- From: Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl>
- Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 19:41:07 +0200
- To: public-tracking@w3.org
On 17/04/2014 20:22, Justin Brookman wrote: > On yesterday's call, we discussed ISSUE-207 (Conditions for Disregarding (or Not) DNT Signals) against the Compliance specification. Previously, some working group participants had argued that servers should never disregard or second guess DNT signals that are correctly formed (syntactically valid). However, as we crafted the TPE, we explicitly provided for a mechanism that allows servers to signal to a user that they are disregarding the signal. As adherence to TCS (or any other compliance regime) is voluntary anyway, there may no longer be an argument that TCS should prohibit disregarding certain DNT headers. In any event, no one on the call yesterday expressed support for the previous change proposal to require servers to honor all DNT requests. > > If anyone wishes to argue for amending the TCS to require compliance with all DNT signals --- or alternatively thinks that TCS needs to be revised to make it more clear that servers have the option to send a D (disregard) signal --- please reply on the mailing list. Otherwise, we will close the issue with no further edits as decided by consensus in two weeks. > Rob already as argued for this better than I can. It only stands to reason that syntactically well-formed DNT requests are honoured without second guessing the user. Regards, Walter
Received on Friday, 18 April 2014 17:42:36 UTC