W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > April 2017

Re: Issues for Monday Call

From: Walter van Holst <walter@vanholst.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2017 17:40:46 +0200
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Message-ID: <5323fd5dd6e65de967dcdca6211bc064@vanholst.com>
On 2017-04-01 17:09, Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) wrote:

> What we need to clarify further is:
> - Why is the data required to be machine readable?

It allows for a much better user experience through extensions that can 
apply rules/webs-of-trust etc.

> - What actions will the browser take once it has read and parsed this 
> data?
> - What bad things would happen if the data continues to be available in
> human-readable form only?

We're missing an opportunity.

> - Why couldnt the fields be defined in a "EU compliance" note (since
> they seem to be specific to the EU)?
> 
> If the browser will only store this data, then a consent-metadata blob
> (JSON or so) would be sufficient. Further notes and best practices can
> then structure this object further.

Sounds like a worthwhile avenue to explore.

> Just my 2cents. Let us discuss this further on monday.

With regrets, I am down with a bit of a cold, so can't join. Which is 
really a pity given the importance of this issue.
Received on Monday, 3 April 2017 15:41:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:40:34 UTC