16:44:13 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dnt
16:44:13 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/02/08-dnt-irc
16:44:22 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #dnt
16:44:37 <aleecia> Zakim, this will be dnt
16:44:37 <Zakim> ok, aleecia; I see T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM scheduled to start in 16 minutes
16:44:43 <aleecia> chair: aleecia
16:44:53 <aleecia> rrsagent, make logs public
16:44:58 <aleecia> agenda?
16:45:22 <aleecia> agenda+ Selection of scribe
16:45:35 <aleecia> agenda+ Reminder: please indicate when you are free for the next f2f meeting, http://www.doodle.com/a663mx5snx75keu4 
16:45:47 <aleecia> agenda+ Review of overdue action items: 
16:45:47 <aleecia>    https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/overdue
16:46:12 <aleecia> agenda+ Orphaned action items we may close
16:46:26 <aleecia> agenda+ Discussion of pending review items
16:46:40 <aleecia> agenda+ Announce next meeting & adjourn
16:49:53 <rvaneijk> rvaneijk has joined #dnt
16:53:50 <npdoty> npdoty has joined #dnt
16:55:02 <Zakim> T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM has now started
16:55:09 <Zakim> +npdoty
16:55:15 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
16:55:16 <Zakim> + +1.408.674.aaaa
16:55:17 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 
16:55:17 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
16:55:18 <trackbot> Meeting: Tracking Protection Working Group Teleconference
16:55:18 <trackbot> Date: 08 February 2012
16:55:25 <npdoty> Zakim, this is 87225
16:55:25 <Zakim> npdoty, this was already T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM
16:55:26 <Zakim> ok, npdoty; that matches T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM
16:56:07 <WileyS> WileyS has joined #DNT
16:56:18 <ninjamarnau> ninjamarnau has joined #dnt
16:56:22 <Zakim> + +1.609.981.aabb
16:57:06 <Zakim> + +49.431.98.aacc
16:57:33 <ninjamarnau> Zakim, aacc is ninjamarnau
16:57:33 <Zakim> +ninjamarnau; got it
16:57:34 <tl> Zakim, aabb is tl
16:57:34 <Zakim> +tl; got it
16:58:08 <Zakim> + +31.65.141.aadd
16:58:09 <npdoty> Regrets+ schunter
16:58:16 <rvaneijk> Zakim, aadd is rvaneijk
16:58:16 <Zakim> +rvaneijk; got it
16:58:59 <Zakim> + +1.813.366.aaee
16:59:08 <hefferjr> hefferjr has joined #dnt
16:59:13 <Zakim> + +1.202.684.aaff
16:59:18 <jmayer> jmayer has joined #dnt
16:59:32 <npdoty> rrsagent, pointer?
16:59:32 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2012/02/08-dnt-irc#T16-59-32
16:59:59 <Zakim> + +1.202.835.aagg
17:00:16 <aleecia> agenda?
17:00:27 <Zakim> + +1.202.326.aahh
17:00:33 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
17:00:38 <clay_cbs_opa> clay_cbs_opa has joined #dnt
17:00:43 <vincent_> vincent_ has joined #dnt
17:00:44 <enewland> enewland has joined #dnt
17:00:47 <Zakim> + +1.206.658.aaii
17:00:52 <Zakim> + +1.415.734.aajj
17:00:55 <Zakim> + +1.510.501.aakk
17:01:04 <Zakim> + +1.202.530.aall
17:01:14 <Zakim> + +1.301.270.aamm
17:01:16 <tl> Zakim, who is making noise?
17:01:18 <pedermagee> pedermagee has joined #dnt
17:01:26 <npdoty> if you just called in and you're on IRC, please tell Zakim which letter combination you are, thx
17:01:26 <Zakim> + +1.408.349.aann
17:01:28 <Zakim> tl, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: npdoty (25%), +1.408.674.aaaa (54%), +1.202.835.aagg (8%)
17:01:32 <Zakim> + +1.334.703.aaoo
17:01:43 <mgroman> mgroman has joined #dnt
17:01:45 <Zakim> - +1.206.658.aaii
17:01:45 <tl> Zakim, mute aaaa
17:01:46 <Zakim> +1.408.674.aaaa should now be muted
17:01:50 <Zakim> + +1.908.541.aapp
17:01:54 <enewland> zakim, aaoo is enewland
17:01:54 <Zakim> +enewland; got it
17:01:58 <Zakim> + +1.646.825.aaqq
17:01:59 <johnsimpson> johnsimpson has joined #DNT
17:02:02 <dwainberg> dwainberg has joined #dnt
17:02:06 <Zakim> + +1.202.326.aarr
17:02:21 <Zakim> + +1.202.346.aass
17:02:26 <jchester2> jchester2 has joined #dnt
17:02:29 <efelten> efelten has joined #dnt
17:02:32 <hwest> hwest has joined #dnt
17:02:35 <clay_cbs_opa> zakim, aapp is clay_cbs_opa
17:02:35 <Zakim> +clay_cbs_opa; got it
17:02:35 <npdoty> scribenick: jchester2
17:02:44 <Zakim> + +1.646.666.aatt
17:02:46 <Zakim> + +1.206.658.aauu
17:02:47 <Zakim> +??P58
17:03:00 <laurengelman> laurengelman has joined #dnt
17:03:03 <aleecia> agenda?
17:03:15 <cOlsen> cOlsen has joined #dnt
17:03:25 <Zakim> + +1.310.392.aavv
17:03:31 <Zakim> +??P61
17:03:35 <Chapell> Chapell has joined #DNT
17:03:36 <dsinger> dsinger has joined #dnt
17:03:46 <dsinger> zakim, [apple] has dsinger
17:03:47 <npdoty> ack aleecia 
17:03:50 <Zakim> + +1.408.423.aaww
17:03:52 <kjoe> kjoe has joined #dnt
17:03:55 <Zakim> sorry, dsinger, I do not recognize a party named '[apple]'
17:03:58 <Zakim> + +1.202.326.aaxx
17:04:00 <Chris> Chris has joined #dnt
17:04:01 <Zakim> + +1.206.369.aayy
17:04:03 <npdoty> Zakim, unmute aaaa
17:04:13 <Zakim> +1.408.674.aaaa should no longer be muted
17:04:15 <dsinger> zakim, whos is here?
