See also: IRC log
<aleecia> DW, visual aid
<aleecia> If you are on IRC but not the call bridge, please dial in
<aleecia> +1.617.761.6200, code TRACK (87225)
<aleecia> 543 intel
<dsinger_> Who is in 949 and 412 areas?
… there'll be another co-chair pending paperwork
… about me
… starting part-time post-doc this fall
… part-time senior privacy researcher at Mozilla
… there'll be another Mozilla representative so I can focus on chairing
… role is to help create consensus decisions
<mischat> tlr: Thomas oversees relevant work at the w3
<mischat> aleecia: people with name starting later in the alphabet, please introduce yourself
aleecia: lots of attention, exciting times
… acknowledge massively aggressive schedule
… there's a lot going on in the ecosystem around us
… and a lot of that is going quickly
… also, note users and DNT implementers
… don't want for early adopters to have to change implementation
… also, users rightly perplexed by what browsers are doing
… want to do excellent work, not just fast work
… there will be times when it's important to slow down
… balancing act there
… compressed time line means more work more quickly
… this work is worth the extra effort
… immediate time line: FPWD end of the month
… (deliverable structure)
… let me highlight a few things we'll not do
… definitions part — don't deal with huge issues like "what is privacy"
… not looking into philosophy, nail down terms needed for there set of the documents
… "what does it mean to be a first party"
… expect for the process to be iterative
… also, don't expect to have consensus on everything
… document what has consensus, and what doesn't
… end month with understanding of scope and direction
… what can you do to help?
… input documents!
… some work here is dating back to 2007
… please send note to mailing list with proposals for input documents
… please be on the lookout for any great input documents
… also, more importantly — think about use cases
… the Princeton humm suggested tracking definition + exceptions
… please send use cases to mailing list that permit somewhat more detailed discussion
… e.g., not just "security"
scribe: also, please think about *your* success criteria
… about the Cambridge meeting — hotels look bad right now, sorry
… two very full days ahead of us with long breaks
… self-hosted dinner on the 21st
… goal is to do things jointly, collaboratively
… we look for spirited back-and-forth, but will step in if discussions should go personal
… most frequently asked question: what to expect for other f2f meetings
… 3-4 meetings; more frequently early on
… second meeting in Santa Clara, CA
… third meeting in Europe, perhaps Belgium — after the holidays
… we'll add fourth meeting if and only if necessary
… travel budgets are known serious issue
… if there's a meeting you just cannot attend, we'll understand
… also, know several orgs are working through paperwork
… MIT sign-up is open to those interested
… please register ASAP — today, ideally
<Bruce> Hello - can you outline the best type of person, i.e. technical background, to attend these session.
<aleecia> oct 31, nov 1 for next meeting
<mischat> tlr: additional information, meeting room booking for TPAC has come through, TPAC registration is open, please reg very soon ...
david: web and TV IG meeting — can't get to Cambridge
dsinger: dates early, please please please
aleecia: sorry, acknowledged, TPAC 31 October, 1 November
kenny(ATT): wonder — where could I find discussion, references about premise and motivation to do the work?
… appreciate there's lots of legal and pseudo-legal discussions around policy issues
… opt-in/opt-out and so on
… set of foundational assumptions?
aleecia: to address one piece first — opt-in/opt-out is a straight-out political question. out of scope.
… that could vary by browser company, by country — whole variety of factors
… that's a discussion that will continue in other fora
… secondly, in terms of some of the foundational work
… input documents that we have put on the WG home page
… are documents we're looking at right now
… if there are others we should look at, we'd be delighted to have input
… if you have additional input, please provide it
… in some cases, will compare documents to see where there are points of agreements
<mischat> ^^ input documents
… in some cases, look at issues etc
… in terms of philosophy for do not track
… expect that if we have 30 people in the room, will have 40 opinions
… different backgrounds and different views
… don't think we'll have all of that resolved
… get to consensus on what technology looks like, and what people need to do
kenny: there must be a consensus about technical requirement assumption
aleecia: consensus of the group
kenny: technical requirements?
aleecia: unusually highly watched, highly political environment
… many of the recommendations from W3C are not on that level
… not unprecedented
… w3c more on the technical, than the political side
… technical decisions / policy decisions influence each other
… note that people from FTC, regulators internationally are paying attention
… likely to act as observers
hannes: my interpretation is that there is one purely technical piece of work
… the header
… there is also a policy piece that goes beyond the technical work
… in the mozilla submission, that related to what the semantics of the header are
<mischat> This specification defines the meaning of a Do Not Track preference and sets out practices for Web sites to comply with this preference." sounds like what people are talking about now
… same meaning associated to that across the meaning
… that's the interesting part of the whole conversation, but also the difficult one
aleecia: that's the bulk of the work, indeed
… to take an example — if there was a decision that DNT does not apply to first parties
… then that has policy implications, also business implications
… those are the things where the technical decisions would implicate the policy effects
DWFarrel: opt-in / opt-out in scope for later?
aleecia: out of scope
francisco: not involved in a w3c group before
… won't be able to attend the first two meetings; I'm in Argentina
… what level of work can be done off-line?
aleecia: expect first draft to be highly face-to-face
… for subsequent drafts, more on mailing list
… use face-to-face to work through issues that have been surfaced on mailing list
… if you're not able to make any of the WG meetings in person, then probably good choice to find somebody else in your organization
francisco: dial-in possible?
aleecia: for first meeting, working to set up phone
… fear the acoustics of the room aren't speaker phone friendly
… also, IRC
… doing best we can to accommodate, but phone bridge might not work as well as we'd like
aleecia: meeting adjourned
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136 of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: tlr Inferring Scribes: tlr WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found. WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: Bruce DWFarrel Francisco Louise MeMe P18 Thomas TruEffect Vodafone Yang aaaa aabb aacc aadd aaff aagg aaii aleecia att david dsinger dsinger_ dwferrell hannes hober intel kenny microsoft mischat mischat_ schunter1 shayman tlr You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Got date from IRC log name: 16 Sep 2011 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/09/16-dnt-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option. WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found! Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>. Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of new discussion topics or agenda items, such as: <dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]