RE: Batch closing of TPE related issues

Thank you Rob – I agree on not transforming either.

- Shane

From: Rob van Eijk [mailto:rob@blaeu.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 8:27 AM
To: Rigo Wenning; Shane Wiley
Cc: David Singer; public-tracking@w3.org; Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation)
Subject: Re: Batch closing of TPE related issues


If the control link includes the means to easily revoke out of band consent, I am fine with pairing OOBC with the control link.

UGE and OOBC are two different concepts and should not be transformed IMHO. UGE is a browserside thing. OOBC is a serverside thing.

Rob
Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org<mailto:rigo@w3.org>> wrote:

On Wednesday 19 June 2013 02:58:25 Shane Wiley wrote:

I believe by pairing the OOBC with the control link, we've removed the
likelihood of false options for users.  If a company were to really
want to make it hard to reverse an OOBC, they would attempt to hide
it from the user and use other persistent means of storing the user's
consent.  I believe places OOBC and UGE in a central location for
users is a far better outcome in all cases.

Fine and convinced (don't know about Rob though). But does this address
the transformation of UGE into OOBC and the other way around? I think
the transition, if possible, needs some guidance in the text.

--Rigo