Re: [TPE] Remove or truncate section 7.6 Transfer of an exception to another third party

I agree that deleting would be the best outcome. The compliance 
discussion around transitivity in a RTB use case is handled in the TCS.
Deleting would keep the buildingblocks in the TPE clean.

Rob

Roy T. Fielding schreef op 2015-02-03 02:42:
> I stumbled across this while reading the TPE diff on last week's call.
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html#transitive-exceptions
> 
> Section 7.6 contains a rather complicated description of what a second
> third party must do when it receives DNT:0 data received from a first
> third party because the first third party has been granted a
> site-specific UGE via some site's first party, wherein the second
> third party is required somehow to use a TSV of "C" (even though that
> is quite impossible unless the user agent is making a request directly
> to that other third party, which would make them a first third party)
> and also a qualifier of "t".
> 
> This has so many problems that I have difficulty even stating them.
> 
>  1) the UA sent DNT:0, so we have no further requirements ... there
>     is no option in DNT for a user agent to tell a third party that
>     "you can track me but don't share any of that tracking stuff with
>      some other third party".
> 
>  2) there is no request to the second third party, so they cannot
>     respond with "C" even if they could distinguish this new meaning
>     for DNT:0
> 
>  3) there is no "t" qualifier defined by TCS.
> 
>  4) this section is all about Compliance, so doesn't belong in TPE.
> 
> I would like to delete 7.6.  Please.  If not, we should at least
> delete its last three paragraphs.
> 
> If deleted, remnants of 7.6 could be moved to TCS, though I personally
> believe that none of it would work.  My guess is that the "G" response
> is a better way to address these issues, in general.
> 
> ....Roy

Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2015 09:48:43 UTC