I disagree. When you click a link on a page that you retrieved from example.org, one that leads to example.com, there is no communication between you and example.org, nor between example.com and example.org. The communication that takes place is between you (party 1, the initiator of the conversation) and example.com (party 2, the target). The HTTP request mentions example.org, but being a third party, it does not participate in it directly.

The only conversation in which example.org was a party was the one in which you requested the page that contained a link to example.com, which has already finished.

In that light, it seems strange to me that under HTML5 (assuming I understand the article correctly), example.org is given a mechanism to dictate how much information you give to example.com. Should that not be your choice, as the sender of said information?