IRC log of dnt on 2012-04-18

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:46:00 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #dnt
15:46:00 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:46:03 [rvaneijk]
rvaneijk has joined #dnt
15:46:09 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #dnt
15:46:18 [aleecia]
Zakim, this is dnt
15:46:18 [Zakim]
aleecia, I see T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be dnt".
15:46:26 [aleecia]
Zakim, this will be dnt
15:46:26 [Zakim]
ok, aleecia; I see T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM scheduled to start in 14 minutes
15:46:42 [aleecia]
regrets+ efelten
15:46:57 [aleecia]
chair: aleecia, schunter
15:47:07 [aleecia]
rrsagent, make logs public
15:47:10 [aleecia]
15:48:08 [aleecia]
agenda+ Selection of scribe
15:48:19 [aleecia]
agenda+ Any comments on minutes
15:48:41 [aleecia]
agenda+ Review of overdue action items:
15:48:58 [aleecia]
agenda+ Request WG's permission to schedule next f2f with six weeks, not eight weeks, notice
15:49:09 [aleecia]
agenda+ Compliance document issues, led by Aleecia
15:49:12 [rvaneijk]
Hi all
15:49:24 [aleecia]
agenda+ TPE document issues, led by Matthias and editors
15:49:34 [aleecia]
agenda+ Announce next meeting & adjourn
15:49:40 [aleecia]
Hi Rob
15:50:26 [Zakim]
T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM has now started
15:50:33 [Zakim]
+ +1.408.674.aaaa
15:50:44 [aleecia]
zakim, aaaa is aleecia
15:50:44 [Zakim]
+aleecia; got it
15:50:44 [rvaneijk]
Hi, is today the TPE or compliance document?
15:50:51 [aleecia]
split across them
15:51:12 [aleecia]
Compliance is mostly housekeeping with one discussion on consent you might be interested in
15:51:24 [rvaneijk]
ok, tnx
15:51:30 [aleecia]
specifically, Issue-69, three proposals for what it means to give consent to be tracked. See -- do we have any consensus here?
15:52:12 [aleecia]
also going through auditing proposal,
15:52:20 [bilcorry]
bilcorry has joined #dnt
15:52:37 [ac]
ac has joined #dnt
15:52:59 [aleecia]
good morning, Bil
15:53:35 [aleecia]
ac, could you please let me know who you are? I'm afraid that isn't enough for me to map to a person.
15:54:58 [Zakim]
+ +31.65.141.aabb
15:55:11 [rvaneijk]
Zakim, aabb is rvaneijk
15:55:12 [Zakim]
+rvaneijk; got it
15:55:19 [aleecia]
15:56:04 [Zakim]
+ +1.408.223.aacc
15:56:15 [Zakim]
15:56:21 [bilcorry]
Zakim, aacc is bilcorry
15:56:21 [Zakim]
+bilcorry; got it
15:56:25 [aleecia]
new caller from 408: please mute, please associate yourself in IRC
15:56:37 [aleecia]
thanks, Bil
15:57:05 [aleecia]
zakim, who is making noise?
15:57:16 [Zakim]
aleecia, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: aleecia (9%), bilcorry (30%)
15:57:23 [fielding]
fielding has joined #dnt
15:57:24 [bilcorry]
15:57:40 [bilcorry]
I added my number to the registry, isn't Zakim suppose to know who I am?
15:57:43 [aleecia]
so much better now than later - no worries
15:57:55 [Zakim]
+ +1.714.852.aadd
15:57:56 [aleecia]
yes, Zakim appears to have forgotten us all again.
15:57:59 [npdoty]
npdoty has joined #dnt
15:58:06 [bilcorry]
Zakim, mute me
15:58:06 [Zakim]
bilcorry should now be muted
15:58:08 [fielding]
Zakim, aadd is fielding
15:58:08 [Zakim]
+fielding; got it
15:58:15 [aleecia]
thanks, Roy
15:58:30 [KevinT]
KevinT has joined #dnt
15:58:52 [Zakim]
15:58:55 [Zakim]
15:59:15 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.587.aaee
15:59:24 [Zakim]
+ +1.415.520.aaff
15:59:33 [ifette]
ifette has joined #dnt
15:59:39 [KevinT]
zakim, aaff is KevinT
15:59:39 [Zakim]
+KevinT; got it
15:59:40 [jchester2]
jchester2 has joined #dnt
15:59:45 [schunter]
Zakim, +??P32 is schunter
15:59:45 [Zakim]
sorry, schunter, I do not recognize a party named '+??P32'
15:59:57 [Zakim]
16:00:02 [Lia]
Lia has joined #dnt
16:00:04 [WileyS]
WileyS has joined #DNT
16:00:05 [npdoty]
ac, who are you? (we have trouble with the initials)
16:00:16 [Joanne]
Joanne has joined #DNT
16:00:18 [fielding]
16:00:20 [rvaneijk]
ac <qw3birc@> “
16:00:34 [ifette]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
16:00:34 [Zakim]
On the phone I see aleecia, rvaneijk, bilcorry (muted), ??P32, fielding, npdoty, ??P37, +1.202.587.aaee, KevinT, Loretta_Guarino_Reid
16:00:36 [Zakim]
+ +1.415.520.aagg
16:00:37 [npdoty]
Zakim, aaee is Charles_NAI
16:00:37 [Zakim]
+Charles_NAI; got it
16:00:38 [Zakim]
+ +1.727.686.aahh
16:00:45 [ifette]
sigh, zakim is backed up
16:00:46 [schunter]
Zakim, ??P32 is schunter
16:00:46 [Zakim]
+schunter; got it
16:00:48 [ifette]
still not showing me
16:00:51 [Joanne]
+1.415.520 is Joanne
16:00:51 [aleecia]
thanks - any ideas on who that might be from Maine?
16:00:57 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.370.aaii
16:00:59 [Zakim]
- +1.727.686.aahh
16:01:02 [npdoty]
a reminder on how to identify yourself:
16:01:03 [Zakim]
+ +1.408.349.aajj
16:01:12 [KevinT]
One of the NAI team was from Maine
16:01:17 [npdoty]
and how to get Zakim to remember you in the future
16:01:18 [robsherman]
robsherman has joined #dnt
16:01:18 [WileyS]
Zakim, aajj is WileyS
16:01:18 [Zakim]
+WileyS; got it
16:01:21 [npdoty]
16:01:30 [Zakim]
+ +1.727.686.aakk
16:01:31 [Zakim]
- +1.202.370.aaii
16:01:38 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.326.aall
16:01:56 [Zakim]
+ +1.301.270.aamm
16:01:58 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.370.aann
16:01:58 [pmagee]
pmagee has joined #dnt
16:02:00 [npdoty]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
16:02:00 [Zakim]
On the phone I see aleecia, rvaneijk, bilcorry (muted), schunter, fielding, npdoty, ??P37, Charles_NAI, KevinT, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, +1.415.520.aagg, WileyS, +1.727.686.aakk,
16:02:03 [Zakim]
... +1.202.326.aall, +1.301.270.aamm, +1.202.370.aann
16:02:03 [Zakim]
16:02:05 [Zakim]
+ +1.510.501.aaoo
16:02:06 [aleecia]
16:02:08 [vinay]
vinay has joined #dnt
16:02:14 [chapell]
chapell has joined #dnt
16:02:18 [Zakim]
+ +1.917.934.aapp
16:02:19 [robsherman]
Zakim, aann is robsherman
16:02:21 [Zakim]
16:02:22 [Zakim]
+robsherman; got it
16:02:24 [Zakim]
16:02:25 [Chris]
Chris has joined #dnt
16:02:43 [Zakim]
16:02:45 [ifette]
16:02:50 [npdoty]
scribenick: jchester2
16:02:52 [NAI]
This is Charlie Simon from the NAI - I'm calling in from Skype and cannot associate by phone
16:02:54 [ifette]
Zakim, Loretta_Guarino_Reid is ifette
16:02:54 [Zakim]
+ifette; got it
16:03:00 [rvaneijk]
Hi Jeff, tnx
16:03:03 [aleecia]
scribe: jchester2
16:03:05 [justin]
justin has joined #dnt
16:03:21 [jchester2]
Comments on minutes on agenda
16:03:24 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.637.aaqq
16:03:25 [Chris]
Chris Mejia from IAB also calling from Skype- cannot associate for phone
16:03:32 [aleecia]
We have minutes from 2/29 - 4/4 listed as draft, some of which we've approved on prior calls. If you have any issues with the minutes leading up to the f2f in DC, please raise them. Otherwise, we will approve them.
