16:50:53 RRSAgent has joined #dnt 16:50:53 logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/03/07-dnt-irc 16:51:06 Zakim has joined #dnt 16:51:07 fielding has joined #dnt 16:51:15 Zakim, this will be dnt 16:51:15 ok, aleecia; I see T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM scheduled to start in 9 minutes 16:51:23 agenda? 16:51:56 T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM has now started 16:52:04 + +1.408.674.aaaa 16:52:17 + +1.609.981.aabb 16:52:34 agenda+ Selection of scribe 16:52:42 zakim, aaaa is aleecia 16:52:42 +aleecia; got it 16:53:09 agenda+ Any comments on minutes: http://www.w3.org/2012/02/29-dnt-minutes 16:53:24 agenda+ TPE discussion 16:53:38 agenda+ Compliance discussion 16:53:51 npdoty has joined #dnt 16:53:56 Zakim, aabb is tl. 16:53:56 +tl; got it 16:54:00 agenda+ (if time allows) Review of overdue action items: 16:54:07 +??P21 16:54:20 agenda+ (if time allows) Creation of new actions for TPE 16:54:21 Just like last week, and every other week, so I'm not sure why this is a surprise to you 16:54:34 agenda+ Announce next meeting & adjourn 16:54:43 Zakim's forgotten me too 16:55:10 +npdoty 16:55:16 Zakim, I thought we were friends! 16:55:16 I don't understand 'I thought we were friends!', tl 16:55:18 We've all made the obvious DNT and personalization jokes until we're done, right? 16:55:25 Zakim, that much is obvious! 16:55:25 I don't understand 'that much is obvious!', tl 16:56:07 I want a site-specific exception for Zakim. I feel like Zakim and I have a special bond. 16:56:20 Sometimes it feels like an abusive relationship though. 16:56:35 You take, take, take: what have you ever done for Zakim? 16:57:26 All I ever give is love an affection, and Zakim manipulates me cruelly. 16:57:32 Alas - watching relatives age, that flag is implemented on older models. 16:58:07 rrsagent, pointer? 16:58:07 See http://www.w3.org/2012/03/07-dnt-irc#T16-58-07 16:58:13 johnsimpson has joined #dnt 16:58:20 rrsagent, make logs public 16:58:23 alex_ has joined #dnt 16:58:27 Oops - thanks Nick 16:58:54 Hi, Matthias! 16:59:02 dsinger has joined #dnt 16:59:04 + +1.310.392.aacc 16:59:14 Meeting: Tracking Protection Working Group teleconference 16:59:16 Hi, who's in 310? 16:59:22 + +1.813.366.aadd 16:59:24 Chair: schunter 16:59:34 Hi, who's calling in from 813? 16:59:40 zakim 310.392.aacc is johnsimpson 16:59:48 zakim, aadd is alex 16:59:48 +alex; got it 16:59:52 Zakim, aacc is johnsimpson 16:59:52 +johnsimpson; got it 16:59:54 WileyS has joined #DNT 17:00:00 Thanks, John & Alex! 17:00:04 jchester2 has joined #dnt 17:00:05 dsriedel has joined #dnt 17:00:17 + +1.415.520.aaee 17:00:19 90% regrets sounds like a night of parties 17:00:22 Zakim, who's on the phone? 17:00:22 On the phone I see aleecia, tl, ??P21, npdoty, johnsimpson, alex, +1.415.520.aaee 17:00:32 Hi, who's calling in from 415? 17:00:36 Zakim, ??P21 is schunter 17:00:36 +schunter; got it 17:00:41 + +1.617.863.aaff 17:00:46 + +1.301.270.aagg 17:00:57 zakim, aaff is wseltzer 17:00:57 zakim, mute me 17:00:57 +wseltzer; got it 17:00:57 johnsimpson should now be muted 17:01:19 zakim, please mute me 17:01:19 sorry, jchester2, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you 17:01:29 + +49.721.913.74.aahh 17:01:39 jchester 2+301-270-3938 17:01:40 zakim, aahh is dsriedel 17:01:40 +dsriedel; got it 17:01:45 zakim, mute me 17:01:45 dsriedel should now be muted 17:01:53 jmayer has joined #dnt 17:01:58 zakim, aagg is jchester2 17:01:58 +jchester2; got it 17:02:07 BrianTs has joined #dnt 17:02:10 + +1.202.684.aaii 17:02:16 + +1.714.852.aajj 17:02:21 mute+1.3012703938 17:02:21 + +1.617.733.aakk 17:02:23 cOlsen has joined #dnt 17:02:28 justin_ has joined #dnt 17:02:28 Zakim, mute jchester2 17:02:30 jchester2 should now be muted 17:02:32 + +1.813.366.aall 17:02:43 Zakim, aajj is fielding 17:02:45 +fielding; got it 17:02:48 I could scribe the first half 17:02:55 If you find someone during the compliance side 17:03:01 I am. 17:03:05 Jonathan has to go to class, though 17:03:06 +[Microsoft] 17:03:06 But I have to go in about 15 minutes. 17:03:15 + +1.202.326.aamm 17:03:15 + +1.206.369.aann 17:03:18 + +1.202.637.aaoo 17:03:25 who is online? 17:03:25 Justin, care to split it? 17:03:34 andyzei has joined #dnt 17:03:49 tedleung has joined #dnt 17:03:57 andyzei, can you scribe? 17:04:02 Zakim, aaoo is justin_ 17:04:02 +justin_; got it 17:04:04 Zakim, who is online? 17:04:04 I don't understand your question, schunter. 17:04:18 Why don't I scribe for the first part, hand off late 17:04:21 later. 17:04:29 I'll take a hand-off mid-way 17:04:29 scribenick: aleecia 17:04:33 Perfect! 17:04:35 It's the quiet ones you have yo watch out for. 17:04:52 Zakim, take up agendum 1 17:04:52 agendum 1. "Selection of scribe" taken up [from aleecia] 17:04:57 schunter: minutes? No comments, approved. 