- From: Peter Cranstone <peter.cranstone@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 08:23:04 -0600
- To: W3 Tracking <public-tracking@w3.org>
Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2012 14:23:51 UTC
I would suggest that those interested read the following article Do Not Track as a Contract. http://www.jetlaw.org/?page_id=11363 Click on the PDF icon to the left of the title to download the content. This is the kind of thing that is now at stake with this spec. There were no regulators around for RFC 2616 (HTTP) but this time it's different. Policy AND Tech are now colliding and the lawyers have the ability to write content faster than the techies can design a protocol. The expectation of a binary protocol (DNT:1) is very simple. It means what it says from the users perspective. It's now time to align that with the decisions made by the server. I doubt failure is going to be an option in this case. Peter ___________________________________ Peter J. Cranstone 720.663.1752
Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2012 14:23:51 UTC