16:03:33 [npdoty]
I still need to do cleanup on our f2f minutes
16:03:35 [justin]
zakim, aaqq is justin
16:03:36 [Zakim]
+justin; got it
16:03:39 [vinay]
Zakim, aapp is vinay
16:03:39 [Zakim]
+vinay; got it
16:03:40 [Zakim]
+ +1.917.318.aarr
16:03:43 [npdoty]
I plan to do so this week and then I'll send them out
16:04:01 [ifette]
are there link to the minutes?
16:04:10 [npdoty]
Zakim, ??P37 is NAI_Charlie
16:04:10 [Zakim]
+NAI_Charlie; got it
16:04:17 [hwest]
hwest has joined #dnt
16:04:19 [Zakim]
+ +1.866.317.aass
16:04:31 [npdoty]
Zakim, ??P30 is Chris_Mejia
16:04:31 [Zakim]
+Chris_Mejia; got it
16:04:32 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.346.aatt
16:04:34 [jchester2]
Am I scribing the whole meeting?
16:04:39 [Jules_]
Jules_ has joined #DNT
16:04:41 [ifette]
the present list is rather lacking...
16:04:43 [Zakim]
16:04:46 [aleecia]
Review of overdue action items:
16:04:46 [aleecia]
16:04:48 [ifette]
not sure if we care
16:04:51 [npdoty]
(guessing on those two VOIP callers)
16:04:54 [ifette]
16:05:02 [Zakim]
16:05:03 [jchester2]
Looking forward to overdue action items
16:05:05 [aleecia]
ack ifette
16:05:07 [hwest]
aatt has hwest
16:05:14 [npdoty]
Zakim, Charles_NAI is actually unknown
16:05:14 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'Charles_NAI is actually unknown', npdoty
16:05:19 [npdoty]
16:05:20 [Anna]
Anna has joined #dnt
16:05:21 [Zakim]
16:05:27 [jchester2]
Ian says present list doesn't reflect all participants
16:05:27 [hwest]
(Wait, how do I connect the phone number and the name? Sorry)
16:05:32 [JC]
JC has joined #DNT
16:05:33 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.684.aauu
16:05:36 [tl]
tl has joined #dnt
16:05:46 [jchester2]
Nick will do clean-up of minutes and attendee list
16:06:04 [vincent]
vincent has joined #dnt
16:06:05 [jchester2]
Ian referring to 4 April call
16:06:09 [rvaneijk]
hwest, <zakim, aa.. is hwest>
16:06:10 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.744.aavv
16:06:17 [chapell]
Zakim, 1.917.318.aarr is Chapell
16:06:17 [Zakim]
sorry, chapell, I do not recognize a party named '1.917.318.aarr'
16:06:20 [hwest]
watt is hwest
16:06:22 [jchester2]
Nick will do clean-up on 4 April.
16:06:32 [hwest]
zakim, aatt is hwest
16:06:32 [Zakim]
+hwest; got it
16:06:39 [chapell]
Zakim, aarr is Chapell
16:06:39 [Zakim]
+Chapell; got it
16:06:43 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.326.aaww
16:06:43 [rvaneijk]
there you go.
16:07:09 [cOlsen]
cOlsen has joined #dnt
16:07:45 [npdoty]
sorry, yes, I think I need to do some cleanup in order to get the correct Present lists etc. for past teleconference minutes
16:07:48 [aleecia]
Action-104, Amy Colando, drafting text for fraud/defense: Even though issue-24 is not closed, I think we can close this action, at least for now. We seem to be working up the stack a layer on permitted uses in general at the moment.
16:07:51 [jchester2]
Overdue action items, clean-up. Action 104, Amy on call?
16:07:59 [JC]
No she won't join today
16:08:00 [ChrisPedigoOPA]
ChrisPedigoOPA has joined #dnt
16:08:07 [alex]
alex has joined #dnt
16:08:12 [aleecia]
Action-120, Alexandros Deliyannis, web-wide exception API: It appears this action is done (see but issue-113 is still in discussion, I believe. Should we close the action?
16:08:14 [npdoty]
Topic: Clean-up of action items
16:08:20 [jchester2]
Action item 120, Alex
16:08:20 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - item
16:08:21 [Zakim]
+ +1.813.366.aaxx
16:08:25 [hefferjr]
hefferjr has joined #dnt
16:08:31 [Dan]
Dan has joined #dnt
16:08:54 [enewland]
enewland has joined #dnt
16:09:13 [npdoty]
16:09:14 [trackbot]
ACTION-177 -- Thomas Lowenthal to add an API to let a site request a web-wide exception -- due 2012-04-19 -- OPEN
16:09:14 [trackbot]
16:09:14 [jchester2]
Alex identified a problem with issue Item 120 associated with. There is text for Issue 138
16:09:32 [npdoty]
16:09:36 [npdoty]
ack npdoty
16:09:36 [jchester2]
Mattias suggests we close 120 and focus on new issue.
16:10:10 [aleecia]
Action-131, Roy Fielding, Use case for user agent requests on tracking status resource: looks like this is still open, could use an update on status.
16:10:14 [johnsimpson]
johnsimpson has joined #dnt
16:10:22 [npdoty]
and a new action, action-177, to do a proposal on the original question
16:10:30 [tl1]
tl1 has joined #dnt
16:10:41 [jchester2]
Roy: Action 131 still open. More work coming. Another week.
16:10:47 [ifette]
16:10:47 [trackbot]
ACTION-131 -- Roy Fielding to sketch use case for user agent requests on tracking status resource -- due 2012-04-03 -- OPEN
16:10:47 [trackbot]
16:10:51 [Zakim]
+ +1.813.366.aayy
16:10:57 [Zakim]
- +1.727.686.aakk
16:11:04 [jchester2]
Mattias suggests we opened a # of actions and we need dates added.
16:11:09 [aleecia]
Action-135, Shane Wiley, detail use case for issue-111 (dnt:2): this has been closed and reopened once. I *think* it should now be closed, but will hear from Shane to be sure.
