IRC log of dnt on 2013-01-30

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:53:02 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #dnt
16:53:02 [RRSAgent]
logging to
16:53:07 [npdoty]
rrsagent, make logs public
16:53:19 [npdoty]
meeting: Tracking Protection Working Group teleconference
16:53:22 [npdoty]
chair: peterswire
16:53:32 [aleecia]
aleecia has joined #dnt
16:53:39 [Brooks]
Brooks has joined #dnt
16:53:46 [Zakim]
T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM has now started
16:53:53 [Zakim]
16:54:08 [Zakim]
16:54:16 [dsinger]
dsinger has joined #dnt
16:54:18 [aleecia]
Zakim, mute me
16:54:18 [Zakim]
Aleecia should now be muted
16:55:47 [Zakim]
+ +1.240.994.aaaa
16:56:28 [dwainberg]
dwainberg has joined #dnt
16:56:52 [Zakim]
16:56:54 [npdoty]
Zakim, aaaa is peterswire
16:56:54 [Zakim]
+peterswire; got it
16:56:54 [fielding]
fielding has joined #dnt
16:56:55 [moneill2]
zakim, [ipcaller] is me
16:56:56 [Zakim]
+moneill2; got it
16:57:11 [Yianni]
Yianni has joined #DNT
16:57:20 [BrendanIAB]
BrendanIAB has joined #dnt
16:57:29 [npdoty]
Regrets: dsinger?, jmayer
16:57:43 [Zakim]
16:57:47 [Zakim]
16:57:56 [schunter]
Zakim, ??P27 is schunter
16:57:56 [Zakim]
+schunter; got it
16:58:04 [Zakim]
16:58:14 [dsinger]
zakim, [ipcaller] is me
16:58:14 [Zakim]
+dsinger; got it
16:58:18 [Zakim]
16:58:32 [aleecia_]
aleecia_ has joined #dnt
16:58:32 [BrendanIAB]
Zakim, IPCaller is probably me
16:58:33 [Zakim]
+BrendanIAB?; got it
16:58:34 [Zakim]
16:58:37 [npdoty]
Regrets- dsinger?
16:58:38 [sidstamm]
Zakim, Mozilla has sidstamm
16:58:38 [Zakim]
+sidstamm; got it
16:58:42 [Zakim]
16:59:10 [jeffwilson]
jeffwilson has joined #dnt
16:59:10 [scannell]
scannell has joined #DNT
16:59:10 [npdoty]
when Dave Singer sends regrets, he's still more likely than most to be on the call
16:59:20 [Zakim]
16:59:25 [schunter1]
schunter1 has joined #dnt
16:59:30 [Zakim]
16:59:31 [Zakim]
16:59:33 [hefferjr]
hefferjr has joined #dnt
16:59:35 [schunter1]
Do we have a scribe for today?
16:59:39 [Zakim]
16:59:52 [Zakim]
17:00:03 [jchester2]
jchester2 has joined #dnt
17:00:03 [hwest]
hwest has joined #dnt
17:00:06 [Zakim]
17:00:11 [Zakim]
17:00:13 [peterswire]
no scribe yet - the person who had said yes cancelled
17:00:21 [vinay]
vinay has joined #dnt
17:00:25 [npdoty]
Peter's slides:
17:00:29 [efelten]
efelten has joined #dnt
17:00:31 [Zakim]
17:00:41 [Zakim]
17:00:44 [jchester2]
zakim, mute me
17:00:44 [Zakim]
jchester2 should now be muted
17:00:53 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.643.aabb
17:00:57 [vincent]
vincent has joined #dnt
17:01:05 [dsinger]
zakim, who is making noise?
17:01:06 [Zakim]
17:01:13 [jeffwilson]
jeffwilson has joined #dnt
17:01:13 [Peter-4As]
Peter-4As has joined #dnt
17:01:16 [Zakim]
dsinger, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: yianni (45%), npdoty (44%), schunter (85%), Brooks (66%)
17:01:18 [npdoty]
Zakim, please choose a scribe
17:01:18 [Zakim]
17:01:18 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose dwainberg
17:01:29 [dwainberg]
I think I did 1/2 the call last week.
17:01:35 [npdoty]
Zakim, please choose a scribe
17:01:35 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Aleecia (muted)
17:01:36 [justin]
justin has joined #dnt
17:01:37 [dwainberg]
maybe someone else can take a turn.
17:01:37 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.639.aacc
17:01:47 [Zakim]
17:01:57 [Zakim]
+ +
17:02:03 [aleecia]
17:02:07 [mecallahan]
mecallahan has joined #dnt
17:02:07 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.331.aaee
17:02:08 [aleecia]
17:02:10 [npdoty]
Zakim, aadd is Marc-GroupM
17:02:10 [Zakim]
+Marc-GroupM; got it
17:02:15 [dsinger]
zakim, who is making noise?