17:04:58 Zakim, take up agendum 2 17:04:58 agendum 2. "Any comments on minutes: http://www.w3.org/2012/02/29-dnt-minutes" taken up [from aleecia] 17:05:00 ac has joined #dnt 17:05:05 Zakim, take up agendum 3 17:05:06 agendum 3. "TPE discussion" taken up [from aleecia] 17:05:10 + +1.516.695.aapp 17:05:33 schunter: Starting with TPE doc, then Compliance, then action item review if time 17:05:35 + +1.408.349.aaqq 17:05:45 Zakim, aaqq is WileyS 17:05:45 +WileyS; got it 17:05:50 schunter: Reviewing TPE, start from the top. 17:05:52 hefferjr has joined #dnt 17:06:21 dsinger, are you well-rested and have a summary? 17:06:30 … Editors, summary since last week? 17:06:33 Lia has joined #dnt 17:07:04 Roy: Last night, changes from Nick for JS 17:07:06 ChrisPedigoOPA has joined #dnt 17:07:32 … site-specific changes. Andy's on fingerprinting to make requirements language consistent 17:07:44 that was the proposal that Tom sent out last week in Markdown, fyi 17:08:16 kj has joined #dnt 17:08:20 … trimmed introduction closer to David's suggestions; added most of JohnS, combined with (mumble) privacy paper 17:08:50 adrianba has joined #dnt 17:08:53 …cleaned up intro before header proposal; wasn't needed any more 17:09:19 … re-org'ed header proposal into sections, easier to read. 17:09:25 KevinT has joined #dnt 17:09:45 s/(mumble)/citation to KnowPrivacy/ 17:09:57 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html 17:09:58 Thanks! 17:10:18 schunter: Things you cannot publish, please raise. 17:10:27 … Think we could publish as it stands 17:10:50 … Introduction shortened. Ok as is? 17:10:51 bryan has joined #dnt 17:11:00 Nick: CG issue here, should we mark it? 17:11:05 Roy: Do we have an issue? 17:11:09 Nick: no, should we? 17:11:11 The only critical item in the TPE draft for us is the prohibition on server-side polling of site-specific exceptions. Uses cases were sent via email and I'll provide alternate text to the digitial fingerprinting concerns to remove that prohibition. 17:11:12 1+ 17:11:15 q+ 17:11:26 +Bryan_Sullivan 17:11:31 Q+ 17:11:36 schunter: issue was didn't value privacy enough 17:11:38 q? 17:11:39 zakim, unmute me 17:11:39 jchester2 should no longer be muted 17:11:46 ack aleecia 17:11:49 + +1.202.744.aarr 17:11:50 present+ Bryan_Sullivan 17:11:53 q? 17:11:53 +q 17:11:54 +[Microsoft.a] 17:11:54 + +385221aass 17:12:09 zakim, unmute me 17:12:09 johnsimpson should no longer be muted 17:12:12 q? 17:12:21 ksmith has joined #DNT 17:12:27 amyc has joined #dnt 17:12:30 aleecia: on our agenda to review and respond to Community Group after publishing these documents 17:12:48 JC has joined #DNT 17:12:49 jchester2: improved, but comments in the CG need to be ack'ed in some way 17:12:54 ack jchester2 17:12:57 ack jchester 17:12:59 q? 17:13:00 (is mentioned in the Compliance doc) 17:13:05 zakim, mute me 17:13:05 jchester2 should now be muted 17:13:09 (perhaps good to add here) 17:13:18 +Cyril_Concolato 17:13:22 ack jchester 17:13:24 schunter: need to add CG issues to tracker 17:13:25 vicnent has joined #dnt 17:13:26 q? 17:13:27 I agree. Thanks. Make formal issues 17:13:29 (agree) 17:13:31 + +1.202.326.aatt 17:13:35 ack johnsimpson 17:13:54 johnsimpson: getting closer, progress. 17:14:20 … This intro seems similar to compliance language. Final rec should have one? 17:14:28 (or: could have them the same) 17:14:44 schunter: both should have intro, should be self-contained, could be identical 17:14:47 q+ 17:14:48 efelten has joined #dnt 17:15:00 … wouldn't mind if identical 17:15:11 … then a note on which doc does what 17:15:15 q? 17:15:22 q? 17:15:23 ack aleecia 17:15:26 ack aleecia 17:15:28 efelten_ has joined #dnt 17:15:45 +??P84 17:16:12 aleecia: let's copy & paste into compliance, unless there's something there people want to keep 17:16:19 no objections on all of chapter 2! 17:16:24 schunter: other feedback on intro? No? ready to publish 17:16:24 q? 17:16:40 … nothing on section 2, ready to publish 17:16:45 lauren has joined #dnt 17:16:46 … section 3, ready to publish 17:16:58 + +1.206.910.aauu 17:17:01 q? 17:17:02 … section 4, 4.1 Expression Format 17:17:16 editors have added a pointer to issue-111 here (do we want a dnt:2?) 17:17:38 …4.2, syntax 17:17:46 + +1.215.286.aavv 17:17:51 q+ 17:17:54 … no comments 17:18:01 … 4.3, any comments? 17:18:04 + +1.202.346.aaww 17:18:10 Amyc: link? 17:18:13 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html 17:18:13 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html 17:18:16 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html 17:18:17 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html 17:18:19 hwest has joined #dnt 17:18:40 Nick, 111? 