16:11:13 [tl1]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:11:13 [Zakim]
On the phone I see aleecia, rvaneijk, bilcorry (muted), schunter, fielding, npdoty, NAI_Charlie, Charles_NAI, KevinT, +1.415.520.aagg, WileyS, +1.202.326.aall, +1.301.270.aamm,
16:11:16 [Zakim]
... robsherman, Chris_Mejia, +1.510.501.aaoo, vinay, [Mozilla], ifette, justin, Chapell, +1.866.317.aass, hwest, ??P73, justin.a, [Microsoft], +1.202.684.aauu, +1.202.744.aavv,
16:11:16 [Zakim]
... +1.202.326.aaww, +1.813.366.aaxx, +1.813.366.aayy
16:11:31 [tl1]
zakim, mozilla has tl
16:11:31 [Zakim]
+tl; got it
16:11:32 [Zakim]
16:11:42 [Zakim]
+ +1.310.392.aazz
16:12:03 [johnsimpson]
zakim johnsimpson is aazz
16:12:15 [alex]
zakim, alex is aaxx
16:12:15 [Zakim]
sorry, alex, I do not recognize a party named 'alex'
16:12:16 [aleecia]
action-135 to move to pending review
16:12:16 [jchester2]
Shane says we have draft text on DNT header
16:12:24 [johnsimpson]
zakim, who is on the phone
16:12:24 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'who is on the phone', johnsimpson
16:12:29 [alex]
zakim, aaxx is alex
16:12:29 [Zakim]
+alex; got it
16:12:32 [ifette]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:12:32 [Zakim]
On the phone I see aleecia, rvaneijk, bilcorry (muted), schunter, fielding, npdoty, NAI_Charlie, Charles_NAI, KevinT, +1.415.520.aagg, WileyS, +1.202.326.aall, +1.301.270.aamm,
16:12:35 [Zakim]
... robsherman, Chris_Mejia, +1.510.501.aaoo, vinay, [Mozilla], ifette, justin, +1.866.317.aass, hwest, ??P73, justin.a, [Microsoft], +1.202.684.aauu, +1.202.744.aavv,
16:12:35 [Zakim]
... +1.202.326.aaww, alex, +1.813.366.aayy, +1.310.392.aazz
16:12:35 [Zakim]
[Mozilla] has tl
16:12:42 [jchester2]
Tom: Does pending review status says we have proposed text
16:13:03 [tedleung]
tedleung has joined #dnt
16:13:06 [npdoty]
Zakim, Charles_NAI is 1.202.587.aaee
16:13:07 [Zakim]
+1.202.587.aaee; got it
16:13:17 [johnsimpson]
apologies, bad traffic today
16:13:24 [dsriedel]
dsriedel has joined #dnt
16:13:28 [jchester2]
Tom: Is this issue still open because we no text for it.
16:13:28 [Zakim]
+ +1.206.369.bbaa
16:13:32 [johnsimpson]
zakim, mute me
16:13:32 [Zakim]
sorry, johnsimpson, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
16:13:39 [Zakim]
+ +49.721.913.74.bbbb
16:13:43 [jchester2]
Mattias: We have to put this issue in pending rveiew because there is text.
16:13:50 [dsriedel]
zakim, bbbb is dsriedel
16:13:50 [Zakim]
+dsriedel; got it
16:13:55 [dsriedel]
zakim, mute me
16:13:55 [Zakim]
dsriedel should now be muted
16:14:05 [npdoty]
can someone point us to the text proposal for 135? just having a link in the action would be helpful here
16:14:16 [tedleung]
zakim, tedleung is bbaa
16:14:16 [Zakim]
sorry, tedleung, I do not recognize a party named 'tedleung'
16:14:26 [npdoty]
Zakim, bbaa is tedleung
16:14:27 [Zakim]
+tedleung; got it
16:14:28 [WileyS]
Fair - we have framing text but not proposed final text
16:14:33 [jmayer]
jmayer has joined #dnt
16:14:40 [johnsimpson]
zakim, johnsimpson is 310.392.aazz
16:14:40 [Zakim]
sorry, johnsimpson, I do not recognize a party named 'johnsimpson'
16:15:11 [npdoty]
so, we can re-assign to Matthias to send out a specific text proposal?
16:15:11 [WileyS]
zakim, aazz is johnsimpson
16:15:11 [Zakim]
+johnsimpson; got it
16:15:12 [aleecia]
Action-139, Tom Lowenthal, reword "affirmatively clicking" to something more general than clicking: this has been open 6 weeks. Would someone other than Tom be willing to pick it up? Shouldn't be too hard, should get done, but we need to get this out of lingering.
16:15:21 [ifette]
16:15:21 [trackbot]
ACTION-139 -- Thomas Lowenthal to improve wording of 3.9 "Meaningful Interaction" to avoid "affirmatively clicking" and make sure that "clicking" is replaced with something more general. -- due 2012-04-04 -- OPEN
16:15:21 [trackbot]
16:15:40 [johnsimpson]
thanks, shane. don't know why it did n't recognize me
16:15:46 [jmayer]
Is this ACTION mooted by our new proposal?
16:15:50 [jchester2]
Action 139. Reword clicking concept. Looking for more general language. Anyone volunteer to take action on wording?
16:15:50 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - 139.
16:16:04 [jmayer]
I don't think we required "clicking" anywhere.
16:16:30 [ifette]
ACTION-139 due May 14 2012
16:16:30 [trackbot]
ACTION-139 Improve wording of 3.9 "Meaningful Interaction" to avoid "affirmatively clicking" and make sure that "clicking" is replaced with something more general. due date now May 14 2012
16:16:33 [WileyS]
John, the format is "Z, <last four alpha code from phone #> is <your IRC handle>"
16:16:56 [justin]
clicking is not required under current def
16:17:01 [aleecia]
Action-150, Ninja Marnau, EU legal implications of *: last we heard, Ninja and Shane were working on this together. Status now?
16:17:20 [Zakim]
16:17:22 [WileyS]
Should add this to new document
16:17:37 [npdoty]
"Global Considerations"
16:18:10 [jchester2]
Question is whether this issue should go to new document---global considerations--move to discussion there. Waiting for developments.
16:18:16 [npdoty]
I thought this also had implications for our API design on * vs origin/origin
16:18:20 [jchester2]
16:18:35 [tl1]
zakim, mute me
16:18:35 [Zakim]
sorry, tl1, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
16:18:36 [ifette]
s/Question/WileyS: Question/
16:18:44 [npdoty]
16:18:44 [trackbot]
ACTION-174 -- Ninja Marnau to write up implication of origin/* exceptions in EU context -- due 2012-04-19 -- OPEN
16:18:44 [trackbot]
16:18:48 [tl]
zakim, mute me
16:18:48 [Zakim]
sorry, tl, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
16:18:56 [tl]
zakim, mozilla has tl
16:18:56 [Zakim]
tl was already listed in [Mozilla], tl
16:19:07 [Zakim]
- +1.202.684.aauu
16:19:14 [tl]
zakim, how are you confused as to which phone i'm on!
16:19:14 [Zakim]
I don't understand you, tl
16:19:21 [tl]
zakim, clearly!
16:19:21 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'clearly!', tl
16:19:32 [WileyS]
I think that is something different
16:19:32 [aleecia]
16:19:36 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.684.bbcc
16:19:42 [tl]
zakim, mozilla has me
16:19:42 [Zakim]
tl was already listed in [Mozilla], tl
16:19:48 [tl]
zakim, mute me.
16:19:48 [Zakim]
sorry, tl, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
16:19:53 [jmayer]
Zakim, bbcc is jmayer
16:19:53 [Zakim]
+jmayer; got it
16:19:56 [tl]
zakim, mozilla does not have tl
16:19:56 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'mozilla does not have tl', tl
16:19:57 [aleecia]
Action-151, JC Cannon, personalization for logged in: has this been overtaken by new action items from the f2f?
16:19:58 [ifette]
Zakim, mute Mozilla
16:19:58 [Zakim]
[Mozilla] should now be muted
16:20:05 [ifette]
16:20:12 [tl]
That's cheating.
