IRC log of dnt on 2012-07-11

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:41:26 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #dnt
15:41:26 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:41:36 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #dnt
15:41:47 [aleecia]
Zakim, this will be dnt
15:41:47 [Zakim]
ok, aleecia; I see T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM scheduled to start in 19 minutes
15:41:53 [aleecia]
chair: aleecia
15:42:20 [aleecia]
regrets+ EdFelten, JCCannon
15:42:31 [aleecia]
rrsagent, make logs public
15:43:02 [aleecia]
15:43:06 [aleecia]
agenda+ Selection of scribe
15:43:12 [tl]
tl has joined #dnt
15:43:52 [aleecia]
agenda+ Review of overdue action items:
15:44:10 [aleecia]
agenda+ Quick check that callers are identified
15:44:54 [aleecia]
agenda+ Walk through of editors' strawman draft:
15:45:10 [aleecia]
agenda+ Announce next meeting & adjourn
15:46:23 [tl]
Has the shared calendar stopped including our conference calls?
15:49:32 [npdoty]
npdoty has joined #dnt
15:50:33 [tl]
Aha, just the person. npdoty, has the WG shared calendar stopped including our conf calls?
15:51:00 [npdoty]
tl, yes, calendar bug, my mistake
15:51:38 [aleecia]
Thanks - I'd wondered about that and hadn't pinged yet
15:52:29 [Zakim]
T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM has now started
15:52:36 [Zakim]
15:52:40 [tl]
Resulted in a colleague trying to meet with me in 40 minutes, sadly.
15:53:00 [Zakim]
+ +1.609.981.aaaa
15:53:15 [tl]
zakim, aaaa is me
15:53:15 [Zakim]
+tl; got it
15:53:19 [tl]
As it has always been.
15:53:28 [aleecia]
And you wonder that I am not a fan of "I'll just put everything into a public calendar and expect it all to automagically work" :-)
15:54:07 [tl]
What you need is a web-enabled *cloud* calendar.
15:54:11 [Zakim]
15:54:20 [tl]
With Twitter integration.
15:54:34 [tl]
...and apps!
15:54:36 [npdoty]
Calendar should be fixed now (or shortly, as it syncs via the tubes).
15:54:44 [aleecia]
I had one of those. In 1989. Only, we didn't have Twitter yet.
15:54:44 [eberkower]
eberkower has joined #dnt
15:54:51 [tl]
Delightful, thanks Nick.
15:55:46 [aleecia]
It seems my whole Interweb experience is a quest for recreation of what worked in the early 90s at a research university
15:56:04 [aleecia]
re-creation, that is
15:56:25 [tl]
Clouds not required?
15:56:41 [aleecia]
yikes, Nick.
15:56:49 [tl]
RFC2821 compliance for email considered a "good day"?
15:57:13 [aleecia]
We didn't call it that… but it was the moral equiv of cloud computing, in its own way
15:57:32 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.587.aabb
15:57:41 [aleecia]
good morning from 202
15:57:50 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.494.aacc
15:58:06 [aleecia]
and another good morning from 202
15:58:07 [Lia]
Lia has joined #dnt
15:58:08 [npdoty]
Zakim, aacc is jchester
15:58:08 [Zakim]
+jchester; got it
15:58:20 [aleecia]
thanks, Nick!
15:58:23 [tl]
Except that you actually knew the bearded guy who was unquestioned master of your data.
15:58:52 [Simon]
Simon has joined #dnt
15:58:54 [Zakim]
- +1.202.587.aabb
15:59:11 [aleecia]
Wayne the wonder operator -- get me to tell you how someone got root out of him some time.
15:59:12 [jeffwilson]
jeffwilson has joined #dnt
15:59:20 [aleecia]
Some time when I can talk.
15:59:24 [Zakim]
+ +1.703.265.aadd
15:59:26 [Zakim]
15:59:42 [aleecia]
good morning, in 703
15:59:59 [aleecia]
uh, did we just lose both 202 callers?
16:00:00 [jmayer]
jmayer has joined #dnt
16:00:07 [npdoty]
Zakim, aadd is jeffwilson
16:00:07 [Zakim]
+jeffwilson; got it
16:00:12 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.684.aaee
16:00:12 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.587.aaff
16:00:17 [aleecia]
zakim, who is on the call?
16:00:17 [Zakim]
On the phone I see aleecia, tl, npdoty, jeffwilson, +1.202.684.aaee, +1.202.587.aaff
16:00:18 [dsriedel]
dsriedel has joined #dnt
16:00:31 [Lia]
aaff is Lia
16:00:35 [Zakim]
16:00:48 [Chris_IAB]
Chris_IAB has joined #dnt
16:00:49 [jmayer]
Zakim, aaee is jmayer
16:00:50 [Zakim]
+jmayer; got it
16:01:46 [Zakim]
+ +1.813.366.aagg
16:01:46 [Zakim]
+ +1.425.269.aahh
16:01:46 [Zakim]
+ +1.919.388.aaii
16:01:46 [KevinT]
KevinT has joined #dnt
16:01:46 [erikn]
erikn has joined #dnt
16:01:46 [Lia]
Zakim, aaff is Lia
16:02:01 [npdoty]
Zakim, ??P42 is probably Simon_CableLabs
16:02:01 [npdoty]
Zakim, aaff is Lia
16:02:01 [Zakim]
+ +49.721.913.74.aajj
16:02:01 [Zakim]
16:02:01 [Zakim]
16:02:01 [Zakim]
+ +1.415.520.aakk
16:02:01 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.326.aall
16:02:04 [johnsimpson]
johnsimpson has joined #dnt
16:02:05 [Zakim]
+Lia; got it
16:02:07 [aleecia]
Nick, if you can take the incoming calls, that would help.
