RE: ACTION-212: Draft text on how user agents must obtain consent to turn on a DNT signal from Shane Wiley on 2012-10-31 (public-tracking@w3.org from October 2012)

From: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 10:33:40 -0700
To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
CC: "Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation)" <mts-std@schunter.org>
Message-ID: <63294A1959410048A33AEE161379C802748480359C@SP2-EX07VS02.ds.corp.yahoo.com>

Rigo,

Good question - I believe you and I had agreed earlier that a response stating the signal is "invalid" would be sent back to the UA.

- Shane

-----Original Message-----
From: Rigo Wenning [mailto:rigo@w3.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 1:32 PM
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Cc: Shane Wiley; Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation)
Subject: Re: ACTION-212: Draft text on how user agents must obtain consent to turn on a DNT signal

On Wednesday 31 October 2012 08:11:37 Shane Wiley wrote:
> If Servers feel the UA did not meet this bar, they should feel free to 
> ignore the signal from that UA.

Shane, will the server signal that it ignores the signal? Or will it send back a valid compliance signal and still ignore?

Rigo

Received on Wednesday, 31 October 2012 17:34:39 UTC