Re: June Change Proposal: Section 7

Hi Amy,

I've create ISSUE-210 on the Compliance June product; a new issue for the topic of this change proposal.

I've set up a wiki page for this proposal: http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Existing_Controls

Thanks,
Nick

On Jun 26, 2013, at 5:52 AM, "Amy Colando (LCA)" <acolando@microsoft.com> wrote:

> SECTION 7: INTERACTION WITH EXISTING USER PRIVACY CONTROLS
> 
> As currently drafted, this section is confusing, as it is not clear to which opt-outs the text is referring (user settings for a specific site? Email marketing opt-outs?).  In addition, the table text does not clarify the types of DNT signals that may be received.  If participants desire to incorporate Digital Advertising Alliance self-regulatory principles into the specification, we could reference those, but we also have concerns about including a reference to this program in a global specification where implementers may be in regions where the self-regulatory program has not been deployed.  We suggest this is a suitable topic for an implementation guide, and that the specification itself should be limited to general guidance to implementers.  The table itself should be deleted, and we submit the following text for review:
> 
> As a general principle, more specific settings override less specific settings, AS WHERE THE SPECIFIC CONSENT IN USER GRANTED EXCEPTIONS OVERRIDES GENERAL SETTINGS.  IN THE EVENT THAT A PARTY PERCEIVES A CONFLICT BETWEEN SETTINGS, A PARTY MAY SEEK CLARIFICATION FROM THE USER OR MAY HONOR THE MORE RESTRICTIVE SETTING.

Received on Thursday, 27 June 2013 01:32:43 UTC