16:20:13 [jchester2]
Item 151, JC on personalization for logged in
16:20:15 [vincent]
vincent has joined #dnt
16:20:21 [JC]
16:20:33 [jchester2]
There are open actions they make this irrelevant says Aleecia and JC. 151 closed.
16:20:38 [aleecia]
Action-152, Shane Wiley, logged in means consent: has this been overtaken by new action items from the f2f?
16:20:51 [aleecia]
Action-156, Heather West, change to "permitted uses" and "user granted exceptions": Heather's done some editorial work, this may be done. Status?
16:20:56 [WileyS]
We have draft text before the group
16:20:58 [jchester2]
Same for 152.
16:21:05 [ifette]
tl, you can always do 61# to mute and 60# to unmute
16:21:06 [Zakim]
16:21:07 [WileyS]
Open item is for non-normative text to be drafted with Justin
16:21:09 [npdoty]
well, we have text from Shane on 152, we can just make that pending review/closed because Shane has completed it
16:21:37 [WileyS]
Nick, Justin and I owe the group non-normative text to support the normative text with examples
16:21:42 [jchester2]
Action 156. Heather and Erica has done a lot of work--very close to done.
16:21:42 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - 156.
16:22:07 [ifette]
tl, i'm lazy too...
16:22:09 [aleecia]
Action-107, Amy Colando, action is closed with a no text proposal
16:22:09 [aleecia]
Action-123, Jeff Chester, response to 1st/3rd proposal: closed, as per WG call prior to f2f
16:22:10 [aleecia]
Action-124, Amy Colando, draft alternate 1st/3rd proposal: closed, likewise overtaken by events
16:22:10 [aleecia]
Action-141, Rigo Wenning, text around user agents and consent: leaving open, untouched. Rigo completed this action, to a bit of disagreement on the list. I think Rigo will not be able to make the call. We should pick this topic up and see if we can get a resolution on the next call he joins.
16:22:11 [aleecia]
Action-162, Erica Newland, remove note from section 5.3 now that we have consensus: status?
16:22:13 [aleecia]
Action-165, Ian Fette, geoloc compliance, non-normative text: status?
16:22:14 [npdoty]
WileyS, is that action 179? or should we open a new action on justin regarding that?
16:22:15 [aleecia]
Action-166, Heather West, updating text on "collection" &c: status?
16:22:24 [ifette]
16:22:24 [trackbot]
ACTION-165 -- Ian Fette to draft example text around using the Geolocation API for non-normative text on "Geolocation compliance" section in Compliance -- due 2012-04-18 -- OPEN
16:22:24 [trackbot]
16:22:25 [tl]
16:22:30 [jchester2]
New business.
16:22:32 [npdoty]
ack tl
16:22:34 [tl]
zakim, unmute mozilla
16:22:34 [Zakim]
[Mozilla] should no longer be muted
16:22:45 [npdoty]
Zakim, [Mozilla] has tl
16:22:45 [Zakim]
tl was already listed in [Mozilla], npdoty
16:23:01 [vincent]
zakim, +??P9 is vincent
16:23:01 [Zakim]
sorry, vincent, I do not recognize a party named '+??P9'
16:23:09 [npdoty]
Zakim, in that case, why didn't you unmute Mozilla when we ack'ed tl?
16:23:09 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, npdoty.
16:23:25 [vincent]
zakim, ??P9 is vincent
16:23:25 [Zakim]
+vincent; got it
16:24:08 [ifette]
ACTION-165 due April 25 2012
16:24:08 [trackbot]
ACTION-165 Draft example text around using the Geolocation API for non-normative text on "Geolocation compliance" section in Compliance due date now April 25 2012
16:24:08 [Chapell]
Chapell has joined #dnt
16:24:15 [jchester2]
Action-165. Status request for Ian
16:24:35 [jchester2]
Ian needs another week.
16:24:56 [tl]
zakim, mute mozilla
16:24:56 [Zakim]
[Mozilla] should now be muted
16:25:15 [WileyS]
Objection - we need 8 weeks
16:25:21 [jchester2]
Aleecia: We can change requirement for F2F so we have six weeks, rather 8 weeks, notice.
16:25:30 [Chapell]
eight weeks would be much better
16:26:11 [Chris]
agree with Shane; 6-weeks is very short notice
16:26:13 [jchester2]
16:26:19 [NAI]
agree with Shane et al. - please leave at eight weeks.
16:26:53 [Chris]
8-weeks is also tight, but doable
16:26:55 [Zakim]
16:26:56 [rvaneijk]
Aleecia, have you had contact with DG INFSO ?
16:27:12 [Zakim]
- +1.510.501.aaoo
16:27:18 [jchester2]
I think we need to meet earlier so we can show public we are making serious progress.
16:27:21 [JC]
I can't make Europe trip
16:27:24 [fielding]
CA, please
16:27:25 [WileyS]
Aleecia, you have multiple folks on the chain saying they need 8 weeks. No way I can do Brussels again in 8 weeks.
16:27:26 [rvaneijk]
West coast works for me too.
16:27:28 [hwest]
I can't make early June
16:27:35 [jmayer]
The EU deadline for DNT is June.
16:27:37 [tl]
16:27:40 [justin]
zakim, who is speaking
16:27:40 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'who is speaking', justin
16:27:42 [WileyS]
Zakim, who is speaking?
16:27:42 [ifette]
Zakim, who's making noise?
16:27:42 [johnsimpson]
europe looks very difficult
16:27:44 [fielding]
zakim, who is making noise
16:27:44 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'who is making noise', fielding
16:27:46 [tl]
Whiskey tango foxtrot.
16:27:49 [ifette]
Zakim, who is making noise?
16:27:52 [johnsimpson]
zakim mute me
16:27:52 [Zakim]
WileyS, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: aleecia (50%), npdoty (19%)
16:28:00 [WileyS]
Sounds like it is Nick
16:28:01 [vincent]
zakim mute me
16:28:02 [ifette]
Zakim, who is making noise?
16:28:03 [Zakim]
ifette, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: aleecia (38%), +1.301.270.aamm (5%), npdoty (45%)
16:28:04 [tl]
Are we being trolled right now, because that's what it sounds like.
16:28:07 [KevinT]
16:28:07 [ifette]
Zakim, drop aamm
16:28:07 [Zakim]
+1.301.270.aamm is being disconnected
16:28:09 [Zakim]
- +1.301.270.aamm
16:28:10 [Zakim]
16:28:14 [Zakim]
ifette, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: aleecia (94%), Chapell (19%), npdoty (15%)
16:28:25 [Zakim]
ifette, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: aleecia (59%)
16:28:28 [Zakim]
16:28:29 [npdoty]
Zakim, mute me
16:28:29 [Zakim]
npdoty should now be muted
16:28:39 [jmayer]
Seriously, you can't plan travel six weeks in advance?
16:28:47 [vincent]
zakim, mute me
16:28:47 [Zakim]
vincent should now be muted
16:28:51 [Zakim]
+ +1.301.270.bbdd
16:28:56 [WileyS]
I have travel planned for the next 6 weeks already.
16:28:56 [ifette]
jmayer, the problem isn't finding flights or hotels, the problem is that people have exisitng commitments
16:29:27 [aleecia]
Action-56, Kevin Trilli, auditing compliance text. In DC we did not take this up because people had not had time to review the proposal. If Kevin or Alex are on the call, I will ask for a summary of their proposal for issue-21: [I'm particularly confused by "TSLs"; I think this is just a very bad name space collision.]
16:29:28 [jmayer]
ifette, that's a date issue
16:29:31 [npdoty]
Zakim, bbdd is jchester2
16:29:31 [Zakim]
+jchester2; got it
16:29:41 [jmayer]
Fix: float several dates in June
16:29:42 [jchester2]
16:29:49 [npdoty]
Zakim, aamm was jchester2
16:29:49 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'aamm was jchester2', npdoty
16:30:07 [ifette]
jchester, sorry -- I asked Zakim who was making noise and it pointed to an unidentified number which turned out to be you. Nothing personal.
16:30:10 [jchester2]
zakim. mute me
16:30:19 [npdoty]
Zakim, mute jchester2
16:30:19 [Zakim]
jchester2 should now be muted
16:30:27 [tl]
16:30:36 [jchester2]
16:31:27 [WileyS]
Don't well known URIs and Response Headers cover this?
16:31:58 [aleecia]
tom, pointer?
16:32:05 [jchester2]
There are mechanisms for audit and monitoring to ensure compliance. Removing from spec doesn't may sense. Enabling may statement. Linkage in user agent.
16:32:47 [jchester2]
Having organaizations providing list of compliant DNT players
16:33:30 [tl]
aleecia, what are you asking for a pointer to?
16:33:54 [tl]
zakim, unmute mozilla.
16:33:54 [Zakim]
[Mozilla] should no longer be muted
16:34:09 [aleecia]
ack tl
16:34:20 [johnsimpson]
Kevin, Do you have text?
16:34:26 [jchester2]
Tom says there isn't need for additional auditing compliance in the spec.
16:34:53 [npdoty]
I think the proposal was for a field to indicate that a particular authority has done a particular type of auditing.
16:35:10 [alex]
16:35:12 [jchester2]
Tom has no objection to adding field or set of fields for auditing. Doesn't think much more addition needed here.
16:35:13 [tl]
zakim, mute me
16:35:13 [Zakim]
sorry, tl, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
16:35:17 [alex]
16:35:23 [npdoty]
Zakim, mute Mozilla
16:35:23 [Zakim]
[Mozilla] should now be muted
16:35:29 [npdoty]
Zakim, unmute Mozilla
16:35:29 [Zakim]
[Mozilla] should no longer be muted
16:35:44 [rvaneijk]
You could probably also use the DNT-extention for audit
16:35:58 [WileyS]
"enjoys auditing" :-)
16:35:59 [rvaneijk]
16:36:20 [alex]
16:36:30 [jchester2]
Tom: We need to ask whether this is needed in version 1.
16:36:53 [aleecia]
ack alex
16:36:53 [jmayer]
16:36:54 [tl]
I agree Nick, my fault.
16:37:31 [WileyS]
Sounds like TPLs again <cringe>
16:37:38 [jchester2]
Alex: Clarification. This proposal is focused on external entity that you trust and have a mechanism on user agent to bring in a third party.
16:38:00 [aleecia]
ack jmayer
16:38:01 [tl]
16:38:08 [johnsimpson]
Is there text on this?
16:38:14 [aleecia]
TPLs was a crazy naming problem, imho
16:38:24 [aleecia]
text is still:
16:38:27 [jchester2]
Jonathan believes there will be a # of methods that can be used for auditing and what's needed will shift over time.
16:38:58 [jchester2]
We should say silent on this issue, says Jonathan, but can have a best practices doc.
16:39:00 [Chapell]
+1 to Mayer - we should stay silent on the specs around auditing and consider having an outside document around best practices
16:39:09 [Zakim]
16:39:11 [fielding]
It would not be difficult to add an optional field "auditor" with link as value even if it is not included in version 1
16:39:27 [Zakim]
16:39:34 [schunter]
16:39:48 [tl]
fielding: Exactly.
16:39:49 [npdoty]
+1 to fielding, a link is easy and can provide validation if you de-reference it
16:40:04 [jmayer]
Then this seems a TPE issue.
16:40:17 [tl]
Agreed, jmayer.
16:40:30 [tl]
zakim, unmute me
16:40:30 [Zakim]
sorry, tl, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
16:40:33 [npdoty]
ack tl
16:40:36 [npdoty]
Zakim, unmute Mozilla
16:40:36 [Zakim]
[Mozilla] was not muted, npdoty
16:40:38 [tl]
zakim, unmute mozilla
16:40:38 [Zakim]
[Mozilla] was not muted, tl
16:41:24 [jchester2]
Tom: Nothing stopping auditors and parties working out what should be in uri.
16:42:31 [fielding]
we don't need name
16:42:35 [jchester2]
Tom proposes we add 2 fields to the spec--auditor name and auditor uri.
16:42:40 [schunter]
We need to allow multiple auditors.
16:42:56 [jmayer]
schunter, ok, auditor array
16:42:59 [jchester2]
Kevin agrees that will be sufficient as baseline.
16:43:10 [npdoty]
fielding, agreed, auditor URI should make it easy for interested user agents to determine the auditor's real world name
16:43:21 [WileyS]
Agreed - Yahoo! has multiple auditors that are attached to practices that may stem from DNT activities (DNT itself, financial audits, etc.)
16:43:22 [schunter]
16:43:35 [tl]
zakim, mute mozilla
16:43:35 [Zakim]
[Mozilla] should now be muted
16:43:55 [tl]
I have no objection for an array of URIs.
16:43:55 [WileyS]
16:44:01 [aleecia]
16:44:41 [jmayer]
e.g. "auditors": ["", ""]
16:45:19 [tl]
yes, action me
16:45:20 [fielding]
jmayer, yep -- an array makes sense
16:45:22 [jchester2]
This belongs in TPE spec as well. Tom will do next pass on this issue and check with Kevin.
16:45:36 [tl]
I suggest more like "auditors": ["", ""]
16:45:44 [Chris]
there are multiple auditors already working in this space, on the advertising front
16:45:52 [npdoty]
action: lowenthal to draft specific field proposal for optional auditors (with Kevin)
16:45:52 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-185 - Draft specific field proposal for optional auditors (with Kevin) [on Thomas Lowenthal - due 2012-04-25].
16:45:53 [jchester2]
Closing Action-56.
16:45:58 [aleecia]
Action-61, Tom Lowenthal, public commitments: we were postponing issue-45 until we had greater clarity on the TPE aspects of the response. Are we ready to pick this all back up again?
16:46:21 [aleecia]
16:46:21 [trackbot]
ACTION-61 -- Thomas Lowenthal to write no-change proposal for ISSUE-45 -- due 2012-02-03 -- CLOSED
16:46:21 [trackbot]
16:46:27 [fielding]
tl, then we should call it "audits"
16:46:29 [ifette]
16:46:29 [trackbot]
ISSUE-45 -- Companies making public commitments with a "regulatory hook" for US legal purposes -- pending review
16:46:29 [trackbot]
16:46:47 [jmayer]
16:46:50 [tl]
zakim, unmute me
16:46:50 [Zakim]
sorry, tl, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
16:46:54 [tl]
zakim, unmute mozilla
16:46:54 [Zakim]
[Mozilla] should no longer be muted
16:46:54 [WileyS]
16:47:17 [jchester2]
Tom believes this issue is almost resolved. His action-61 is closed.
16:48:28 [npdoty]
we're talking about
16:48:43 [justin]
That non-normative addition would be a good idea.
16:49:04 [justin]
I can do it
16:49:04 [jchester2]
Jonathan says that by having response header, also fulfilled requirement.
16:49:28 [npdoty]
action: justin to clarify non-normative text on making a public commitment (also in a privacy policy, e.g.)
