Re: ACTION-212: Draft text on how user agents must obtain consent to turn on a DNT signal

Not to imply that I agree that a server can ignore a facially valid DNT message, however the WG comes on this, I'd say if server plans to disregard DNT it MUST notify the UA.

----------
John M. Simpson
Consumer Advocate
Consumer Watchdog
2701 Ocean Park Blvd., Suite 112
Santa Monica, CA,90405
Tel: 310-392-7041
Cell: 310-292-1902
www.ConsumerWatchdog.org
john@consumerwatchdog.org

On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:33 AM, Shane Wiley wrote:

> Rigo,
> 
> Good question - I believe you and I had agreed earlier that a response stating the signal is "invalid" would be sent back to the UA.
> 
> - Shane
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rigo Wenning [mailto:rigo@w3.org] 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 1:32 PM
> To: public-tracking@w3.org
> Cc: Shane Wiley; Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation)
> Subject: Re: ACTION-212: Draft text on how user agents must obtain consent to turn on a DNT signal
> 
> On Wednesday 31 October 2012 08:11:37 Shane Wiley wrote:
>> If Servers feel the UA did not meet this bar, they should feel free to 
>> ignore the signal from that UA.
> 
> Shane, will the server signal that it ignores the signal? Or will it send back a valid compliance signal and still ignore?
> 
> Rigo
>