Re: ACTION-114 ISSUE-107 : Revised response header.

typo fixed here

On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Sean Harvey <sharvey@google.com> wrote:

> Hi Tom,
>
> I've reviewed the revised response header extensively with my teams
> internally and it does indeed seem entirely manageable from the perspective
> of large servers as well as publisher operations teams, which is exciting.
>
> I do however want to mention one thing related to site-specific
> exemptions. I am not clear on this point, but want to make sure that
> adherence to site-specific exemptions by a server is optional.
>
> In particular, I want to make sure that, given that the server should be
> able to understand what the user's default DNT value is regardless of
> whether or not a site-specific exemption is in effect, the server may
> choose to ignore that exception, while still fully respecting DNT.
>
> The concern is that some systems may wish to respect a DNT header being on
> (in part) by setting an opt-out cookie. This opt-out cookie would mean that
> site-specific exemptions will be ignored and the user will be treated as
> DNT=on in all cases. This is practically easier in some cases, and we would
> want this to at least be an option for a server when faced with an array of
> DNT states.
>
> In your view is this currently the case in the revised header spec, and
> does anyone have any objections to this?
>
> sean
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 12:01 AM, Tom Lowenthal <tom@mozilla.com> wrote:
>
>> ACTION-114 ISSUE-107 ISSUE-47 ISSUE-48 ISSUE-51 ISSUE-76 ISSUE-90
>> ISSUE-106 ISSUE-45
>>
>> Here is the latest version of the response header. I've also added it to
>> the action on the tracker.
>>
>> Editors: it is in markdown, but *do not panic*, any of us can convert it
>> to HTML at a moment's notice.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Sean Harvey
> Business Product Manager
> Google, Inc.
> 212-381-5330
> sharvey@google.com
>



-- 
Sean Harvey
Business Product Manager
Google, Inc.
212-381-5330
sharvey@google.com