W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > November 2012

Re: ACTION-212: Draft text on how user agents must obtain consent to turn on a DNT signal

From: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 08:45:31 -0500
To: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe@cdt.org>, Justin Brookman <justin@cdt.org>
CC: <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CCC90951.25A42%achapell@chapellassociates.com>
Thanks Joe. Here's the issue I'm trying to get at. I don't know of a
single UA that describes DNT completely or accurately as of today. And
when I complained about this issue and default browser settings at the F2F
in Redmond, Justin responded with the not particularly helpful advice that
I should "just go sue MSFT"

If you have a suggestion that seems less prescriptive but that gets at the
core issue I'm trying to address, I'm all ears...

On 11/13/12 3:54 PM, "Joseph Lorenzo Hall" <joe@cdt.org> wrote:

>On 11/13/12 2:06 PM, Justin Brookman wrote:
>> I leave it to others to opine as to whether it is even possible for all
>> user agents to monitor all other user agents' configuration of DNT
>> settings and confirm those choices with a user, but again it sounds
>> burdensome and prescriptive.  Would that confirmation also require
>> disclosure about the potential negative consequences of choosing to turn
>> on DNT?
>Despite the fact Justin is my boss, I want to emphasize and reiterate
>that this (the proposed language from David) is not a good idea and
>seems exceedingly prescriptive for UAs in this forum to have to
>incorporate some nebulous "keep DNT signal honest" technical mechanism.
>It should be about the protocol, the exchange, exceptions and what it
>takes to be considered compliant.
>best, Joe
>Joseph Lorenzo Hall
>Senior Staff Technologist
>Center for Democracy & Technology
>1634 I ST NW STE 1100
>Washington DC 20006-4011
>(p) 202-407-8825
>(f) 202-637-0968
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2012 13:46:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:45:00 UTC