17:18:54 schunter: 4.3, any comments? 17:18:58 Well, aren't we just a bunch of pointdexters. We can all stay behind after class to clean the erasers. 17:19:04 Shane: open issue on server side? 17:19:25 … section 6, no problem 17:19:26 we are looking at revision 1.97 date: 2012/03/07 13:37:42; 17:19:39 … will raise later in the document, issue-111 17:19:39 + +1.206.619.aaxx 17:19:48 WileyS, editors have added pointers to 111 around the DNT:2 question, which has server-side impact 17:19:53 zakim, aaxx is andyzei 17:19:53 +andyzei; got it 17:19:54 schunter: 4.3 comments? None. 4.4? 17:20:01 - +1.202.346.aaww 17:20:14 +q 17:20:14 … 4.5 is new. Language from David Singer. 17:20:25 4.5 Tracking Preference Expressed in Other Protocols 17:20:25 A user's tracking preference is intended to apply in general, regardless of the protocols being used for Internet communication. The protocol expressed here is specific to HTTP communication; however, the semantics are not restricted to use in HTTP; the same semantics may be carried by other protocols, either in future revisions of this specification, or in other specifications. 17:20:25 When it is known that the user's preference is for no tracking, compliant services are still required to honor that preference, even if other protocols are used. For example, re-directing to another protocol in order to avoid receipt of the header is not compliant. 17:20:35 schunter: comments? 17:20:42 tl: comment on 4.4 17:20:52 rvaneijk has joined #dnt 17:20:57 right, TBD 17:21:02 … last sentence Therefore, we will define here various mechanisms for communicating the tracking preference via common plug-in APIs. 17:21:05 + +31.65.141.aayy 17:21:17 zakim, aayy is rvaneijk 17:21:17 +rvaneijk; got it 17:21:20 … task we could drop if it doesn't look like it's getting done before due date 17:21:25 … can leave to browsers 17:21:38 … no great loss if we fail to get to this 17:21:58 Roy: If we fail to do that, plug-ins cannot adhere to the protocol 17:22:22 schunter: replace with - browser vendors should look into way to do this, rather than standardized 17:22:27 tl: yep, sure 17:22:29 I think we should try and develop the API parameters 17:22:33 Roy: nice theory, don't see it works 17:22:46 tl, do you want to change the text here right now? 17:22:49 … don't see a need to change this now, but if we don't have an API next time, sure 17:22:56 tl: let's just add a note to that 17:22:57 q+ 17:23:00 this text is about protocols, not APIs. 17:23:11 we're talking about FTP or ... 17:23:14 schunter: drop the sentence, raise issue of what we should say here on right api approach 17:23:20 Roy: fine 17:23:24 npdoty: "Note: this task is not of critical priority." 17:23:26 (Tom?) 17:23:31 yes, we have an API issue with plug-ins; they need to know the DNT status 17:23:59 amyc: would this apply to applications on the same machine where the DNT pref in the browser or HTML app, where the app isn't receiving DNT signal? 17:24:24 tl: exciting adventure we can play, there are implementations that might work. Best to focus on other pieces first. 17:24:28 - +1.202.684.aaii 17:24:31 Mozilla's Boot-to-Gecko is a relevant example there (for OS-level communication), for example 17:24:53 amyc: sounds right to me too, seems difficult communicating to other apps that exist 17:25:04 tl: advert for B2G 17:25:21 schunter: think we agree 17:25:31 so we're adding a note? 17:25:36 back to 4.5 17:25:50 I'm fine with just a note. 17:26:00 +1 17:26:06 action: fielding to remove last sentence in 4.4 + add a note instead 17:26:06 Created ACTION-144 - Remove last sentence in 4.4 + add a note instead [on Roy Fielding - due 2012-03-14]. 17:26:06 Lets move on. 17:26:06 +1 to note 17:26:15 schunter: adding a note, removing last sentence - action for Roy 17:26:22 … 4.5 comments? 17:26:42 … completes section 4, can publish with single change. 17:26:56 … section 5, Communicating a Tracking Status 17:27:25 +q 17:27:32 … two proposals, 5.1 Tracking Status Resource and 5.2 Tk Header Field for HTTP Responses 17:27:50 q? 17:27:57 …comments on 5.1 as a whole? 17:28:13 tl: conversation with Roy, hope to compromise without contention 17:28:19 …working on writing that text 17:28:31 for after this WD 17:28:32 chapell has joined #DNT 17:28:35 … if it matches what Roy thinks, we can all go play with unicorns and so forth 17:29:14 tom, please summarize this: I went to fix a typo and lost context 17:29:48 schunter: won't get in for WD in time, but this is good news 17:29:53 request: add a note? 17:29:53 - +1.516.695.aapp 17:29:57 + to publish as is. 17:30:04 q? 17:30:08 ack tl 17:30:10 I'd want to see the specific text, but a compromise that uses a header for signaling something that has changed in real time sounds promising to me 17:30:12 tl, I think we agreed that the header would be optional (MAY) unless a change was just made to status, but we can work on that after the WD 17:30:14 Yes, let's add a note. 17:30:14 let's let people know we're close 17:30:26 tom, could you draft a note? 17:30:30 q- 17:30:31 perhaps in real time? 17:30:36 Yes, action me up! 17:30:43 was hoping for Right Now :-) 17:30:59 schunter: yes, let's add a note. comments on 5.1? 