W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > January 2012

Re: ACTION-43: added user-agent-managed site-specific exception proposal to Editor's Draft

From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:05:07 +0100
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Cc: Sid Stamm <sid@mozilla.com>, JC Cannon <jccannon@microsoft.com>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Message-ID: <4060289.Lbv2RKGSpR@freud>
On Thursday 19 January 2012 13:31:09 Sid Stamm wrote:
> Users may choose one UA over another because it makes the right decisions
> for them... then the UAs will cater to their set of users based on how
> those users want to interact with the UA and the web.

I came here, because of the conflict that may arise if the site is not honoring 
DNT and the user sends DNT. Or if the site wants to track and the user is 
still "unset". Or if you want to "opt-back-in". How does the user interaction 
work. Do I opt-back-in by default in my configuration?
> 
> It's a good idea to spec out how the UA communicates with web servers, and
> makes sense to provide non-normative guidance or examples about
> implementation techniques, but not normative language dictating how user
> agents help users make choices.

I think we are talking passed each other (with David and JC too). Probably 
because I sound like I'm in  trenches that I'm really not wanting to be in. I 
am not taking about an OK button for every cookie. We are trying to get to the 
opposite and only bother the user if it makes sense. But to be aware, a site 
may want to trigger such a prompt. Because I don't believe that browser 
manufacturers can anticipate every possible situation in their configuration or 
implementation. I was talking about such an option. 

Best, 

Rigo
Received on Friday, 20 January 2012 14:05:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:38:30 UTC