Private mode

Hi,

Looking at the 15 October draft I have a couple (loosely speaking) of comments.

1. I think it would be useful to state the goals of private mode explicitly in terms of priority - which I believe at a high level is the order they are currently listed, but there may be finer-grained choices to make.

The fact that any option falls through to "fail" and then "get informed consent" should make this less complex than it may seem at first glance.

2. I believe the terminology should consistently use "private mode" not "privacy mode". Without control over the server, privacy is in many ways a pipe dream since many privacy breaches are the basis of aggregating user information, and even within private mode such information can be aggregated.

3. Should a Do Not Track header be included? If so, as a matter of course? It seems reasonable to conclude that enabling Private Mode is a conscious decision to reduce tracking, in the terms of the discussion in the DNT group…

4. In the section on extensions, why is the use of additional services (translate, spellcheck, etc) not a MUST NOT?

cheers

--
Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com

Received on Thursday, 25 December 2014 16:30:42 UTC