17:02:16 [Marc-GroupM]
17:02:24 [schunter1]
zakim, mute me
17:02:24 [Zakim]
schunter should now be muted
17:02:26 [Zakim]
dsinger, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: yianni (8%), Brooks (33%)
17:02:28 [npdoty]
Zakim, please choose a scribe
17:02:28 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose peterswire
17:02:29 [schunter1]
is it better now?
17:02:31 [npdoty]
Zakim, please choose a scribe
17:02:31 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose BillScannell
17:02:35 [Zakim]
17:02:37 [Zakim]
17:02:46 [schunter1]
Let me fetch another phone. Sorry for the 1min delay.
17:03:01 [Zakim]
+ +49.173.259.aaff
17:03:15 [Yianni]
Zakim, mute me
17:03:15 [Zakim]
yianni should now be muted
17:03:19 [Zakim]
17:03:20 [dsinger]
zakim, who is making noise?
17:03:28 [Yianni]
that's fine
17:03:30 [Zakim]
dsinger, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: peterswire (52%), +1.202.639.aacc (4%), Alan (4%)
17:03:33 [npdoty]
scribenick: Yianni
17:03:43 [Joanne]
Joanne has joined #DNT
17:03:45 [Zakim]
17:03:54 [schunter1]
Zakim, ??P27
17:03:54 [Zakim]
I don't understand '??P27', schunter1
17:04:08 [Zakim]
17:04:11 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.253.aagg
17:04:13 [Zakim]
17:04:15 [Yianni]
Mathias: open action items, there is no overdue action
17:04:17 [dsinger]
zakim, ??P27 is schunter1
17:04:17 [Zakim]
+schunter1; got it
17:04:18 [jeffwilson]
jeffwilson has joined #dnt
17:04:33 [Yianni]
...this hasn't happened for a year, thanks for everyone who has done there action items on time
17:04:45 [Zakim]
17:04:56 [Yianni]
...Nick doing caller identification
17:04:59 [Zakim]
17:05:08 [npdoty]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
17:05:08 [Zakim]
On the phone I see npdoty, Aleecia (muted), peterswire, moneill2, Fielding, dsinger, BrendanIAB?, [Mozilla], Brooks, dwainberg, RichardWeaver, yianni (muted), hefferjr,
17:05:09 [Chapell]
Chapell has joined #DNT
17:05:09 [Yianni]
Nick: if you are on IRC and 202 please let us know who you are
17:05:12 [Zakim]
... BillScannell, vinay, jchester2 (muted), +1.202.643.aabb, efelten_, vincent, +1.202.639.aacc, Chris_Pedigo, Marc-GroupM, +1.202.331.aaee, [CDT], Alan, +49.173.259.aaff,
17:05:12 [Zakim]
... schunter1, JeffWilson, +1.202.253.aagg, samsilberman, BerinSzoka, WileyS
17:05:12 [Zakim]
[Mozilla] has sidstamm
17:05:20 [hwest]
Zakim, aabb is hwest
17:05:20 [Zakim]
+hwest; got it
17:05:31 [AN]
AN has joined #dnt
17:05:38 [Zakim]
17:05:48 [Yianni]
Mathias: please register for Face to Face, no questions
17:05:53 [Wileys]
Wileys has joined #dnt
17:06:02 [JC]
JC has joined #DNT
17:06:04 [Zakim]
+ +1.425.614.aahh
17:06:07 [schunter1]
Zakim, mute me
17:06:07 [Zakim]
schunter1 should now be muted
17:06:09 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.344.aaii
17:06:11 [adrianba]
zakim, aahh is me
17:06:11 [Zakim]
+adrianba; got it
17:06:14 [kulick]
kulick has joined #dnt
17:06:22 [adrianba]
zakim, mute me
17:06:22 [Zakim]
adrianba should now be muted
17:06:28 [Lmastria_DAA]
Lmastria_DAA has joined #dnt
17:06:28 [eberkower]
eberkower has joined #dnt
17:06:33 [Yianni]
Peter: Go through file send by Peter earlier
17:06:43 [Zakim]
+ +1.206.658.aajj - is perhaps Amy_Colando
17:06:44 [Yianni]
...second slides have some disclaimers
17:06:47 [Zakim]
17:06:58 [Yianni]
...slides are one person's attempt to summarize different perspectives
17:07:04 [Zakim]
17:07:09 [dsinger_]
dsinger_ has joined #dnt
17:07:13 [Zakim]
17:07:16 [Yianni]
...these are not the views of Peter, he is trying to accurately say others arguments
17:07:26 [npdoty]
Zakim, aagg is MikeZ
17:07:26 [Zakim]
+MikeZ; got it
17:07:31 [Zakim]
+ +44.772.301.aakk
17:07:39 [Yianni]
...Why Peter is giving context
17:07:46 [Zakim]
+ +1.646.654.aall
17:07:50 [David_MacMillan]
David_MacMillan has joined #dnt
17:07:53 [Yianni]
...trying to connect DNT to other debates in US and Europe generally
17:08:00 [Zakim]
17:08:01 [eberkower]
eberkower is 646-654.aall
17:08:07 [dsinger_]
zakim, [IPcaller] is me
17:08:07 [Zakim]
+dsinger_; got it
17:08:12 [Yianni]
...DNT does not take place in the working group, lots of other people care
17:08:15 [npdoty]
Zakim, aall is eberkower
17:08:15 [Zakim]
+eberkower; got it
17:08:22 [npdoty]
Zakim, who is making noise?
