16:42:01 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dnt
16:42:01 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/11/28-dnt-irc
16:42:04 <npdoty> rrsagent, make logs public
16:42:15 <npdoty> Meeting: Tracking Protection Working Group teleconference
16:42:19 <npdoty> Chair: schunter
16:42:30 <npdoty> Zakim, agenda?
16:42:30 <Zakim> I see nothing on the agenda
16:45:20 <adrianba> adrianba has joined #dnt
16:53:45 <yianni_> yianni_ has joined #DNT
16:55:00 <dsinger> dsinger has joined #dnt
16:55:24 <tlr> tlr has joined #dnt
16:55:24 <aleecia> zakim, who is on the call?
16:55:25 <Zakim> sorry, aleecia, I don't know what conference this is
16:55:26 <Zakim> On IRC I see tlr, dsinger, yianni_, adrianba, RRSAgent, aleecia, Zakim, robsherman, npdoty, schunter1, efelten, hober, Walter, mamund, mischat, trackbot, wseltzer
16:55:31 <npdoty> Zakim, this is 87225
16:55:31 <Zakim> ok, npdoty; that matches T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM
16:55:33 <aleecia> zakim, this will be dnt
16:55:33 <Zakim> ok, aleecia, I see T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM already started
16:55:39 <npdoty> agenda+ scribe
16:55:44 <npdoty> agenda+ action items
16:55:48 <npdoty> agenda+ check callers
16:55:57 <BrendanIAB> BrendanIAB has joined #dnt
16:55:59 <tlr> zakim, call thomas-mobile-us
16:55:59 <Zakim> ok, tlr; the call is being made
16:55:59 <npdoty> agenda+ pending review items
16:55:59 <aleecia> zakim, who is on the call?
16:56:00 <Zakim> On the phone I see +1.408.674.aaaa
16:56:00 <Zakim> +Thomas
16:56:07 <npdoty> agenda+ open issues
16:56:27 <tlr> zakim, Thomas has npdoty, wseltzer, tlr
16:56:27 <Zakim> +npdoty, wseltzer, tlr; got it
16:56:32 <Zakim> +??P29
16:56:38 <tedleung> tedleung has joined #dnt
16:56:40 <aleecia> zakim, aaaa is aleecia
16:56:40 <Zakim> +aleecia; got it
16:56:46 <npdoty> agenda+ next steps
16:56:48 <jchester2> jchester2 has joined #dnt
16:56:49 <BrendanIAB> Zakim, ??P29 is probably me.
16:56:49 <Zakim> +BrendanIAB?; got it
16:57:02 <tlr> zakim, mute thomas
16:57:02 <Zakim> Thomas should now be muted
16:57:11 <npdoty> agenda: http://www.w3.org/mid/50B513D8.1010302@schunter.org
16:57:22 <jeffwilson> jeffwilson has joined #dnt
16:57:22 <moneill2> moneill2 has joined #dnt
16:57:28 <Zakim> + +1.703.438.aabb
16:57:31 <jmayer> jmayer has joined #dnt
16:57:34 <Zakim> +jchester2
16:57:40 <jchester2> Zakim, mute me
16:57:40 <Zakim> jchester2 should now be muted
16:57:43 <tlr> ack thomas
16:57:53 <Josnne> Josnne has joined #DNT
16:57:55 <tlr> zakim, aabb is RichardWeaver
16:57:56 <Zakim> +RichardWeaver; got it
16:58:05 <Zakim> +TedLeung
16:58:08 <tlr> zakim, mute me
16:58:08 <Zakim> sorry, tlr, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
16:58:10 <npdoty> Zakim, mute Thomas
16:58:11 <tlr> zakim, mute thomas
16:58:11 <Zakim> Thomas should now be muted
16:58:11 <jchester2> Shall we sing Old Lang Digital Syne?
16:58:12 <Zakim> Thomas was already muted, tlr
16:58:19 <Zakim> +Jonathan_Mayer
16:58:21 <Zakim> + +1.703.265.aacc
16:58:38 <jeffwilson> zakim, aacc is jeffwilson
16:58:40 <David_M> David_M has joined #dnt
16:58:41 <Zakim> +jeffwilson; got it
16:58:47 <Zakim> + +1.415.520.aadd
16:58:57 <tlr> zakim, unmute thomas
16:58:57 <Zakim> Thomas should no longer be muted
16:59:00 <Josnne> Zakim, aadd is me
16:59:00 <Zakim> +Josnne; got it
16:59:02 <Zakim> +dsinger
16:59:08 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
16:59:17 <ninjamarnau> ninjamarnau has joined #dnt
16:59:18 <tlr> zakim, mute thomas
16:59:18 <Zakim> Thomas should now be muted
16:59:25 <moneill2> zakim, [IPcaller is me]
16:59:25 <Zakim> +me]; got it
16:59:33 <tlr> zakim, me] is really moneill2
16:59:33 <Zakim> +moneill2; got it
16:59:41 <Joanne> Joanne has joined #DNT
17:00:01 <Zakim> +David_McMillan
17:00:06 <Zakim> + +49.431.98.aaee
17:00:12 <dsinger> zakim, mute dsinger
17:00:13 <Zakim> dsinger should now be muted
17:00:16 <ninjamarnau> zakim, aaee is ninjamarnau
17:00:16 <Zakim> +ninjamarnau; got it
17:00:19 <Zakim> + +1.714.852.aaff
17:00:28 <Lia> Lia has joined #dnt
17:00:47 <Zakim> + +1.202.331.aagg
17:01:03 <Zakim> +??P66
17:01:06 <peter-4As> peter-4As has joined #dnt
17:01:09 <Zakim> + +1.202.587.aahh
17:01:10 <schunter1> Zakim, ??P66 is schunter
17:01:10 <Zakim> +schunter; got it
17:01:11 <Zakim> + +1.202.296.aaii
17:01:31 <tlr> zakim, who is one the phone?
17:01:32 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, tlr.
17:01:36 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
17:01:36 <Zakim> +Chris_Pedigo
17:01:37 <tlr> zakim, who is on the phone?
17:01:38 <Zakim> On the phone I see aleecia, Thomas (muted), BrendanIAB?, RichardWeaver, jchester2 (muted), TedLeung, Jonathan_Mayer, jeffwilson, Josnne, dsinger (muted), moneill2, David_McMillan,
17:01:38 <Zakim> ... ninjamarnau, +1.714.852.aaff, +1.202.331.aagg, schunter, +1.202.587.aahh, +1.202.296.aaii, [Microsoft], Chris_Pedigo
17:01:38 <Zakim> Thomas has npdoty, wseltzer, tlr
17:01:42 <adrianba> zakim, [Microsoft] is me
17:01:42 <Zakim> +peter
17:01:42 <Zakim> +adrianba; got it
17:01:44 <npdoty> ack Thomas
17:01:44 <Lia> Zakim, aahh is Lia
17:01:46 <Zakim> +Lia; got it
17:01:56 <vinay> vinay has joined #dnt
17:01:56 <ChrisPedigoOPA> ChrisPedigoOPA has joined #dnt
17:01:57 <Zakim> + +1.917.934.aajj
17:02:04 <Zakim> -ninjamarnau
17:02:08 <tlr> zakim, aagg is peter-4As
17:02:09 <Zakim> +peter-4As; got it
17:02:09 <vincent> vincent has joined #dnt
17:02:12 <vinay> zakim, aajj is vinay
17:02:12 <Zakim> +vinay; got it
17:02:16 <Zakim> -peter-4As
17:02:17 <Zakim> +[Mozilla]
17:02:17 <moneill2> zakim, mute me
17:02:17 <Zakim> moneill2 should now be muted
17:02:25 <npdoty> Zakim, mute Thomas
17:02:25 <Zakim> Thomas should now be muted
17:02:28 <dwainberg> dwainberg has joined #dnt
17:02:30 <peterswire> peterswire has joined #dnt
17:02:30 <npdoty> Zakim, aaff is fielding
17:02:31 <Zakim> +fielding; got it
17:02:55 <Zakim> + +1.206.658.aakk
17:03:08 <hefferjr> hefferjr has joined #dnt
17:03:09 <npdoty> Zakim, unmute Thomas
17:03:09 <Zakim> Thomas should no longer be muted
17:03:17 <Zakim> +ninjamarnau
17:03:24 <npdoty> Zakim, mute Thomas
17:03:24 <Zakim> Thomas should now be muted
17:03:27 <npdoty> Zakim, aakk is amyc
17:03:27 <Zakim> +amyc; got it
17:03:49 <Zakim> + +1.813.366.aall
17:03:51 <fielding> fielding has joined #dnt
17:04:01 <hefferjr> zakim, aall is hefferjr
17:04:01 <Zakim> +hefferjr; got it
17:04:11 <WileyS> WileyS has joined #dnt
17:04:12 <Zakim> +peter-4As
17:04:29 <npdoty> schunter: hi everybody
17:04:31 <npdoty> agenda?
