RE: Issue 115, exemptions, best practices: Issue 25 and 34

I feel Karl brought out an important point. Too often people point to lack of use of a privacy feature as a sign of failure. We should be focusing on adoption, effectiveness and ease of use. We shouldn't be looking to ensure that all consumers enable or disable DNT or that either of the stakeholders in this process is unduly disadvantaged.

The DNT standard should provide consumers with the flexibility to make an informed choice of which sites or companies they want to trust, understanding that we can't dictate the UI for browser companies or websites. After the fact the consumer should be able to validate their DNT status with a site.

JC

-----Original Message-----
From: Karl Dubost [mailto:karld@opera.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 6:08 PM
To: Kevin Smith
Cc: public-tracking@w3.org Group WG
Subject: Re: Issue 115, exemptions, best practices: Issue 25 and 34


Le 23 févr. 2012 à 18:16, Kevin Smith a écrit :
> I think we are largely missing the boat here.  I understand the concern Jeff has that people will be coerced into granting site level exceptions.

It's not about missing the boat, it's about different categories of people having different expectations. (not saying that I agree with Jeff or you, but just that the spectrum is large.)


> I actually think the success of DNT may ride largely on how smooth the browsers are able to make the exception process for users, and how easy it is for sites to implement exceptions.  

Agreed, but acknowledge that the success of DNT doesn't mean at all a success for certain category of users with regards to personal data usage.  Basically the « success » of DNT is measured in terms of deployment. The satisfaction of consumers organization will be on how meaningful it is to have DNT on. 
One is not necessary the consequence of the other. :)





-- 
Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/
Developer Relations, Opera Software

Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 16:44:52 UTC