17:08:32 [Zakim]
npdoty, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: 40 (35%), +1.202.639.aacc (9%)
17:08:36 [johnsimpson]
johnsimpson has joined #dnt
17:08:41 [Yianni]
...lots of interest in what can be done in multi-stakeholder, beyond technical
17:08:50 [dsinger]
zakim, dsinger_ is dsinger
17:08:51 [Zakim]
+dsinger; got it
17:08:52 [Wileys]
zakim, who is on the call?
17:08:52 [Zakim]
On the phone I see npdoty, Aleecia (muted), peterswire, moneill2, Fielding, BrendanIAB?, [Mozilla], Brooks, dwainberg, RichardWeaver, yianni (muted), hefferjr, BillScannell, vinay,
17:08:54 [Yianni] on both sides of Atlantic by leaders to create a standard
17:08:56 [Zakim]
... jchester2 (muted), hwest, efelten_, vincent, +1.202.639.aacc, Chris_Pedigo, Marc-GroupM, +1.202.331.aaee, [CDT], Alan, +49.173.259.aaff, schunter1 (muted), JeffWilson, MikeZ,
17:08:56 [Zakim]
... samsilberman, BerinSzoka, WileyS, adrianba (muted), +1.202.344.aaii, Amy_Colando, [Microsoft], kulick, David_MacMillan, +44.772.301.aakk, eberkower, dsinger
17:08:56 [Zakim]
[Mozilla] has sidstamm
17:09:18 [Yianni]
...five ways to describe what we are doing
17:09:33 [phildpearce]
phildpearce has joined #dnt
17:09:36 [jchester2]
Peter: can you repeat what you said about "top down" regulatory regime. Are you suggesting that this would be bad?
17:09:50 [Zakim]
17:09:56 [Yianni]
...technical compliance DNT=1, W3C in multistakeholder, example of multi-stakeholder process relevant to US, relevant to global internet governance
17:10:08 [Yianni]
...DNT success is more than a technical thing
17:10:09 [justin]
I think "top down" is redundant in this context.
17:10:32 [Yianni]
...EU Data Protection proposed in January a year ago
17:10:45 [Yianni]
...Commission issued Draft Regulation, called a regulation not a directive
17:10:59 [Yianni]
...a regulation applies directly to states, does not have to go through national legislatures
17:11:12 [Yianni]
...beyond data protection about unifying Europe
17:11:24 [Yianni]
...New report issued for hundreds of amendments
17:11:34 [Yianni]
...Commission, parliament, and council in Europe
17:11:44 [Yianni]
...official negotations between 3 bodies
17:12:06 [Yianni]
...Goal to get this done before Parliament ends
17:12:21 [Yianni]
...June 2014 is next election
17:12:26 [kj]
kj has joined #dnt
17:12:47 [Yianni]
...Multi-stateholder processes work in European Union
17:12:58 [Yianni]
...basic approach is that in EU you need law
17:13:13 [Yianni]
...Lisbon treaty made it explicit that privacy is fundamental human right
17:13:33 [Yianni]
...people in speeches said they had to pass draft regulation because of Lisbon Treaty
17:13:56 [Yianni]
...Another approach: limiting data and harmonizing rules accross market that allows information to flow
17:14:13 [Yianni]
...95 directive: two discourses, limiting data and common market
17:14:35 [Yianni]
...skeptism of self-regulation that industry has dominate role
17:14:43 [Zakim]
+ +1.646.825.aamm - is perhaps AnnaLong?