17:04:39 <npdoty> volunteers to scribe?
17:04:56 <Zakim> + +1.202.370.aamm
17:05:01 <Chris_IAB> Chris_IAB has joined #dnt
17:05:05 <aleecia> zakim, who is making noise?
17:05:05 <npdoty> I can do the second half, if someone can help with the first
17:05:16 <Zakim> aleecia, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: aleecia (45%), schunter (16%)
17:05:22 <Zakim> + +aann
17:05:23 <npdoty> ... where I think I will have to follow up on several of the issues
17:05:28 <robsherman> robsherman has joined #dnt
17:05:28 <Zakim> + +1.646.666.aaoo
17:05:41 <npdoty> Zakim, choose a victim
17:05:41 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose wseltzer
17:05:43 <aleecia> i am so muted. what
17:05:48 <aleecia> zakim, mute me
17:05:48 <Zakim> aleecia should now be muted
17:05:53 <Zakim> + +1.408.349.aapp
17:05:54 <npdoty> scribenick: wseltzer
17:06:03 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
17:06:12 <pedermagee> pedermagee has joined #dnt
17:06:18 <Chris_IAB> just joined via Skype
17:06:35 <tlr> zakim, [IPcaller] is probably Chris_IAB
17:06:35 <Zakim> +Chris_IAB?; got it
17:06:36 <npdoty> Zakim, [IPcaller] is  Chris_IAB
17:06:36 <Zakim> sorry, npdoty, I do not recognize a party named '[IPcaller]'
17:06:47 <tlr> zakim, IPcaller is probably Chris_IAB
17:06:47 <Zakim> sorry, tlr, I do not understand your question
17:06:48 <wseltzer> schunter1: added an item at the end on core next steps for compliance doc
17:06:50 <Zakim> + +1.646.654.aaqq
17:06:53 <wseltzer> ... start with that item.
17:07:01 <WileyS> Zakim, aapp is WileyS
17:07:01 <Zakim> +WileyS; got it
17:07:05 <tlr> ack thomas
17:07:12 <npdoty> Dwainberg, I thought your comments weren't differences for the agenda, but just comments on the issue items
17:07:19 <Zakim> + +1.215.286.aarr
17:07:20 <aleecia> zakim, unmute me
17:07:20 <Zakim> aleecia should no longer be muted
17:07:24 <susanisrael> susanisrael has joined #dnt
17:07:26 <npdoty> Zakim, take up agendum 6
17:07:26 <Zakim> agendum 6. "next steps" taken up [from npdoty]
17:07:28 <wseltzer> tlr: ack aleecia
17:07:50 <wseltzer> aleecia: I am stepping down as co-chair. Thanks all for the opportunity to serve for the past year and a half.
17:08:06 <Zakim> +jchester2.a
17:08:14 <jchester2> zakim, mute me
17:08:14 <Zakim> 'jchester' is ambiguous, jchester2
17:08:15 <wseltzer> ... it's been a great ride. Extremely excited to welcome Peter Swire.
17:08:17 <dwainberg> Nick, it was both.
17:08:33 <jchester2> zakim, mute me
17:08:33 <Zakim> 'jchester' is ambiguous, jchester2
17:08:38 <wseltzer> ... Thanks everybody for all your hard work. I'll continue to be an active participant in the group.
17:08:43 <eberkower> eberkower has joined #dnt
17:08:49 <wseltzer> tlr: Thank you very much aleecia for your work and dedication.
17:08:53 <aleecia> zakim, mute me
17:08:53 <Zakim> aleecia should now be muted
17:09:02 <susanisrael> 215286-xxxx is Susanisrael
17:09:03 <wseltzer> ... Peter, would you introduce yourself?
17:09:21 <jchester2> Bravo Aleecia!  Welcome Peter
17:09:24 <jeffwilson> thanks aleecia!
17:09:27 <wseltzer> Peter_Swire: Hello, and thanks to those who have been introducing yourselves.
17:09:37 <npdoty> Zakim, aarr is susanisrael
17:09:37 <Zakim> +susanisrael; got it
17:09:39 <dwainberg> Thank you, Aleecia!
17:09:52 <npdoty> +1, thanks so much Aleecia
17:09:53 <Keith> Keith has joined #dnt
17:09:54 <susanisrael> Thank you very  much Aleecia!
17:09:54 <wseltzer> ... I ask for your patience and understanding as I work through the institutional history.
17:09:55 <tedleung> Thank you Aleecia!
17:10:02 <wseltzer> ... There's lots I don't yet know.
17:10:12 <David_M> Zakim  David_McMillan is David_MacMillan
17:10:16 <robsherman> +1 — Aleecia, thanks so much for your hard work on this important effort.
17:10:20 <wseltzer> ... I'm going to try to learn it all, to act in good faith, and I ask for your goodwill.
17:10:30 <wseltzer> ... as I learn W3C process, technology.
17:10:33 <Zakim> + +385345aass
17:10:50 <npdoty> Zakim, David_McMillan is really David_MacMillan
17:10:50 <Zakim> +David_MacMillan; got it
17:11:00 <wseltzer> ... Aleecia and Matthias have been concert pianists, I'm still going through the finger exercises.
17:11:25 <wseltzer> ... Background: I know quite a few of your and your organizations, even though I haven't been through the DNT meetings.
17:11:52 <Zakim> -fielding
17:11:53 <wseltzer> ... On the substance, I've worked on privacy as a law professor and elsewhere since the mid-90s.
17:12:05 <Chris_IAB> Thanks for all your work on this Aleecia-- not always easy, but always appreciated.  Welcome aboard Peter!
17:12:10 <wseltzer> ... 2 books out this fall, global Foundations introductory course, US privacy law and practice.
17:12:11 <cOlsen> cOlsen has joined #dnt
17:12:24 <wseltzer> ... This is not a US process, it's a global process.
17:12:34 <npdoty> Zakim, who is making noise?
17:12:34 <wseltzer> ... My experience with the EU privacy regime may be helpful.
17:12:45 <Zakim> npdoty, listening for 10 seconds I could not identify any sounds
17:12:49 <Zakim> +[FTC]
17:12:52 <wseltzer> ... 90's, part of the team that negotiated EU-US safe-harbor.
17:13:06 <wseltzer> ... Sensitivity to different regimes is important here.
17:13:28 <wseltzer> ... Background on substance, with institutions.
17:13:46 <wseltzer> ... Worked with FTC, at the White House under Pres. Clinton.
17:13:48 <kj> kj has joined #dnt
17:14:10 <wseltzer> ... where part of my role was as NAI was being formed.
17:14:23 <wseltzer> ... Good relations with US Congress, both Democrats and Republicans.
17:14:36 <wseltzer> ... Working with Art 29 WP in Europe.
17:14:52 <wseltzer> ... In addition to W3C, there are many other institutions playing in the privacy space.
17:14:58 <Chapell> Chapell has joined #DNT
17:15:00 <wseltzer> ... Consumer groups and privacy advocates.
17:15:22 <wseltzer> ... Worked with CDT, EFF, Jeff Chester, Stanford, others.
