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

Re: QUESTION FOR BROWSERS who have partial DNT implementations today - plans to fully implement? (i.e. DNT:0)

From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 12:36:20 +0200
To: public-tracking@w3.org, Alex Fowler - Mozilla <afowler@mozilla.com>
Cc: Sid Stamm <sid@mozilla.com>, JC Cannon <jccannon@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <1476751.1fuBaUyte2@hegel.sophia.w3.org>

thanks for that comment. I know that the hard issues are with the 
user interface and would like to recommend us some patience. Maybe 
the marketeers can help here, maybe not. W3C will do whatever eases 
the pain here. 

Just catching up a bit before starting again, let me emphasize that 
the lack of full browser implementations killed P3P. And the lack of 
full implementation - including API and DNT:0 state - will kill DNT. 

IMHO DNT is NOT just an improper implementation of a pseudo blocking 
tool that blocks things by sending a 5 character string to people 
who may want to take that into account. DNT is a complex 
communication mechanism that will create an eco-system. And the eco-
system will not work with software that can only spawn DNT:1 
headers. The DNT:1 header promise will remain a marketing bubble 
without implementation of the rest IMHO and not be able to solve the 
EU cookie problem that one can see already making ugly marks on UK 

I hope, not only people from Mozilla will read that statement..


On Wednesday 25 July 2012 16:26:30 Sid Stamm wrote:
> Hi Chris,
> (I sent this message, though apparently I picked the wrong thread
> for reply, so I'm re-sending this to the mailing list.  Apologies
> for repeating myself.)
> We plan to provide an option for all Firefox users to send a DNT:0
> option.  We've implemented this in our prototype Firefox OS [0]
> and are currently working to design and deploy three-state
> settings for our desktop and Android browsers.  There's
> difficulty in the wording and user interface, and we're working
> through that now.  (For example, nobody will want to enable a
> "tell sites to track me", and checkboxes don't have three
> states).
> We are currently working to find something our usability experts
> agree will work and will deploy the third state to our users
> soon.
> There's no real *technical* hold-ups here per se; rather, the
> difficulty is around user experience: we need to ship something
> to users that they understand and can properly act on so that it
> is valuable.  This takes time and planning to get right, as I'm
> sure you understand.
> Cheers,
> Sid
Received on Friday, 27 July 2012 10:36:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:38:51 UTC