17:04:18 <Zakim> sorry, dsinger, I do not understand your question
17:04:22 <dsinger> zakim, who is here?
17:04:22 <Zakim> On the phone I see npdoty, +1.408.674.aaaa, tl, ninjamarnau, rvaneijk, +1.813.366.aaee, +1.202.684.aaff, +1.202.835.aagg, +1.202.326.aahh, [IPcaller], +1.415.734.aajj,
17:04:28 <Zakim> ... +1.510.501.aakk, +1.202.530.aall, +1.301.270.aamm, +1.408.349.aann, enewland, clay_cbs_opa, +1.646.825.aaqq, +1.202.326.aarr, +1.202.346.aass, +1.646.666.aatt, +1.206.658.aauu,
17:04:30 <johnsimpson> zakim, who is on call?
17:04:31 <Zakim> ... ??P58, +1.310.392.aavv, ??P61, +1.408.423.aaww, +1.202.326.aaxx, +1.206.369.aayy
17:04:33 <Zakim> On IRC I see Chris, kjoe, dsinger, Chapell, cOlsen, laurengelman, hwest, efelten, jchester2, dwainberg, johnsimpson, mgroman, pedermagee, enewland, vincent_, clay_cbs_opa, jmayer,
17:04:33 <tedleung> tedleung has joined #dnt
17:04:37 <Zakim> ... hefferjr, ninjamarnau, WileyS, npdoty, rvaneijk, Zakim, RRSAgent, aleecia, mischat, tl, karl, schunter, trackbot, pde, hober
17:04:41 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, johnsimpson.
17:04:49 <dwainberg> zakim, aaqq is dwainberg
17:04:50 <jchester2> Aleecia: this call and next call focused on compliance, and we will use to oublish second working draft.
17:05:07 <Zakim> +dwainberg; got it
17:05:08 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
17:05:15 <tl> Aleecia, every so often, you become quiet for a second or two.
17:05:17 <johnsimpson> zakim, who is here?
17:05:24 <Zakim> - +1.408.423.aaww
17:05:24 <andyzei> andyzei has joined #dnt
17:05:35 <jchester2> First day of Brussels minutes is up
17:05:36 <Zakim> On the phone I see npdoty, +1.408.674.aaaa, tl, ninjamarnau, rvaneijk, +1.813.366.aaee, +1.202.684.aaff, +1.202.835.aagg, +1.202.326.aahh, [IPcaller], +1.415.734.aajj,
17:05:39 <Zakim> ... +1.510.501.aakk, +1.202.530.aall, +1.301.270.aamm, +1.408.349.aann, enewland, clay_cbs_opa, dwainberg, +1.202.326.aarr, +1.202.346.aass, +1.646.666.aatt, +1.206.658.aauu,
17:05:40 <rigo> rigo has joined #dnt
17:05:42 <Zakim> ... ??P58, +1.310.392.aavv, ??P61, +1.202.326.aaxx, +1.206.369.aayy, [Microsoft]
17:05:43 <aleecia> http://www.doodle.com/a663mx5snx75keu4
17:05:52 <BrianTs> BrianTs has joined #DNT
17:05:54 <Zakim> +[Apple]
17:05:58 <Zakim> On IRC I see andyzei, tedleung, Chris, kjoe, dsinger, Chapell, cOlsen, laurengelman, hwest, efelten, jchester2, dwainberg, johnsimpson, mgroman, pedermagee, enewland, vincent_,
17:06:03 <Zakim> ... clay_cbs_opa, jmayer, hefferjr, ninjamarnau, WileyS, npdoty, rvaneijk, Zakim, RRSAgent, aleecia, mischat, tl, karl, schunter, trackbot, pde, hober
17:06:04 <dsinger> zakim, [apple] has dsinger
17:06:05 <jmayer> Procedure Q: Was there any further discussion of moving the weekly call time?
17:06:13 <johnsimpson> on call?
17:06:23 <jchester2> We are looking to fix dates for April meeting, people should do doodle poll
17:06:34 <Zakim> +dsinger; got it
17:06:52 <Zakim> +[Microsoft.a]
17:06:54 <Lia> Lia has joined #dnt
17:06:58 <Zakim> +??P62
17:07:04 <jchester2> we need to keep this as regular time for now for conf call
17:07:17 <aleecia> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/agenda
17:07:17 <npdoty> Topic: action items
17:07:17 <tl> Aleecia, I'm still hearing you become quiet for a second or two every so often. Am I the only one?
17:07:19 <jmayer> Thanks.  Then for at least the next month, I won't be able to make more than the first half hour.
17:07:39 <johnsimpson> i am hearing you fine
17:07:41 <jchester2> are people having troible hearing Aleecia and indicate in IRC
17:07:46 <tl> =[
17:07:53 <Zakim> +Rigo
17:08:11 <jchester2> we are looking at closing orphan issues. [help!]
17:08:16 <BrianTs> Zakim, [Microsoft.a] has BrianTs
17:08:16 <Zakim> +BrianTs; got it
17:08:19 <npdoty> action-1?
17:08:19 <trackbot> ACTION-1 -- Aleecia McDonald to look at summary of DNT definition/compliance proposals -- due 2012-02-03 -- OPEN
17:08:19 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/1
17:08:47 <npdoty> heather and aleecia were going to work on that, but haven't had time, don't see it happening any time soon
17:08:55 <npdoty> anyone interested in taking this one on?
17:09:01 <jchester2> Action 1--Aleecia closing out item on summary different DNT definitions across documents.  
17:09:01 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 1--Aleecia
17:09:04 <hwest> No objection to closing it - would be useful, but zero chance I can do it
17:09:24 <WileyS> Would it be possible simply list links to existing documents somewhere?  We can all pitch in on that task.
17:09:31 <alex> alex has joined #dnt
17:09:36 <WileyS> possible "to" simply...
