- From: David Wainberg <david@networkadvertising.org>
- Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 00:04:48 -0400
- To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- CC: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe@cdt.org>, "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
On 9/18/12 12:57 PM, David Singer wrote: > >>> yup. >>> >>> 'indicates an explicit indication by the user that they have not asked not to be tracked' is the tightest literal meaning, but I hate sentences with that number of negatives. can anyone do better? >> Perhaps: "indicates an explicit indication by the user that they are willing to be tracked" > probably good enough, and we can avoid the repetition by using a simple 'is' > > "is an explicit indication by the user that they are willing to be tracked (by the site receiving the header)" > It still bothers me to use the word "tracked" without defining it. Although intro and explanatory text talks about users expressing preferences with regard to tracking, I don't think the spec actually says that in light of DNT:1 a site may not track. Instead it lists out fairly complex terms about what a party may or may not do, without mention of tracking.
Received on Wednesday, 19 September 2012 04:05:22 UTC