16:49:28 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-186 - Clarify non-normative text on making a public commitment (also in a privacy policy, e.g.) [on Justin Brookman - due 2012-04-25].
16:49:39 [npdoty]
action-186: related to issue-45
16:49:39 [trackbot]
ACTION-186 Clarify non-normative text on making a public commitment (also in a privacy policy, e.g.) notes added
16:50:12 [Zakim]
16:50:12 [jmayer]
My thoughts on a consent standard, if the group gets there, are on the list.
16:50:20 [Zakim]
16:50:39 [justin]
OK, will send to you after I revise.
16:50:40 [npdoty]
action-186: tl has volunteered to help, and has opinions
16:50:40 [trackbot]
ACTION-186 Clarify non-normative text on making a public commitment (also in a privacy policy, e.g.) notes added
16:50:40 [jchester2]
Tom will work with Justin on this.
16:50:58 [aleecia]
Action-49, Shane, about permitted uses. I think the definitions proposed here are already incorporated in the two major proposals, though I also think we heard from Rob that tighter definitions would be quite helpful. Suggestion: we close this action and review text as part of the proposals.
16:51:13 [aleecia]
16:51:13 [trackbot]
ACTION-49 -- Shane Wiley to propose what the operational carve-outs for (e.g. debugging by 3rd party) are -- due 2012-01-31 -- PENDINGREVIEW
16:51:13 [trackbot]
16:51:23 [WileyS]
Agreed - modifying/adding non-normative text now
16:51:41 [rvaneijk]
I sent WileyS a mail, will wait for that.
16:51:56 [aleecia]
Action-72, Kathy Joe, text for issue-25, issue-74 on permitted uses: this action is done, but I think this is getting folded into the larger proposals. There's no "postponed" state for actions, and I don't want to close it quite yet -- leaving it as pending review seems the least wrong option this week.
16:52:16 [rvaneijk]
s/crusial/would be quite helpful/
16:52:40 [aleecia]
16:52:40 [trackbot]
ACTION-72 -- Kathy Joe to review aleecia's draft on issue-25, issue-74 -- due 2012-02-06 -- PENDINGREVIEW
16:52:40 [trackbot]
16:53:18 [jchester2]
Having discussions on higher level on permitted users.
16:53:28 [aleecia]
Action-137, Tom Lowenthal, targeting based on registration: listed as pending review but does not link to an email thread. Status?
16:53:36 [jchester2]
sorry. Users!
16:53:49 [aleecia]
16:53:49 [trackbot]
ACTION-137 -- Thomas Lowenthal to draft alternate proposal on first-party targeting based on registration information -- due 2012-03-10 -- PENDINGREVIEW
16:53:49 [trackbot]
16:54:14 [aleecia]
so action-72 goes to open
16:54:27 [aleecia]
and action-137 goes to closed
16:54:27 [Zakim]
16:54:33 [jchester2]
Tom says we close this item.
16:54:41 [aleecia]
Action-73, action-74, action-76, action-77, action-78: these were the five views from Belgium (remember to forget me, etc.) Several of them have been incorporated in other ways. I suggest we close these now.
16:55:05 [WileyS]
Agreed - these can be closed as the text is already in the proposals
16:55:14 [johnsimpson]
you can close these. we are beyond that
16:55:27 [jchester2]
Agreement we can close these five.
16:55:30 [aleecia]
Issue-99, How does DNT work with Identity providers: I think we're in broad agreement that identity providers are not first parties. Looking to make sure I am correct, and looking for someone to take an action item to write this down.
16:56:07 [hwest]
I'm not sure that was the sense of the group, but I haven't been paying as close attention
16:56:11 [aleecia]
16:56:17 [aleecia]
ack jmayer
16:56:23 [npdoty]
aleecia: I think we have agreement that identity providers aren't first parties, just need to write this down?
16:56:28 [WileyS]
Unless they somehow obtain explicit, informed consent - I believe we all agree they are 3rd party outside of the specific logging transaction
16:56:43 [WileyS]
Agree with what Tom just said.
16:56:51 [jchester2]
Identity providers can be both 1st and 3rd party, suggests Tom.
16:58:14 [hwest]
tl, happy to help/take a look at that.
16:58:32 [ifette]
ACTION: tl to write text for ISSUE-99 around identity providers as first or third parties, DUE May 5 2012
16:58:32 [trackbot]
Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - tl
16:58:32 [trackbot]
Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. tleung2, tlowenth)
16:58:34 [jchester2]
I would also like to help on this.
16:58:39 [aleecia]
Issue-88, different rules for ad impressions and interactions: I do believe we can close this as "yes." Impressions -> 3rd party, interactions -> 1st party.
16:58:45 [ifette]
ACTION: lowenthal to write text for ISSUE-99 around identity providers as first or third parties, DUE May 5 2012
16:58:45 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-187 - Write text for ISSUE-99 around identity providers as first or third parties, DUE May 5 2012 [on Thomas Lowenthal - due 2012-04-25].
16:58:45 [ifette]
[09:58am] • trackbot noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it.
16:58:57 [ifette]
ACTION-187 due May 5 2012
16:58:57 [trackbot]
ACTION-187 Write text for ISSUE-99 around identity providers as first or third parties, DUE May 5 2012 due date now May 5 2012
16:59:05 [npdoty]
action-187: heather and jeff both volunteered to help review
16:59:05 [trackbot]
ACTION-187 Write text for ISSUE-99 around identity providers as first or third parties, DUE May 5 2012 notes added
16:59:27 [jchester2]
Agreement on issue 88. closed
16:59:35 [aleecia]
Issue-69, three proposals for what it means to give consent to be tracked. See -- do we have any consensus here?
17:00:01 [aleecia]
The term “affirmative, informed consent” is used throughout this document. While this terminology may ultimately be modified, some options for explaining the underlying idea are presented below:
17:00:09 [aleecia]
3.9.1 Option 1
17:00:09 [aleecia]
"Affirmative, Informed Consent to be Tracked" means consent given by an affirmative action such as clicking a consent box in response to a clear and prominent request to ignore a "Do Not Track" setting that is distinct and separate from any other notifications or requested permissions.
17:00:10 [jchester2]
3 proposals slightly different suggestions for what needed for affirmative informed consent.
17:00:12 [dsriedel]
zakim, mute me
17:00:12 [Zakim]
dsriedel should now be muted
17:00:17 [aleecia]
3.9.2 Option 2
17:00:17 [aleecia]
"Affirmative, Informed Consent to be Tracked" has been obtained when a mechanism to provide for or facilitate the acquisition and storage of permission to ignore the header has been made available to the user and the user has meaningfully interacted with the mechanism in a way that makes clear her intent to grant this permission.
17:00:31 [aleecia]
3.9.3 Silence
17:00:32 [aleecia]
The hope is that this option will ensure consistency with EU regulations; it may not unless notice is included.
17:00:32 [aleecia]
No definition, other than explicitly leaving the definition of consent to local rules.
17:00:36 [ifette]
not EU regulations but local regulations
17:00:37 [WileyS]
In discussion we're using "explicit, informed consent" and Justin and I have an action to backfill this with non-normative text
17:01:00 [ifette]
I am still suggesting silence as an option
17:01:02 [WileyS]
+1 for Silence
17:01:07 [jchester2]
Aleecia asks does anyone suggestion silence is an option.
17:01:17 [hwest]
+1 silence
17:01:46 [npdoty]
"The term “affirmative, informed consent” is used throughout this document." ... but then it isn't used throughout the document?
17:01:58 [schunter]
17:02:17 [tl]
17:02:20 [Zakim]
17:02:23 [jchester2]
I don't think we should rely on such proposals as local approach that would allow silence.
