Re: Proposed version of the final TPE Note we plan to publish

I think that will be fine, though in fact we had more than enough sites implementing to support advancement. That was never a high bar.

....Roy


> On Oct 25, 2018, at 12:40 AM, Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) <mts-std@schunter.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Folks,
> 
> 
> I think that it is important to spell out the third parties and
> ecosystem since the "normal" sites are not the main bottleneck.
> 
> I had a quick discussion with Jason and we suggest to add:
> 
> "… there has not been sufficient willingness on the part of sites, third
> parties, and the ecosystem at large to adopt the specification nor any
> indications of planned support among user agents for the proposed
> extensions to justify further advancement."
> 
> Any objections to this addition?
> 
> 
> Regards,
> matthias
> 
> 
>> Am 25.10.2018 um 08:57 schrieb Jason A. Novak:
>> I think that it would be valuable to add to the introductory note the
>> notion that Wendy highlighted, namely that in addition to a failure of
>> UAs implementing the extensions as defined, there was a failure of sites
>> to respond to the DNT signal in a meaningful way as well.
>> 
>> I would propose incorporating Wendy’s text 
>> 
>>>>>  "insufficient sites showed willingness to adopt the
>>>>> specification and user-agents discontinued development of
>>>>> implementations
>> 
>> to the introduction as follows:
>> 
>>    This Note is a final outcome of the standardization process by the
>>    Tracking Protection Working Group for the extensions to HTTP known
>>    variously as DNT, Do Not Track, or Tracking Protection Expression.
>> 
>>    Since its last publication as a Candidate Recommendation, there has not
>>    been sufficient willingness on the part of sites to adopt the
>>    specification nor 
>>    any indications of planned support among user agents for the
>>    extensions as 
>>    defined to justify further advancement. The working group has therefore 
>>    decided to conclude its work and republish the final product as this
>>    Note, 
>>    with any future addendums to be published separately.
>> 
>> 
>> Best,
>> Jason
>> 
>> 
>>> On Oct 25, 2018, at 8:35 AM, Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation)
>>> <mts-std@schunter.org <mailto:mts-std@schunter.org>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Roy,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> thanks a lot for updating the draft. I am fine with the current version.
>>> 
>>> Team: These are the three documents we plan to publish as Notes:
>>> 1. Roy's CR-converted-to-Note:
>>> https://w3c.github.io/dnt/drafts/tracking-dnt.html
>>> 2. Mike's Addenum:
>>> https://w3c.github.io/dnt/drafts/PurposesAddendumMinimised.html
>>> 3. I assume that our former compliance spec will continue to exist as
>>> a Note.
>>> 
>>> Please send me any objections against publication of these drafts by end
>>> of October.
>>> 
>>> Question (to W3C):
>>> - Will there be an archived "former TPWG" page that contains all
>>> our work documents or should they refer to each other?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> matthias
>>> 
>>> Am 25.10.2018 um 00:50 schrieb Roy T. Fielding:
>>>>> On Oct 24, 2018, at 3:07 AM, Wendy Seltzer <wseltzer@w3.org> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 10/24/2018 03:31 AM, Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) wrote:
>>>>>> Dear TPWG,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> thanks to Roy who has converted the CR into a Note. The draft Note can
>>>>>> be found here:
>>>>>>  https://w3c.github.io/dnt/drafts/tracking-dnt.html
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We plan to publish this note along with the Addenum edited by Mike.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Jeff Jaffe suggested we add some context to the note. David Singer
>>>>>> and I
>>>>>> propose to add these two paragraphs to the Note:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> This Note is the outcome of the standardization process by the
>>>>>>> Tracking Protection Working Group that resulted in publishing this
>>>>>>> text as a Candidate Recommendation on DATE.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> An insufficient number of W3C members was willing to implement
>>>>>>> this standard that offers enhanced privacy and transparency. Due
>>>>>>> to lack of support, the TPWG working group then decided at the W3C
>>>>>>> technical plenary on 2019-10-24 to close down. The former
>>>>>>> Candidate Recommendation was then republished as this Note.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I think it's "insufficient sites showed willingness to adopt the
>>>>> specification and user-agents discontinued development of
>>>>> implementations" rather than specifically a lack of W3C members --
>>>>> non-member implementations are considered too.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> --Wendy
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I tried inserting the text as is and it just made things worse.
>>>> After various attempts at cleaning it up into something that non-wonks
>>>> can understand, here is what I added to the SOTD:
>>>> 
>>>>   This Note is a final outcome of the standardization process by the
>>>>   Tracking Protection Working Group for the extensions to HTTP known
>>>>   variously as DNT, Do Not Track, or Tracking Protection Expression.
>>>> 
>>>>   Since its last publication as a Candidate Recommendation, there has not
>>>>   been sufficient deployment of these extensions (as defined) to justify
>>>>   further advancement, nor have there been any indications of planned
>>>>   support among browser implementations. The working group has therefore
>>>>   decided to conclude its work and republish the final product as this
>>>>   Note, with any future addendums to be published separately.
>>>> 
>>>> However, this is small compared to all of the other front matter and
>>>> auto-generated information provided in the document.  Hence,
>>>> folks should view the actual document at
>>>> 
>>>>   https://w3c.github.io/dnt/drafts/tracking-dnt.html
>>>> 
>>>> to see it in context.  The W3Team might want to consider removing or
>>>> reducing some of that SOTD clutter when publishing it in TR space
>>>> (after a final fixed version is exported from the Respec draft).
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> 
>>>> ....Roy
>>>> 
>>> 
>>

Received on Friday, 26 October 2018 01:13:57 UTC