17:09:48 <hwest> There's a list of input docs on the W3C site - I think that's a good start
17:09:49 <jchester2> Rigo is going to look into action and asked that decision to close action by deferred by one week.
17:09:49 <npdoty> +1 to WileyS on aggregating links
17:10:20 <Zakim> + +1.813.366.aazz
17:10:31 <rigo> zakim, mute me
17:10:31 <Zakim> Rigo should now be muted
17:10:31 <alex> Zakim, aazz is alex
17:10:32 <Zakim> +alex; got it
17:10:39 <jchester2> Rigo is now responsible for that issue and we will distribute info as suggested by Shane
17:10:53 <npdoty> action-67?
17:10:57 <npdoty> action-68?
17:10:57 <trackbot> ACTION-68 -- Justin Brookman to provide text on ISSUE-54 -- due 2012-02-01 -- OPEN
17:10:57 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/68
17:11:04 <enewland> he's not
17:11:05 <jchester2> 67, 68, 109 are being discussed on list.
17:11:06 <enewland> he has a webinar
17:11:14 <Zakim> + +1.202.695.bbaa
17:11:46 <vincent_> q+
17:11:50 <npdoty> i think ksmith has actually sent out his proposal
17:12:04 <vincent_> q-
17:12:35 <npdoty> action-80?
17:12:37 <npdoty> action-99?
17:12:38 <jchester2> Action 80, David Singer says connected to Action 99 and has draft in to Nick and will be distributed to others.  
17:12:40 <trackbot> ACTION-80 -- David Singer to singer and shane wiley to determine whether dave singer's paradigm on parties would be a solution for Issue 27 -- due 2012-02-01 -- OPEN
17:12:43 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/80
17:12:48 <trackbot> ACTION-99 -- David Singer to write up automated discoverability of party relationships proposal (Nick and Bryan to help) -- due 2012-02-02 -- OPEN
17:12:50 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/99
17:12:54 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 80,
17:13:00 <npdoty> action-91?
17:13:00 <trackbot> ACTION-91 -- Andy Zeigler to write text on fingerprinting risk (ISSUE-109, ISSUE-114), with Nick Doty -- due 2012-02-07 -- OPEN
17:13:01 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/91
17:13:02 <johnsimpson> zakim, mute me
17:13:02 <Zakim> sorry, johnsimpson, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
17:13:23 <jchester2> Action 91, Andy to write text on finger printing issue.  Tom, Sid, Nick  and Andy close to send out text proposal
17:13:23 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 91,
17:13:34 <npdoty> andyzei: very close to sending out a text proposal, hopefully today
17:13:46 <johnsimpson> zakim, johnsimpson is aavv
17:13:46 <Zakim> sorry, johnsimpson, I do not recognize a party named 'johnsimpson'
17:13:55 <jchester2> Action 92, Alan Chappel.  Issue 113, Alan:  We are letting issue close
17:13:55 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 92,
17:14:00 <npdoty> issue-113?
17:14:00 <trackbot> ISSUE-113 -- Should there be a JavaScript API to prompt for a Web-wide exception? -- raised
17:14:00 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/113
17:14:04 <efelten> zakim, aavv is johnsimpson
17:14:04 <Zakim> +johnsimpson; got it
17:14:05 <Zakim> +[Microsoft.aa]
17:14:28 <tl> q+
17:14:30 <npdoty> q?
17:14:36 <npdoty> ack tl
17:14:38 <JC> JC has joined #DNT
17:14:56 <johnsimpson> zakim, mute me
17:14:56 <Zakim> johnsimpson should now be muted
17:15:05 <aleecia> also having trouble hearing
17:15:07 <WileyS> Why couldn't we leverage the existing site-specific exception process for web-wide exceptions - they would simply list a single domain versus a domain pair.
17:15:17 <jchester2> Issue 113. JeffChester also having trouble hearing
17:15:25 <WileyS> q
17:15:29 <WileyS> q+
17:15:31 <npdoty> I think the suggestion is that user agents may be able to implement this without our writing it into the spec
17:15:46 <aleecia> ack WileyS
17:16:31 <npdoty> WileyS, are you volunteering to write up that change?
17:16:32 <jmayer> Have we decided that there will be web-wide exceptions?
17:16:37 <jchester2> Shane:  We can leverage specific site exemption structure for worldwide exemption structure.  We need to discuss how will worldwide exemption process be presented to a user
17:16:57 <WileyS> Okay
17:17:07 <WileyS> Nick - will you lead?
17:17:22 <laurengelman> is this like an exemption for "discus" or "twitter" button
17:17:26 <Zakim> + +1.714.852.bbbb
17:17:26 <WileyS> Okay - I'll lead then.
17:17:31 <jchester2> Nick will write counterproposal but will help Shane
17:17:49 <fielding> fielding has joined #dnt
17:18:05 <jmayer> E.g. ("yahoo.com", "*")
17:18:13 <jchester2> q+
17:18:20 <aleecia> I think we have two action items out of this: one on Shane to revise non-norm text with Nick's help, and one to still address issue-113 head on
17:18:27 <laurengelman> exemptions for 3rd parties?
17:18:38 <laurengelman> google ads?
17:19:08 <jchester2> Shane:  We still need to discuss whether group supports worldwide exceptions
17:19:12 <vincent_> jmayer, it'd be more something like (*, "yahoo.com") I think
17:19:15 <npdoty> action: Wiley to write a proposal on web-wide exception API (for ISSUE-113) (with npdoty)
17:19:15 <trackbot> Created ACTION-120 - Write a proposal on web-wide exception API (for ISSUE-113) (with npdoty) [on Shane Wiley - due 2012-02-15].
17:19:16 <dsinger> goodness yes.  embedded widgets, a trusted advertiser
17:19:25 <dsinger> q?
17:19:31 <tl> tl has joined #dnt
17:19:42 <tl> q+
17:19:47 <aleecia> ack jchester
17:19:53 <jmayer> vincent, just wanted to show that the syntax is trivial
17:20:15 <jmayer> (If we decide to allow such exceptions.)