16:02:13 [dsriedel]
zakim, aajj is dsriedel
16:02:20 [KevinT]
zakim, aakk is KevinT
16:02:24 [AnnaLong]
AnnaLong has joined #dnt
16:02:28 [Joanne]
Joanne has joined #DNT
16:02:32 [Zakim]
+ +1.415.520.aamm
16:02:33 [Zakim]
+ +1.703.265.aann
16:02:35 [Zakim]
- +1.425.269.aahh
16:02:36 [fielding]
fielding has joined #dnt
16:02:38 [suegl]
suegl has joined #dnt
16:02:38 [johnsimpson]
I am on IRC only
16:02:41 [Zakim]
+Simon_CableLabs?; got it
16:02:42 [Zakim]
sorry, npdoty, I do not recognize a party named 'aaff'
16:02:48 [alex]
alex has joined #dnt
16:02:49 [Joanne]
Zakim, Joanne is aamm
16:02:49 [aleecia]
thanks, John, so noted
16:02:52 [npdoty]
Zakim, aall is Peder
16:02:52 [hwest]
hwest has joined #dnt
16:02:53 [pmagee]
pmagee has joined #dnt
16:02:54 [Zakim]
+dsriedel; got it
16:03:05 [npdoty]
Present+ Chris_AOL
16:03:05 [Zakim]
+KevinT; got it
16:03:05 [Zakim]
16:03:05 [dsriedel]
zakim, mute me
16:03:05 [dsinger]
zakim, [apple] has dsinger
16:03:07 [Chris_IAB]
joining from a live conference so I won't be able to speak on today's call - I'm sure some won't mind that! ;)
16:03:16 [cblouch]
cblouch has joined #dnt
16:03:18 [kj]
kj has joined #dnt
16:03:22 [Zakim]
sorry, Joanne, I do not recognize a party named 'Joanne'
16:03:23 [aleecia]
hi Chris, thanks for joining on IRC
16:03:28 [Zakim]
+Peder; got it
16:03:38 [dsinger]
zakim, who is making noise?
16:03:39 [Chris_IAB]
I'm on the phone as well, in listen-only mode
16:03:43 [Joanne]
Zakim, aamm is Joanne
16:03:51 [Zakim]
dsriedel should now be muted
16:03:53 [Zakim]
+dsinger; got it
16:03:55 [Zakim]
16:03:57 [amyc]
amyc has joined #dnt
16:03:57 [samsilberman]
samsilberman has joined #dnt
16:03:57 [vincent]
vincent has joined #dnt
16:04:07 [aleecia]
listening with one ear to each? :-)
16:04:14 [aleecia]
zakim, who is on the call?
16:04:19 [Zakim]
+ +1.714.852.aaoo
16:04:23 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.346.aapp
16:04:37 [dwainberg]
dwainberg has joined #dnt
16:04:43 [fielding]
zakim, aaoo is fielding
16:04:45 [Zakim]
+Joanne; got it
16:04:46 [Zakim]
+ +1.425.269.aaqq
16:04:50 [Zakim]
dsinger, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Simon_CableLabs? (21%), +1.202.346.aapp (10%)
16:05:00 [Zakim]
On the phone I see aleecia, tl, npdoty, jeffwilson, jmayer, Lia, Simon_CableLabs?, +1.813.366.aagg, +1.919.388.aaii, dsriedel (muted), ??P50, KevinT, jchester, Peder, Joanne,
16:05:05 [npdoty]
Zakim, mute Simon_CableLabs
16:05:05 [Zakim]
... +1.703.265.aann, [Apple], [Microsoft], +1.714.852.aaoo, +1.202.346.aapp, +1.425.269.aaqq
16:05:06 [suegl]
zakim, aaqq is suegl
16:05:08 [Zakim]
[Apple] has dsinger
16:05:09 [Zakim]
+ +1.781.472.aarr
16:05:11 [npdoty]
Zakim, mute aapp
16:05:12 [Simon]
I already muted
16:05:12 [hefferjr]
hefferjr has joined #dnt
16:05:16 [Zakim]
16:05:17 [Zakim]
16:05:20 [Zakim]
+ +1.813.366.aass
16:05:27 [Zakim]
+fielding; got it
16:05:32 [Chris_IAB]
I'm calling in from a blocked number (privacy ;)
16:05:36 [hefferjr]
Zakim, aass is hefferjr
16:05:41 [Zakim]
16:05:43 [Zakim]
+ +1.207.619.aatt
16:05:46 [hwest]
Zakim, aapp is hwest
16:05:47 [Zakim]
Simon_CableLabs? should now be muted
16:05:50 [Zakim]
+suegl; got it
16:05:53 [Zakim]
+1.202.346.aapp should now be muted
16:05:56 [dwainberg]
zakim, aatt is dwainberg
16:06:08 [npdoty]
Present+ Chris_IAB
16:06:11 [Zakim]
+hefferjr; got it
16:06:19 [npdoty]
Zakim, who is making noise?
16:06:20 [Zakim]
+hwest; got it
16:06:21 [alex]
Zakim, aagg is alex
16:06:27 [vincent]
Zakim, ??P70 is vincent
16:06:27 [Zakim]
+dwainberg; got it
16:06:36 [Zakim]
+alex; got it
16:06:47 [Zakim]
+vincent; got it
16:06:51 [Zakim]
npdoty, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: aleecia (57%), justin (19%)
16:07:02 [aleecia]
16:07:06 [npdoty]
scribenick: vincent
16:07:17 [Lia]
Zakim, mute me
16:07:24 [Zakim]
+ +1.646.666.aauu
16:07:31 [Chapell]
Chapell has joined #DNT
16:07:39 [npdoty]
Zakim, who is making noise?
16:07:39 [Zakim]
Lia should now be muted
16:07:44 [Zakim]
+ +1.425.985.aavv
16:07:50 [Zakim]
16:07:58 [amyc]
audio is awful?
