Re: Modifying a DNT Header (ISSUE-153, ACTION-285)


This seems at odd with the initial consent requirement:

Key to that notion of expression is that it must reflect the user's preference, not the choice of some vendor, institution, or network-imposed mechanism outside the user's control. The basic principle is that a tracking preference expression is only transmitted when it reflects a deliberate choice by the user.

Consent is a MUST, but under this text choice could be overridden without even specifically violating the spec just because a vendor chose not to follow a best practice?  This doesn't appear very consistent.



Brooks Dobbs, CIPP | Chief Privacy Officer | KBM Group | Part of the Wunderman Network
(Tel) 678 580 2683 | (Mob) 678 492 1662 |


This email  including attachments  may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient,
 do not copy, distribute or act on it. Instead, notify the sender immediately and delete the message.

From: Jonathan Mayer <<>>
Date: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 1:52 AM
To: "<>" <<>>
Subject: Modifying a DNT Header (ISSUE-153, ACTION-285)
Resent-From: <<>>
Resent-Date: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 1:52 AM

Proposed text:

If user-controlled software modifies a DNT header sent by a user agent, it is a best practice for the software to clearly explain its modifications to the user.

Received on Wednesday, 31 October 2012 15:02:08 UTC