17:31:10 schunter: 5.2 comments? 17:31:27 give me a sec 17:31:33 schunter 5.3? 17:31:33 do we need an open issue for 5.3? 17:31:42 5.3 Status Code for Tracking Required 17:31:43 An HTTP error response status code might be useful for indicating that the site refuses service unless the user either logs into a subscription account or agrees to an exception to DNT for this site and its contracted third-party sites. 17:32:01 npdoty: there's an open issue for 5.3, should we add it to the doc? 17:32:13 schunter: don't know? 17:32:38 npdoty: didn't even get far enough we could have it contested 17:32:42 this has not changed since FPWD, so let's keep it as is. 17:32:51 schunter: "might be useful" isn't the right final language either 17:33:04 … leave it as it is, but should raise an issue to come back to this later 17:33:10 (could we add the issue to the doc?) 17:33:25 schunter: any other objections? Ok, 5 is done, section 6 17:33:39 issue: HTTP error status code to signal that tracking is required? 17:33:58 … Site-specific Exceptions and JS API, Nick and Shane 17:34:09 … any objections to section 6? 17:34:10 WileyS, you had issues here? 17:34:17 … as a whole? 17:34:17 enewland has joined #dnt 17:34:22 No issue 17:34:27 issue-111? 17:34:28 Created ISSUE-128 - HTTP error status code to signal that tracking is required? ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/128/edit . 17:34:30 ISSUE-111 -- Signaling state/existence of site-specific exceptions -- open 17:34:30 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/111 17:34:37 +[Microsoft.aa] 17:34:42 The open issue is listed that I was looking for - I was looking for it in the wrong place :-) 17:34:45 schunter: we're done, two minor changes 17:34:45 q? 17:34:56 great, WileyS, thanks 17:34:57 … we're ready to make fixes and publish 17:34:58 Note: We are currently working on a proposal which combines the Tk: response header and Tracking Status Resource. It would make the TSR compulsory and the Tk: header optional. However, it would be required to use the Tk: header to notify the user when something in the TSR has changed in real time. 17:35:19 scribenick: wseltzer 17:35:23 Zakim, next agendum 17:35:23 agendum 1. "Selection of scribe" taken up [from aleecia] 17:35:25 fielding: ^ Also, I added a proposed note on the Plugin API to you action for that. 17:35:28 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-compliance.html 17:35:43 Zakim, take up agendum 4 17:35:43 agendum 4. "Compliance discussion" taken up [from aleecia] 17:35:49 tl, I just finished adding one to the spec 17:35:56 aleecia: Moving to the Compliance Document 17:36:26 Notes to new readers: this document is a snapshot of live discussions within the Tracking Protection Working Group. It does not capture all of our work. For example, we have issues that are [PENDING REVIEW] with complete text proposals that did not make it into this draft. Text in white is typically [CLOSED]: we have reached a consensus decision. Text in blue boxes presents multiple options the group is considering. In some cases we are close to agreement, and 17:36:26 others we have more to discuss. 17:36:41 fielding: Don't see it? 17:36:41 +1 17:36:43 ... Introduction: additions: Notes to new readers. 17:36:55 testing first, then commit 17:36:55 - +1.215.286.aavv 17:36:57 We have not reviewed comments from the Community Group associated with this work. We thank them for their time and detailed feedback, and will address their comments in the near future. 17:37:11 minor editing, worth making the Note to new readers a boxed "Note" 17:37:17 ... Second note: Community Group comments have not yet been incorporated. 