16:08:03 [Zakim]
npdoty, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: aleecia (33%)
16:08:04 [vincent]
I can not hear at all
16:08:05 [Chapell]
i hear it
16:08:08 [vincent]
somene is running?
16:08:08 [dwainberg]
I'm glad it's not just me.
16:08:11 [justin_]
justin_ has joined #dnt
16:08:11 [Simon]
Pounding is coming through loud and clear
16:08:15 [Zakim]
+ +1.646.654.aaww
16:08:17 [npdoty]
Zakim, who is making noise?
16:08:21 [Zakim]
16:08:27 [Zakim]
npdoty, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: aleecia (30%)
16:08:28 [cblouch]
Sounds like clog dancing
16:08:34 [Zakim]
- +1.646.654.aaww
16:08:34 [Simon]
16:08:37 [npdoty]
Zakim, mute aleecia
16:08:37 [dsriedel]
16:08:37 [Zakim]
aleecia should now be muted
16:08:43 [Zakim]
+ +1.201.723.aaxx
16:08:50 [npdoty]
Zakim, ack aleecia
16:08:50 [Zakim]
unmuting aleecia
16:08:51 [Zakim]
I see no one on the speaker queue
16:09:03 [fielding]
justin can start now
16:09:07 [Zakim]
+ +1.646.654.aayy
16:09:20 [npdoty]
Zakim, aaxx is SusanIsrael
16:09:20 [Zakim]
+SusanIsrael; got it
16:09:23 [BrendanIAB]
BrendanIAB has joined #dnt
16:09:36 [Zakim]
16:09:38 [Craig]
Craig has joined #dnt
16:09:48 [vincent]
16:09:48 [trackbot]
ACTION-218 -- Nick Doty to write up proposal on issue-112 that we do exceptions based on origin -- due 2012-06-29 -- OPEN
16:09:48 [trackbot]
16:09:52 [adrianba]
adrianba has joined #dnt
16:10:02 [Zakim]
16:10:05 [vincent]
npdoty: overlooked, should be available this week
16:10:15 [fielding]
all of mine are +1 week
16:10:18 [samsilberman]
zakim, aarr is samsilberman
16:10:18 [Zakim]
+samsilberman; got it
16:10:21 [laurengelman]
laurengelman has joined #dnt
16:10:30 [Chapell]
zakim, aauu is chapell
16:10:30 [Zakim]
+chapell; got it
16:10:34 [laurengelman]
i am in the room with Justin
16:10:36 [npdoty]
I'll try for faster than +1 week, since I only have one
16:10:40 [vincent]
aleecia: three open actions on fielding
16:10:43 [hwest]
Zakim, unmute me
16:10:43 [Zakim]
hwest should no longer be muted
16:10:44 [npdoty]
Present+ laurengelman
16:10:45 [vincent]
16:10:45 [trackbot]
ACTION-209 -- Jonathan Mayer to draft a definition of DNT:0 expression -- issue-148 -- due 2012-06-14 -- CLOSED
16:10:45 [trackbot]
16:10:48 [cblouch]
zakim, cblouch is Chris Blouch
16:10:48 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'cblouch is Chris Blouch', cblouch
16:10:52 [vincent]
16:10:52 [trackbot]
ACTION-224 -- Roy Fielding to ensure that Section 4 reflects the latest DomAPI proposal by Nick -- due 2012-07-01 -- OPEN
16:10:52 [trackbot]
16:10:57 [vincent]
16:10:57 [trackbot]
ACTION-217 -- Roy Fielding to change text around DNT "on"/"off"/ -- due 2012-06-29 -- OPEN
16:10:57 [trackbot]
16:11:23 [Craigspi]
Craigspi has joined #dnt
16:11:24 [vincent]
fielding: not any progress on these issue, well be done next week
16:11:27 [Zakim]
16:11:36 [vincent]
... not sure 224 for is it for dsinger ?
16:11:40 [BrendanIAB]
+??P5 is BrendanIAB
16:11:45 [Chris_IAB]
Chris_IAB has joined #dnt
16:12:07 [Zakim]
+ +1.408.349.aazz
16:12:08 [vincent]
npdoty: I'll follow up on this issue as it is realted to the JS API
16:12:10 [CraigspiOTA]
CraigspiOTA has joined #dnt
16:12:14 [WileyS]
WileyS has joined #DNT
16:12:21 [vincent]
16:12:21 [trackbot]
ACTION-221 -- Jonathan Mayer to draft optional version of explicit/explicit exception api -- due 2012-06-29 -- OPEN
16:12:21 [trackbot]
16:12:43 [vincent]
jmayer: this end-up being redundant something is in the TPE already
16:12:45 [WileyS]
AKA - We've not worked on this action :-)
16:12:54 [vincent]
dsinger: agree this is in the TPE already
16:13:04 [erikn]
erikn has joined #dnt
16:13:05 [npdoty]
jmayer, was this action for explicitly making it an optional method?
16:13:07 [vincent]
aleecia: closing 221 as redundant
16:13:17 [Zakim]
16:13:24 [adrianba]
zakim, [Microsoft.a] is me
16:13:24 [Zakim]
+adrianba; got it
16:13:53 [vincent]
aleecia: dsinger is doing an independant cnsistency check on TPE
16:14:03 [vincent]
16:14:03 [trackbot]
ACTION-170 -- Heather West to provide an alternative approach to well-known URI for resources that are used in both first-party and third-party contexts without changing the resource URI -- due 2012-06-13 -- OPEN
16:14:03 [trackbot]
16:14:10 [jmayer]
npdoty, think this was focused on the API design
16:14:10 [eberkower]
eberkower has joined #dnt
16:14:20 [tl]
+1 - has been bypased
16:14:21 [vincent]
hwest: we moved passed that in the discussion we can remove that action
16:14:36 [vincent]
aleecia: close action 170
16:14:44 [aleecia]
zakim, who is on the call?
