TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Ask HN: EU Cookie Law Element Standardization?

2 点作者 jasonkostempski将近 7 年前
I&#x27;m sick of seeing these things. If we could all agree to give the elements a unique class name like &quot;useless-eu-cookie-law-notice&quot;, a simple element blocking rule for uBlock Origin would solve the issue.<p>I think there are already some blocking lists out there, but that seems like a silly thing to waste time maintaining given neither web master or user wants them to exist in the first place.

1 comment

tzs将近 7 年前
Perhaps a more structured class name would be better, such as &quot;legal-eu-cookies&quot;? Then similar names could be used for other legal notices, such as &quot;legal-us-children&quot; and &quot;legal-eu-gdpr&quot;.<p>Then someone outside the EU could block everything that starts with &quot;legal-eu-&quot; to get rid of everything added to comply with EU law, and someone outside the US could block &quot;legal-us-&quot; to get rid of everything added to comply with US law.<p>(Do the major blockers allow blocking based on a prefix of a class name? If not, the same effect can be achieved by giving the element multiple class names such as &quot;legal- legal-eu- legal-eu-cookies&quot;).<p>People might want to block by subject regardless of what jurisdiction&#x27;s laws caused something, which suggests there should also be &quot;legal-gdpr-eu&quot;, so if the US passes a similar privacy law someday that could by &quot;legal-gdpr-us&quot;, and someone could block &quot;legal-gdpr-&quot; if they don&#x27;t want to see any of these kinds of notices. But the US probably would not call its similar law &quot;GDPR&quot;, so may it would be better if instead of &quot;gdpr&quot;, we start with &quot;legal-eu-privacy-gdpr&quot; and &quot;legal-privacy-eu-gdpr&quot;? Then a similar US law would get &quot;legal-us-privacy-x&quot; and &quot;legal-privacy-us-x&quot; where &quot;x&quot; is whatever tortured acronym name Congress comes up with. (And probably cookies then belong under legal-eu-privacy-cookies).<p>This is getting complicated enough that it might be better to go to some kind of tag based system, with tags implemented by class names of the form &quot;legal-NAME-VALUE&quot; (for now, I&#x27;m assuming this is all for blocking regulator imposed legal notices, hence all tags started with &quot;legal-&quot;).<p>Tags that might be used for the earlier examples include:<p><pre><code> legal-jurisdiction-eu legal-jurisdiction-us legal-category-privacy legal-category-children legal-law-gdpr legal-law-dumb_us_acronym legal-law-cookies legal-law-copra </code></pre> So GDPR notices would be tagged &quot;legal-jurisdiction-eu legal-category-privacy legal-law-gdpr&quot;. Notices about protecting children in the US would be tagged &quot;legal-jurisdiction-us legal-category-children legal-law-copra&quot;.<p>For this to both be useful and not become an ungainly mess to deal with, it would need probably be carefully thought out beforehand, and have some group maintaining and managing a registry of supported tags, and making sure any additions to the list are well thought out and consistent. It could be a lot of work.
评论 #17681618 未加载