17:20:20 <aleecia> ack tl
17:20:32 <jchester2> Aleecia:  There is interest from Europe on the exemption issues.
17:20:34 <vincent_> oh ok, sorry
17:20:57 <WileyS> Agreed with Tom - that was my "non-normative" element of text I refered to and will provide draft text for this.
17:21:31 <npdoty> tl: user agents can handle this; can use a UI or permission structure like seen in some geolocation implementations
17:21:35 <rigo> I think the exemption issue is also connected to the make and record consent issue (opt-back in)
17:21:38 <jchester2> Aleecia: Who wants to take Issue 113 as it stands?
17:22:04 <ChrisPedigo> ChrisPedigo has joined #dnt
17:22:22 <laurengelman> i agree that it sounds like something that can be so technically trivial that users will have no idea what they opted into. especially with a broad definition of "party"
17:22:39 <jchester2> Nick:  Text that we will send it will address Javascriot API and it will include issue 113
17:22:54 <jchester2> sorry about typos!
17:23:09 <tl> npdoty: andyzei, do we have a marked action item for this?
17:23:13 <npdoty> and I'll be sure to note the connection to issue-113 when we send out text related to action 91
17:23:39 <npdoty> action-93?
17:23:40 <trackbot> ACTION-93 -- Jeffrey Chester to write suggestions for best practices for issue-115, assisted by Ninja, Alan, Jim -- due 2012-02-07 -- OPEN
17:23:40 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/93
17:23:41 <jchester2> Action 93, Best Practices: Jeff will send after the call
17:23:41 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 93,
17:24:00 <npdoty> action-106?
17:24:00 <trackbot> ACTION-106 -- Heather West to sharing of data between entities via cookie syncing / identity brokering, with Vincent Toubiana -- due 2012-02-02 -- OPEN
17:24:00 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/106
17:24:10 <npdoty> vincent_, didn't you just send this out today?
17:24:16 <vincent_> yes
17:24:52 <npdoty> close action-106
17:24:52 <trackbot> ACTION-106 Sharing of data between entities via cookie syncing / identity brokering, with Vincent Toubiana closed
17:24:58 <jchester2> Action 106.  Orphan action to be closed.  Sharing data between entities via cookie syncing.  Heather wants to discuss whether it should be in spec or is covered by other items.
17:24:58 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 106.
17:25:00 <npdoty> action-106 pending review
17:25:11 <npdoty> action-107?
17:25:11 <trackbot> ACTION-107 -- Peter Eckersley to peter & MeMe, Draft text on Will Do Not Track apply to offline aggregating or selling of data? -- issue 30 -- due 2012-02-02 -- OPEN
17:25:11 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/107
17:25:18 <npdoty> pde? meme?
17:25:37 <tl> q+
17:25:46 <aleecia> ack tl
17:26:15 <jchester2> Action 107:  Does DNT apply to Issue 30, apply to offline data gathering.  Mimi interested in reviewing text but not draft.  Tom says current draft doesn't make distinction between sharing off and online.  It seems this is covered. 
17:26:15 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 107
17:26:33 <npdoty> tl: seems like issue-30 is already covered
17:26:49 <jchester2> Amy can draft something on Action 107.
17:27:49 <npdoty> andyzei, is adrian here?
17:27:51 <jchester2> Action 109, Adrian.  Drafting text Issue 54.  This is being discussed on mailing list now.  
17:27:51 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 109,
17:28:04 <npdoty> action-116?
17:28:04 <trackbot> ACTION-116 -- Thomas Lowenthal to draft text prohibitng third parties from acting or representing themselves as first parties -- due 2012-02-15 -- OPEN
17:28:04 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/116
17:28:51 <jchester2> Tom, Action 116.  Working on issue.
17:29:15 <Zakim> - +1.202.684.aaff
17:29:32 <jchester2> Tom gets one more week for Action 116
17:30:09 <npdoty> aleecia: for next call, we'll try to sit down with a draft to see where we can live with things to publish another public draft
17:30:09 <jchester2> Aleecia: Next call we will be sitting done with draft to discuss what we can live with
17:30:21 <npdoty> Topic: issues for discussion
17:30:32 <npdoty> issue-57?
17:30:32 <trackbot> ISSUE-57 -- What if an opt-out cookie exists but an "opt back in" out-of-band is present? -- raised
17:30:32 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/57
17:30:36 <aleecia> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Jan/0419.html
17:30:55 <jchester2> Issue 57, Text from Shane if you have mixed messages
17:31:35 <jchester2> Aleecia suggests we change text: honors DNT, not honors DNT
17:31:44 <npdoty> q+
17:31:52 <aleecia> ack npdoty
17:31:55 <WileyS> I'm fine with that change - this was a cut/paste from an early submission
17:32:17 <WileyS> q+
17:32:23 <JC> q+
17:32:30 <npdoty> Opt-Out / DNT Exception:  Exception is honored (browser/device is not opted-out)
17:32:39 <rigo> conflict between DNT header and opt-out cookie
17:32:53 <rigo> DNT=0 set and opt-out cookie sent back
17:33:07 <jchester2> Nick has concern that if there is both opt-out cookue and DNT exemption, how we address
17:33:08 <rigo> in this case, browser should see this as opt-in
17:33:19 <aleecia> DNT Signal / No Opt-Out:  Browser/device is opted-out
17:33:55 <WileyS> q+
17:34:00 <aleecia> Opt-Out / DNT Exception:  Exception is honored (browser/device is not opted-out)
17:34:11 <aleecia> q?
17:34:18 <aleecia> ack WileyS
17:34:39 <aleecia> Shane once again understands both people speaking, even without drop outs
17:35:13 <aleecia> So is the general rule: the specific trumps the general?
17:35:25 <jchester2> Shane--we always go to privacy conservative side, but in 4th case when we receive site specific exemption would override a passive or cookie based setting elsewhere.  A explicit consent event.