16:14:44 [Zakim]
On the phone I see aleecia, tl, npdoty, jeffwilson, jmayer, Lia (muted), Simon_CableLabs? (muted), alex, +1.919.388.aaii, dsriedel (muted), ??P50, KevinT, Peder, Joanne,
16:14:48 [Zakim]
... +1.703.265.aann, [Apple], [Microsoft], fielding, hwest, suegl, samsilberman, justin, vincent, hefferjr, dwainberg, chapell, +1.425.985.aavv, +1.646.654.aayy, SusanIsrael, ??P5,
16:14:48 [Zakim]
... +1.408.349.aazz, adrianba
16:14:48 [Zakim]
[Apple] has dsinger
16:14:54 [hwest]
hwest has left #dnt
16:15:02 [hwest]
hwest has joined #dnt
16:15:07 [Zakim]
- +1.919.388.aaii
16:15:08 [vincent]
now looking for unidentifeid people
16:15:13 [aleecia]
sorry - talking is still killing me
16:15:14 [WileyS]
Zakim, aazz is WileyS
16:15:14 [Zakim]
+WileyS; got it
16:15:19 [eberkower]
646 = eberkower
16:15:34 [eberkower]
646 is eberkower
16:15:37 [aleecia]
zakim, aayy is eberkower
16:15:37 [Zakim]
+eberkower; got it
16:15:39 [Chris_IAB]
blocked number
16:15:47 [AnnaLong]
919 is AnnaLong. i lost my connection and i'm dialing back in
16:15:58 [aleecia]
zakim, aaii is annalong
16:15:58 [Zakim]
sorry, aleecia, I do not recognize a party named 'aaii'
16:15:59 [dsinger]
zakim, aayy is eberkower
16:16:00 [Zakim]
sorry, dsinger, I do not recognize a party named 'aayy'
16:16:06 [npdoty]
Zakim, ??P50 is probably Chris_IAB
16:16:06 [Zakim]
+Chris_IAB?; got it
16:16:14 [npdoty]
Zakim, ??P5 is probably BrendanIAB
16:16:14 [Zakim]
+BrendanIAB?; got it
16:16:21 [npdoty]
Zakim, aayy is eberkower
16:16:29 [Zakim]
sorry, npdoty, I do not recognize a party named 'aayy'
16:16:34 [Zakim]
+ +1.919.388.bbaa
16:16:35 [justin_]
Here is the draft:
16:16:51 [vincent]
aleecia: justin will walk through the strawman draft,
16:16:52 [npdoty]
Zakim, bbaa is AnnaLong
16:16:52 [Zakim]
+AnnaLong; got it
16:17:15 [vincent]
... looking for structural problems
16:17:28 [vincent]
... just going the part that have changed
16:17:36 [aleecia]
zakim, mute aleecia
16:17:36 [Zakim]
aleecia should now be muted
16:17:46 [adrianba]
zakim, mute me
16:17:46 [Zakim]
adrianba should now be muted
16:18:31 [vincent]
justin_: not updated for a couple of months and now bringing the proposal together
16:18:50 [vincent]
... the doc was chage from HTML to other format so there are some fomrating issue
16:18:52 [aleecia]
TODO: editors note note note
16:18:57 [vincent]
... putting it in the right shape
16:19:08 [vincent]
introductiona nd scope have not changed at all
16:19:22 [vincent]
... will have to go back and rewrite scope and goals at some point
16:19:31 [vincent]
... user and user agent have not changed
16:19:32 [Zakim]
16:19:48 [robsherman]
robsherman has joined #dnt
16:19:55 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.370.bbbb
16:20:06 [robsherman]
zakim, bbbb is robsherman
16:20:06 [Zakim]
+robsherman; got it
16:20:07 [vincent]
... parties: has changed due to the compromise, agreed in Bellevue that Shane draft will be the base
16:20:12 [erikn]
zakim, [Apple.a] has erikn
16:20:12 [Zakim]
+erikn; got it
16:20:29 [vincent]
... but Shane draft was not in that form, so started from jmayer draft
16:20:45 [aleecia]
TODO: tagging non-normative sections as such
16:20:56 [fielding]
I would really appreciate it if the editors considered comments other than the two diametrically opposite and equally unacceptable proposals.
16:20:57 [vincent]
... notion of affiliate, the link describing the affiliate have to be easily discoverable
16:21:31 [vincent]
... outsourcing should be considered as first parties, if a person is a third aprty under outsourcing provisin, they can act as a first party
16:22:03 [hwest]
16:22:03 [fielding]
16:22:05 [vincent]
... agreement on the language of service providers and service providers is good?
16:22:12 [johnsimpson]
Roy, do you have specific text to which you are referring?
16:22:13 [vincent]
... or do we want other language propose
16:22:14 [npdoty]
fielding, do you think that applies to the party size and outsourcing questions?
16:22:22 [aleecia]
16:22:24 [hwest]
16:22:32 [aleecia]
ack fielding
16:22:34 [vincent]
fielding: same comment as before: not acceptable
16:22:47 [aleecia]
ack hwest
16:22:47 [vincent]
justin_: any alternative or ther option?
16:22:54 [vincent]
fielding: posting on irc
16:23:10 [vincent]
hwest: problem with the language and the specificity
16:23:15 [dwainberg]
16:23:18 [jmayer]
16:23:22 [vincent]
... number of option has been proposed in bellevye that are simpler
16:23:40 [dsinger]
16:23:41 [aleecia]
ack dwainberg
16:23:51 [vincent]
... most people have the same context in their head but the language is not there
16:23:56 [aleecia]
ack jmayer
16:24:07 [hwest]
I think most folks are in the same place in terms of what the language SHOULD say, but I don't think the language in the straw man now reflects that
16:24:07 [aleecia]
sorry - jmayer next
16:24:15 [aleecia]
agreed, David
16:24:24 [aleecia]
this will not be the only opportunity to comment
16:24:26 [jmayer]
16:24:36 [vincent]
dwainberg: hope we're not getting in a substantive discussion, we should keep that open
16:24:42 [aleecia]
knowing where there are issues is very helpful, though
16:24:59 [Zakim]
- +1.425.985.aavv
16:25:01 [aleecia]
ack dsinger
16:25:04 [dwainberg]
agreed, Aleecia. thx.
