Expose user's preferences in API?

[flavi1]

What about allow websites to detect the settings before load the CPM?
Something like this:

Window.consentsSettings[type] true / false

Then if a web developper wants to improve user experience with an unknown CPM, he just have to check this settings and then don't load the CPM if presents. This can be a performance concerns since the CPM does not have to be loaded at all if this settings are detected.

Later, we can write some articles, or post some comments about the existence of this settings and it can become a de-facto standart (see https://stackoverflow.com/questions/73570064/why-is-there-no-cookies-consent-api-in-browsers ).
So other hypothetics webextensions developpers can follow the same namespace for consistancy (Window.consentsSettings[type]).

Another related question : Do you recommand a specific CPM to be used with your extension ? Something open source, fully fully RGPD compliant, respectuous user experience, Accessibility etc. I mean, as a developper web, if I want to choose something good, ideally designed to be Consent-O-Matic compliant, wish one should I choose?
If you know one or more, can you add them in a FAQ or at the footer of your websites?

Best regards.
Thank you so much for this extension

[MidasN]

There have been and currently are some projects working towards standardising these signals, actually. There used to be the W3C P3P standard (https://www.w3.org/P3P/) and there is currently the Advanced Data Protection Control (https://www.dataprotectioncontrol.org/). The issue is not so much that there is no technological solution, but more that many CMPs/websites have no incentive to make the user experience better.
From our side, we're a bit reluctant to expose an API that would make it easy to detect and circumvent Consent-O-Matic.

We also don't currently recommend a specific CMP as being better than others. Most major CMPs all have the option to be configured in both a compliant and non-compliant way, so it would be difficult to say one CMP is always better than another. Depending on the complexity of your website, though, I wouldn't see any reason to not just go for a free and open source solution (e.g., https://tarteaucitron.io/en/).