17:37:28 Lulz. 17:37:35 ... accept Nick's "Note" note. 17:37:52 look good to me 17:37:52 both good 17:37:53 ... No objections seen. 17:38:08 fielding: Is your note live? 17:38:15 fielding, dsinger, moving these notes to TPE? 17:38:25 schunter: OK to add to DNT doc as well. 17:38:30 sorry, I am lost 17:38:36 aleecia: Scope and goals. Sec 2.1 17:38:46 will take action from matthias 17:38:59 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-compliance.html#scope-and-goals 17:39:06 While there are a variety of business models to monetize content on the web, many rely on advertising. Advertisements can be targeted to a particular user's interests based on information gathered about one's online activity. While the Internet industry believes many users appreciate such targeted advertising, as well as other personalized content, there is also an understanding that some people find the practice intrusive. If this opinion becomes widespread, i 17:39:06 could undermine the trust necessary to conduct business on the Internet. This Compliance specification and a companion [TRACKING-DNT] specification are intended to give users a means to indicate their tracking preference and to spell out the obligations of compliant websites that receive the Do Not Track message. The goal is to provide the user with choice, while allowing practices necessary for a smoothly functioning Internet. This should be a win-win for busi 17:39:06 and consumers alike. The Internet brings millions of users and web sites together in a vibrant and rich ecosystem. As the sophistication of the Internet has grown, so too has its complexity which leaves all but the most technically savvy unable to deeply understand how web sites collect and use data about their online interactions. While on the surface many web sites may appear to be served by a single entity, in fact, many web sites are an assembly of multiple 17:39:11 parties coming together to power a user’s online experience. As an additional privacy tool, this specification provides both the technical and compliance guidelines to enable the online ecosystem to further empower users with the ability to communicate a tracking preferences to a web site and its partners. 17:39:16 +1 17:39:19 ... Suggesting we sync from DNT doc, killing this paragraph. 17:39:25 OK with that 17:39:27 ... no objections. 17:39:29 I am ok with that 17:39:58 @@: can we move 2 paragraphs to status section? 17:39:58 We should mirror the approach in both documents 17:40:05 "status of this document" section for both documents 17:40:08 s/@@/fielding/ 17:40:11 Consistency on shared elements is good 17:40:26 aleecia: ok. 17:40:29 fielding: Did you add notes to DNT? 17:40:50 +[Microsoft.aaa] 17:40:50 3.2.1 Option 1: User Expectations 17:40:53 - +1.206.910.aauu 17:41:06 3.2.2 Option 2: Discoverable Affiliates 17:41:07 +1 17:41:09 ... Sec. 3; 3.2.1 Options: change to give them names. 17:41:24 Where is the draft text that Amy and I came up with? 17:41:39 Was more text than that 17:41:50 ... That became Option 2 17:41:54 Okay 17:42:07 3.3.1.2 Option 2: Affiliates 17:42:10 3.3.1.2 I think also comes from WileyS and AmyC 17:42:14 q+ 17:42:33 amyc: we can delete the ... 17:43:03 ... Defintion isn't solely focused on affiliates. Suggests "Discoverable ownership and affiliates" 17:43:03 "Discoverable Ownership and Affiliates" for 3.2.2 17:43:31 aleecia: Will accept the original authors' suggestion for title 17:43:36 nick beat me to it 17:43:48 s/"amyc: we can delete the ..."/"amyc: we can delete the ellipsis, replace with period." 17:43:58 I default to Amy but I think yes 17:44:07 ... 3.3.1.2 remove "or ...." 17:44:14 3.3.1.2 Option 2: Affiliates 17:44:38 aleecia: We now have two parallel proposals; Jonathan & Tom, and Shane & Amy. 17:44:50 Would there be time to elaborate a bit on "similar services" in 3.3.1.2 Option 2: Affiliates? 17:45:15 ... We will need to resolve these; this doc shows the public our thinking. 17:45:45 ... Clearly we're not done with either of these texts, but in good shape to publish as draft. 17:45:47 dsriedel, what's your question there? 17:45:51 3.3.2 Data Controller and Processor 17:46:13 For the EU, the outsourcing scenario is clearly regulated. In the current EU Directive 95/46/EC, but also in the suggested regulation reforming the data protection regime, an entity using or processing data is subject to data protection law. A First Party (EU: data controller) is an entity or multiple entities (EU: joint data controller) who determines the purposes, conditions and means of the data processing will be the data controller. A service provider (EU: 17:46:13 processor) is an entity with a legal contractual relation to the Data Controller. The Service Provider does determine the purposes, conditions and means of the data processing, but processes data on behalf of the controller. The data processor acts on behalf of the data controller and is a separate legal entity. An entity acting as a first party and contracting services of another party is responsible for the overall processing. A third party is an entity with 17:46:14 contractual relation to the Data Controller and no specific legitimacy or authorization in processing personal data. If the third party has own rights and privileges concerning the processing of the data collected by the first party, it isn't a data processor anymore and thus not covered by exemptions. This third party is then considered as a second data controller with all duties attached to that status. As the pretensions of users are based on law, they apply 17:46:19 first and third party alike unless the third party acts as a mere data processor. 