Re: ISSUE-59: Should the first party be informed about the DNT values sent to third parties

I have a question regarding:

- The web-wide exceptions are implemented client side and user agents
must be considered unreliable.

What constitutes an unreliable user agent? How can the server tell if it
is only checking for the presence of a DNT:1, 0 , or "" header value?




Peter
___________________________________
Peter J. Cranstone
720.663.1752








-----Original Message-----
From: Matthias Schunter <mts-std@schunter.org>
Date: Saturday, June 23, 2012 5:11 PM
To: W3 Tracking <public-tracking@w3.org>
Subject: ISSUE-59: Should the first party be informed about the DNT values
 sent to third parties
Resent-From: W3 Tracking <public-tracking@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 23:12:26 +0000

>Hi DNT team,
>
>
>my suggestioin to resolve this issue (based on our revised user-granted
>exception approach)
>
>1. If a first party receives DNT;1, it can assume that its third parties
>(in general) also receive DNT;1
>2. If a first party receives DNT;0, it can assume that its third parties
>(in general) also receive DNT;0
>3. If it needs more information, it can call the exceptioin API
>3. If it needs _reliable_ information, this must to be retrieved from
>the third parties.
>
>Why "in general"?
>- In general, a site-wide exception for this first party should trigger
>sending DNT;0 while else DNT;1 is sent
>- The web-wide exceptions are implemented client side and user agents
>must be considered unreliable.
>- This simple signal cannot reflect the compexity of user preferences.
>   The most simple example is that DNT;1 will be sent even if some third
>parties have a web-wide exception.
>
>Note that I believe that there is no need for more signaling (DNT;2, 3,
>...). I hope you all agree (if not, please tell me so).
>
>Comments / Feedback?
>
>
>Regards,
>matthias
>
>

Received on Saturday, 23 June 2012 23:35:26 UTC