17:15:35 <Zakim> + +1.949.573.aatt
17:15:45 <wseltzer> ... Also spent time working professionally with business community. MS, Intel, IBM, Google, more
17:16:01 <wseltzer> ... Fellow with Future of Privacy Forum, industry-funded privacy expert group.
17:16:06 <Zakim> + +1.609.258.aauu
17:16:11 <fielding> zakim, aatt is fielding
17:16:11 <Zakim> +fielding; got it
17:16:13 <efelten> Zakim, aauu is me
17:16:14 <Zakim> +efelten; got it
17:16:14 <wseltzer> ... worked to be practical working with business.
17:16:19 <Zakim> + +44.772.301.aavv
17:16:36 <wseltzer> ... with MoFo with real clients and real problems.
17:17:00 <wseltzer> ... Tech is at the center of W3C work, along with policy, politics, law.
17:17:23 <wseltzer> ... Worked for many years on encryption, 1999 chaired WH group on crypto.
17:17:35 <wseltzer> ... Spoken at FC.
17:17:55 <wseltzer> ... Main research recently has been on de-identification.
17:18:15 <wseltzer> ... that has given immersion in actual workings of how companies do de-ID.
17:18:44 <wseltzer> ... Finally, facilitating complicated negotiations. WH coorddinator for HIPAA.
17:18:57 <fielding_> fielding_ has joined #dnt
17:19:02 <Chris_IAB> only 52,000 comments? ;)
17:19:03 <johnsimpson> johnsimpson has joined #dnt
17:19:13 <wseltzer> ... That rule is still in place today.
17:19:38 <wseltzer> ... In WH 2009-10 under Larry Summers NEC, chairing complicated processes.
17:19:52 <johnsimpson> Apologies, bad LA traffic
17:20:04 <wseltzer> ... I hope and believe I can be a good listener to many perspectives and backgrounds.
17:20:04 <WileyS> Stellar resume Peter!
17:20:27 <wseltzer> ... Hopeful we can make progress in W3C standards process and larger privacy issues.
17:20:35 <Zakim> + +1.310.392.aaww
17:20:36 <Chris_IAB> +1 to WileyS comment - very impressive indeed
17:21:08 <wseltzer> ... Scheduling: tomorrow, I finish fall semester at Ohio State. Calendar clear now-end of May.
17:21:20 <wseltzer> ... Cleared my schedule to try to be helpful here.
17:21:23 <aleecia> Here's to a reboot with new energy.
17:21:30 <wseltzer> tlr: thank you Peter, welcome on board.
17:21:36 <johnsimpson> zakim, 310.292.aaww is johnsimpson
17:21:36 <Zakim> sorry, johnsimpson, I do not recognize a party named '310.292.aaww'
17:21:42 <npdoty> Zakim, aaww is johnsimpson
17:21:42 <Zakim> +johnsimpson; got it
17:21:47 <wseltzer> ... questions or discussion?
17:21:51 <aleecia> q?
17:21:53 <schunter1> or feedback.
17:21:55 <WileyS> zakim, aaww is johnsimpson
17:21:55 <Zakim> sorry, WileyS, I do not recognize a party named 'aaww'
17:22:16 <jchester2> Peter:  Since we are in many ways at an impasse, how do you think we can move ahead?
17:22:44 <Chris_IAB> hear you loud and clear Peter, even on speaker
17:22:55 <npdoty> agenda?
17:23:07 <wseltzer> schunter1: Let's dive into the technology
17:23:11 <johnsimpson> zakim, who is on call?
17:23:11 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, johnsimpson.
17:23:20 <schunter1> q?
17:23:28 <Zakim> + +1.206.910.aaxx
17:23:32 <schunter1> q?
17:23:39 <johnsimpson> zakim, who is on telephone?
17:23:39 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, johnsimpson.
17:23:43 <schunter1> q?
17:23:46 <aleecia> zakim, who is on the call?
17:23:46 <Zakim> On the phone I see aleecia (muted), Thomas, BrendanIAB?, RichardWeaver, jchester2 (muted), TedLeung, Jonathan_Mayer, jeffwilson, Josnne, dsinger (muted), moneill2 (muted),
17:23:49 <Zakim> ... David_MacMillan, schunter, Lia, +1.202.296.aaii, adrianba, Chris_Pedigo, peter, vinay, [Mozilla], amyc, ninjamarnau, hefferjr, peter-4As, +1.202.370.aamm, +aann,
17:23:49 <Zakim> ... +1.646.666.aaoo, WileyS, Chris_IAB?, +1.646.654.aaqq, susanisrael, jchester2.a, +385345aass, [FTC], fielding, efelten, +44.772.301.aavv, johnsimpson, +1.206.910.aaxx
17:23:49 <Zakim> Thomas has npdoty, wseltzer, tlr
17:24:14 <Joanne> Zakim, Josnne is Joanne
17:24:14 <Zakim> +Joanne; got it
17:24:15 <wseltzer> schunter1: Happy to have Peter on the call. Really appreciated Aleecia's energy and advice.
17:24:17 <eberkower> aaqq = eberkower
17:24:23 <npdoty> Zakim, aaqq is eberkower
17:24:23 <Zakim> +eberkower; got it
17:24:37 <dwainberg> nick, note that I'm also on Mozilla's phone
17:24:40 <wseltzer> ... acknowledge that our initial schedule was a bit optimistic, but thanks to Aleecia we made lots of progress.
17:24:50 <npdoty> Zakim, [Mozilla] has Dwainberg
17:24:50 <Zakim> +Dwainberg; got it
17:25:09 <wseltzer> ... one advantage for a newcomer is that he can ask all the stupid questions.
17:25:14 <Chapell> zakim, aaoo is Chapell
17:25:14 <Zakim> +Chapell; got it
17:25:20 <wseltzer> ... That's it for intros.
17:25:30 <npdoty> Zakim, take up agendum 2
17:25:30 <Zakim> agendum 2. "action items" taken up [from npdoty]
17:25:33 <wseltzer> schunter1: First, action items.
17:25:35 <npdoty> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/overdue
17:25:50 <aleecia> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/overdue?sort=owner
17:25:52 <afowler> afowler has joined #dnt
17:26:10 <robsherman> zakim, aamm is me
17:26:10 <Zakim> +robsherman; got it
17:26:29 <tlr> action-334?
17:26:29 <trackbot> ACTION-334 -- Nick Doty to re-update on handling of sub-domains, clarify concrete options (issue-112, perhaps with Shane) -- due 2012-11-14 -- OPEN
17:26:29 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/334
17:26:54 <wseltzer> npdoty: sent the review half an hour ago, summarizing issues.
17:26:56 <tlr> issue-112?
17:26:56 <trackbot> ISSUE-112 -- How are sub-domains handled for site-specific exceptions? -- pending review
17:26:56 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/112
17:27:10 <wseltzer> ... if we can decide which option, that'll save writing up both.
17:27:11 <tlr> zakim, mute me
17:27:11 <Zakim> sorry, tlr, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
17:27:14 <tlr> zakim, mute thomas
17:27:14 <Zakim> Thomas should now be muted
17:27:24 <tlr> action-131?
17:27:24 <trackbot> ACTION-131 -- Roy Fielding to sketch use case for user agent requests on tracking status resource -- due 2012-11-21 -- OPEN
17:27:24 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/131
17:27:52 <wseltzer> fielding: @@
17:28:09 <wseltzer> schunter1: we'll mark it as closed. Any objection?
17:28:14 <npdoty> fielding, you're suggesting that we close/drop action-131? (had trouble hearing)
17:28:15 <Zakim> -BrendanIAB?
17:28:27 <wseltzer> schunter1: closing action-131
17:28:36 <wseltzer> action-258?
17:28:36 <trackbot> ACTION-258 -- Thomas Lowenthal to propose 'should' for same-party and why -- due 2012-10-22 -- OPEN
17:28:36 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/258
17:28:45 <fielding> yes, so someone else can pick it up.  if not, I'll do it later.
17:28:51 <Zakim> +??P9
17:28:54 <npdoty> is tl or someone from Mozilla able to report on this?
17:28:55 <wseltzer> action-323?
