- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 16:30:21 -0700
- To: Tamir Israel <tisrael@cippic.ca>
- Cc: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
On Jun 12, 2012, at 3:55 PM, Tamir Israel wrote: > Hi Roy -- surely these decisions are not made in complete ignorance of how they will ultimately have to be operationalized? I think it would be foolhardy to ignore the existence of regional laws, out-of-band consent mechanisms, user account settings, and even the swaying power of the full moon to the extent any of these will necessarily form the backdrop of implementation. Tamir, decisions are not being made in ignorance. Everyone here is aware of those laws. Removing an invalid header field does not, in any way, impact those laws because the absence of a header field reverts the protocol to the true default: no expression received. And that includes the laws (current and future) for Canada, a fact that has been repeated multiple times. DNT is not the only consent mechanism. Right now it doesn't even qualify as one. Inside the tracking status resource you will see a link to a control resource. That resource is a consent mechanism. It doesn't depend on DNT. It doesn't disappear even if the DNT field is ignored. And that's just one of many possible consent mechanisms other than DNT that a site might use in order to comply with regional laws. ....Roy
Received on Tuesday, 12 June 2012 23:30:45 UTC