17:14:57 [Yianni]
...skeptism of multi-stakeholder process is there enough role for government to speak up
17:15:46 [Yianni]
...there is a conflict brewing about the internet, if standard does not work with EU law
17:15:54 [aleecia]
aleecia has joined #dnt
17:16:14 [Yianni]
...regulation makes clear that US must comply with EU rule
17:16:29 [Yianni]
...advertising served to EU will be governed by new EU rules
17:16:48 [Yianni]
...DNT=0, March to have in Berlin a global consideration task force
17:17:03 [Yianni]
...Peter giving personal sense, DNT=0 could be a choice mechanism in EU
17:17:11 [Yianni]
...could be part of consent in EU privacy directive
17:17:38 [Yianni]
...if DNT=0 was a step of showing consent, could be a one stop way for websites to handle
17:17:47 [Yianni]
...debate in group, for including this in the process
17:18:11 [Yianni] is a world comliance organization, could enable global standard
17:18:22 [Yianni]
...but do not need to define the rules accross the world
17:18:40 [Yianni]
...meetings in Brussels
17:19:04 [Yianni] wide range of advocate, governments, etc.
17:19:21 [Yianni]
...W3C has previous met with DG Connect
17:19:35 [Yianni]
...DG Connect would be very happy if we do make process
17:19:46 [Yianni]
...DG Justice proposed the regulation with strong fundamental rights outlook
17:19:52 [Zakim]
17:20:21 [Zakim]
+ +1.206.658.aann - is perhaps Amy_Colando
17:20:23 [npdoty]
in case you missed the slides link from before... :
17:20:25 [Yianni]
...Brussels, Albreicht - lead charge on writing amendments
17:20:37 [Yianni]
...more focus on fundamental rights than with original regulation
17:20:45 [Yianni]
...step towards more regulatory approaches
17:20:58 [Yianni]
...Report mentions DNT in 2 places: one is amendment 105
17:21:07 [Yianni]
...incentives to use pseudonymous data
17:21:13 [jchester2]
NGOs do not consider the Albrecht amendments more rgeulatory--but better protecting privacy.
17:21:18 [npdoty]
Zakim, who is making noise?
17:21:28 [Yianni]
...section 15 german telemedia law
17:21:30 [Zakim]
npdoty, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: +49.173.259.aaff (4%)
17:21:44 [Zakim]
+ +1.919.388.aaoo
17:21:52 [Yianni]
. . . Amendment says standard needs to be approved by Commission
17:21:55 [npdoty]
Zakim, aaii is Lmastria_DAA
17:21:55 [Zakim]
+Lmastria_DAA; got it
17:22:10 [Yianni]
...Another amendment is limits on definition of profiling
17:22:12 [npdoty]
Zakim, Lmastria_DAA has marcg
17:22:12 [Zakim]
+marcg; got it
17:22:18 [Yianni]
...shows interest in technical measures with one stop compliance
17:22:26 [AnnaLong]
AnnaLong has joined #dnt
17:22:32 [Yianni]
...lots of amendment will be made to ALbreicht's proposal
17:22:49 [Yianni]
...Meeting with EU Data Protection supervisor (50 full time employees)
17:23:24 [Yianni]
...Huxting? fundamental rights approach, and experience as Dutch leader
17:23:51 [Yianni]
...One issue: whether users understand what they are agreeing to
17:24:02 [Yianni]
...thinking about how a technical standard can sit into a legal structure
17:24:09 [vincent]
17:24:14 [Yianni]
...shift to previous week in meetings in DC
17:24:43 [Yianni]
...Meetings in White House, Cam Kerry in Commerce, and state department
17:24:55 [npdoty]
Zakim, aaoo is probably AnnaLong
17:24:55 [Zakim]
+AnnaLong?; got it
17:24:56 [Yianni]
...discussion with federal trade commission, spoke with Julie Brill
17:25:09 [Yianni]
...Good set of contacts of US government people
17:25:16 [Zakim]
17:25:19 [jchester2]
Peter: Please explain what the conversation with the White House discussed.