17:28:55 <trackbot> ACTION-323 -- Thomas Lowenthal to share results of what-the-response-is-for discussion -- due 2012-10-22 -- OPEN
17:28:55 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/323
17:28:59 <BrendanIAB> Zakim, ??P9 is probably me.
17:29:00 <Zakim> +BrendanIAB?; got it
17:29:00 <Zakim> - +44.772.301.aavv
17:29:04 <wseltzer> schunter1: I'll send reminders to tl
17:29:20 <npdoty> action-131: fielding is happy to let someone else take this up if they have time, or will otherwise get to it later
17:29:20 <trackbot> ACTION-131 Sketch use case for user agent requests on tracking status resource notes added
17:29:30 <wseltzer> ... re 258, 323
17:29:34 <wseltzer> action-317?
17:29:34 <trackbot> ACTION-317 -- David Singer to draft non-normative examples on same-party (issue-164) -- due 2012-11-14 -- OPEN
17:29:34 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/317
17:29:35 <schunter1> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/317
17:29:43 <Zakim> + +44.772.301.aayy
17:29:52 <npdoty> ack dsinger
17:29:57 <aleecia> david's on the bus
17:30:14 <schunter1> I can hear you
17:30:17 <wseltzer> action-333?
17:30:17 <trackbot> ACTION-333 -- David Singer to work with Ian's text, Adrian's text, and Nick's cleanup to produce a new exception API proposed specification -- due 2012-11-14 -- OPEN
17:30:17 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/333
17:30:32 <fielding> nothing
17:30:37 <wseltzer> dsinger: @@
17:30:43 <npdoty> ack Thomas
17:31:18 <npdoty> s/@@/sent text on exceptions out to the mailing list already/
17:31:22 <npdoty> Zakim, mute Thomas
17:31:22 <Zakim> Thomas should now be muted
17:31:25 <wseltzer> dsinger; I wrote something, not sure if it went to mailing list or just to Roy
17:31:38 <wseltzer> ... Will send it again and make sure it's linked.
17:31:45 <npdoty> Zakim, who is making noise?
17:31:55 <dsinger> dsinger has joined #dnt
17:31:56 <Zakim> npdoty, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: johnsimpson (9%), dsinger (98%)
17:32:04 <wseltzer> dsinger: Re 333, sent text a few weeks ago. Adrian wants a few more days to review.
17:32:26 <wseltzer> ... by the end of this week I'll send something to the mailing list.
17:32:44 <npdoty> dsinger: will send something to the mailing list by the end of the week, even if we haven't heard feedback from ian/adrian yet
17:32:51 <wseltzer> action-332?
17:32:51 <trackbot> ACTION-332 -- David Wainberg to review TPE spec to ensure iframes are fine for exception API; if not, propose text changes -- due 2012-11-21 -- OPEN
17:32:51 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/332
17:32:56 <Zakim> -jchester2.a
17:33:04 <Zakim> + +1.408.423.aazz
17:33:06 <aleecia> ouch
17:33:09 <npdoty> Zakim, who is making noise?
17:33:10 <Zakim> -dsinger
17:33:15 <wseltzer> dwainberg: @@
17:33:18 <Chris_IAB> very hard to hear you David
17:33:20 <Zakim> npdoty, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: schunter (33%)
17:33:23 <wseltzer> ... add a week or two
17:33:25 <dsinger> zakim, aazz is dsinger
17:33:25 <Zakim> +dsinger; got it
17:33:28 <wseltzer> schunter1: I'll add a week
17:33:46 <npdoty> Zakim, close agendum 2
17:33:46 <Zakim> agendum 2, action items, closed
17:33:46 <wseltzer> schunter1: done for TPE
17:33:48 <Zakim> I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
17:33:48 <Zakim> 1. scribe [from npdoty]
17:33:49 <fielding> we are done? YAY
17:33:53 <dwainberg> yes, I didn't realize I had that action item -- need another week to review.
17:34:08 <npdoty> Zakim, who is on the phone?
17:34:09 <Zakim> On the phone I see aleecia (muted), Thomas (muted), RichardWeaver, jchester2 (muted), TedLeung, Jonathan_Mayer, jeffwilson, Joanne, moneill2 (muted), David_MacMillan, schunter,
17:34:09 <Zakim> ... Lia, +1.202.296.aaii, adrianba, Chris_Pedigo, peter, vinay, [Mozilla], amyc, ninjamarnau, hefferjr, peter-4As, robsherman, +aann, Chapell, WileyS, Chris_IAB?, eberkower,
17:34:09 <Zakim> ... susanisrael, +385345aass, [FTC], fielding, efelten, johnsimpson, +1.206.910.aaxx, BrendanIAB?, +44.772.301.aayy, dsinger
17:34:14 <Zakim> Thomas has npdoty, wseltzer, tlr
17:34:14 <Zakim> [Mozilla] has Dwainberg
17:34:15 <npdoty> Zakim, ack Thomas
17:34:16 <Zakim> unmuting Thomas
17:34:16 <Zakim> I see no one on the speaker queue
17:34:52 <tlr> zakim, aaii is Keith
17:34:52 <Zakim> +Keith; got it
17:34:59 <wseltzer> zakim, aaxx is JC
17:34:59 <Zakim> +JC; got it
17:35:12 <npdoty> Zakim, [FTC] has peder, chris
17:35:13 <Zakim> +peder, chris; got it
17:35:54 <tlr> zakim, aayy is PhilPearce
17:35:54 <Zakim> +PhilPearce; got it
17:36:27 <tlr> zakim, drop aass
17:36:27 <Zakim> +385345aass is being disconnected
17:36:28 <Zakim> - +385345aass
17:36:39 <wseltzer> zakim, who is on the phone?
17:36:39 <Zakim> On the phone I see aleecia (muted), Thomas, RichardWeaver, jchester2 (muted), TedLeung, Jonathan_Mayer, jeffwilson, Joanne, moneill2 (muted), David_MacMillan, schunter (muted),
17:36:42 <npdoty> Zakim, mute Thomas
17:36:43 <Zakim> ... Lia, Keith, adrianba, Chris_Pedigo, peter, vinay, [Mozilla], amyc, ninjamarnau, hefferjr, peter-4As, robsherman, +aann, Chapell, WileyS, Chris_IAB?, eberkower, susanisrael,
17:36:43 <Zakim> ... [FTC], fielding, efelten, johnsimpson, JC, BrendanIAB?, PhilPearce, dsinger
17:36:43 <Zakim> Thomas has npdoty, wseltzer, tlr
17:36:43 <Zakim> [FTC] has peder, chris
17:36:43 <Zakim> [Mozilla] has Dwainberg
17:36:43 <Zakim> Thomas should now be muted
17:37:25 <npdoty> Zakim, close agendum 3
17:37:25 <Zakim> agendum 3, check callers, closed
17:37:26 <wseltzer> schunter1: Went through issues and categorized them; issues where we have some text
17:37:27 <Zakim> I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
17:37:27 <Zakim> 1. scribe [from npdoty]
17:37:29 <npdoty> Zakim, take up agendum 4
17:37:29 <Zakim> agendum 4. "pending review items" taken up [from npdoty]
17:37:38 <wseltzer> ... do we accept the text, ask for alternatives, agree to drop
17:37:49 <wseltzer> ... Second is open issues where we need to assign actions to produce text.
17:37:54 <wseltzer> ISSUE-21?
17:37:54 <trackbot> ISSUE-21 -- Enable external audit of DNT compliance -- pending review
17:37:54 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/21
17:38:06 <dwainberg> q+
17:38:33 <npdoty> q+
17:38:35 <tl> tl has joined #dnt
17:38:37 <schunter1> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Feb/0000.html
17:38:49 <wseltzer> ... ^ text on the table
17:38:52 <schunter1> ack dwainberg
17:38:53 <aleecia> poorly
17:38:56 <Joanne> q+
17:39:04 <tlr> ack Joanne
17:39:05 <wseltzer> dwainberg: Is Kevin on the call?
17:39:10 <Joanne> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Mar/0419.html
17:39:20 <wseltzer> Joanne: No. We provided some updated text. ^ link.