17:46:26 ... text not final; may wind up in a different doc or place. 17:46:48 @npdoty: Well, we were wondering where to draw the line, seperating ads from widgets. As every ad is a potential widget, something the user can interact with. 17:46:55 +q 17:46:56 ... thanks Rob and Rigo. 17:47:07 ack amy 17:47:11 q- 17:47:13 ack tl 17:47:25 We will need an entire section, or perhaps another document, to address DNT in various countries and regions. While we cannot provide legal advice, we can provide pointers to more information. A small subset of the group is working on this task. The text that follows may move elsewhere. 17:48:01 , or not make the final document 17:48:06 tl: Note on 3.3.2 is different from agreement I recall. Suggest adding "text may not make the final document" 17:48:13 "move elsewhere or be removed." 17:48:14 +1 17:48:22 +1 to npdoty 17:48:26 aleecia: We do have some uncertainty here. 17:48:36 rvaneijk, does that sound good to you? 17:48:48 I am fine with the addition to the note 17:48:48 , or be removed 17:48:50 +1 17:48:59 edit the note as such 17:49:01 +1 17:49:26 A "network interaction" is an HTTP request and response, or any other set of logically related network traffic. 17:49:43 aleecia: 3.4. Any objections to changing set to sequence? 17:49:46 Fine by me. 17:49:53 +1 to sequence 17:50:02 ... no objections. Close note, change text. 17:50:04 "Happy." 17:50:10 3.4.2 Non-Normative Discussion 17:50:29 ... hasn't changed. 17:50:37 ... 3.5, also unchanged 17:50:52 ... 3.6, also unchanged 17:51:05 We are still working through how, or if, to define tracking. Some suggest the phrase "cross-site tracking" only. We will need to ensure both final recommendations use the same terms in the same way. 17:51:11 ... 3.7, mostly format changes. New note ^ 17:51:28 Looks good 17:51:34 ... no objections. 17:51:45 3.7.1 Option 1: Non-first Party Identifiers 17:51:51 ... 3 options for tracking, now given names. 17:51:55 3.7.2 Option 2: Cross-site or Over Time 17:51:58 vincent has joined #dnt 17:52:04 3.7.3 Option 3: Silence 17:52:32 The rest, is silence. 17:52:35 ... 3.8, boxes seeking names 17:52:37 +q 17:52:39 "What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence." 17:52:45 ack WileyS 17:52:48 ack WileyS 17:53:09 WileyS: Where is the Belgium text? 17:53:27 aleecia: different section, 4.1 17:53:40 ac has joined #dnt 17:53:44 Wording needs polish to ensure it works with accessibility issues, but other than minor edits this is agreed upon. 17:53:53 aleecia: 3.9, added note ^ 17:54:06 ... 3.10, 3.11 locked down for a while. 17:54:10 The main issue for me is that IE does not render the section IDs when viewing the documents. Which browser should I use? 17:54:15 ... final call for Sec 3. 17:54:24 +1 to publish sec. 3 17:54:26 WileyS: Firefox, obviously. 17:54:29 Now for the "fun" part. 17:54:32 LOL - okay, I'll try that 17:54:33 4. Compliance with an expressed tracking preference 17:55:09 ... Sec 4.1, captures 5 different approaches discussed in Belgium. 17:55:23 +1 ! <3 Blue boxes! 17:55:27 MUCH better in FF - thank you Tom. :-) 17:55:30 ... might put the entire thing in a blue box, but not 5 blue boxes. 17:55:48 WileyS: I take personal responsibility =p 17:56:08 add big blue box to 4.1 17:56:09 +q 17:56:26 ack WileyS 17:56:36 +q 17:56:41 WileyS: Should we give these names as well? Still don't see all the Belgium text. 17:56:46 note that not all text is here 17:57:08 npdoty: Is there a CSS3 option to make the blue boxes larger on the inside? 17:57:31 +q 17:57:43 editors? 17:57:43 aleecia: Trying to keep this small, readable; but there is text that's not here. 17:57:46 ack johnsimpson 17:58:06 editors did the editing down to these 5, and I think they did a nice job summarizing 17:58:07 johnsimpson: This is a higher-level discussion of the options, not so specific as earlier sections. 17:58:18 ... reflects where we are right now. 17:58:24 +q 17:58:28 .. Favors publishing, in a blue box. 17:58:29 I support John's proposal 17:58:33 ack WileyS 17:58:37 q+ 17:58:39 I'm fine leaving it as it is for now. 17:58:43 WileyS: Concern that we not lose the previous work. 17:59:06 q- 17:59:08 ... Fine not having them in the doc, so long as they are kept around. 17:59:12 ... Titles would be helpful. 17:59:23 +1 to Shane's suggestion 17:59:33 aleecia: Issue 17 links to the text, mailing list discussion. 17:59:59 ... Add to the note above that there is substantial additional text, so public and we don't lose it. 18:00:04 ... Make sure it's issue 17. 