17:35:27 <fielding> basically, a specific conset overrides a general opt-out
17:35:59 <johnsimpson> Does DNT Exception equal DNT:0
17:35:59 <fielding> s/conset/consent/
17:36:03 <rigo> +1 to fielding
17:36:26 <WileyS> I'm sorry Nick - I didn't really follow that example
17:36:35 <WileyS> Gr8
17:36:37 <rigo> consent always trumps whatever
17:36:43 <jchester2> Nick will write something up on this issue
17:36:48 <WileyS> Yes - I'll rewrite
17:36:54 <WileyS> Please assign new action item :-)
17:36:56 <JC> q-
17:37:35 <npdoty> action: Shane to re-write language on issue-57 proposal to avoid "opt out" language
17:37:35 <trackbot> Created ACTION-121 - Re-write language on issue-57 proposal to avoid "opt out" language [on Shane Wiley - due 2012-02-15].
17:38:04 <npdoty> issue-25?
17:38:04 <trackbot> ISSUE-25 -- Possible exemption for research purposes -- pending review
17:38:04 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/25
17:38:16 <jchester2> Issue 25:  Possible exemption for research purposes, w/text in
17:38:19 <npdoty> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Feb/0106.html
17:38:34 <tl> Zakim, mute me.
17:38:34 <Zakim> tl should now be muted
17:38:50 <aleecia> ISSUE-36: Should DNT opt-outs distinguish between behavioral targeting and other personalization?
17:38:50 <trackbot> ISSUE-36 Should DNT opt-outs distinguish between behavioral targeting and other personalization? notes added
17:38:50 <aleecia> This standard provides general requirements on data collection, use, and disclosure. These requirements are not specific to behavioral advertising. (Note: this text may be better placed in the preamble.)
17:39:16 <npdoty> issue-36?
17:39:16 <trackbot> ISSUE-36 -- Should DNT opt-outs distinguish between behavioral targeting and other personalization? -- raised
17:39:16 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/36
17:39:39 <jchester2> We are close on Issue 36
17:39:47 <tl> I just want to put it in the preamble.
17:39:49 <WileyS> I still owe Tom a response on finding the exact preamble location
17:39:57 <tl> Yay!
17:40:08 <fielding> which text?
17:40:14 <jchester2> Issue 36 is closed
17:40:16 <rigo> I'm in favor of not having it specific as dnt can be a general consent mechanism for personalization
17:40:24 <tl> It's still possible that this may be merged in more elegantly in the final editing pass.
17:40:40 <tl> Ageed.
17:40:44 <tl> *Agreed.
17:40:47 <WileyS> +1
17:40:54 <npdoty> issue-36 closed
17:40:54 <trackbot> ISSUE-36 Should DNT opt-outs distinguish between behavioral targeting and other personalization? closed
17:41:06 <npdoty> resolution: don't need to distinguish between behavioral advertising and other personalization
17:41:18 <npdoty> issue-74?
17:41:18 <trackbot> ISSUE-74 -- Are surveys out of scope? -- raised
17:41:18 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/74
17:41:42 <npdoty> can Kathy or Alex explain this?
17:41:42 <jchester2> Issue 74.  Are surveys out of scope.  Nothing special about surveys, re: our research discussion.  Issue is closed.
17:41:43 <johnsimpson> +1 to close 74
17:42:00 <npdoty> okay, great
17:42:58 <aleecia> For the EU, the outsourcing scenario is clearly regulated. In the current EU 
17:42:58 <aleecia> Directive 95/46/EC, but also in the suggested regulation reforming the data 
17:42:58 <aleecia> protection regime, an entity using or processing data is subject to data 
17:42:59 <aleecia> protection law. An entity acting as a first party and contracting services of 
17:42:59 <aleecia> another party is responsible for the overall processing. If the third party 
17:42:59 <aleecia> has own rights and privileges concerning the processing of the data collected 
17:43:00 <aleecia> by the first party, it isn't a data processor anymore and thus not covered by 
17:43:02 <jchester2> Action 48 [against Issue 10 via Rigo]
17:43:02 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 48
17:43:02 <aleecia> exemptions. This third party is then considered as a second data controller 
17:43:04 <aleecia> with all duties attached to that status. As the pretensions of users are based 
17:43:06 <aleecia> on law, they apply to first and third party alike unless the third party acts 
17:43:08 <aleecia> as a mere data processor. 
17:43:25 <rigo> q+
17:43:31 <KevinT> KevinT has joined #dnt
17:43:34 <rigo> ack rigo
17:43:35 <npdoty> ack rigo
17:44:16 <tl> q+
17:45:12 <jchester2> Rigo:  This would require additional contractual information between third and first parties.
17:45:54 <tl> q-
17:46:06 <Zakim> -[Apple]
17:46:22 <tl> dsinger: An unexpected joy for all of us. =]
17:46:27 <jchester2> q+
17:46:50 <rigo> zakim, mute me
17:46:51 <Zakim> Rigo should now be muted
17:46:53 <npdoty> q+
17:47:17 <aleecia> ack jchester
17:47:51 <npdoty> q-
17:48:16 <aleecia> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Jan/0440.html
17:48:35 <aleecia> A party MAY take action contrary to the requirements of this standard if compelled by applicable law.  If compelled by applicable law to collect, retain, or transmit data  despite receiving a DNT:1 signal for which there is no exception or exemption, the party SHOULD notify affected users to the extent practical and allowed by law.
17:49:10 <jchester2> Mandatory legal process via Justin and his modification's to Jonathan's text.  Should the final text include a "must"
17:49:10 <WileyS> SHOULD
17:49:40 <tl> *Or*, we could just see which group can yell their preferred word luder, right now in the call?
17:49:43 <rigo> q+
17:49:45 <npdoty> q+
17:49:47 <tl> *Louder.
17:49:49 <rigo> ack rig
17:50:02 <WileyS> T1 :-)
17:50:47 <jchester2> Rigo:  The relation between law and the standards of W3C.  W3C is just the tool-maker and will be a tool in various legal frameworks.  We over-estimate the normative of W3C standards
17:50:50 <rigo> zakim, mute me
17:50:50 <Zakim> Rigo should now be muted
17:50:58 <WileyS> Agree with Rigo - in place where the law requires disclosure we're already doing this.
