- From: Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) <mts-std@schunter.org>
- Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 14:56:39 +0100
- To: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Hi Folks, enclosed are some issues that I believe to be resolved and that can be closed (and/or an action to include the text into the spec can be triggered). If you disagree, drop me a line and we discuss these issues is more detail. Regards, matthias ------------------------------------------------------------- How to handle multi-domains (ISSUE-171) http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/171 On these issues IMHO the status is as follows: - For multi-domains, we agreed that no explicit API should be included due to risks of mis-use. - Shane Wiley has proposed an approach how to allow multi-site exceptions without an explicit API: http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/314 Text: http://www.w3.org/mid/63294A1959410048A33AEE161379C8027484803519%2540SP2-EX07VS02.ds.corp.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------- ISSUE-116: How can we build a JS DOM property which doesn't allow inline JS to receive mixed signals? http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/116 Nick proposed to "The diff included below (also attached) would update the draft to move the JS doNotTrack property to window (from navigator) and remove the requestDNTStatus( ) method (which would now be redundant). " http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/318 I suggest to implement this change and close ISSUE-116 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ISSUE-138: Web-Wide Exception Well Known URI http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/138 Question was how a site without HTML can trigger exceptions (e.g. a tracking pixel). Nick has written non-normative text https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/319 Please drop me a line if you do not agree with Nicks text. ---------------------------------------------------- ISSUE-173: The TPE uses "top-level domain" in a sense that is not the normal meaning http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/173 David Singer has performed the corresponding edits. Drop me a line if this is not OK. ------------------------------ ISSUE-160 -- Do we need an API that will tell a host what its current exception status is? http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/160 Status: - Section 6.6 contains a proposed API that will be retained in the updated API proposal - Suggest to close this issue
Received on Monday, 5 November 2012 13:57:09 UTC