How would you "know" a US is noncompliant? On Jun 1, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Shane Wiley wrote: > David, > > I disagree. If you know that an UA is non-compliant, it should be fair to NOT honor the DNT signal from that non-compliant UA and message this back to the user in the well-known URI or Response Header. Further, we can provide information for the user to use a UA that is DNT compliant if they wish for their preference to be honored in that regard. > > - Shane > > From: David Singer [mailto:singer@apple.com] > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 2:17 PM > To: Kevin Smith > Cc: ifette@google.com; Lauren Gelman; Shane Wiley; Justin Brookman; public-tracking@w3.org > Subject: Re: tracking-ISSUE-150: DNT conflicts from multiple user agents [Tracking Definitions and Compliance] > > > On Jun 1, 2012, at 13:53 , Kevin Smith wrote: > > > A better question would be, does a compliant entity have to respect a signal sent from a non-compliant entity. > > I guess you can choose to be non-compliant to the protocol and try to plead that you because you believe the other end was non-compliant first, but second-guessing the other end will probably not be part of the protocol and therefore probably will not make you compliant. > > Even if we define that GP UAs cannot have it on by default, how would you tell the difference between a user that wanted it on, and a user who had not thought about it? To be compliant, you have to respect the first user's desires. > > Note that I am not agreeing with (or discussing) whether general-purpose UAs should turn it on by default, only whether servers have any business trying to second guess "gee, did he really really MEAN that or can I ignore it, I wonder?". The answer can only be 'no, I think. You have other mechanisms to criticize incorrect implementations than ignoring what they say. > > > David Singer > Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc. > ---------- John M. Simpson Consumer Advocate Consumer Watchdog 1750 Ocean Park Blvd. ,Suite 200 Santa Monica, CA,90405 Tel: 310-392-7041 Cell: 310-292-1902 www.ConsumerWatchdog.org john@consumerwatchdog.org
Received on Friday, 1 June 2012 21:27:18 UTC