- From: Walter van Holst <walter@vanholst.com>
- Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2017 17:40:46 +0200
- To: public-tracking@w3.org
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