Re: ACTION-390: alternative UA affordances for DNT choice

On Thursday 25 April 2013 13:36:32 Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> However, this entire discussion seems to be ignoring our prior
> decisions on ISSUE-4. If we are going to have requirements on the
> configuration of a user preference, they need to be consistent with
> the protocol expressed in TPE.  So, at minimum, you have to
> incorporate all of the options regarding how those preferences
> might be set, as described in section 3 of TPE.
> The reason we have section 3 in TPE is because the semantics of a
> header field are defined by how, why, and when that field is sent.
> These cannot be separated from the protocol, since they are the
> most important part of any protocol (syntax is often trivially
> rearranged at the end of discussing what should be communicated).



Received on Friday, 26 April 2013 00:14:47 UTC