17:02:26 [npdoty]
WileyS, agree, if we're just talking about consent for out-of-band override of DNT header, I thought Justin was writing up "explicit, informed consent" with you
17:02:27 [aleecia]
ack schunter
17:02:31 [rvaneijk]
The FTC ahs been very specific on affermative and explicit consent
17:02:43 [jchester2]
17:02:57 [WileyS]
First choice is "silence" on this topic and allow legal frameworks to determine what is valid user consent.
17:03:02 [aleecia]
ack tl
17:03:06 [WileyS]
Second choice is the text I'm working with Justin on
17:03:44 [jchester2]
Tom agrees with Mattias. We should define consent standard for DNT.
17:03:56 [aleecia]
ack jchester
17:03:56 [johnsimpson]
Agree with Matthias and Tom. Need a standard in the spec.
17:04:17 [justin]
Can we park this until WileyS and I have a proposed alternative?
17:04:30 [npdoty]
+1 to justin
17:04:32 [rvaneijk]
FTC uses '“Express affirmative consent'
17:05:00 [jchester2]
There is need for concrete proposals.
17:05:19 [WileyS]
17:05:21 [justin]
We have proposals, but discussions have pushed us in a new (consensus!) direction
17:05:28 [aleecia]
ack WileyS
17:05:48 [tl]
17:05:57 [justin]
No . . .
17:06:01 [aleecia]
ack tl
17:06:01 [jchester2]
Shane suggests another approach--speak to valid user consent. Use global compliance doc to go into detail. Rather than construct new psuedo legal construct.
17:06:33 [jchester2]
Tom: Says we aren't creating a new legal construct that is part of rule system we are constructing.
17:06:43 [WileyS]
But the URI doesn't attempt to set rules on what is a valid representation - the consent discussion does
17:06:57 [fielding]
I suggest that if we define consent, we should also define browser UI
17:07:05 [jchester2]
There is additional work to be done and we will all review.
17:07:12 [aleecia]
Housekeeping changes - again please let me know if I got anything wrong:
17:07:13 [aleecia]
Issue-28 was closed adopting the text from action-58; closed action-58.
17:07:21 [tl]
WileyS: The URI specifies what you can and can't put in it.
17:07:42 [aleecia]
Issue-6 was closed; closed action-101 to revise issue-6.
17:07:52 [WileyS]
Tom: Only very broadly, if the Consent definition is equally "very broad" then we may be okay
17:07:56 [aleecia]
Action-103, Frank Wagner, EU controller v. data processor language: this action is done. We've agreed to move the text to the Global Considerations document. Closed action-103, added an action against me to migrate the text from issue-14 into the (does not exist yet) Global Considerations text.
17:08:44 [aleecia]
Issue-26, providing data to 3rd parties and consent: comments say we closed it and why, yet it remained open. Closed now.
17:09:01 [tl]
WileyS: From where I'm standing, I want something along the lines of an interactive affirmative operation, rather than checking the box that I've read the privacy policy/tos.
17:09:24 [schunter]
17:09:36 [npdoty]
Topic: TPE Issues
17:09:43 [Zakim]
17:09:48 [WileyS]
Tom: That may be too detailed as that prescribes a specific UI treatment
17:10:11 [jchester2]
Please check the issue tracker--everything should be up to date.
17:10:13 [WileyS]
Tom: Wait to see our proposed text and see if we can find the consensus line here
17:10:42 [tl]
WileyS: Agreed.
17:10:53 [ifette]
17:10:53 [trackbot]
ISSUE-59 -- Should the first party be informed about whether the user has sent a DNT header to third parties on their site? -- open
17:10:53 [trackbot]
17:10:59 [aleecia]
zakim, mute me
17:10:59 [Zakim]
aleecia should now be muted
17:11:02 [ifette]
yes :)
17:11:07 [WileyS]
17:11:12 [tl]
Resolved by JS API, no?
17:11:14 [tl]
17:11:26 [WileyS]
17:11:30 [ifette]
17:11:34 [npdoty]
17:11:38 [jchester2]
No one has proposed anything in this area. Proposal to close unless people comment.
17:11:40 [schunter]
17:11:44 [npdoty]
ack tl
17:11:54 [npdoty]
tl: I think this is dealt with by the JS API
17:11:56 [jchester2]
Tom: This is dealt with by Javascript API.
17:12:13 [npdoty]
ack WileyS
17:12:27 [fielding]
tl, we would need an example in spec
17:12:48 [jchester2]
Shane says this requires polling on every single user sessions, so they have proposed under Issue-111, would give first party info that is poll worthy occuring.
17:12:57 [npdoty]
in that case, do we need two different issues for this?
17:13:14 [schunter]
17:13:17 [npdoty]
ack ifette
17:13:19 [schunter]
ack ifette
17:13:37 [jchester2]
Ian believes this is connected to issues related to site and web-wide exceptions.
17:13:40 [WileyS]
17:13:54 [WileyS]
Web-Wide, Site-Wide, and possibly "Site-Specific"
17:14:13 [tl]
+q to say that I can't live with only site wide or web-wide exceptions.
17:14:19 [Zakim]
- +1.866.317.aass
17:14:28 [ifette]
17:14:31 [npdoty]
agree to close 59
17:14:34 [tl]
17:14:37 [jchester2]
Mattias suggests we continue this discussion on Item-111
17:14:40 [tl]
zakim, who is on the phone?
17:14:40 [Zakim]
On the phone I see aleecia (muted), rvaneijk, bilcorry (muted), schunter, fielding, NAI_Charlie, 1.202.587.aaee, KevinT, +1.415.520.aagg, WileyS, +1.202.326.aall, robsherman,
17:14:43 [Zakim]
... Chris_Mejia, vinay, [Mozilla], ifette, hwest, ??P73, justin.a, [Microsoft], +1.202.744.aavv, +1.202.326.aaww, alex, +1.813.366.aayy, johnsimpson, tedleung, vincent (muted),
17:14:43 [Zakim]
... npdoty (muted), jchester2
17:14:43 [Zakim]
[Mozilla] has tl
17:14:45 [npdoty]
we have agreement, for example, that the first party is getting a header
17:14:47 [johnsimpson]
works for me
17:14:48 [schunter]
17:14:54 [tl]
17:15:05 [ifette]
ISSUE-111: subsumes issue 59
17:15:05 [trackbot]
ISSUE-111 Signaling state/existence of site-specific exceptions notes added
17:15:10 [tl]
zakim, disconnect aaee aagg aaw aaww aayy aall
17:15:10 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'disconnect aaee aagg aaw aaww aayy aall', tl
17:15:17 [tl]
zakim, disconnect aaee
17:15:17 [Zakim]
sorry, tl, I do not see a party named 'aaee'
17:15:23 [npdoty]
tl, are you chairing this call?
17:16:26 [Zakim]
- +1.202.326.aaww
17:16:42 [jchester2]
Roy says that Item-137 is part of incorporating action involving tl.
17:17:00 [npdoty]
fielding, which action is it that should be attached to issue-137?
17:17:09 [aleecia]
zakim, unmute me
17:17:09 [Zakim]
aleecia should no longer be muted
17:17:18 [KevinT1]
KevinT1 has joined #dnt
17:17:25 [npdoty]
+1 to everyone busy working on the spec :)
17:17:29 [fielding]
17:17:33 [ifette]
17:17:33 [trackbot]
ISSUE-138 -- Web-Wide Exception Well Known URI -- closed
17:17:33 [trackbot]
17:17:44 [jchester2]
Issue 138 may be marked as closed, says Alex, can we please review.