16:25:05 [npdoty]
what I'm hearing: same context in our head, but not set on the language
16:25:12 [vincent]
jmayer: what's overly specific and what's out of sope but that'd be too long
16:25:29 [jmayer]
s/what's/would ask what's/
16:25:34 [aleecia]
david getting text on that would help
16:25:35 [vincent]
dsinger: party definition: we need to say someting about the responsability following the data
16:25:56 [aleecia]
zakim, mute me
16:25:56 [Zakim]
aleecia was already muted, aleecia
16:25:59 [vincent]
thx jmayer
16:26:08 [jmayer]
Yep, this is a concern David has frequently expressed that isn't in the draft as an option.
16:26:14 [aleecia]
zakim, unmute me
16:26:14 [Zakim]
aleecia should no longer be muted
16:26:20 [vincent]
justin_: 3.4 distinction between first and third parties
16:26:28 [vincent]
... what is the first party
16:26:42 [hwest]
I have a problem with the first and third party definitions in there right now
16:26:54 [vincent]
... Shane proposal say that the first party is the site you're going too
16:27:08 [vincent]
... we consider several example like multiple first party
16:27:12 [hwest]
16:27:22 [dsinger]
an issue we need to grapple with is when 'promotion' happens (from 3rd to 1st party) and whether the two ends agree and notice
16:27:35 [vincent]
... I think there was general agreement that link shortener are not first party
16:27:40 [aleecia]
TODO: grep for &emdash; and fix
16:27:45 [vincent]
... concer about this lamguage?
16:27:48 [aleecia]
ack hwest
16:28:09 [vincent]
hwest: it des not make sens to say that first party have to infer
16:28:11 [fielding]
my comments on service providers:
16:28:24 [vincent]
justin_: if there is an alternative
16:28:41 [aleecia]
TODO: editors to review Roy's service provider text above
16:28:41 [tl]
I think that the infer language has been consensus for a while?
16:28:47 [justin_]
16:28:49 [vincent]
hwest: we could use corporate ownership
16:28:51 [amyc]
agree that definition should be objective
16:29:12 [vincent]
justin_: hwest taking an action item on a definition of first/third party
16:29:13 [aleecia]
Heather I'm not seeing how ownership solves this, but look forward to seeing what you write
16:29:25 [npdoty]
action: heather to propose an alternative definition of first party (based on ownership? alternative to inference?)
16:29:25 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-225 - Propose an alternative definition of first party (based on ownership? alternative to inference?) [on Heather West - due 2012-07-18].
16:29:46 [vincent]
justin_: unlinkable data, I've freezed the two option
16:29:53 [hwest]
aleecia, it may be that I'm framing the two definitions differently in my head than others are - but they feel to me like they're not even internally consistent
16:30:05 [vincent]
... one dervied from Shane text, let me know if I'm wrong there
16:30:19 [vincent]
... second option taken from jmayer draft
16:30:25 [justin_]
16:30:27 [aleecia]
Perhaps we could add that to the FAQ, actually
16:30:34 [vincent]
... we did not come on an agreement on that yet
16:30:53 [fielding]
my detailed comments on outsourcing sections:
16:30:57 [vincent]
justin_: netwrok transcation, transcational data are quite stable definition, no complaint
16:31:13 [vincent]
justin_: what it data collection/view/sahrng and what is tracking
16:31:36 [vincent]
... the use of unique identifier (point of contention) would go there
16:31:36 [aleecia]
TODO: definitions of collection, retention, use, sharing, tracking
16:31:55 [npdoty]
TODO: use the several definitions of tracking that Roy has extracted
16:32:00 [vincent]
justin_: section 3.10 explicit and informed consent
16:32:29 [vincent]
.. when you need the consent to have DNT on in the first place and when you have consent for user granted exception
16:32:55 [justin_]
16:32:55 [npdoty]
is there general agreement that this applies both to setting a preference and overriding a preference?
16:32:57 [vincent]
... two options, one from jmayer draft, defined initilaly for UGE but can be used to dnt on as well
16:33:09 [vincent]
I missed the second option
16:33:11 [WileyS]
Yes - I agree - we can dig that up if needed
16:33:11 [aleecia]
if we're doing "choice mechanism" but using it in both places, that may get confused
16:33:23 [aleecia]
second option was silence, leave to local law
16:33:33 [vincent]
thx aleecia
16:33:58 [aleecia]
TODO: David Singer & Shane to work with Justin on alternative text on consent
16:34:01 [justin_]
16:34:17 [dsinger]
zakim, who is making noise?
16:34:20 [WileyS]
16:34:30 [vincent]
justin_: compliance broke in three parties
16:34:31 [Zakim]
dsinger, listening for 11 seconds I could not identify any sounds
16:34:42 [WileyS]
16:34:52 [vincent]
... first aprty compliance, I don't think this language work but none propose
16:34:59 [Zakim]
16:35:04 [vincent]
... anyone else taking an action item on it
16:35:05 [aleecia]
TODO: reworking section 4 first party language
16:35:13 [justin_]
16:35:23 [vincent]
justin_: sec 5 user agent compliance
16:35:37 [vincent]
... second paragraph taken from tpe draft
16:35:51 [justin_]
16:35:54 [vincent]
... WileyS had a couple of extra requirement on user agent, reported there
16:36:09 [vincent]
... section 6: third party compliance
16:36:28 [vincent]
... 6.1 not sure there is a consensus
16:36:59 [aleecia]
we'd walked through geo-targeting and closed things, then Ian had new suggestions on the mailing list
16:37:00 [justin_]
16:37:04 [WileyS]
16:37:05 [vincent]
... consensus on the geolocation ?