17:39:23 <aleecia> I'm surprised we're talking about this on TPE?
17:39:32 <aleecia> Oh - because it's down to an array.
17:39:58 <wseltzer> ... General understanding is the group didn't have an objection as this would be optional flag.
17:40:21 <wseltzer> dwainberg: can we take a minute to walk through this new text?
17:40:33 <wseltzer> Joanne: TK response header as optional tracking status resource
17:40:43 <wseltzer> ... where party responding to DNT signal can put in additional info
17:40:59 <wseltzer> ... such as link to privacy policy, indication that they've undergone 3d party audit.
17:41:05 <wseltzer> ... along with other optional resources
17:41:21 <Chris_IAB> I don't believe we are in favor of this option
17:41:23 <wseltzer> ... way for companies to show accountability, communicate that they've agreed to comply with 3d-pty standards
17:41:24 <Zakim> -PhilPearce
17:41:25 <npdoty> I believe the mechanism is the `audits` optional field in the tracking status resource
17:41:26 <dwainberg> q?
17:41:39 <Chris_IAB> it's out of scope for DNT
17:41:41 <wseltzer> ... text we proposed back in March was condensed, a lot less prescriptive.
17:41:50 <fielding> q+
17:42:01 <npdoty> q-
17:42:02 <wseltzer> ... [reading]
17:42:03 <wseltzer> A party MAY seek additional compliance verification with DNT through an audit authority communicating that a privacy policy is present (yes/no), and it has been certified; at minimum its in compliance with the DNT standard or in alignment with certain best practices.
17:42:18 <Zakim> +PhilPearce
17:42:21 <wseltzer> dwainberg: is this normative?
17:42:24 <Chris_IAB> q+
17:42:29 <Joanne> A party MAY seek additional compliance verification with DNT through an audit authority communicating that a privacy policy is present (yes/no), and it has been certified; at minimum its in compliance with the DNT standard or in alignment with certain best practices.   The User Agent MAY enable for a representation of this additional status in the form of an additional mechanism such as one of the following:  1.              Tracker Selection List [TSL][CUT]
17:42:32 <wseltzer> Joanne: I'll paste proposed normative text into irc.
17:42:42 <npdoty> although I actually think this could be non-normative text, as they're examples/suggestions
17:42:46 <Chapell> q+
17:42:46 <schunter1> q?
17:42:48 <wseltzer> dwainberg: [hard to hear]
17:43:00 <wseltzer> ... propose moving this to compliance spec
17:43:08 <wseltzer> schunter1: two angles to the audit
17:43:11 <aleecia> This actually does fit in TPE, it took me a minute to remember why too
17:43:22 <wseltzer> ... compliance angle, extra data fields in the response protocol
17:43:35 <wseltzer> ... in TPE, we shoudl focus on what are the data field exchange flags needed.
17:43:36 <aleecia> It did start in Compliance, but now that it's simplified it's really more of a TPE fit
17:43:44 <schunter1> q?
17:43:48 <npdoty> ack fielding
17:43:49 <schunter1> ack fielding
17:43:56 <schunter1> Zakim, mute me
17:43:56 <Zakim> schunter should now be muted
17:44:09 <jmayer> matthias, could we tackle ISSUE-137 next?
17:44:20 <schunter1> q?
17:44:24 <wseltzer> fielding: we have an audit field in the response
17:44:26 <npdoty> "An optional member named audit may be provided with an array value containing a list of URI references to external audits of the designated resource's privacy policy and tracking behavior in compliance with this protocol.", from the TPE
17:44:27 <wseltzer> ... we can move on.
17:44:33 <jmayer> I have to run to Corporations in 10 minutes and would like to be able to comment.
17:44:34 <npdoty> ack schunter1
17:44:35 <schunter1> Zakim, unmute me
17:44:36 <Zakim> schunter should no longer be muted
17:45:02 <jmayer> I don't follow why this would be a Compliance issue.  It's a way to transmit something—pure protocol.
17:45:06 <dsinger> Roy's text is this (quoting the spec): "An optional member named audit may be provided with an array value containing a list of URI references to external audits of the designated resource's privacy policy and tracking behavior in compliance with this protocol. Preferably, the audit references are to resources that describe the auditor and the results of that audit; however, if such a resource is not available, a reference to the auditor is sufficient."
17:45:07 <wseltzer> schunter1: Action on Kevin to see whether he needs additional fields
17:45:09 <npdoty> q+ jmayer
17:45:13 <fielding> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html#dfn-audit
17:45:14 <schunter1> ack Chris_IAB
17:45:14 <npdoty> ack Chris_IAB
17:45:30 <wseltzer> Chris_IAB: DAA and IAB would not support
17:45:33 <npdoty> Zakim, who is making noise?
17:45:33 <Joanne> Matthias, I can take any action items assigned to Kevin
17:45:43 <schunter1> ok.
17:45:45 <Zakim> npdoty, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: johnsimpson (17%)
17:45:48 <wseltzer> ... an issue of scope. Programs are important, but not part of DNT.
17:45:48 <schunter1> q?
17:45:53 <npdoty> Zakim, mute johnsimpson
17:45:53 <Zakim> johnsimpson should now be muted
17:45:56 <npdoty> ack Chapell
17:45:57 <jmayer> q-
17:46:08 <wseltzer> Chapell: nothing to add to David and Chris.
17:46:16 <schunter1> ack jmayer
17:46:18 <npdoty> Alan, you were a contributor to this text proposal, yeah?
17:46:23 <aleecia> q+
17:46:30 <wseltzer> ack aleecia
17:46:32 <Zakim> -johnsimpson
17:46:51 <wseltzer> aleecia: a little history. We were happy with this proposal
17:47:02 <Chapell> npdoty, I participated in a preliminary call, but did not provide text
17:47:05 <wseltzer> ... it started very long and involved, has now been trimmed to something manageable.
17:47:12 <Joanne> q+
17:47:25 <wseltzer> ... give ability to have more transparency, trust. let users understand status of 3d-pty auditing.
17:47:28 <Chris_IAB> DAA has a program that already addresses this
17:47:32 <wseltzer> ... surprised to hear controversy.
17:47:46 <Joanne> q-
17:47:52 <fielding> q+
17:47:52 <wseltzer> ... this has had a lot of work, now moving to something optional for companies that want to show this info to their users.
17:47:54 <Joanne> Aleecia covered this well
17:47:56 <Chris_IAB> the DAA program is different than DNT (today's definition)
17:47:57 <Joanne> thanks
17:48:04 <Zakim> +johnsimpson
17:48:04 <ChrisPedigoOPA> q+
17:48:08 <aleecia> zakim, mute me
17:48:08 <Zakim> aleecia should now be muted
17:48:09 <dsinger> q+
17:48:15 <npdoty> Chris_IAB, maybe there's some confusion here, I don't think this would in any way replace an existing program, it lets the site tell the user that they follow such a program
17:48:20 <Chapell> .... while I'm sure that some may provide audit / evaluations for DNT, I don't think there is any benefit to specifying this in the text
17:48:21 <Joanne> please assign it to me
17:48:23 <npdoty> scribenick: npdoty
17:48:43 <Chris_IAB> npdoty, I feel it's out of scope, per the Charter
17:48:44 <efelten> It's an *optional* field, so "my company won't use it" isn't a strong argument against.
17:48:50 <npdoty> schunter: worth making an update to see if we need any additional language or additional fields
17:49:01 <tlr> q?
17:49:04 <ChrisPedigoOPA> I don't remember there being consensus on this
17:49:19 <Chapell> q+
17:49:21 <Chris_IAB> I fail to see where this is in scope per our current Charter
17:49:24 <npdoty> action: joanne to update on audits field proposal and any normative requirements as necessary
17:49:25 <trackbot> Created ACTION-340 - Update on audits field proposal and any normative requirements as necessary [on Joanne Furtsch - due 2012-12-05].
17:49:31 <Chapell> I don't remember consensus on this item either
17:49:34 <schunter1> q?
