[whatwg] <a href="" ping="">
jg307 at cam.ac.uk
Wed Jan 18 09:38:41 PST 2006
> dolphinling wrote:
>> Ian Hickson wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, dolphinling wrote:
>>>> Like I said before, I like the semantics of ping=. But it doesn't
>>>> fit into the usage model that advertisers and other trackers want.
>>>> Semantically, I want notification and linking to be separate. In
>>>> usage, they want them to be linked. They seem to me to be mutually
>>> In my experience, "they" are ok with it being separate, as it conveys
>>> a number of benefits to the user. (I would consider my source on this
>>> matter reasonably authoritative.)
>> Hmm... perhaps your source could explain his reasoning here? :) It's
>> extremely easy to make non-circumventable tracking, and I assumed that
>> most times it _was_ circumventable were due to ignorance rather than
>> an informed decision. To me, it seems, the benefits to an advertising
>> company of doing so outweigh the benefits of not.
> I'd still like to hear this reasoning for this :)
And boy does it suggest this feature will be a marketing problem :(
Darin Fisher blogged the Mozilla implementation and received a stream
of comments, many from people who clearly haven't thought about how easy
tracking already is, to the effect that they will never use a browser
with this feature etc. It's hardly a representative sample of people
(since the more alarmed users are more likely to comment) but I can
easily imagine grossly unfair headlines like "Firefox 3 allows
advertisers to track you across the web", ignoring the fact that any
browser that implements HTTP redirects supports the same feature in a
much less transparent way.
"It seems to be a constant throughout history: In every period, people
believed things that were just ridiculous, and believed them so strongly
that you would have gotten in terrible trouble for saying otherwise."
More information about the whatwg