Re: Request for well-known URI: dnt-policy.txt

Hey Roy,

> On 18 Aug 2015, at 3:55 am, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:
> 
> I have to say that this is extremely poor behavior on the part of EFF.
> 
> The well-known URI dnt has been agreed to by the W3C working group, including
> the EFF, for more than three years.  The purpose for which they are using this
> new, confusing, and incredibly inefficient "dnt-policy.txt" resource is identical
> to a dnt representation of {tracking="N", compliance=["https://www.eff.org/dnt-policy"]}.
> 
> IOW, the private EFF registration is non-standard, redundant, and far less
> efficient than the existing specification for DNT requires.  That should be
> noted in their registration.

I don't think it's appropriate to say that in the registration; we don't judge the quality of registration entries beyond what's required by the well-known RFC, and I think that the material there (and in DNT's entry) is sufficient to disambiguate them.

Cheers,

> 
> ....Roy
> 
> 
>> On Aug 16, 2015, at 10:56 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>> 
>> IANA,
>> 
>> The registration below is approved; please enter it into the registry of Well Known URIs <https://www.iana.org/assignments/well-known-uris/well-known-uris.xml>.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>> 
>>> From: Alan Toner <at@eff.org>
>>> Subject: Request for well-known URI: dnt-policy.txt
>>> Date: 12 August 2015 9:52:06 am AEST
>>> To: wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org
>>> Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wellknown-uri-review/l-6B-xfh-MKOAJ4I-0dlS5oCd-E>
>>> 
>>> This is a request on behalf of the Electronic Frontier Foundation for
>>> the registration of the well-known uri: dnt-policy.txt
>>> 
>>> Websites are asked to post such a file to indicate compliance with EFF's
>>> Do Not Track policy.
>>> 
>>> Uri: dnt-policy.txt
>>> 
>>> Change controller: Electronic Frontier Foundation, 815 Eddy Street
>>> San Francisco, CA 94109-7701
>>> 
>>> Specification document(s): https://www.eff.org/dnt-policy
>>> 
>>> There is currently no separate specification document, just the policy
>>> itself and a list of previous acceptable versions. Am I correct in
>>> believing that a specification will have to be posted in order for this
>>> application to be approved?
>> 
>> --
>> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> wellknown-uri-review mailing list
>> wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wellknown-uri-review
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/