- From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2012 11:34:35 +0100
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Cc: public-tracking@w3.org, John Simpson <john@consumerwatchdog.org>
On Friday 02 November 2012 03:05:36 Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> If we want these servers to be compliant with DNT, we have to
> allow them to communicate non-compliance in specific instances
> without implying non-compliance in all instances.
Hear, Hear! Looks like a feature that we may want to discuss. What
about opening an issue?
I would suggest to add a status to 5.2 that introduces state "T":
T <strong>Ignoring</strong>: The designated resource believes
it has not received a valid DNT header and will behave as
if no DNT header was sent.
Would that work?
Rigo
Received on Friday, 2 November 2012 10:35:09 UTC