16:37:05 [hwest]
I know Ian will want to take another look
16:37:31 [vincent]
dwainberg: I'd like to go back and discuss that letter
16:37:38 [aleecia]
ack WileyS
16:37:43 [justin_]
ack WileyS
16:38:26 [justin_]
16:38:29 [tl]
Isn't this reopening a closed issue?
16:38:31 [vincent]
WileyS: flag the behavior example and not mix element about other user agent details
16:38:45 [vincent]
justin_: not problem revising that
16:39:10 [aleecia]
TODO: revisit invasive behavior example (though yes, this was closed, Shane's point is also reasonable)
16:39:32 [justin_]
16:39:39 [vincent]
... section general agreement depend on the defintion of hat collection is
16:39:40 [aleecia]
Tom might work with Justin to find an example we're all clearer about
16:40:10 [WileyS]
16:40:17 [vincent]
justin_: "content delivrery that could be conextual" we might want to revisit that
16:40:50 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.524.bbcc
16:40:51 [justin_]
ack WileyS
16:40:52 [aleecia]
ack WileyS
16:41:17 [justin_]
16:41:32 [vincent]
WileyS: content delivrery based on context, we thought it was out of the scope, not confortable to have it in the permitted uses section
16:41:33 [aleecia]
TODO: revisit if contextual belongs some place other than permitted use
16:41:54 [jmayer]
(This is plainly within scope.)
16:41:59 [aleecia]
this suggests collect is data about a user, perhaps
16:42:06 [npdoty]
WileyS: could put this in the Collection section, for example [trying to capture the suggestion]
16:42:43 [vincent]
justin_: frequency capping, financial logging and auditing based on WileyS proposal
16:43:03 [vincent]
... issue rasied in bellevue, could a contract llow you to log data forever
16:43:04 [WileyS]
I thought we agreed that contracts would NOT trump the standard
16:43:08 [justin_]
16:43:09 [aleecia]
16:43:17 [tl]
+1 shane
16:43:24 [npdoty]
ack aleecia
16:43:35 [vincent]
aleecia: much of this could be solved by the third party acting as a first party
16:44:20 [vincent]
... to come back to WileyS point, we agreed that there are exisitng contract that DNT should not trump but DNT should impact future contracts
16:44:42 [vincent]
justin_: sounds liek there is an agreement on that
16:44:49 [aleecia]
TODO: for financial logging/ auditing, look to 3rd parties as 3rd parties
16:44:59 [susanisrael]
susanisrael has joined #dnt
16:45:04 [justin_]
16:45:08 [vincent]
... security and fraud prevention, we could had jmayer gratuated response
16:45:14 [Zakim]
16:45:26 [vincent]
... debugging, language come from bellevue or WileyS draft
16:45:29 [aleecia]
TODO: write down end point in Seattle of existing contracts remain in force, but new contracts to be written with DNT in mind
16:45:31 [susanisrael]
susan israel rejoined the call, this time from 202 379 XXXX
16:45:50 [WileyS]
16:45:52 [aleecia]
zakim, who is on the call?
16:45:52 [Zakim]
On the phone I see aleecia, tl, npdoty, jeffwilson, jmayer, Lia (muted), Simon_CableLabs? (muted), alex, dsriedel (muted), Chris_IAB?, KevinT, Peder, Joanne, +1.703.265.aann,
16:45:55 [Zakim]
... [Apple], fielding, hwest, suegl, samsilberman, justin, vincent, hefferjr, dwainberg, chapell, eberkower, BrendanIAB?, WileyS, adrianba (muted), AnnaLong, [Apple.a], robsherman,
16:45:55 [Zakim]
... +1.202.524.bbcc
16:45:55 [Zakim]
[Apple] has dsinger
16:45:55 [Zakim]
[Apple.a] has erikn
16:46:05 [fielding]
16:46:21 [susanisrael]
susan israel is also on the call
16:46:48 [aleecia]
ack fielding
16:47:12 [aleecia]
16:47:14 [vincent]
justin_: different opinion: you can use the data avaialble, fear that it would encourage long data retention for other purposes
16:47:36 [aleecia]
ok so this is a new use case we haven't explored
16:48:11 [vincent]
fielding: security and fraud prevention is inherently based on a sharing data process (have I capture that correctly?)
16:48:24 [aleecia]
TODO: add examples on security without outsourced parties
16:48:31 [fielding]
vincent, yes
16:48:40 [vincent]
justin_: 6..2.2 addition requirement from WileyS proposal
16:48:56 [cblouch]
zakim, aann is cblouch
16:48:56 [Zakim]
+cblouch; got it
16:49:12 [justin_]
16:49:19 [vincent]
... how long do you keep the data and eventually explaining reason, no personalisation of user experience except fro frequency capping
16:49:45 [vincent]
justin_: 6.3 user granted exception, is also in the TPE doc
16:50:18 [vincent]
... 6.3.1 explain interaction with other controls, quite stable
16:50:37 [WileyS]
Depends on the consent conveyed by the user in entering the logged in state
16:50:45 [aleecia]
We had pretty much deadlock around logged in / logged out, with people to write both sides, and one of those dropped.
16:50:47 [justin_]
16:50:49 [vincent]
... 6.3.2 consent from a login state, have we a consensus on that
16:50:52 [tl]
+1 Shane
16:51:12 [npdoty]
+1 to dropping this section and relying on the definitions around consent
16:51:29 [vincent]
justin_: 6.4 is a new section
16:51:39 [aleecia]
(If we have extra time on this call, which it looks we will, let's come back to 6.3)
16:51:47 [susanisrael]
is it possible to repost the link to the document justin is walking through. I apologize, I was not on IRC before.