17:49:34 <Chris_IAB> q+
17:49:36 <dwainberg> q+
17:49:44 <npdoty> ack fielding
17:49:44 <dsinger> q-
17:49:45 <schunter1> ack fielding
17:50:21 <npdoty> " <npdoty> any objections to an audit field?
17:50:21 <npdoty> <aleecia> Awesome
17:50:22 <npdoty> <npdoty> no objections to the audit field. ", from Bellevue
17:50:46 <npdoty> fielding: agree with aleecia in general, not sure the text that we looked at in emails today is necessary for the TPE side
17:50:47 <aleecia> there are two things out of scope by charter. This is neither of them.
17:50:54 <schunter1> We agree on the audit field. We discuss what non-normative text to wrap around it.
17:51:14 <npdoty> ... but if there's anything that needs to be updated on the audits field, please let us know
17:51:15 <Chapell> q-
17:51:55 <dsinger> yes, I would like to know what more edits are proposed to TPE, and why (over and above the 'audit' field)
17:52:00 <npdoty> ChrisPedigoOPA: don't want to get in the way of audits, concerned that we're adding complexity or too strongly encouraging use of the audit identifier
17:52:12 <npdoty> ack ChrisPedigoOPA
17:52:15 <jmayer> q+
17:52:27 <npdoty> ChrisPedigoOPA: don't think we need the TRUSTe proposal right now
17:52:27 <schunter1> ack Chris_IAB
17:52:48 <npdoty> npd: not entirely sure what ChrisP means by the TRUSTe proposal and what isn't needed
17:53:16 <Joanne> here is the test from teh TPE
17:53:18 <Joanne>  An optional member named audit may be provided with an array value containing a list of URI references to external audits of the designated resource's privacy policy and tracking behavior in compliance with this protocol. Preferably, the audit references are to resources that describe the auditor and the results of that audit; however, if such a resource is not available, a reference to the auditor is sufficient.  audit         = %x22 "audit" %x22 audi[CUT]
17:53:30 <Joanne>  An optional member named audit may be provided with an array value containing a list of URI references to external audits of the designated resource's privacy policy and tracking behavior in compliance with this protocol. Preferably, the audit references are to resources that describe the auditor and the results of that audit; however, if such a resource is not available, a reference to the auditor is sufficient.  audit         = %x22 "audit" %x22 audi[CUT]
17:53:39 <npdoty> Chris_IAB: we have our own ways through the DAA program to confirm compliance with the DAA program, a program that's quite different from DNT, would lead to confusion if we add on additional compliance regimes at this time
17:53:54 <Joanne> q+
17:54:02 <npdoty> ... want to stay focused on defining tracking and dnt
17:54:16 <npdoty> ack Dwainberg
17:54:30 <npdoty> Dwainberg: should move on, we have an action item to revise text
17:54:38 <aleecia> Is there any reason someone *cannot* live with this proposal?
17:54:42 <npdoty> ... better suited to discussion in compliance?
17:54:56 <fielding> aleecia, which one?
17:55:01 <schunter1> q?
17:55:06 <npdoty> npd: are the objections to having the audit field at all? or the text proposed in march?
17:55:14 <npdoty> ack jmayer
17:55:19 <aleecia> With an optional TPE field for audit transparency
17:55:29 <schunter1> Agreement on "audit" field. Disagreement on whether additional text is needed.
17:55:43 <fielding> ditto
17:55:44 <Chapell> q+
17:56:03 <schunter1> ack Chapell
17:56:05 <Zakim> -Jonathan_Mayer
17:56:11 <npdoty> jmayer: arguments seem in favor of adding an optional audit field, if consumers did want to learn about auditing, having an optional consistent path is what we would do to facilitate marketplace competition
17:56:20 <Chris_IAB> npdoty, I object to both
17:56:30 <jmayer> Phone fail. Hope that made sense, off to class.
17:56:37 <schunter1> q?
17:56:48 <npdoty> schunter: don't debate the audit field, we had consensus at our last f2f about that field, just a question of whether additional text is necessary
17:56:50 <Chapell> Kick off que  (:
17:57:10 <npdoty> ... leave it to Joanne to see if we need an update at all
17:57:29 <aleecia> Great
17:57:33 <npdoty> Joanne: we're fine with the language in the TPE, but if the group is fine with what's in the TPE now, issue 21 can be closed
17:57:38 <schunter1> q?
17:57:43 <schunter1> ack Joanne
17:57:43 <npdoty> schunter: quick turnaround on that action
17:57:44 <Chapell> Wondering if the audit field is related to the token field discussion --- is it ok for DNT compliant to be audited pursuant to the DAA or NAI Codes?
17:57:44 <Chris_IAB> q+
17:57:57 <tlr> issue-21?
17:57:57 <trackbot> ISSUE-21 -- Enable external audit of DNT compliance -- pending review
17:57:57 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/21
17:57:58 <Chapell> I was....
17:58:04 <tlr> q+ cahpell
17:58:04 <npdoty> schunter: suggest closing issue 21, unless we need additional text
17:58:11 <npdoty> ... does anyone need additional text for issue 21?
17:58:13 <schunter1> q?
17:58:17 <tlr> queue=chapell
17:58:20 <aleecia> ack Chris_IAB
17:58:26 <Chapell> Thanks TLR
17:58:40 <npdoty> Chris_IAB: didn't recall an agreement in Amsterdam about the audit field
17:58:45 <npdoty> q+
17:58:49 <Joanne> it was in Seattle we discussed it
17:58:57 <fielding> yes, in Bellevue
17:58:58 <Zakim> -hefferjr
17:58:59 <npdoty>  <npdoty> any objections to an audit field?
17:59:00 <npdoty> <aleecia> Awesome
17:59:01 <npdoty> <npdoty> no objections to the audit field.
17:59:04 <npdoty> http://www.w3.org/2012/06/22-dnt-minutes
17:59:09 <schunter1> q?
17:59:12 <aleecia> thank you, Nick
17:59:20 <npdoty> Chris_IAB: can you get an update on that from the minutes offline?
17:59:23 <schunter1> q?
17:59:27 <aleecia> Which meeting was it?
17:59:29 <npdoty> ack Chapell
17:59:41 <tlr> aleecia, 22 June, Bellevue, WA
18:00:00 <Chris_IAB> npdoty, I am not in favor of an audit field
18:00:10 <npdoty> Chapell: if we set up an audit field, there might be some concern from the group about whether NAI or others is providing an audit, or what ruleset might apply
18:00:14 <aleecia> thanks. I also remembered this discussion but not Amsterdam. This seems right to me.
18:00:16 <fielding> tes, this is going down a rathole and we are not discussing it -- audit is a link
18:00:23 <npdoty> ... blank check around an audit function
18:00:32 <Chris_IAB> npdoty, I am searching the notes from Amsterdam, and can't find where we agreed on adding an audit field??
18:00:45 <tlr> Chris, http://www.w3.org/2012/06/22-dnt-minutes
18:00:48 <schunter1> q?
18:00:48 <fielding> s/tes/yes/
18:00:52 <npdoty> schunter: for the protocol, this is just a field
18:00:57 <schunter1> ack npdoty
18:00:59 <npdoty> ack Thomas
18:01:12 <npdoty> issue-137?
18:01:12 <trackbot> ISSUE-137 -- Does hybrid tracking status need to distinguish between first party (1) and outsourcing service provider acting as a first party (s) -- pending review
18:01:12 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/137
18:01:15 <dsinger> I think this is very different from a previous discussion, where we considered and rejected a proposal to say which compliance you claim; this is about whether you have been *audited* for the compliance...
18:01:20 <aleecia> (might make sense to put the link to the minutes into the notes for the issue, so we don't have to pull this again)
18:01:44 <tlr> issue-21: see discussion at Bellevue face-to-face, http://www.w3.org/2012/06/22-dnt-minutes
18:01:44 <trackbot> ISSUE-21 Enable external audit of DNT compliance notes added
18:01:56 <dsinger> this links to my action-317 same-party (optional)
18:02:20 <dsinger> q+
18:02:29 <npdoty> schunter: tl had said at one point that it's important to indicate whether a server is a service provider
18:02:39 <npdoty> ... fielding had pointed out that they may not be allowed to or want to
18:02:55 <schunter1> q?
