch closing: - ISSUE-152: User Agent Compliance: feedback for out-of-bound consent As a consequence (unless someone points me to messages that I've overlooked), I will close the other issues below. CONGRATULATIONS! This has brought us a large step closer towards closing the remaining issues on the TPE document! Regards, matthias On 15/08/2012 18:16, Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) wrote: > Hi Team, > > > in preparation for tomorrow's TPE call, I started assessing the status > of our TPE-related ISSUES: > > I'd like to thank Roy and David for preparing the next major revision > of the TPE spec! They have performed a huge push towards implementing > all our prior discussions and draft agreements as updates to the TPE > spec. As a consequence, many of our informal agreements are now > documented in the text and we have the opportunity to make a large > leap towards closing the remaining TPE issues. > > Enclosed is a list of issues that I believe satisfy the following > criteria: > - Have been discussed before > - Proposed text is in TPE spec > - I believe that all participants can live with the current text > > I would like to double-check that my perception is correct and then > close these issues. > > PLEASE: > - Double check that you can live with the proposed resolution and the > current corresponding text in the TPE > - Send any comments and clarifying questions to the mailing list > - Send a note if you cannot live with one of the proposed resolutions > to the chairs and editors at: > team-tracking-editors@w3.org [In this case, some of the issues will > be discussed further] > > DEADLINE: August 20 > - If I do not get further input on any of the issues below, I plan to > close them by August 20 > > > Regards, > matthias > > -----------------------------------------8>--- ISSUES to be closed + > proposed Resolutions --------------------- > > http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/47 > ISSUE-47: Should the response from the server indicate a policy that > describes the DNT practices of the server? > RESOLUTION: > - A policy attribute at the well-known URI may point to a site-wide > policy (Section 5.4.1) > - The response header may identify a more specific policy at a > different URL (Section 5.3.2) > > http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/61 > ISSUE-61: A site could publish a list of the other domains that are > associated with them > RESOLUTION: > - "partners" attribute at the well-known URI identifies partner sites > (Section 5.4.1) > > http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/84 > ISSUE-84: Make DNT status available to JavaScript > RESOLUTION: > - Revised text in section 4.3.3 > > http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/107 > ISSUE-107: Exact format of the response header? > RESOLUTION: > - Revised response header values in Section 5.2 and syntax in 5.3 > > http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/112 > ISSUE-112: How are sub-domains handled for site-specific exceptions? > <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/112> > RESOLUTION: > - Exceptions are granted for fully qualified domain names (Section 6.3.1) > > http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/124 > How shall we express responses from a site to a user agent (headers, > URIs, ...)? <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/124> > RESOLUTION: > - Well-known URI + Headers where the essential information needs to be > provided with one of the mechanisms > > http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/128 > ISSUE-128: HTTP error status code to signal that tracking is required? > <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/128> > RESOLUTION: > - "409" ;-) > > http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/130 > ISSUE-130: User-granted Exceptions b) Web-wide Exception for Third > Parties (thisthirdparty, anywhere) > <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/130> > RESOLUTION: > - We agreed that web-wide exceptions shall be possible. Text in > Section 6.5 > > http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/155 > ISSUE-155: Remove the received member from tracking status > <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/155> > RESOLUTION: > - Removed attribute has been removed > since we assume reliable communication
Received on Saturday, 25 August 2012 06:56:46 UTC