17:25:36 [Yianni]
...multi-stakeholder processes: Obama has supported in domestic issues
17:25:46 [Yianni] privacy, big even at white house for DNT
17:25:58 [Yianni]
...FTC has supported effective DNT, and will probably continue
17:26:07 [Yianni]
...DNT=1 would be a highly visible success
17:26:17 [Yianni]
...if it does not work, that would be highly visible as well
17:26:46 [Yianni]
...EU privacy and data protection, US government has expressed a number of concerns
17:27:07 [Yianni]
...EU has to much regulation here, US wants interoperability for global companies for global data flows
17:27:23 [Yianni]
...DNT is an example of multi-stakeholder facilitating ineroperability
17:27:40 [Yianni]
...If it fails, US has nothing to point to out of W3C process
17:27:51 [Yianni]
...having success here could ease discussion on global data flows
17:28:04 [Yianni]
...US and EU free trade agreement, trying to negotiate
17:28:18 [Yianni]
...trying to remove barriers to free trade and service
17:28:28 [Yianni]
...push to get regulatory interoperability and harmonization
17:28:43 [Yianni] and regulatory harmonization are at top of agenda for free trade negotiation
17:28:55 [Yianni]
...Hard to get US and EU to pass a law
17:29:12 [Yianni]
...multi-stakeholder could be a good model to buttress free trade approach
17:29:34 [Yianni]
...Organization that want fewer regulatory models could get that through this process
17:29:38 [Zakim]
17:29:41 [Zakim]
17:29:44 [sidstamm]
sidstamm has left #dnt
17:29:45 [Zakim]
17:29:47 [susanisrael]
susanisrael has joined #dnt
17:30:11 [Yianni]
...DNT is going to be viewed as part of broader debates
17:30:23 [Yianni]
...what should the role be of ITU for Internet governance
17:30:49 [Yianni]
...china, russia, iraq led the way to give the ITU more power, US rejected to top down approach
17:30:55 [Yianni]
...EU members were alligned with US
17:31:18 [Yianni]
...meetings in May, discussion of ITU and its role
17:31:38 [Yianni]
...Position that US and EU have taken is that internet governance should emphasize bottom up multi-stakeholder processes
17:31:45 [Yianni]
...they should not fall under top down process
17:32:13 [Yianni]
...If there is a visible inability to use bottom up governance, what would that show?
17:32:20 [Yianni]
...we need to show to success stories
17:32:36 [Yianni]
...remind ourself of goals of this project
17:32:54 [Yianni]
...its worth doing for its own sake, but also important for general internet governance
17:33:00 [peterswire]
17:33:03 [npdoty]
17:33:11 [jchester2]
17:33:12 [Yianni]
...Any questions or comments?
17:33:12 [schunter1]
17:33:16 [jchester2]
zakim, unmute me
17:33:16 [Zakim]
jchester2 should no longer be muted
17:33:24 [npdoty]
ack jchester2
17:33:28 [npdoty]
ack jchester
17:33:38 [jchester2]
zakim, mute me
17:33:38 [Zakim]
jchester2 should now be muted
17:33:39 [Yianni]
Jeff Chester: who did you talk to at the white house and what did those discussion entail?
17:33:57 [Yianni]
Peter: David Edelman works for ecnomic council, also office of science and tech policy
17:34:04 [Yianni]
...also spoke with Michael Froman
17:34:11 [BerinSzoka]
BerinSzoka has joined #DNT
17:34:18 [Yianni]
...brieder meeting with Gene Spurling and Jason?
17:34:33 [jchester2]
what was the nature of the WH discussion. what was specificlaly said.
17:34:41 [Yianni]
... Cam Kerry in Commerce, Ambassador Rever? in state department
17:34:54 [Yianni]
...tride to give themes of what was said
17:35:13 [npdoty]
17:35:15 [npdoty]
17:35:19 [jchester2]
Amb Verveer
17:35:21 [Yianni]
...EU/US dialogue, how US domestic policy would be handled, tried to be pretty specific
17:35:29 [npdoty]
17:35:47 [Yianni]
...For Boston, focus on uses and delinking
17:35:52 [scannell]
scannell has joined #DNT
17:35:56 [Yianni]
...hoping we can get as far as we can on those issues
17:35:57 [npdoty]
Topic: Boston meeting discussion
17:36:09 [Yianni]
...alerting that if you have issues on those things, please let us know
17:36:15 [Yianni]
...this is what we are going to try to work on
17:36:25 [Yianni]
...request to editors, Heather West, Justin Brookman
17:36:37 [Yianni]
...Yianni will be assisting, and David Singer will do some help as well
17:36:49 [Yianni]
...hope to prepare a shorter, perhaps cleaner portion of the text
17:37:00 [Yianni]
...goal of editors is not to make substantive changes
17:37:16 [Yianni]
...Peter's own view, text of requirements (normative)
17:37:32 [Yianni]
...text can be relative brief, and then have explanatory material
17:37:42 [Yianni]
...can focus on normative language for Boston
17:38:01 [Yianni]
...for Boston, trying to get people who are knowledgable about certain things to help
