Re: DNT: Agenda for April 10 call

On 4/11/13 7:25 AM, Alan Chapell wrote:
> Thanks Sid. Your email cut off after "should not be tied to other" -- can
> you complete that sentence?

Whoops.  Sorry.  Appears I sent an incomplete draft.  That should read:

If the intent here is that the activation of DNT (and exceptions) should
not be tied to other, clearly unrelated features: we should clarify
that's the point, and then I can probably support it.  Our goal should
be to make it obvious that when the DNT or exceptions thing is
activated, it is a result of a user wanting to turn it on.

(Given the opportunity, I'll expand on my point a little here.)

But at the same time, there's lots of related privacy features that can
be combined into one user experience; I can imagine a "tracking
protection" mode or something that enables DNT but also does some other
stuff with web cookies, cache, etc.  I think this should be allowed,
even though in this case DNT enablement is part of the "meta-feature".

On the other hand, I can also imagine a personalization mode that, when
enabled, turns on DNT:0, logs them into a social API endpoint, and
starts mashing up data for a more personal web experience.  In this
case, DNT is not central to the personalization mode, but clearly
helpful and should not be prohibited even though it's not the complete
story for this mode.

-Sid

> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 4/11/13 10:16 AM, "Sid Stamm" <sid@mozilla.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Apologies for not joining the call this week, I got pulled into a
>> face-to-face meeting and couldn't break away.
>>
>> On 4/10/13 9:19 AM, David Singer wrote:
>>> I think this is much better.
>>>
>>> I also appreciate that we should try not to use MUST for
>>> non-testable considerations, to the greatest extent possible.
>>
>> I agree with both of these statements.
>>
>> The problem I think we're trying to solve is "correct preference
>> solicitation".  I am encouraged by how Adrian's text covers both
>> exceptions and the global settings in one package.
>>
>> Aside, regarding non-normative text -- I think Alan's proposed
>> non-normative stuff was a reasonable block, though we should tweak it to
>> encompass exceptions UI on web properties if we decide to include it.
>> I'm not convinced it's absolutely crucial for inclusion, though, and it
>> does make the document more complicated.  Mozilla published a field
>> guide for DNT to aid in the practicalities of UI and implementation, and
>> I anticipate others will probably do the same regardless of what the
>> compliance doc says.
>>
>> Specific thoughts on Adrian's update:
>>
>>> On Apr 9, 2013, at 22:03 , Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I offer the following text for consideration as an alternative to
>>>> Alanšs proposal:
>>>>  
>>>> 5. User Preferences
>>>> User agents and web sites MUST obtain express and informed consent
>>>> when setting controls that affect the tracking preference
>>>> expression. The controls MUST communicate the user's preference in
>>>> accordance with the [TRACKING-DNT] recommendation.
>>>>  
>>>> User agents and web sites offering tracking preference choices to
>>>> users MUST follow the following user interface guidelines:
>>>> 1.     User agents and web sites are responsible for determining
>>>> the user experience by which a tracking preference is controlled;
>>>> 2.      User agents and web sites MUST ensure that tracking
>>>> preference choices are communicated to users clearly and accurately
>>>> and shown at the time and place the tracking preference choice is
>>>> made available to a user;
>>
>> In the spirit of David Singer's comments about MUST, how do we test that
>> the preference choices are clear and accurate?  (e.g., If "clear and
>> accurate" means a paragraph of text in the browser settings, I'm
>> concerned I will have trouble convincing our user experience designers
>> it's a good idea.)  If the intent here is that the activation of DNT
>> (and exceptions) should not be tied to other
>>
>>>> 3.      User agents and web sites SHOULD ensure that the tracking
>>>> preference choices describe the parties to whom DNT applies and
>>>> SHOULD make available explanatory text to provide more detailed
>>>> information about DNT functionality.
>>
>> I like this revision as it doesn't tie the available information to a
>> "link".
>>
>> -Sid
>>
>>
> 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 11 April 2013 14:42:54 UTC