17:51:04 <tl> Sadly, only Shane would be able to tell who was yelling louder, because he's the only person who can hear everyone. =p
17:51:12 <WileyS> LOL
17:51:22 <WileyS> And therefore I win by default - love it.
17:51:38 <aleecia> ack npdoty
17:52:03 <jchester2> Nick:  Can a party using a contract as compelled by law--do we have language
17:52:08 <tl> WileyS: And that's why we're against just yelling into the void.
17:52:42 <fielding> no
17:52:45 <npdoty> ack rigo
17:52:52 <fielding> law != contracts
17:53:02 <tl> +1
17:53:03 <tl> q+
17:53:12 <laurengelman> well, you can just explicitly say it does not
17:53:14 <tl> ack tl
17:53:14 <npdoty> ack tl
17:53:18 <rvaneijk> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Jan/0358.html
17:53:19 <fielding> q?
17:53:22 <rigo> Shane, disclosure is rather a P3P-like topic (and Dave has suggested to use the vocab and throw away the protocol, which is really interesting suggestion)
17:53:25 <fielding> q+
17:53:44 <rigo> q+
17:53:59 <laurengelman> q+
17:54:09 <laurengelman> yes
17:54:20 <jchester2> Tom:  We need to provide guidance in the document, and loss to users that sites can claim contract to undermine DNT intent
17:54:21 <npdoty> ack fielding 
17:54:25 <WileyS> Where companies are legally compelled to disclose, we do.  The attempt to add further burdens for required disclosures is inappropriate and therefore the request for SHOULD instead of MUST.
17:54:38 <jchester2> Roy: Contracts can't violate law by definition.
17:54:42 <rigo> ack ri
17:55:27 <jchester2> Rigo:  We should write some explanatory text
17:55:29 <aleecia> the question wasn't if contracts trump law, it was if someone might claim contracts are sufficient to compel them
17:55:47 <tl> fielding: I think what we mean is that a company would be "compelled by law" if they wrote a contract with someone else, because it would be legally prohibited to violate that contract.
17:56:00 <npdoty> s/fielding:/fielding,/
17:56:00 <Chapell> q+
17:56:23 <rigo> zakim, mute me
17:56:23 <Zakim> Rigo should now be muted
17:56:32 <fielding> tl: actually, no, it would just break the contract -- contracts are not compelled by law
17:56:58 <aleecia> ack laurengelman
17:57:03 <npdoty> s/tl:/tl,/
17:57:06 <rigo> roy, contracts can break law, say having a contract to rob a bank
17:57:12 <jchester2> Lauren:  If they say they are DNT compliant, they can't use contracts to undermine compliance position.
17:57:19 <aleecia> ack Chapell
17:57:23 <fielding> tl: failure to adhere to a contract may include required remedies, but those remedies are by contract or judicial imposition (not laws)
17:57:30 <npdoty> s/tl:/tl,/
17:57:37 <amyc> amyc has joined #dnt
17:57:53 <rigo> in the EU you need consent. DNT is a mechanism
17:57:59 <amyc> q+
17:57:59 <tl> fielding: Breach of contract is legally prohibited, now?
17:58:02 <tl> *no?
17:58:05 <fielding> rigo: in the US, contacts that contain illegal activity are null and void
17:58:13 <jchester2> Aleecia proposes that we take starting pt text from Justin; add a sentence on compelled by applicable law doesn't mean contract; and address should vs. must
17:58:15 <rigo> in the US you make a promise. If you not adhere to it, you deceive the user
17:58:17 <aleecia> ack amyc
17:58:30 <npdoty> aleecia: take Justin's text, add a sentence about contracts not compelling, note that SHOULD/MUST is still open
17:58:47 <jchester2> Amy:  Can the text she and Shane drafted make it into draft?
17:58:55 <npdoty> amyc, is there a difference besides the SHOULD/MUST disclosure question?
17:59:29 <rigo> WileyS, URI for Dave's paper for disclosures: http://www.w3.org/2010/09/raggett-fresh-take-on-p3p/
17:59:51 <rigo> again, just tooling
18:00:04 <npdoty> issue-84?
18:00:04 <trackbot> ISSUE-84 -- Make DNT status available to JavaScript -- pending review
18:00:04 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/84
18:00:04 <Zakim> - +1.202.695.bbaa
18:00:19 <npdoty> action-84?
18:00:20 <trackbot> ACTION-84 -- Shane Wiley to wiley to describe the reason for setting DNT=null -- due 2012-02-01 -- PENDINGREVIEW
18:00:20 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/84
18:00:27 <tl> q+
18:00:36 <Zakim> - +1.415.734.aajj
18:01:28 <jchester2> Action 84, via Shane, discuss DNT to null.   If there are user agents that don't support DNT and have them send back null.  From Shane:  Use case, companies will want to support DNT site specific exemptions when they can. 
18:01:28 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 84,
18:02:46 <amyc> Issue 28 proposed text: this standard is not intended to override applicable local, state, or country law.
18:02:51 <WileyS> Maybe its a SHOULD instead of a MUST then
18:03:01 <Zakim> -tl
18:03:01 <JC> That sounds odd since UAs support DNT today but cannont send DNT:Null
18:03:20 <Zakim> - +1.510.501.aakk
18:03:32 <aleecia> q?
18:03:36 <rigo> ack ri
18:03:42 <aleecia> ack tl
18:03:51 <Zakim> +tl
18:04:05 <rigo> zakim, mute me
18:04:05 <Zakim> Rigo should now be muted
18:04:10 <aleecia> q?
18:05:29 <fielding> tl: not that I am aware of -- contracts are an agreement between parties -- breach may result in civil action or required remedies that have nothing to do with laws per se.  Laws are the rules that governments pass to define what is legal or illegal activity and how decisions are made for the public good. The process by which civil actions are resolved is certainly imposed by law. So, contracts are not compelled by law, though resolution of disputes might be.
18:05:33 <jchester2> Tom:  Problem solved by existence of Javascript API.