17:38:09 [Yianni]
...example, MRC for auditing
17:38:18 [Yianni]
...people in marketing research to maybe present
17:38:23 [Yianni]
...German telemedia law
17:38:42 [Yianni]
...encrption that can address some attacks of hashes, may have briefing on that
17:38:56 [Yianni]
...Khaled has a detailed set of checklists of risks and harms
17:39:03 [hwest]
hwest has joined #dnt
17:39:20 [Yianni]
...have been working with Khaled to make list available
17:39:31 [Yianni]
...this will turn out as an exercise of risks of re-identification
17:39:45 [Yianni]
...own hope that people from different perspectives could work on
17:39:59 [Yianni]
...could perhaps use check list to clarify where views about the world are similar
17:40:12 [Yianni]
...then narrow to small list of where people's views of the world differ
17:40:25 [Yianni]
...could simplify the normative discussion of how to proceed
17:40:28 [fielding]
peterswire, I would like to see a real session on the definition of tracking and agreement on a scope for this work, preferably near start of F2F meeting
17:40:35 [David_MacMillan_]
David_MacMillan_ has joined #dnt
17:40:58 [Yianni]
...responding to Roy, why uses are relevant
17:41:14 [Yianni]
...any spec that emerges that allows security uses, but does not allow other uses
17:41:38 [Yianni]
...any spec that emerges here that is so aggregate and so removed, it does not count as tracking
17:41:56 [Yianni] longer tracking because its aggregated, uses for security may not be tracking
17:42:17 [Yianni]
...close overlap of what you get with uses and de-identification, you get close to the meaning of tracking
17:42:41 [Yianni]
...tracking may be difficult to define, but could be able to with specific uses and de-identification
17:42:58 [Yianni]
...Peter thinks that de-identification and uses is highly relevant to tracking
17:43:03 [fielding]
we did that … it hasn't worked for the past year
17:43:10 [Yianni]
...can do so without argueing about what the word tracking means
17:43:29 [Yianni]
...for compliance part of Boston meeting, we are likely early in compliance
17:43:39 [Yianni]
...maybe in opening remark on Monday with discussion of process
17:43:52 [Yianni]
...lots of comments of when you need to raise objections
17:44:00 [Yianni]
...hard to know when question is being called
17:44:47 [peterswire]
17:44:49 [adrianba]
why is it taking a long time to create a mailing list? isn't it easy to do?
17:44:49 [Yianni]
...Process, in first meeting, decorum is very important and has been pleasantly optimistic and hope to continue that in Boston
17:45:14 [npdoty]
adrianba, apologies, that's a delay on my end
17:45:15 [Yianni] is easy to do, we just have not figured how the annoucement would happen
17:45:28 [Zakim]
17:45:29 [schunter1]
Zakim, unmute me
17:45:30 [Zakim]
schunter1 should no longer be muted
17:45:41 [npdoty]
... but yes, I wanted to make sure the division of mailing lists would work correctly for clients
17:45:54 [Yianni]
Matthias: my piece is very easy, since we are making progress on open issues
17:46:03 [Yianni]
...want to create more work
17:46:04 [Zakim]
17:46:06 [aleecia]
aleecia has joined #dnt
17:46:26 [Yianni]
...want to look at raised issues
17:46:42 [Yianni]
...pick some issues that we want to tackle them, or this is clearly out of scope
17:46:50 [fielding]
17:47:00 [Zakim]
17:47:00 [Yianni]
...main question, which of these 10-15 we want to discuss in Boston and coming weeks
17:47:10 [Yianni]
...others we can make candidates for closing
17:47:13 [schunter1]
17:47:25 [npdoty]
or the bottom half of this list:
17:47:25 [aleecia]
(can sort)
17:47:28 [Yianni]
...this is a list of all TPE related issues, browse down half a page
17:47:44 [aleecia]
17:47:44 [trackbot]
ISSUE-161 -- Do we need a tracking status value for partial compliance or rejecting DNT? -- raised
17:47:44 [trackbot]
17:47:46 [npdoty]
Topic: Raised Issues on TPE
17:47:48 [Yianni]
...first 151:user agent requirement handle exception request
17:47:58 [npdoty]
17:47:58 [trackbot]
ISSUE-151 -- User Agent Requirement: Be able to handle an exception request -- raised
17:47:58 [trackbot]
17:48:05 [Yianni]
...means: do we want to mandate that user agents that can store exeptions
17:48:28 [Yianni]
...are there oppinions on issue 151?
17:48:28 [schunter1]
17:48:31 [fielding]
we need the new text in TPE first … is that done now?
17:48:39 [schunter1]
17:48:41 [aleecia]
Required is too strong
17:48:42 [BrendanIAB] <- just the raised issues
17:48:49 [Wileys]
Required is appropriate
17:49:04 [dsinger]
are you asking for opinions on the issue, or opinions on whether we should take it up?
