- From: (unknown charset) Matthias Schunter <mts@zurich.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:01:34 +0100
- To: (unknown charset) public-tracking@w3.org
Hi Sean, the site specific exeptions do not cause extra effort unless you want to request them: - All sites always receive the 'correct' DNT header - If someone (e.g. a 1st party) has asked for exceptions for some / it's 3rd parties, then these third parties will receive DNT;0 from that point on - Naturally, all sites need to be able to deal with changing DNT preferences (DNT0 -> 1 and vice versa) since users may change their mind or exeptions may change. - You are right that the default state is not transmitted. What they receive is the actual DNT preference for their site. I.e., dealing with sometimes on / sometimes off is part of dealing with any user preference that can be changed. However, the DNT header always transmits the actual preference for the given site. - If they receive a DNT;1 and they do not like it, they can ask for a site-specitic exception. Does this clarify your question? Regards, matthias On 2/9/2012 3:28 PM, Sean Harvey wrote: > 2. The majority of third parties are probably not going to start by > supporting site specific exceptions because of the technical > complexity involved in sometimes-on/sometimes-off states, and the > work involved in creating site-specific partitions. What they want > to know is the user's default state so they can opt them out of > any cookie-ing and be done with it. Will they now be unable to do > this based on the current state of the dnt header spec? >
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2012 15:02:16 UTC