Re: Issue-207

On Apr 21, 2014, at 11:11 , Roy T. Fielding <> wrote:

> On Apr 21, 2014, at 7:12 AM, Rob van Eijk wrote:
>> Burying the explenation in a large text would not suffice in my view.
> Then don't bury it.
>> You can not expect the user to keep track of which company accepts his user agent of choice, and which companies do not. Especially since there can be more than just one reason why a syntactically valid user expression of choice was disregarded.
> I don't expect them to.  I don't expect a user to ever look at this
> field, or anything else in the protocol for that matter.  I expect
> regulators to look at them, and the occasional automated spider or
> extension driven by someone with advocacy in mind.

I think if we ever get to the point where the vast majority of servers implement DNT, and the exceptions etc. are rare enough to be worth flagging, we might start exposing them automatically to users, but right now, I tend to agree.  It’ll be users who ask for ‘privacy debugging mode’, advocates, regulators, and so on, who look.

David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.

Received on Monday, 21 April 2014 18:23:07 UTC