17:49:09 [aleecia]
But having a standard mechanism is reasonable
17:49:10 [Yianni]
...Nick, question of whether to open this issue
17:49:15 [Wileys]
It should be open already - or is this a duplicate of an already open issue?
17:49:19 [aleecia]
What's the alternative to opening it?
17:49:23 [aleecia]
Closing it?
17:49:29 [Yianni]
...Matthias: don't want to go into full blown discussion, but no unanimous agreement
17:49:33 [npdoty]
fielding, David added updated exceptions at least a couple weeks ago
17:49:34 [Wileys]
I object to closing this issue
17:49:34 [aleecia]
If we're talking required, let's just close it
17:49:44 [Yianni]
...leaving it in the raised state, we could open it, or we could close it
17:50:03 [Yianni]
...different oppinions and probably worth discussing in face to face
17:50:08 [Yianni]
...will later open 151
17:50:08 [dsinger]
on the issue itself, I think we have divergence of opinion, yes
17:50:09 [aleecia]
Not low hanging fruit :-)
17:50:17 [aleecia]
17:50:17 [trackbot]
ISSUE-152 -- User Agent Compliance: feedback for out-of-band consent -- raised
17:50:17 [trackbot]
17:50:27 [Yianni]
...Issue 152
17:51:00 [Yianni]
...Is on when you are interacting with website that tracks you to remind you of out of band consent
17:51:01 [npdoty]
17:51:07 [schunter1]
17:51:14 [dsinger]
I don't think I understand the issue.
17:51:38 [Wileys]
As a reminder - this is a "MAY" if I remember correctly - as well as allowing Servers with communicating OOB exceptions to the UA
17:51:39 [Yianni]
Nick: requirement of user agent to do something with information that it receives
17:51:43 [aleecia]
Shane -- I can live with should, if a UA can implement (and not all can) then they should do so (for last issue) But I'm going to fight limiting what a UA can be back door this way :-)
17:51:46 [npdoty]
personally, I don't think we need a UA requirement here
17:51:55 [dsinger]
I don't think a UA requirement is needed
17:51:56 [schunter1]
17:51:57 [Yianni]
Matthias: how to notify use this website is claiming out of bound consent
17:51:59 [justin]
agreed, npdoty
17:52:00 [npdoty]
17:52:11 [Yianni]
...currently no user agent requirement
17:52:17 [rvaneijk]
rvaneijk has joined #dnt
17:52:21 [aleecia]
Again I'm fine with this as optional but not required
17:52:26 [Yianni] tells user agent, I believe I have out of bound consent
17:52:30 [justin]
does anyone want to argue for a UA requirement?
17:52:31 [dsinger]
UAs should be *able* to check/inform etc., but we'll go crazy trying to work out what they must/should/may/should-not/must-not show :-(
17:52:36 [Yianni] require user agent to notify the users regularly
17:52:39 [Wileys]
Aleecia, understood - as per our conversation last week I believe balance is important here. If UAs are permitted with only supporting DNT:1 and not DNT:0, then they are not W3C DNT compliant (in my opinion).
17:52:39 [aleecia]
And coming up with a common approach for those who do would be handy
17:52:53 [Yianni]
...question from Justin and Nick is if anyone is pushing this at all
17:53:01 [Wileys]
Not pushing as a requirement - only as a "may"
17:53:01 [npdoty]
I'm willing to draft an explanation of no-requirement, and see on the mailing list if anyone disagrees
17:53:03 [Yianni]
...that user agent has to give feedback with out of bound consent
17:53:18 [Yianni]
...currently user agent can do whatever they like with the signals
17:53:33 [dsinger]
as a piece of info, some folks are trying to inspire creation of a 'debugging UA' which exposes and checks all it cann
17:53:38 [dsinger]
17:53:43 [justin]
Is a MAY even necessary?
17:53:43 [Yianni]
...Nick's approach is right, I would like to open it
17:53:49 [justin]
Or useful?
17:53:57 [Yianni]
...if no one purshes, we can then close it
17:54:09 [npdoty]
open issue-152
17:54:12 [Yianni]
...openning 152, with hope it will be a quick one
17:54:14 [Wileys]
Justin, I'm with you - not necessary - was okay with MAY if others were pushing for it
17:54:32 [Yianni]
...168 is a complex one
17:54:32 [schunter1]
17:54:37 [npdoty]
action: doty to draft proposal that we close 152 with no UA requirements
17:54:37 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-358 - Draft proposal that we close 152 with no UA requirements [on Nick Doty - due 2013-02-06].
17:54:39 [Yianni]
...Is David on the call?
