- 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