17:17:50 [WileyS]
Alex, agreed - this should be at pending review, correct?
17:18:09 [Chris]
how long does this call last? i thought it was 1-hour
17:18:14 [jchester2]
Aleecia says we are be sent Doodle poll for next F2F. By Friday response.
17:18:18 [Chris]
17:18:47 [Chris]
September is good
17:18:54 [WileyS]
LOL - a bit of a gross overstatement :-)
17:19:08 [rvaneijk]
Also, the EU is going to decide if DNT is going to lead to compliance or not... in JUNE...
17:19:18 [alex]
Yes issue-138 should be pending review
17:19:23 [rvaneijk]
... and currently it doesn't.
17:19:51 [WileyS]
Perhaps the EU will need to give the working group a few more months rather come up with arbitrary deadlines
17:19:56 [jchester2]
We need last call doc out for review, so we need a final f2f
17:20:10 [npdoty]
+1 to alex, i think issue-138 is distinct
17:20:23 [rvaneijk]
WileyS, the deadline has been there for a year now.
17:20:28 [jchester2]
This is my opinion. We need to meet and deliver to global public a meaningful W3C DNT system. We need to meet soon for f2f.
17:20:55 [npdoty]
s/This is my opinion./jchester2: /
17:21:13 [aleecia]
Personally, I'd also like to get my life back. Perhaps others agree...
17:21:14 [WileyS]
Agreed - but the work may take longer than 1 year. What was so magically about 1 year?
17:21:15 [jchester2]
17:21:25 [WileyS]
17:21:28 [aleecia]
we're already slipping past that 1 year
17:21:35 [Zakim]
17:21:36 [tl]
17:21:47 [npdoty]
schunter: will clean this up, add more text from the email itself, move to pending review
17:21:49 [WileyS]
Aleecia, I'm more concerned with "getting it right" than getting my life back - as if we don't get it right, I'll lose more of my life longer-term
17:22:11 [Zakim]
17:22:14 [jchester2]
tl asks whether we have agreed to permit unidentified users on call.
17:22:31 [rvaneijk]
WileyS, The industry now needs, by this June, to develop and deliver a standard that governs the consequences when a user does select not to be tracked, and meets other key features (
17:22:59 [aleecia]
17:23:05 [aleecia]
ack tl
17:23:06 [tl]
ack tl
17:23:10 [Zakim]
- +1.202.326.aall
17:23:12 [Zakim]
17:23:14 [Zakim]
17:23:15 [Zakim]
- +1.202.744.aavv
17:23:16 [WileyS]
Rob, the difficulty is that this process isn't led by "industry" therefore the delay
17:23:17 [jchester2]
17:23:19 [Zakim]
17:23:21 [Zakim]
17:23:22 [Zakim]
17:23:22 [Zakim]
- +1.415.520.aagg
17:23:23 [Zakim]
17:23:23 [Zakim]
17:23:23 [Zakim]
17:23:24 [Zakim]
17:23:26 [Zakim]
17:23:28 [Zakim]
17:23:30 [Zakim]
17:23:32 [Zakim]
17:23:34 [Zakim]
17:23:34 [tedleung]
tedleung has left #dnt
17:23:35 [npdoty]
rrsagent, draft minutes
17:23:35 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate npdoty
17:23:36 [Zakim]
17:23:38 [Zakim]
17:23:39 [ifette]
Zakim, list participants
17:23:41 [Zakim]
- +1.813.366.aayy
17:23:42 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been +1.408.674.aaaa, aleecia, +31.65.141.aabb, rvaneijk, +1.408.223.aacc, bilcorry, +1.714.852.aadd, fielding, npdoty, +1.202.587.aaee,
17:23:46 [Zakim]
... +1.415.520.aaff, KevinT, +1.415.520.aagg, +1.727.686.aahh, schunter, +1.202.370.aaii, +1.408.349.aajj, WileyS, +1.727.686.aakk, +1.202.326.aall, +1.301.270.aamm,
17:23:48 [johnsimpson]
johnsimpson has left #dnt
17:23:48 [Zakim]
... +1.202.370.aann, +1.510.501.aaoo, +1.917.934.aapp, robsherman, ifette, +1.202.637.aaqq, justin, vinay, +1.917.318.aarr, NAI_Charlie, +1.866.317.aass, Chris_Mejia,
17:23:52 [Zakim]
... +1.202.346.aatt, [Microsoft], +1.202.684.aauu, +1.202.744.aavv, hwest, Chapell, +1.202.326.aaww, +1.813.366.aaxx, +1.813.366.aayy, tl, +1.310.392.aazz, alex, 1.202.587.aaee,
17:23:56 [Zakim]
... +1.206.369.bbaa, +49.721.913.74.bbbb, dsriedel, tedleung, johnsimpson, +1.202.684.bbcc, jmayer, vincent, +1.301.270.bbdd, jchester2
17:23:57 [Zakim]
17:24:01 [Zakim]
17:24:03 [Zakim]
17:24:04 [Zakim]
17:24:13 [ifette]
rrsagent, draft minutes
17:24:13 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ifette
17:24:35 [ifette]
(for whatever reason, rrsagent seems to get a more complete list if you do list participants first, no idea why...)
17:24:48 [npdoty]
ifette, that's the Zakim bug I was referring to earlier
17:24:56 [robsherman]
robsherman has joined #dnt
17:25:01 [npdoty]
or at least related to that bug
17:25:16 [robsherman]
robsherman has left #dnt
17:25:22 [Zakim]
17:28:12 [enewland]
enewland has joined #dnt
17:28:25 [Zakim]
17:28:41 [Zakim]
17:35:00 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, WileyS, in T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM
17:35:01 [Zakim]
T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM has ended
17:35:01 [Zakim]
Attendees were +1.408.674.aaaa, aleecia, +31.65.141.aabb, rvaneijk, +1.408.223.aacc, bilcorry, +1.714.852.aadd, fielding, npdoty, +1.202.587.aaee, +1.415.520.aaff, KevinT,
17:35:01 [Zakim]
... +1.415.520.aagg, +1.727.686.aahh, schunter, +1.202.370.aaii, +1.408.349.aajj, WileyS, +1.727.686.aakk, +1.202.326.aall, +1.301.270.aamm, +1.202.370.aann, +1.510.501.aaoo,
17:35:03 [Zakim]
... +1.917.934.aapp, robsherman, ifette, +1.202.637.aaqq, justin, vinay, +1.917.318.aarr, NAI_Charlie, +1.866.317.aass, Chris_Mejia, +1.202.346.aatt, [Microsoft], +1.202.684.aauu,
17:35:06 [Zakim]
... +1.202.744.aavv, hwest, Chapell, +1.202.326.aaww, +1.813.366.aaxx, +1.813.366.aayy, tl, +1.310.392.aazz, alex, 1.202.587.aaee, +1.206.369.bbaa, +49.721.913.74.bbbb, dsriedel,
17:35:09 [Zakim]
... tedleung, johnsimpson, +1.202.684.bbcc, jmayer, vincent, +1.301.270.bbdd, jchester2
17:36:08 [KevinT1]
KevinT1 has left #dnt
17:55:28 [mischat]
mischat has joined #dnt
17:57:56 [mischat_]
mischat_ has joined #dnt
18:31:38 [ifette]
ifette has joined #dnt
18:39:57 [ifette]
ifette has joined #dnt
19:28:05 [tl1]
tl1 has joined #dnt
19:33:07 [tl]
tl has joined #dnt
19:55:36 [ifette]
ifette has joined #dnt