18:03:00 <npdoty> ... we need alternatives of text for this, in order to close it
18:03:05 <npdoty> ack dsinger
18:03:06 <Chris_IAB> npdoty, thanks for pointing me to this.  I must have stepped out of the room, so I apologize.  I'm still not in support of it, but anyway, I see how it was added.
18:03:50 <npdoty> dsinger: my recollection is that we accepted fielding's point on this, but might be useful to indicate when you're in a service provider relationship (like when you are on a different domain)
18:04:03 <npdoty> ... connected to my action-317, but also to Rigo's @@@
18:04:21 <npdoty> ... optional, in order to disambiguate in cases where you might appear to be a "rogue" first party
18:04:25 <Chris_IAB> npdoty, reading the notes, I believe the context of an audit field is with respect to a DNT audit (against THIS spec), not for just any old audit.
18:04:40 <efelten> +1 dsigner, I remember it the same way.
18:04:42 <tlr> action-317?
18:04:42 <trackbot> ACTION-317 -- David Singer to draft non-normative examples on same-party (issue-164) -- due 2012-11-14 -- OPEN
18:04:42 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/317
18:04:48 <fielding> The entire point of having service provider constraints is to classify them as part of the first party controller.  There is NO reason to indicate that in the protocol.
18:05:01 <npdoty> dsinger: can move forward with my text suggestion for 317
18:05:10 <schunter1> q?
18:05:22 <Zakim> -JC
18:05:25 <aleecia> q+
18:05:39 <npdoty> fielding: don't have any need or desire for mechanical distinction between sites that are made up of multiple service providers
18:06:16 <npdoty> ... a flag added to the protocol does not help except for sites wholly owned by one corporation
18:06:35 <schunter1> q?
18:06:47 <npdoty> ... if it weren't for the constraints on service providers (handling the data as if they were wholly owned by the provider, so there's no additional loss of privacy there)
18:06:47 <efelten> +q
18:07:52 <npdoty> schunter: to recap an argument, when the service provider is running on an independent domain, a user agent may be confused if two separate sites are indicated as the same party
18:08:03 <schunter1> q?
18:08:06 <npdoty> ... declaring when an independent site is not the same party but a service provider
18:08:09 <npdoty> ack aleecia
18:08:21 <dsinger> yes, this is to enable dealing with the case when a site appears different (e.g. because of hostname) but is in fact under an SP relationship
18:08:33 <npdoty> aleecia: to roy's point, I have two possible concerns where the distinction would be useful for the user
18:08:47 <fielding> really?
18:08:49 <npdoty> ... one possible approach for service providers is that they could combine data from multiple first parties
18:09:56 <npdoty> ... if that were the approach we took (which I wouldn't support), I would be concerned about a lack of signal to the user
18:10:07 <dsinger> is having a hard time seeing why an *optional* notifier is objectionable
18:10:27 <dsinger> if you don't see a need to use it, then don't use it
18:10:57 <npdoty> ... second, if DNT were providing value mostly on transparency rather than controlling collection, then it might be an issue to reduce transparency
18:11:12 <npdoty> ... might depend on our definition of service provider
18:11:12 <vinay> Aleecia -- which proposed text are you referring to where it allows a service provider to combine user-level data (not aggregate data) across first parties?
18:11:33 <npdoty> efelten: given that we're talking about an optional field, then we should look at whether it would be useful for a server to say whether it's a service provider
18:11:46 <aleecia> Shane's been proposing that for months
18:11:47 <npdoty> ... for example, if a site is offering from a different domain, but says that it has consent from the user
18:11:58 <fielding_> fielding_ has joined #dnt
18:12:00 <schunter1> q?
18:12:03 <schunter1> ack efelten
18:12:10 <npdoty> ... it would look to the user/ua like a false assertion of consent
18:12:28 <schunter1> q?
18:12:29 <dsinger> +1 to ed; this makes possible disambiguation, but does not require it
18:12:32 <npdoty> ... where there would be genuine confusion about whether a site is a service provider or not
18:13:05 <npdoty> schunter: the question was just whether to have it as mandatory, not whether to have it as an optional field
18:13:06 <schunter1> q?
18:13:12 <fielding> I don't see how a flag disambiguates that.  I have no problem with a link that says who the first party is for each tracking status resource
18:13:17 <npdoty> efelten: not taking a position on mandatory, but keeping an optional field is important
18:13:41 <Chris_IAB> how do optional fields get added to the spec in the end?  must we show use before they are added to the final spec?
18:14:06 <npdoty> efelten, I think fielding believes that the policy link can be used to disambiguate in those cases
18:14:19 <Chris_IAB> +q
18:14:24 <fielding> or a new "first-party" link
18:14:25 <npdoty> schunter: optional doesn't mean whether we add the field to the spec, but a piece of info that sites may or may not transmit
18:14:26 <aleecia> Roy, that's interesting. What would that look like?
18:14:43 <aleecia> In Europe, I think that works really well. In the US, not as well.
18:14:45 <dsinger> notes that issue-168 is the other related issue here
18:14:57 <npdoty> ... optional from a syntax perspective, there are sometimes messages that don't have the field
18:15:09 <aleecia> So would a first party just list itself as the first party?
18:15:17 <aleecia> Or just claim "I'm a first party" and be done?
18:15:19 <efelten> Roy, there's also a cases where a SP is acting on behalf of a third party.
18:15:46 <npdoty> ... truly optional, sites may or may not transmit the flag for whatever reasons it has
18:15:46 <schunter1> q?
18:15:51 <npdoty> ack Chris_IAB
18:15:52 <fielding> efelten, but in those cases they cannot claim more than 3rd party status
18:15:54 <Zakim> -BrendanIAB?
18:16:19 <npdoty> Chris_IAB: procedurally, do we have to show two parties
18:16:19 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
18:16:20 <npdoty> q+
18:16:25 <npdoty> ack Thomas
18:16:31 <BrendanIAB> Zakim, IPCaller is probably me.
18:16:31 <Zakim> +BrendanIAB?; got it
18:16:32 <dsinger> yes, if we end up with no-one implementing, we could/woudl remove the feature eventually
18:16:35 <schunter1> q?
18:16:40 <schunter1> ack npdoty
18:17:14 <fielding> q+
18:17:19 <schunter1> q?
18:17:20 <dsinger> linked to 317
18:17:21 <npdoty> Chris_IAB: do we have to have two interoperable implementations in order to move forward with it?
18:17:33 <schunter1> q?
18:17:59 <npdoty> npdoty: we can as a group indicate features that are "at risk" that would be removed from the spec if those features were not implemented interoperably
18:18:07 <npdoty> ... a step we would take at CR
18:18:37 <schunter1> q?
18:18:39 <npdoty> dsinger: happy to have it optional but not mandatory, and (related to 317) can write up some cases where it might be useful
18:18:53 <Chris_IAB> thank you npdoty, that seems very clear
18:18:56 <schunter1> q?
18:18:59 <fielding> making it option does not remove the concern about UAs discriminating on the basis of this field, which again is an anti-competition issue
18:18:59 <schunter1> ack fielding
18:19:11 <npdoty> Zakim, who is making noise?
18:19:20 <npdoty> fielding: not a case where you can make it optional and it's still okay
18:19:22 <Zakim> npdoty, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: johnsimpson (29%)
18:19:28 <npdoty> Zakim, mute johnsimpson
18:19:28 <Zakim> johnsimpson should now be muted
18:19:59 <Chris_IAB> +1 to fielding
18:20:02 <dsinger> ah, ok, I will take that into account when I do the write-up, thanks Roy
18:20:04 <npdoty> ... if users use the flag to discriminate, then that could have a negative market effect on smaller players
18:20:14 <npdoty> ... would have to be a formal objection, even if optional
18:20:37 <npdoty> action: singer to write up potential use cases for optional indication of service provider status, including points from Roy
18:20:37 <trackbot> Created ACTION-341 - Write up potential use cases for optional indication of service provider status, including points from Roy [on David Singer - due 2012-12-05].