18:05:47 <jchester2> Shane:  We need text so issue is addressed
18:05:47 <Zakim> -??P61
18:05:58 <npdoty> q+
18:06:07 <aleecia> ack npdoty
18:06:24 <WileyS> SHOULD not MAY :-)
18:06:26 <fielding> q+
18:06:31 <WileyS> But not MUST - agree
18:06:47 <WileyS> That's why I said SHOULD, not MUST
18:06:57 <jchester2> Nick:  Hard to convince user agents for a feature that users haven't turned on.
18:07:03 <aleecia> ack fielding
18:07:24 <jchester2> Roy: We need volunteers to write text for TPE spec.
18:07:41 <jchester2> Nick volunteers to do first draft
18:08:21 <johnsimpson> still having trouble understanding the use case...
18:08:46 <npdoty> action: doty to draft possible use of site-specific exception API to test existence of DNT / ask for exceptions even without DNT turned on
18:08:46 <trackbot> Created ACTION-122 - Draft possible use of site-specific exception API to test existence of DNT / ask for exceptions even without DNT turned on [on Nick Doty - due 2012-02-15].
18:09:18 <jchester2> Amy has placed text in IRC
18:09:48 <WileyS> John - I can ask a user today to give Yahoo! out-of-band to track for a particular widget.  Rather than continue to support out of band persmissions, where appropriate it would be great to be able to leverage DNT supported mechanisms if they exist.  The issue is being able to see a browser supports DNT prior to a user first setting DNT:1.  That's what the request is for - as a SHOULD, not a MUST.
18:10:21 <WileyS> "...give out-of-band 'permission' to..."
18:10:44 <npdoty> action-65?
18:10:44 <trackbot> ACTION-65 -- Thomas Lowenthal to propose clarification on ISSUE-39 -- due 2012-02-03 -- PENDINGREVIEW
18:10:44 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/65
18:10:47 <jchester2> Action 65, Tracking of Geographic Data
18:10:47 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 65,
18:11:49 <jchester2> Aleecia: They way we have DNT now, impacts geo-IP look-up
18:12:38 <aleecia> q?
18:13:01 <npdoty> aleecia: had thought there was a concern that ZIP+4 was too much (actually from Jules?)
18:13:08 <WileyS> I thought we had draft text for this now?
18:13:15 <npdoty> ... but also the position that geo IP targeting wasn't tracking
18:13:18 <jchester2> Aleecia wants to place in doc. options on geo-location
18:13:32 <WileyS> Okay - I didn't see the strong disagreement
18:13:35 <npdoty> I liked the idea of a "contextual" exception
18:13:36 <WileyS> q+
18:13:37 <tl> q+
18:13:41 <jchester2> I think this requires key focus for next week on geo-targeting
18:13:46 <aleecia> ack WileyS
18:14:09 <aleecia> Tom's original text: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Feb/0081.html
18:14:19 <jchester2> Shane:  no way to get to zip+4 without user consent today
18:14:22 <aleecia> which is after Shane's proposal that we not address it at all
18:14:41 <jchester2> q+
18:14:47 <johnsimpson>  should an international standard have a reference to Zip code?
18:15:12 <fielding> outsourcing constraints are the same as for other cases, I think
18:15:16 <aleecia> disagreement from DavidW: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Feb/0115.html
18:15:21 <npdoty> I think there's a concern that IP geolocation is or may be increasing in precision
18:15:47 <aleecia> ack tl
18:15:57 <aleecia> If we have more agreement than I thought, bonus
18:15:59 <WileyS> Yes
18:16:29 <WileyS> I didn't catch all of that but in general I'm supportive of the text in the email chain
18:16:39 <aleecia> ack jchester
18:17:11 <npdoty> q+
18:17:16 <Zakim> -ninjamarnau
18:17:31 <jchester2> Jeff Chester asked that we focus on geo-location for next week;s call
18:17:55 <aleecia> and from Justin: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Feb/0170.html
18:17:57 <Zakim> - +1.202.835.aagg
18:17:59 <aleecia> Rigo, we do have text
18:18:23 <WileyS> Let's address it as hyper-percise vs. generally accurate
18:18:31 <jchester2> Nick suggests we could speak to invasiveness or potential of geo-location info.
18:19:19 <fielding> If the geolocation information is essential to use of a site, as in most mobile contextual offer sites, then consent is generally collected once and DNT is ignored. Right?
18:19:33 <jchester2> q+
18:19:37 <npdoty> q-
18:19:46 <npdoty> q- jchester
18:19:57 <npdoty> q+ jchester
18:20:01 <WileyS> q+
18:20:26 <aleecia> DMA is good enough for most business cases 
18:20:35 <aleecia> or general zip level
18:20:47 <johnsimpson> q+
18:20:58 <aleecia> 100,000 or so people living there
18:21:24 <aleecia> consent needed for more precision
18:21:28 <aleecia> ack jchester
18:22:03 <laurengelman> yes
18:22:06 <npdoty> do we want to use "precise" or "hyper-precise" and then reference some existing document that defines it?
18:22:15 <hwest> Most of those are nowhere near precise location
18:22:38 <WileyS> Please speak to Apple :-)  We're not alwasy in control.
18:22:42 <WileyS> always
18:22:56 <aleecia> ack johnsimpson
18:22:57 <npdoty> ack johnsimpson 
18:23:22 <rigo> q+
18:23:33 <aleecia> ack WileyS
18:23:36 <laurengelman> have to hop.
18:23:37 <rigo> ack ri
18:23:37 <npdoty> johnsimpson: we keep referring to Zip, Zip+4, but doesn't this need to apply internationally?
18:23:38 <WileyS> Agreed - that's why we're moving to "hyper-percise"
18:23:40 <laurengelman> laurengelman has left #dnt
18:23:42 <jchester2> John Simpson says that language using zip +4 not approp, given international use of location
18:23:45 <johnsimpson> zakim, mute me
18:23:45 <Zakim> johnsimpson should now be muted
18:23:56 <jchester2> Rigo:  Zip or postal codes are international
18:24:03 <Zakim> -??P58
18:24:22 <Zakim> -??P62
18:24:28 <aleecia> zip code or locally appropriate analog? would that work?
