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

The group has received new information about its language on browser user interface.  The group consensus had been that a mainstream browser must reflect a user's preference to be compliant.  Many members of the group only agreed so long as a website could not ignore DNT headers from a non-compliant browser.  Recent events include:
a large advertising company announced it would ignore DNT headers from an allegedly (but not actually) non-compliant web browser,
several advertising industry trade groups have endorsed that position, and
a popular open-source web server shipped with a configuration that would ignore DNT headers from that browser.

These episodes undermined a foundational assumption of the group's consensus on browser user interface.  I am uncertain whether that consensus remains intact.

Jonathan


On Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Dobbs, Brooks wrote:

> Jonathan,
>  
> 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    
>  
> --  
>  
> Brooks Dobbs, CIPP | Chief Privacy Officer | KBM Group | Part of the Wunderman Network
> (Tel) 678 580 2683 | (Mob) 678 492 1662 | kbmg.com (http://kbmg.com)  
> brooks.dobbs@kbmg.com
>  
>  
>  
> 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 <jmayer@stanford.edu (mailto:jmayer@stanford.edu)>
> Date: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 1:52 AM
> To: "public-tracking@w3.org (mailto:public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org (mailto:public-tracking@w3.org)>
> Subject: Modifying a DNT Header (ISSUE-153, ACTION-285)
> Resent-From: <public-tracking@w3.org (mailto:public-tracking@w3.org)>
> 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.  
>