18:20:54 <Chris_IAB> fielding and dsinger, we should always consider the "level playing field" when considering features here -- very good call Roy
18:21:03 <johnsimpson> yes
18:21:05 <aleecia> Hi, Peter
18:21:10 <peterswire> q+
18:21:20 <tlr> ack peterswire
18:21:21 <efelten> Obviously, any (mis)use of the standard in violation of antitrust law would be subject to law enforcement.
18:21:26 <npdoty> npd: fielding, that would be a disincentive to using the optional field, yeah?
18:21:33 <npdoty> topic: request to help
18:21:52 <npdoty> peterswire: we'll post this request, want to solicit input from any of you
18:22:03 <npdoty> ... comments to be submitted for the call a week from today
18:22:07 <aleecia> The only note I have is pretty obvious from this call: I'll be taking a different role here now that I'm not co-chair.
18:22:13 <npdoty> ... no more than 3 points and no more than 300 words
18:22:18 <Chris_IAB> efelten, good point, though it can be a grey line as you know
18:22:26 <npdoty> ... I'll read all that fit that limit
18:22:49 <npdoty> ... what are the most important things for the process to consider, areas of agreement to highlight, things for the new co-chair to know
18:23:12 <npdoty> ... comments posted by a week from now, for response by Wed, Dec 12
18:23:17 <dsinger> …is confused; comments on what?
18:23:34 <npdoty> tlr: usual way is just to use the mailing list, answers to the email that Peter will send
18:23:36 <Chris_IAB> should we set up a topic on the mailing list?
18:23:37 <schunter1> Kick-off advise and your main requirements
18:23:37 <aleecia> Can we *please* have a second dlist that is not for discussion?
18:23:46 <tlr> yes :)
18:23:49 <aleecia> That's been promised for months now
18:23:58 <tlr> peter was asking for input on priorities
18:23:58 <susanisrael> +1 aleecia
18:24:02 <npdoty> peter: will post request for comments today, exact wording
18:24:25 <afowler> +1 aleecia and susan
18:24:35 <npdoty> npd: aleecia, susanisrael, afowler, will follow up on that again, apologies
18:24:38 <npdoty> Zakim, who is making noise?
18:24:39 <Ian> Ian has joined #dnt
18:24:41 <Ian> Ian has left #dnt
18:24:49 <Zakim> npdoty, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: PhilPearce (18%)
18:24:52 <Zakim> -[FTC]
18:24:53 <Zakim> -johnsimpson
18:24:53 <Zakim> - +aann
18:24:55 <schunter1> q?
18:24:56 <npdoty> Zakim, mute PhilPearce
18:24:56 <johnsimpson> johnsimpson has left #dnt
18:24:56 <Zakim> PhilPearce should now be muted
18:25:19 <npdoty> schunter: from my perspective that's all, anything I overlooked for today in last minutes?
18:25:20 <Zakim> -Joanne
18:25:21 <Zakim> -moneill2
18:25:23 <schunter1> q?
18:25:24 <npdoty> ... if not, we can close the call
18:25:34 <Zakim> -jchester2
18:25:37 <Zakim> -Lia
18:25:38 <Zakim> -RichardWeaver
18:25:39 <Zakim> -susanisrael
18:25:40 <Zakim> -TedLeung
18:25:41 <Zakim> -efelten
18:25:41 <Zakim> -BrendanIAB?
18:25:42 <tedleung> tedleung has left #dnt
18:25:43 <Zakim> -vinay
18:25:43 <Zakim> -peter
18:25:43 <Zakim> -peter-4As
18:25:43 <Zakim> -adrianba
18:25:44 <Zakim> -amyc
18:25:45 <npdoty> ... thanks a lot, adjourned, see you all next week.
18:25:46 <Zakim> -ninjamarnau
18:25:47 <Zakim> -Thomas
18:25:47 <Zakim> -schunter
18:25:49 <Zakim> -eberkower
18:25:49 <Zakim> -PhilPearce
18:25:49 <Zakim> -aleecia
18:25:51 <Zakim> -[Mozilla]
18:25:51 <Zakim> -jeffwilson
18:25:52 <npdoty> rrsagent, make logs public
18:25:56 <npdoty> rrsagent, draft minutes
18:25:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/11/28-dnt-minutes.html npdoty
18:25:56 <Zakim> -dsinger
18:26:01 <afowler> afowler has left #dnt
18:26:05 <Zakim> -David_MacMillan
18:26:21 <Zakim> -Keith
18:26:22 <Zakim> -WileyS
18:26:25 <Zakim> -Chapell
18:26:27 <Zakim> -Chris_Pedigo
18:26:29 <Zakim> -robsherman
18:26:38 <npdoty> Zakim, list attendees
18:26:38 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been +1.408.674.aaaa, npdoty, wseltzer, tlr, aleecia, BrendanIAB?, +1.703.438.aabb, jchester2, RichardWeaver, TedLeung, Jonathan_Mayer,
18:26:42 <Zakim> ... +1.703.265.aacc, jeffwilson, +1.415.520.aadd, dsinger, moneill2, +49.431.98.aaee, ninjamarnau, +1.714.852.aaff, +1.202.331.aagg, +1.202.587.aahh, schunter, +1.202.296.aaii,
18:26:42 <Zakim> ... Chris_Pedigo, peter, adrianba, Lia, +1.917.934.aajj, peter-4As, vinay, fielding, +1.206.658.aakk, amyc, +1.813.366.aall, hefferjr, +1.202.370.aamm, +aann, +1.646.666.aaoo,
18:26:47 <Zakim> ... +1.408.349.aapp, Chris_IAB?, +1.646.654.aaqq, WileyS, +1.215.286.aarr, susanisrael, +385345aass, David_MacMillan, +1.949.573.aatt, +1.609.258.aauu, efelten, +44.772.301.aavv,
18:26:47 <Zakim> ... +1.310.392.aaww, johnsimpson, +1.206.910.aaxx, Joanne, eberkower, Dwainberg, Chapell, robsherman, +44.772.301.aayy, +1.408.423.aazz, Keith, JC, peder, chris, PhilPearce
18:26:52 <Zakim> -fielding
18:27:00 <npdoty> rrsagent, draft minutes
18:27:00 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/11/28-dnt-minutes.html npdoty
18:27:45 <Zakim> -Chris_IAB?
18:27:46 <Zakim> T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM has ended
18:27:46 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.408.674.aaaa, npdoty, wseltzer, tlr, aleecia, BrendanIAB?, +1.703.438.aabb, jchester2, RichardWeaver, TedLeung, Jonathan_Mayer, +1.703.265.aacc, jeffwilson,
18:27:46 <Zakim> ... +1.415.520.aadd, dsinger, moneill2, +49.431.98.aaee, ninjamarnau, +1.714.852.aaff, +1.202.331.aagg, +1.202.587.aahh, schunter, +1.202.296.aaii, Chris_Pedigo, peter, adrianba,
18:27:48 <Zakim> ... Lia, +1.917.934.aajj, peter-4As, vinay, fielding, +1.206.658.aakk, amyc, +1.813.366.aall, hefferjr, +1.202.370.aamm, +aann, +1.646.666.aaoo, +1.408.349.aapp, Chris_IAB?,
18:27:48 <Zakim> ... +1.646.654.aaqq, WileyS, +1.215.286.aarr, susanisrael, +385345aass, David_MacMillan, +1.949.573.aatt, +1.609.258.aauu, efelten, +44.772.301.aavv, +1.310.392.aaww, johnsimpson,
18:27:52 <Zakim> ... +1.206.910.aaxx, Joanne, eberkower, Dwainberg, Chapell, robsherman, +44.772.301.aayy, +1.408.423.aazz, Keith, JC, peder, chris, PhilPearce
18:29:30 <robsherman> robsherman has joined #dnt
18:42:31 <robsherman1> robsherman1 has joined #dnt
19:08:19 <peterswire> peterswire has joined #dnt