- From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 09:44:32 -0800
- To: Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl>
- Cc: Tracking Protection Working Group <public-tracking@w3.org>
I am sorry Walter, I simply don’t understand. I am saying, if you write a browser or other UA, that accepts plugins or other add-ons, whose DNT header can be affected by those plug-ins or add-ons, you need to engineer the way that they work so that the rules are followed. There are many ways to do this. We are entirely within the end-system ‘house’ here; we have not stepped into a garden, walled or not. On Jan 14, 2014, at 12:11 , Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl> wrote: > On 14/01/2014 20:55, David Singer wrote: > >> I have not heard from Brad yet, but I think we should have an option that reads: >> >> "A user-agent that permits an extension or plug-in to configure or inject a DNT header is jointly responsible, with the plug-in or extension, for ensuring that the rules are followed.” >> >> Indeed, I think that this might reach amicable consensus. (We would leave the existing ban on network intermediaries, and manage plug-ons or add-ins this way.) > > This may work in walled-garden scenarios, but not in an open source > world. I would very strongly object to such an outcome. > > Regards, > > Walter > David Singer Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Wednesday, 15 January 2014 17:45:07 UTC