- From: Matthias Schunter <mts-std@schunter.org>
- Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 14:34:33 +0200
- To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- CC: Andy K <akahl@evidon.com>, Nicholas Doty <npdoty@w3.org>, public-tracking@w3.org, Colin O'Malley <colin@evidon.com>
- Message-ID: <4FB0FBD9.4020107@schunter.org>
Hi! I read Andy's mails as asking to allow per-site decisions instead of global on/off preferences. I believe that this is a good idea and I suggest to change the non-normative language in Section 3 by adding: "Note that the scoping of preferences is left to the user agents. A user agent may choose when and how to collect preference. E.g., one user agent may ask for a global preference at install-time while another may ask for individual sites." Andy: Would this satisfy your input? Regards, matthias On 17/04/2012 02:12, David Singer wrote: > Andy > > do you have specific suggested edits, or suggested edits in specific > places, that you think would help clarify this? > > On Apr 16, 2012, at 21:40 , Andy K wrote: > >> The latter, and if it's in there, I missed it... so I'd argue it >> isn't anywhere nearly as precisely expressed as the former case, >> which is discussed at length. >> >> The concern is that the spec as written has focuses directly on the >> inital act of a user's browser-wide, every-call decision. This is >> less likely (in my estimation) to be enacted by a user than a >> opt-out choice delivered at the time of transaction. At the very >> least, the latter should be considered as potentially beneficial, and >> I'd like to see the spec reflect directly that in addition to DNT:1 >> excepted to DNT:0 in some cases, it is advisable to build a mechanism >> for DNT:no prefrence excepted to DNT:1. >> >> /ak >> >> *Andy Kahl* >> Senior Product Manager >> <image002.png> >> c. 408.931.0573 >> andy@evidon.com <mailto:andy@evidon.com> >> http://www.evidon.com <http://www.evidon.com/> >> twitter: @evidon >> facebook/EvidonInc >> >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Nicholas Doty <npdoty@w3.org >> <mailto:npdoty@w3.org>> wrote: >> >> Hi Andy, >> >> Thanks for the note. I'm not entirely sure I understand the >> suggestion: is the idea that the header mechanism could be used >> to send DNT:0 to certain sites (even when Do Not Track was not >> broadly enabled) to indicate consent for tracking? I believe that >> possibility is covered in part by "6.6 Exceptions without a DNT >> header" http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html#exceptions-when-not-enabled >> >> Or are you thinking of the opposite situation: that a user might >> not have expressed a general Do Not Track preference for all >> their web browsing, but still want to send DNT:1 in some >> situations? I believe that's also compatible with the current >> text of the specification, but maybe that isn't clear to readers >> (or perhaps others in the Working Group even disagree). >> >> Thanks, >> Nick >> >> On Apr 12, 2012, at 12:46 PM, Andy K wrote: >> >>> Hello all - Andy Kahl, product manager with Evidon here. I've >>> been following the progress of the Tracking Protection >>> Expression specification closely, and let me thank the group >>> from the start for the quality work you've done. >>> >>> I have a suggestion that relates to section 6 (working from the >>> 2012-03-13 working draft), titled Site-specific Exceptions. This >>> section generally deals with the notion that the DNT preference >>> has been enabled in a browser and an exception should be made - >>> that is - DNT is set to 1 by policy but should be set to 0 in a >>> specific case. >>> >>> However, there is no opposite exception discussed - that is - if >>> no previous DNT preference has been expressed, but a user would >>> like to send a DNT expression to a specific site/domain. I >>> propose that this notion of DNT inclusion (rather than >>> exception), available whether or not they've made prior >>> user-agent policy decisions, be captured in the document. This >>> woud enable (and encourage) context-based solutions like the >>> platform Evidon provides to adopt the DNT header along with >>> current cookie-based opt-outs, without relying on the user to >>> make a top-level browser configuration decision about DNT. >>> >>> It appears that many of the lower-level implementation questions >>> around a concept like this are left to those who would execute >>> (that is, the browser manufacturers), so I'll refrain from >>> making those kinds of suggestions here. Please let me know if >>> more detail along those lines is appropriate. >>> >>> Thanks again for your hard work, and in advance for your >>> consideration. >>> >>> /ak >>> >>> *Andy Kahl* >>> Senior Product Manager >>> <image002.png> >>> c. 408.931.0573 >>> andy@evidon.com <mailto:andy@evidon.com> >>> http://www.evidon.com <http://www.evidon.com/> >>> twitter: @evidon >>> facebook/EvidonInc >>> >> >> > > David Singer > Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc. >
Received on Monday, 14 May 2012 12:35:02 UTC