-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Weak requirements language #35
Comments
This could be addressed by including a cross-reference to § 5 (Legal Effects) after the prefatory phrase.
Different jurisdictions are going to have different UX requirements. One country may require an express act to turn on the signal, another may say that the choice of a privacy-specific browser or browsing mode is sufficient to imply intent. Still others may be entirely silent, or they may say that the signal should always be sent by default to accord with the reasonable expectations of most users. I think SHOULD is appropriate to express the general subjective principle of reflecting user intent while affording the flexibility necessary to accommodate varying legal regimes. |
Just for context: the I personally don't have a preference either way on this one; I'm just flagging that this is there because people keep saying "but you can't set law." We don't need to. The |
This one might be unavoidable, but this is effectively a meaningless statement. Consider avoiding normative language and instead concentrate on the intended semantics of carrying the signal. The real teeth in this mechanism lies in the legal enforcement part, so explain that more directly rather than use a "In the absence of regulatory, legal, or other requirements" preface to this statement.
This could easily be a "MUST".
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: