Re: Today's call: summary on user agent compliance

There is a simple solution.

Server sees UA from MSIE 10 and sees that DNT:1 is set
Sends a nice "marketing approved" message to the consumer and asks "is
this your intent?"
User says yes, server sets a cookie
Problem solved


Peter
___________________________________
Peter J. Cranstone
720.663.1752








On 6/13/12 4:44 PM, "Rigo Wenning" <rigo@w3.org> wrote:

>On Wednesday 13 June 2012 15:25:32 Kevin Smith wrote:
>> Our currently defined protocol does provide a way to indicate who
>> set the value - the presence of a DNT:1 was intended to
>> communicate the user's intent.  If DNT:1 is set by default, there
>> is no way to communicate to the server the user's
>> intent.  Therefore, it is impossible for that a UA which sends
>> DNT:1 by default to send a valid DNT request since they cannot in
>> any way express the user's intent.
>
>You're digging into (silly) trenches instead of looking for a
>solution. We are repeating the same dialog for the n-th time:
>
>"The WG has decided the UA must represent a user's preference. A
>default is not a preference. Let's ignore that user agent"
>
>versus
>
>"The protocol does not tell you whether a signal was sent as a
>result of a user preference, but you can trigger an exception or not
>respond at all. Because there will be any number of user agents and
>options. In case you refuse the header, you can't claim compliance"
>
>Can we go beyond that and start brainstorming again? I'm conscious
>about the potential loss of revenue. There must be a more
>intelligent way out than just claim "bad user agent".
>
>Rigo
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2012 22:50:17 UTC