16:51:55 [npdoty]
16:51:58 [WileyS]
Of course, I strongly disagree with option 1 - would you mind moving this to the last option?
16:52:00 [dsinger]
16:52:01 [justin_]
16:52:01 [vincent]
... non compliant user agent, first option : if the header is correctly form you have to respect it
16:52:06 [susanisrael]
16:52:10 [aleecia]
ack dsinger
16:52:28 [aleecia]
That sounds like a good solution to me, speaking as me and not as co-chair
16:52:36 [vincent]
... second option, if we can beleive that the user did not set the preference, the party may not respect the request
16:52:37 [justin_]
16:52:40 [justin_]
16:52:45 [WileyS]
+1 to what David said
16:52:52 [vincent]
... third option, you can do nothing wathsoever
16:52:53 [Zakim]
16:52:55 [npdoty]
I think we might be able to use the TPE response character for "we have consent"
16:53:06 [WileyS]
16:53:09 [aleecia]
This is an open issue against TPE
16:53:16 [hwest]
Apologies, I'll need to drop in a minute
16:53:26 [vincent]
dsinger: we could be silent on that, and on the TPE describe the response "we're not respecting you're header and here is why"
16:53:36 [vincent]
... that would solve the problem
16:53:37 [aleecia]
noted; Heather, let's touch base soon?
16:53:41 [aleecia]
16:53:47 [justin_]
16:53:48 [aleecia]
ack WileyS
16:53:54 [johnsimpson]
What was David's suggestion?
16:54:06 [aleecia]
David's suggestion was we not have text here in compliance
16:54:20 [Zakim]
+ +1.917.318.bbdd
16:54:21 [Joanne]
Joanne has joined #DNT
16:54:33 [Zakim]
16:54:39 [justin_]
16:54:43 [Zach]
Zach has joined #dnt
16:54:43 [vincent]
WileyS: in agreement with david positin, as long as we can inform users that we're not respecting the signal
16:54:46 [jmayer]
There's not agreement on this. Move on.
16:54:52 [vincent]
... it is important to convey that to the user
16:55:10 [Chapell]
zakim bbdd is chapell
16:55:27 [aleecia]
perhaps some day we'll even have a DNT logo
16:55:36 [npdoty]
Zakim, bbdd is Chris_IAB
16:55:36 [Zakim]
+Chris_IAB; got it
16:55:37 [aleecia]
16:55:39 [justin_]
16:55:43 [npdoty]
Zakim, bbdd is actually Chapell
16:55:43 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'bbdd is actually Chapell', npdoty
16:55:47 [WileyS]
I thought Issue 65 was closed with a "Yes" response?
16:55:52 [Zakim]
16:55:55 [npdoty]
Zakim, bbdd is really Chapell
16:55:55 [Zakim]
sorry, npdoty, I do not recognize a party named 'bbdd'
16:55:56 [vincent]
justin_: 6.6.1 third party auditing, there was not much there intially
16:56:24 [WileyS]
Oops - I meant Issue 93
16:56:24 [johnsimpson]
Seems to me if you get a technically valid DNT:1, you've got to honor it.
16:56:38 [fielding]
16:56:42 [WileyS]
Disagree John
16:56:44 [npdoty]
16:56:44 [trackbot]
ACTION-219 -- Roy Fielding to add optional audit field array -- due 2012-06-29 -- OPEN
16:56:44 [trackbot]
16:56:55 [vincent]
aleecia: about section 6.6.1 we can move that to the TPE
16:57:10 [vincent]
... or we can add a cross reference to the TPE
16:57:20 [vincent]
justin_: ok
16:57:24 [jmayer]
16:57:27 [johnsimpson]
I know Shane. That's why it's open issue.
16:57:30 [aleecia]
ack aleecia
16:57:52 [vincent]
justin_: few change should be available on friday, concern can be sent to the lsit
16:57:57 [npdoty]
ack jmayer
16:58:11 [johnsimpson]
16:58:15 [vincent]
jmayer: different approach on the proposal I worked on about the permitted uses
16:58:17 [Zakim]
16:58:19 [aleecia]
TODO: change section 6.6.1 3rd party auditing to point to TPE on an array of URIs, likely move it as well
16:58:40 [WileyS]
John - If our goal is to have companies implement DNT, forcing them to honor "ANY" DNT:1 signal regardless of compliance with the specification will not be helpful and will likely drive most companies to not implement this version of DNT
16:58:40 [Zakim]
16:58:43 [Zakim]
16:59:00 [npdoty]
Zakim, Chris_IAB.a is really Chapell
16:59:00 [Zakim]
+Chapell; got it
16:59:10 [justin_]
16:59:32 [vincent]
... unlinkable data has broader exception, we could add something to limit the use of these data (is that correct jmayer? )
16:59:43 [jmayer]
s/about permitted uses/about permitted uses, please add an option/
17:00:19 [Chris_IAB]
any news about the next face-to-face?
17:00:35 [vincent]
aleecia: come back to the login/logout state
17:01:18 [vincent]
aleecia: about the f2f couple of options, doodle poll at the end of this week or next week
17:01:48 [npdoty]
also feel free to follow up with me via email re: charter
17:01:48 [vincent]
... rechartering discussion are happening, contact thomas for furhter info
17:02:07 [dsinger]
17:02:16 [vincent]
aleecia: npdoty could you explain your suggestion
17:02:45 [vincent]
npdoty: we could remove the section about login/logout and just refer to the consent
17:02:53 [aleecia]
ack dsinger
17:02:54 [justin_]
How about just an example where someone gets consent through a login process?
