- From: Mike O'Neill <michael.oneill@baycloud.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 23:47:45 +0100
- To: "'Chris Mejia'" <elementslifestylegroup@hotmail.com>, "'Roy T. Fielding'" <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Cc: "'W3C DNT Working Group Mailing List'" <public-tracking@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Chris, What is not implementable at scale & in real-time, the UGE? I can assure you it can and in fact already has. Mike > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Mejia [mailto:elementslifestylegroup@hotmail.com] > Sent: 06 June 2014 19:50 > To: Roy T. Fielding; Mike O'Neill > Cc: W3C DNT Working Group Mailing List > Subject: Re: issue-170 > > Agree with Roy on this. Logistically/technically speaking, the proposal is > not implementable at scale, in real-time. > > -- > Chris Mejia > > > > > > > On 6/6/14, 10:56 AM, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote: > > >On Jun 4, 2014, at 5:38 AM, Mike O'Neill wrote: > >> If a 1st Party receives a request with DNT:0 set then data regarding > >>the user MAY be used or shared but, if the header signal resulted from > >>an explicitly-granted exception, only for the purposes that were clearly > >>and comprehensively explained when the exception was granted. > > > >There is no need for this text. If a server receives DNT:0, > >it will behave according to its own set of practices for DNT:0. > >It is not going to change its practices on a per-user basis. > > > >If those practices exceed whatever the server might have stated in some > >request for a UGE, the server owner is inviting regulatory action or > >lawsuits. We do not need to say anything about servers that mislead. > > > >If the server does not request UGEs (and thus only receives DNT:0 when > >set web-wide), then it has no control over what was explained to the user > >and is instead relying on the browser configuration. What the browser > >configuration means is largely outside the scope of compliance, though > >we all hope that they will eventually become consistent. > > > >....Roy -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (MingW32) Comment: Using gpg4o v3.3.26.5094 - http://www.gpg4o.com/ Charset: utf-8 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTkkUQAAoJEHMxUy4uXm2J4M4H/1ERdk61XdWOyBj9Z53CHckx 6vNiU1hgnGzI3cpBeOdSgcaPfwS6IMRfpe+LNQKvuXZHlfEKsnUYpgtqiqkSdQZV ej35JIN8pSPCxAp7MXoQxQ0uihh/oNMF/nM8fJdb4mAPDyt/yiJ3QcVO/p7mimP2 EYaQVtSQDqL75wCyeQcBXVSL10FhuVkvqW22DFp95fb+5P1XvG5jnux1GJvjQfB4 ZIArJ8/y5rNtURwvoBZc0mS/sc4iPYK0d77qlzLp/zHVCO7JsWdd/syuQ806M0CR E3nArZqmrx8EQIzPq47Q7ssA9/7qRyCk7hFqHYADMN3qqBnVeDvJojVD4Ix/irU= =g/oK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Friday, 6 June 2014 22:48:24 UTC