18:24:37 <npdoty> rigo: in p3p, checked on internationalization, using postal codes seemed okay
18:24:38 <rigo> zakim, mute me
18:24:38 <Zakim> Rigo should now be muted
18:24:41 <jchester2> Rigo: Once we are in last call, we will have internalization discuss then
18:25:32 <WileyS> +1
18:25:34 <jchester2> Aleecia:  We will incorp. Tom's existing text into draft and have that as the discussion.  Gets us to good snapshot
18:25:36 <tl> q+
18:25:38 <fielding> postal codes: Universal Postal Union, “International Postal Address Components and Templates,” UPU S42-1, November 2002.
18:25:46 <tl> ack tl
18:25:48 <aleecia> ack tl
18:26:07 <npdoty> who will take the action to integrate the text? can one of the editors volunteer for that?
18:26:07 <jchester2> Tom:  Says its good plan and our language is focued on guidance in level of accuracy
18:26:11 <aleecia> next steps: add Tom's text to the draft
18:26:23 <rigo> Roy, what people do not realize is that the country on the letter MUST be written in french according to the treaty
18:26:33 <WileyS> With a statement that explicit user consent trumps DNT (out of band permission at this time)
18:26:56 <hwest> Tom, can you email that language to me directly?
18:27:09 <rigo> consent trumps everything, much to the dismay of some privacy advocates
18:27:11 <jchester2> We will need text to ensure that explicit consent fairly obtained--which is not case today
18:27:14 <fielding> rico, no problem -- we just redefine French ;-)
18:27:18 <hwest> And anyone else who doesn't see their text in the draft over the next few days, heatherwest@google.com
18:27:25 <fielding> s/rico/rigo/
18:27:32 <rigo> :)
18:27:43 <aleecia> q?
18:27:48 <jchester2> Aleecia:  We will publish text in short order.  Adjourn
18:27:55 <tl> =D
18:27:59 <WileyS> Thank you for scribing Jeff!
18:28:03 <Zakim> - +1.202.326.aarr
18:28:04 <Zakim> - +1.202.326.aaxx
18:28:04 <Zakim> - +1.646.666.aatt
18:28:05 <Zakim> -Rigo
18:28:06 <Zakim> -dwainberg
18:28:15 <Zakim> - +1.202.346.aass
18:28:16 <Zakim> - +1.206.658.aauu
18:28:16 <Zakim> - +1.301.270.aamm
18:28:16 <enewland> thanks aleecia
18:28:17 <Zakim> - +1.813.366.aaee
18:28:17 <Zakim> -rvaneijk
18:28:17 <Zakim> - +1.408.674.aaaa
18:28:18 <enewland> enewland has left #dnt
18:28:18 <Zakim> -johnsimpson
18:28:20 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
18:28:21 <Zakim> -alex
18:28:23 <Zakim> -[Microsoft.aa]
18:28:24 <johnsimpson> johnsimpson has left #DNT
18:28:25 <Zakim> -[Microsoft]
18:28:27 <Zakim> - +1.206.369.aayy
18:28:29 <Zakim> -tl
18:28:31 <Zakim> - +1.714.852.bbbb
18:28:33 <Zakim> - +1.202.530.aall
18:28:35 <Zakim> -npdoty
18:28:36 <tedleung> tedleung has left #dnt
18:28:39 <aleecia> RRSAgent, make minutes
18:28:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/02/08-dnt-minutes.html aleecia
18:28:39 <Zakim> -clay_cbs_opa
18:28:48 <npdoty> Zakim, list attendees
18:28:48 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been npdoty, +1.408.674.aaaa, +1.609.981.aabb, +49.431.98.aacc, ninjamarnau, tl, +31.65.141.aadd, rvaneijk, +1.813.366.aaee, +1.202.684.aaff,
18:28:51 <Zakim> ... +1.202.835.aagg, +1.202.326.aahh, [IPcaller], +1.206.658.aaii, +1.415.734.aajj, +1.510.501.aakk, +1.202.530.aall, +1.301.270.aamm, +1.408.349.aann, +1.334.703.aaoo,
18:28:51 <Zakim> ... +1.908.541.aapp, enewland, +1.646.825.aaqq, +1.202.326.aarr, +1.202.346.aass, clay_cbs_opa, +1.646.666.aatt, +1.206.658.aauu, +1.310.392.aavv, +1.408.423.aaww, +1.202.326.aaxx,
18:28:54 <Zakim> ... +1.206.369.aayy, dwainberg, [Microsoft], dsinger, Rigo, BrianTs, +1.813.366.aazz, alex, +1.202.695.bbaa, johnsimpson, +1.714.852.bbbb
18:28:58 <fielding> s/+1.714.852.bbbb/fielding/g
18:29:02 <Zakim> -[Microsoft.a]
18:29:52 <npdoty> trackbot, bye
18:29:52 <trackbot> trackbot has left #dnt
18:29:55 <npdoty> rrsagent, bye
18:29:55 <RRSAgent> I see 4 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/08-dnt-actions.rdf :
18:29:55 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Wiley to write a proposal on web-wide exception API (for ISSUE-113) (with npdoty) [1]
18:29:55 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/08-dnt-irc#T17-19-15
18:29:55 <RRSAgent> ACTION: 107 to Does DNT apply to Issue 30, apply to offline data gathering.  Mimi interested in reviewing text but not draft.  Tom says current draft doesn't make distinction between sharing off and online.  It seems this is covered.  [2]
18:29:55 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/08-dnt-irc#T17-26-15
18:29:55 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Shane to re-write language on issue-57 proposal to avoid "opt out" language [3]
18:29:55 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/08-dnt-irc#T17-37-35
18:29:55 <RRSAgent> ACTION: doty to draft possible use of site-specific exception API to test existence of DNT / ask for exceptions even without DNT turned on [4]
18:29:55 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/08-dnt-irc#T18-08-46