18:00:23 ... Also will add titles. Will put names on mailing list and discuss there. 18:00:40 ... but won't hold up publication. 18:01:19 no official standard 18:01:23 @@: In the TPE, when we list an issue, we give it title; here, we don't have the names. 18:01:30 s/@@/WileyS/ 18:01:43 shane would like: titles for issues, 18:02:02 We'll see what we can do . . . 18:02:04 Thank you! 18:02:18 1. add to note that there's more text 18:02:21 When did we stop committing the editors' time for things they don't want to do? 18:02:22 2. list out issues 18:02:31 3. big blue box 18:02:35 4. names for options 18:02:48 q? 18:02:48 aleecia: anything else on 4.1? 18:03:03 Yes 18:03:22 ... ^ Addresses concerns. 18:03:24 -[Microsoft.a] 18:03:29 ... No objections. 18:03:39 ... 4.2, Intermediary Compliance. 18:04:02 ... lots of disclaimers; any comments? 18:04:16 ... 4.3. Compliance by a third party 18:04:57 ... fix typo; anything else? 18:05:00 q+ 18:05:18 ... remove the > from 4.3.1 point 4 18:05:54 These aren't options in 4.3 18:06:03 s/\>/\"\>\" 18:06:09 +q 18:06:14 q- 18:06:21 npdoty: Titles, to be taken offline 18:06:23 schunter, note that intro text was moved to SOTD for both documentts 18:06:27 ack WileyS 18:07:18 WileyS: The options are listed under 1st party, but they often address 3d party 18:07:30 aleecia: We could move them up a level 18:07:45 ... under Compliance with an expressed tracking preference 18:07:52 ... Any response from editors? 18:08:15 I'm fine with just having the editors do something reasonable that includes adding titles somewhere within 4 18:08:17 +q 18:08:28 ... Sec 4.1 Options refer to both 1st and 3d parties. Push it up to "Compliance" rather than "Compliance by first party" ? 18:08:50 vincent has joined #dnt 18:09:12 fielding, Can you add this note to the header/URI section: "Note: We are currently working on a proposal which combines the Tk: response header and Tracking Status Resource. It would make the TSR compulsory and the Tk: header optional. However, it would be required to use the Tk: header to notify the user when something in the TSR has changed in real time." 18:09:15 - +385221aass 18:09:57 WileyS: In Brussels, we didn't break up our text/discussions in that way between 1st and 3d parties 18:10:07 -q 18:10:07 Okay - good to go then :-) 18:10:11 npdoty: Whatever the editors think is reasonable. 18:10:43 @@: retain the current structure for now. 18:10:49 s/@@/justin/ 18:10:57 ... separate question why we have 4.3.1 18:11:26 aleecia: this will change as we reach a decision; close enough for now. 18:12:00 ... 4.2 this overlaps with DNT, so may change or come out of the doc. 18:12:07 q+ 18:12:38 justin: Would prefer to add some options on geolocation 18:13:03 I think having just 4 and 5 would be the most relevant for that section 18:13:15 ... will clean up tomorrow. 18:13:16 If we have agreement, that's fine. 18:13:27 aleecia: to continue on mailing list. 18:13:46 we don't need options for location, but clearly delineating how DNT impacts location 18:13:47 tl, done 18:13:53 ... 4.3.2, 4.3.3 issues? 18:13:56 =D 18:14:07 ... 4.4, pending review 18:15:02 ... 4.5, Cookie syncing 18:15:18 ... proposed text under review 18:15:34 formatting for 4.5.2, make a single Issue box for those numbered items and remove the Note box 18:15:40 ... 4.6, pending review, Usage exceptions 18:15:46 Q+ 18:16:09 ack justin_ 18:16:17 justin: outsourcing, should it be an exception here or under 1st party. 18:16:20 +q 18:16:21 +1 for moving it up 18:16:26 ... my preference to move to sec 3. Disagreement? 18:16:27 +1 18:16:33 q? 18:16:54 ack tl 18:16:57 tl: prefer not to make that change right before publication 18:17:10 vincent has joined #dnt 18:17:22 ... location has implications for the way the text is read 18:17:35 I would prefer to make the change now, for the same reason 18:17:42 aleecia: Suggest adding 2 notes; one where you'd move it, another here saying "this may move" 18:17:53 Now is better - I don't believe there will be a semantics impact 18:17:55 ... last-minute changes are disfavored. 18:18:18 I expect we'll probably want this section to come after we discuss 3rd-parties, fwiw 18:18:20 ... discuss at the end of the call, if there's time. 18:18:22 In the next thirteen minutes? 18:18:22 The changes have no real effect, but for that reason, I don't care that strongly. 18:18:22 -npdoty 18:18:35 Twelve 18:18:41 TPE is done, afaik 18:19:03 +npdoty 18:19:04 aleecia: a pile of not-yet baked exceptions and issues 18:19:26 ... Sec 5. Exemptions, lots of open issues 18:19:42 we're using "site-specific exception" as the term for this in the TPE doc 18:19:48 ... 