ISSUE-161: Do we need a tracking status value for partial compliance?

Do we need a tracking status value for partial compliance?

State:

CLOSED

Product:

Tracking Preference Expression (DNT)

Raised by:

Roy Fielding

Opened on:

2012-08-22

Description:

There is a concern that the mere presence of a tracking status resource implies full compliance with the specification, because there is no option to say otherwise. There is some value in the other fields that may be useful to the user even if the server is not yet in full compliance.

Related Actions Items:

• ACTION-359 on Roy Fielding to Make text proposal on ISSUE-161 in draft with option block - due 2013-02-06, closed
• ACTION-361 on Roy Fielding to Include proposal how to resolve ISSUE-161 as an option into the TPE spec - due 2013-02-06, closed
• ACTION-386 on Roy Fielding to Add disregard/"D" response value to TPE draft - due 2013-03-27, closed

Related emails:

1. Re: Batch closing of TPE issues (Deadline: December 03) (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-12-17)
2. Re: Your concerns with ISSUE_197? (from dwainberg@appnexus.com on 2013-12-11)
3. Re: Your concerns with ISSUE_197? (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-12-09)
4. Re: Your concerns with ISSUE_197? (from dwainberg@appnexus.com on 2013-12-09)
5. RE: Batch closing of TPE issues (Deadline: December 03) (from bs3131@att.com on 2013-12-05)
6. RE: Batch closing of TPE issues (Deadline: December 03) (from wileys@yahoo-inc.com on 2013-12-05)
7. Your concerns with ISSUE_197? (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-12-04)
8. Concerns with ISSUE-161 (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-12-04)
9. RE: Batch closing of TPE issues (Deadline: December 03) (from michael.oneill@baycloud.com on 2013-12-04)
10. RE: Batch closing of TPE issues (Deadline: December 03) (from bs3131@att.com on 2013-12-04)
11. Re: Batch closing of TPE issues (Deadline: December 03) (from kulick@yahoo-inc.com on 2013-12-04)
12. Updated Agenda for December 04, 2013 call - V02 (from ninja@w3.org on 2013-12-03)
13. Re: Batch closing of TPE issues (Deadline: December 03) (from dwainberg@appnexus.com on 2013-12-03)
14. Re: Batch closing of TPE issues (Deadline: December 03) (from jack@networkadvertising.org on 2013-12-03)
15. Re: Batch closing of TPE issues (Deadline: December 03) (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-12-03)
16. Re: Batch closing of TPE issues (Deadline: December 03) (from kulick@yahoo-inc.com on 2013-11-21)
17. Re: Batch closing of TPE issues (Deadline: December 03) (from singer@apple.com on 2013-11-15)
18. Re: Batch closing of TPE issues (Deadline: December 03) (from jack@networkadvertising.org on 2013-11-14)
19. Re: Batch closing of TPE issues (Deadline: December 03) (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-11-14)
20. Re: Batch closing of TPE issues (Deadline: December 03) (from achapell@chapellassociates.com on 2013-11-14)
21. Batch closing of TPE issues (Deadline: December 03) (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-11-14)
22. Proposed text for ISSUE-161 (Disregard Signal) (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-06-20)
23. Re: Proposed text for ISSUE-161 (Disregard Signal) (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-06-19)
24. Re: Agenda for June 05 call on TPE (from jmayer@stanford.edu on 2013-06-05)
25. Agenda for June 05 call on TPE (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-06-04)
26. Re: Mapping the "framework" to ISSUEs (from john@consumerwatchdog.org on 2013-05-07)
27. Mapping the "framework" to ISSUEs (from jmayer@stanford.edu on 2013-05-07)
28. Re: F2F: Open Issues for the TPE Discussion on Tuesday (from fielding@gbiv.com on 2013-05-05)
29. F2F: Open Issues for the TPE Discussion on Tuesday (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-05-05)
30. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from rigo@w3.org on 2013-04-24)
31. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from singer@apple.com on 2013-04-24)
32. RE: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from michael.oneill@baycloud.com on 2013-04-22)
33. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-04-22)
34. RE: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from michael.oneill@baycloud.com on 2013-04-22)
35. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-04-22)
36. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from fielding@gbiv.com on 2013-04-21)
37. RE: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from michael.oneill@baycloud.com on 2013-04-21)
38. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from rob@blaeu.com on 2013-04-21)
39. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from rob@blaeu.com on 2013-04-21)
40. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from rob@blaeu.com on 2013-04-21)
41. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from rob@blaeu.com on 2013-04-21)
42. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from singer@apple.com on 2013-04-21)
43. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from jmayer@stanford.edu on 2013-04-20)
44. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from singer@apple.com on 2013-04-20)
45. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from singer@apple.com on 2013-04-19)
46. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from jmayer@stanford.edu on 2013-04-18)
47. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from jmayer@stanford.edu on 2013-04-18)
48. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from singer@apple.com on 2013-04-18)
49. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from jmayer@stanford.edu on 2013-04-17)
50. Re: DNT:Agenda for April 17 DNT Call (from singer@apple.com on 2013-04-17)
51. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-04-17)
52. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (was: Batch closing) (from fielding@gbiv.com on 2013-04-17)
53. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (was: Batch closing) (from singer@apple.com on 2013-04-17)
54. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (was: Batch closing) (from jmayer@stanford.edu on 2013-04-17)
55. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (was: Batch closing) (from fielding@gbiv.com on 2013-04-16)
56. DNT:Agenda for April 17 DNT Call (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-04-16)
57. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-04-16)
58. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from singer@apple.com on 2013-04-16)
59. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from jmayer@stanford.edu on 2013-04-15)
60. Re: ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-04-15)
61. RE: Batch closing of TPE-related issues (response by April 16) (from michael.oneill@baycloud.com on 2013-04-15)
62. Re: Batch closing of TPE-related issues (response by April 16) (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-04-15)
63. ISSUE-161: Discussion of semantics and alternatives to "!" (was: Batch closing) (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-04-15)
64. Re: Batch closing of TPE-related issues (response by April 16) (from john@consumerwatchdog.org on 2013-04-12)
65. Re: Batch closing of TPE-related issues (response by April 16) (from jmayer@stanford.edu on 2013-04-12)
66. Re: Batch closing of TPE-related issues (response by April 16) (from david@appnexus.com on 2013-04-12)
67. RE: Batch closing of TPE-related issues (response by April 16) (from michael.oneill@baycloud.com on 2013-04-12)
68. Batch closing of TPE-related issues (response by April 16) (from mts-std@schunter.org on 2013-04-12)
69. Re: ACTION-359: Add proposal for ISSUE-161 to allow an indicator of non-compliance within the tracking status value for testing and deployment (from jmayer@stanford.edu on 2013-02-11)
70. Re: ACTION-359: Add proposal for ISSUE-161 to allow an indicator of non-compliance within the tracking status value for testing and deployment (from fielding@gbiv.com on 2013-02-11)
71. Re: ACTION-359: Add proposal for ISSUE-161 to allow an indicator of non-compliance within the tracking status value for testing and deployment (from jmayer@stanford.edu on 2013-02-10)
72. Re: ACTION-359: Add proposal for ISSUE-161 to allow an indicator of non-compliance within the tracking status value for testing and deployment (from david@networkadvertising.org on 2013-02-10)
73. Re: ACTION-359: Add proposal for ISSUE-161 to allow an indicator of non-compliance within the tracking status value for testing and deployment (from fielding@gbiv.com on 2013-02-09)
74. Re: ACTION-359: Add proposal for ISSUE-161 to allow an indicator of non-compliance within the tracking status value for testing and deployment (from david@networkadvertising.org on 2013-02-06)
75. Re: ACTION-359: Add proposal for ISSUE-161 to allow an indicator of non-compliance within the tracking status value for testing and deployment (from derhoermi@gmx.net on 2013-02-06)
76. Re: ACTION-359: Add proposal for ISSUE-161 to allow an indicator of non-compliance within the tracking status value for testing and deployment (from david@networkadvertising.org on 2013-02-06)
77. ACTION-359: Add proposal for ISSUE-161 to allow an indicator of non-compliance within the tracking status value for testing and deployment (from fielding@gbiv.com on 2013-01-30)
78. Re: TPWG agenda for Wednesday, January 16 (from jmayer@stanford.edu on 2013-01-30)
79. Re: TPWG agenda for Wednesday, January 16 (from singer@apple.com on 2013-01-29)
80. Re: ISSUE-161: proposal for transparent non-compliance (from rigo@w3.org on 2012-09-16)
81. Re: ISSUE-161: proposal for transparent non-compliance (from fielding@gbiv.com on 2012-09-14)
82. Re: ISSUE-161: proposal for transparent non-compliance (from jmayer@stanford.edu on 2012-09-13)
83. Re: ISSUE-161: proposal for transparent non-compliance (from singer@apple.com on 2012-09-13)
84. ISSUE-161: proposal for transparent non-compliance (from fielding@gbiv.com on 2012-09-12)
85. ISSUE-161: Do we need a tracking status value for partial compliance or rejecting DNT? (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2012-08-22)

Related notes:

Display change log