17:02:55 [dsinger]
I think this is covered by the needing explicit/separate/informed consent. I think logged-in/out implying consent to track is roughly in the same state as the argument over UA defaults. Unless the service's primary purpose and explicit function is to track logged-in users (my example of, it's not OK.
17:03:02 [vincent]
dsinger: I think this is covered by the consent section
17:03:47 [Chris_IAB]
how do you define what an explicit service for privacy David?
17:04:03 [vincent]
aleecia: my concern is that people who read the doc may not know that login/logout case is covered by the consent section
17:04:26 [dsinger]
to Chris_IAB - an explicit servce for *tracking*" is the example
17:04:45 [vincent]
aleecia: agreement on that, it should be in the next draft
17:04:52 [Chris_IAB]
dsinger, I'm not sure I understand, sorry.
17:05:21 [npdoty]
TODO: aleecia suggests that we just make logged-in a section in consent with an example, and point to it elsewhere
17:05:36 [Zakim]
17:05:37 [Zakim]
17:05:38 [Zakim]
17:05:38 [Zakim]
17:05:40 [Zakim]
17:05:40 [Zakim]
17:05:41 [Zakim]
17:05:45 [Zakim]
17:05:45 [Zakim]
17:05:47 [Zakim]
17:05:49 [Zakim]
17:05:52 [Zakim]
17:05:53 [Zakim]
17:05:53 [aleecia]
And sorry again for being quiet / sick
17:05:55 [Zakim]
17:05:58 [Zakim]
17:05:59 [Zakim]
17:06:01 [Zakim]
17:06:03 [Zakim]
17:06:06 [Zakim]
17:06:09 [Zakim]
17:06:11 [Zakim]
17:06:14 [tl]
aleecia Sorry that we're making you sick.
17:06:15 [Zakim]
17:06:17 [Zakim]
17:06:19 [Zakim]
17:06:21 [Zakim]
17:06:25 [Zakim]
17:06:27 [Chris_IAB]
dsinger, my concern is that the definition of "an explicit service" can be left to gray area, and thus open for 'interesting' interpretation...
17:06:37 [Zakim]
- +1.202.524.bbcc
17:07:08 [npdoty]
Zakim, list attendees
17:07:08 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been aleecia, +1.609.981.aaaa, tl, npdoty, +1.202.587.aabb, +1.202.494.aacc, jchester, +1.703.265.aadd, jeffwilson, +1.202.684.aaee,
17:07:11 [Zakim]
... +1.202.587.aaff, jmayer, +1.813.366.aagg, +1.425.269.aahh, +1.919.388.aaii, +49.721.913.74.aajj, +1.415.520.aakk, +1.202.326.aall, Lia, +1.415.520.aamm, +1.703.265.aann,
17:07:11 [Zakim]
... Simon_CableLabs?, dsriedel, KevinT, Peder, dsinger, [Microsoft], +1.714.852.aaoo, +1.202.346.aapp, Joanne, +1.425.269.aaqq, +1.781.472.aarr, justin, +1.813.366.aass, fielding,
17:07:15 [dsinger]
Chris_IAB: yes, quite. But I don't know how to do better - I am open to conversation. It's one of those tricky edge-cases.
17:07:16 [Zakim]
... hefferjr, +1.207.619.aatt, suegl, hwest, dwainberg, alex, vincent, +1.646.666.aauu, +1.425.985.aavv, +1.646.654.aaww, +1.201.723.aaxx, +1.646.654.aayy, SusanIsrael,
17:07:16 [Zakim]
... samsilberman, chapell, +1.408.349.aazz, adrianba, WileyS, eberkower, Chris_IAB?, BrendanIAB?, +1.919.388.bbaa, AnnaLong, [Apple], +1.202.370.bbbb, robsherman, erikn,
17:07:16 [Zakim]
... +1.202.524.bbcc, cblouch, +1.917.318.bbdd, Chris_IAB
17:07:31 [Zakim]
17:07:38 [cblouch]
cblouch has left #dnt
17:08:03 [johnsimpson]
johnsimpson has left #dnt
17:08:04 [aleecia]
Chris, we also need to work that out for UAs
17:08:50 [aleecia]
We have people reading the text and coming to different views on anti-virus software
17:09:17 [aleecia]
Whatever you think the answer *should* be there, I think we can all agree we ought at least be clear enough that people walk away thinking the same thing
17:09:48 [aleecia]
Same idea for explicit service
17:10:18 [Chris_IAB]
dsinger, fair enough. Let's work on it together... I think it's unavoidable to make clear and hard-line definitions when it comes to compliancy.
17:11:19 [Zakim]
17:12:24 [adrianba]
adrianba has left #dnt
17:15:12 [Zakim]
17:23:56 [aleecia]
rrsagent, make logs public
17:24:22 [aleecia]
RRSAgent, make minutes
17:24:22 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate aleecia
17:32:03 [npdoty]
zakim, bye
17:32:03 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees were aleecia, +1.609.981.aaaa, tl, npdoty, +1.202.587.aabb, +1.202.494.aacc, jchester, +1.703.265.aadd, jeffwilson, +1.202.684.aaee,
17:32:03 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #dnt
18:03:32 [KevinT]
KevinT has left #dnt
18:17:22 [tl]
tl has joined #dnt
18:18:07 [tl]
tl has joined #dnt
18:23:21 [robsherman1]
robsherman1 has joined #dnt
18:49:39 [aaa]
aaa has joined #dnt
18:50:40 [aaa]
aaa has left #dnt
19:10:41 [robsherman]
robsherman has joined #dnt
20:30:25 [robsherman]
robsherman has joined #dnt
21:03:36 [robsherman]
robsherman has joined #dnt
22:14:34 [tl]
tl has joined #dnt
22:20:21 [robsherman]
robsherman has left #dnt