5.3 is baked 18:19:53 q+ 18:20:31 fielding: excpetions in TPE spec, exemptions here 18:20:42 ksmith has left #DNT 18:21:26 aleecia: note, these terms are still being discussed 18:21:30 I will add thatn ote 18:21:32 okay if we change all to exceptions -- exemptions are never client-side 18:21:32 Note 18:21:36 ... we need new words 18:21:57 ... Justin to add a note. 18:21:57 I thin it is exceptions... 18:22:31 aleecia: 5.4, 2 different options on logged-in 18:23:04 ... 5.6, enforcement and compliance. Again note that final wording may change 18:23:22 ... reviewed one audit proposal, may hear something else in the future. 18:23:30 ... no agreement yet. 18:23:45 ... please add yourself to doodle to be acknowledged. 18:23:52 suggest that the last sentence in 5.6.2 should be a Note 18:24:05 http://www.doodle.com/z9672cm55hgzvwys 18:24:11 ... if you've contributed and would like to be listed, please join the doodle. 18:24:12 noted 18:24:38 ... Does anyone object to publishing with these changes? 18:24:44 ... None heard. 18:25:03 ... Justin & Aleecia to make sure document is done Thurs; 18:25:05 can we remove the header-field/DOM stuff from the Acknowledgements section? 18:25:11 I believe all requested changes have been made to the TPE spec during the call. 18:25:12 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html 18:25:15 Justin: Schedule works 18:25:23 Great work Editors!!! 18:25:25 yes to COB friday 18:25:26 aleecia: Can people review changes by COB Friday? 18:25:27 group to review changes by close of business Friday 18:25:29 ... no objectionjs. 18:25:42 aleecia: expects to submit for publication on Tuesday. 18:25:44 submit to be published on Tuesday, March 13th 18:25:45 New iPad being presented at this very moment 18:25:49 -??P84 18:25:56 WileyS: ? 18:26:04 http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/07/apple-ipad-3-liveblog/ 18:26:10 do we have any more details on the f2f? 18:26:11 -andyzei 18:26:11 For those who care... :-) 18:26:12 - +1.202.744.aarr 18:26:14 yay! 18:26:15 Adjourned. 18:26:15 - +1.202.326.aamm 18:26:16 -justin_ 18:26:17 -alex 18:26:18 - +1.415.520.aaee 18:26:18 -Bryan_Sullivan 18:26:19 - +1.813.366.aall 18:26:19 -aleecia 18:26:21 -[Microsoft.aa] 18:26:22 publishing drafts! 18:26:22 -schunter 18:26:23 good work all 18:26:24 - +1.202.326.aatt 18:26:26 -dsriedel 18:26:28 thank you!!! 18:26:28 - +1.206.369.aann 18:26:30 - +1.617.733.aakk 18:26:33 -johnsimpson 18:26:35 -Cyril_Concolato 18:26:36 -wseltzer 18:26:36 thank you 18:26:38 -fielding 18:26:39 johnsimpson has left #dnt 18:26:40 -npdoty 18:26:42 -tl 18:26:44 -WileyS 18:26:47 -rvaneijk 18:26:47 tedleung has left #dnt 18:26:59 -[Microsoft] 18:27:04 npdoty, will you take care of generating the minutes? 18:27:25 thanks to Wendy for scribing! 18:27:40 Zakim, list attendees 18:27:40 As of this point the attendees have been +1.408.674.aaaa, +1.609.981.aabb, aleecia, tl, npdoty, +1.310.392.aacc, +1.813.366.aadd, alex, johnsimpson, +1.415.520.aaee, schunter, 18:27:44 ... +1.617.863.aaff, +1.301.270.aagg, wseltzer, +49.721.913.74.aahh, dsriedel, jchester2, +1.202.684.aaii, +1.714.852.aajj, +1.617.733.aakk, +1.813.366.aall, fielding, [Microsoft], 18:27:44 ... +1.202.326.aamm, +1.206.369.aann, +1.202.637.aaoo, justin_, +1.516.695.aapp, +1.408.349.aaqq, WileyS, Bryan_Sullivan, +1.202.744.aarr, +385221aass, Cyril_Concolato, 18:27:44 ... +1.202.326.aatt, +1.206.910.aauu, +1.215.286.aavv, +1.202.346.aaww, +1.206.619.aaxx, andyzei, +31.65.141.aayy, rvaneijk 18:29:25 aleecia, I made the change to the SOTD in both documents 18:29:32 rrsagent, draft minutes 18:29:32 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/03/07-dnt-minutes.html npdoty 18:29:46 rrsagent, make minutes public 18:29:46 I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', npdoty. Try /msg RRSAgent help 18:31:26 Zakim, bye 18:31:26 leaving. As of this point the attendees were +1.408.674.aaaa, +1.609.981.aabb, aleecia, tl, npdoty, +1.310.392.aacc, +1.813.366.aadd, alex, johnsimpson, +1.415.520.aaee, schunter, 18:31:26 Zakim has left #dnt 18:31:29 ... +1.617.863.aaff, +1.301.270.aagg, wseltzer, +49.721.913.74.aahh, dsriedel, jchester2, +1.202.684.aaii, +1.714.852.aajj, +1.617.733.aakk, +1.813.366.aall, fielding, [Microsoft], 18:31:29 ... +1.202.326.aamm, +1.206.369.aann, +1.202.637.aaoo, justin_, +1.516.695.aapp, +1.408.349.aaqq, WileyS, Bryan_Sullivan, +1.202.744.aarr, +385221aass, Cyril_Concolato, 18:31:29 ... +1.202.326.aatt, +1.206.910.aauu, +1.215.286.aavv, +1.202.346.aaww, +1.206.619.aaxx, andyzei, +31.65.141.aayy, rvaneijk 18:31:35 rrsagent, bye 18:31:35 I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/03/07-dnt-actions.rdf : 18:31:35 ACTION: fielding to remove last sentence in 4.4 + add a note instead [1] 18:31:35 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/03/07-dnt-irc#T17-26-06