17:54:46 [justin]
UAs MAY do lots of things, not sure we want to spell out all possibilities :)
17:54:48 [aleecia]
Well, Shane, we'll see what happens with the formal objection. But for now, as things stand, your opinion is not the standard. I look forward to the final round off appeals
17:54:49 [npdoty]
17:54:49 [trackbot]
ISSUE-168 -- What is the correct way for sub-services to signal that they are taking advantage of a transferred exception? -- raised
17:54:49 [trackbot]
17:55:06 [Yianni]
Matthias: signal they are taking advantage of transfer exception
17:55:08 [Zakim]
17:55:18 [Zakim]
- +49.173.259.aaff
17:55:36 [Yianni]
David Singer: origninal website had orignal consent, how does the transfer of than consent gets relayed back that there is a service agreement here on the third party side
17:55:50 [Yianni] was a resulf tof Rigo's text, section 6.7 of TPE
17:55:51 [kj_]
kj_ has joined #dnt
17:56:02 [Yianni]
Nick: do we agree with that text or new issue?
17:56:21 [Yianni]
Singer: not sure how to show user or user agent how to relay transfer in consent
17:56:33 [Yianni]
...its a design issue, seperate from service provider flag
17:56:41 [Yianni]
Matthias: wants to open this
17:56:49 [Yianni]
Singer: I will work with Roy
17:56:57 [npdoty]
dsinger, fielding, that sounds like an action item :)
17:57:01 [dsinger]
s/I will/I would like to/
17:57:19 [Yianni]
Matthias: we need a proposal on the table, do in a small group
17:57:52 [fielding]
I raised it.
17:57:54 [Yianni]
...Issue 162 is also an interesting one, doesn't say who raised it
17:58:05 [Yianni]
...if user comes to DNT=1, and only part is compliance that is easy
17:58:06 [dsinger]
I think this is the 'under construction' issue
17:58:09 [dsinger]
17:58:12 [npdoty]
is there a difference between 162 and 161?
17:58:21 [Yianni] comply, you don't comply: do we want anything more detailed
17:58:23 [aleecia]
Should we add beta as an issue?
17:58:26 [moneill2]
can we get a link
17:58:34 [Yianni]
....will take it to hunt it down
17:58:45 [npdoty]
17:58:46 [Yianni]
Singer: this was the under contruction issue that we did not understand
17:58:52 [fielding]
er, no, I did 161
17:58:57 [npdoty]
aleecia, I think "under construction" and "beta" are both covered in issue 161
17:59:00 [Yianni]
...not yet done, so cannot claim complaince
17:59:03 [aleecia]
17:59:20 [Zakim]
17:59:21 [Yianni]
...compliance is not yet claimed by this site
17:59:31 [fielding]
dsinger, it needs to be the TSV -- not a qualifier
17:59:33 [moneill2]
link to 162?
17:59:41 [npdoty]
17:59:52 [npdoty]
17:59:54 [Yianni]
Matthias: more detailed, writing down and taking a look at with whole group
17:59:59 [dsinger]
I think it's worth having it as a qualifier so it doesn't obscure 1st/3rd claims
18:00:05 [npdoty]
18:00:12 [dsinger]
to Roy: but let's discuss
18:00:13 [fielding]
18:00:15 [aleecia]
Action for david?
18:00:15 [trackbot]
Error finding 'for'. You can review and register nicknames at <>.
18:00:19 [aleecia]
18:00:20 [schunter1]
18:00:24 [dsinger]
18:00:32 [Yianni]
Nick: 161 seems related to 162
18:00:42 [Yianni]
...maybe we have a proposal from Roy
18:00:52 [Yianni] we need some additiona text before we can clearly discuss
18:00:53 [Zakim]
18:01:11 [Yianni]
Roy: just made a link, efficient to discuss but is not exact text
18:01:31 [Yianni]
...only difference is that David wanted to put more things in the qualifier category
18:01:47 [Yianni] not want to make this status equivalent to the server being compliant with DNT, they are not
18:01:53 [npdoty]
maybe we need to find someone who objects to Roy's approach, and ask them to write up their concerns
18:02:14 [npdoty]
could "P1" indicate non-compliant but working on 1st-party compliance?
18:02:15 [Yianni]
Singer: problem is indication of working on being a first party site and third party site
18:02:17 [johnsimpson]
seems to me that you're either compliant or you're not.
18:02:25 [aleecia]
I can live with losing 1/3
18:02:28 [rvaneijk]
rvaneijk has joined #dnt
18:02:32 [dwainberg]
18:02:36 [npdoty]
18:02:37 [Yianni]
Nick: Jonathan had some concerns that we need to work out
18:02:45 [dsinger]
to John: you use this status, you are not (yet) compliant, clearly
18:03:17 [rvaneijk]
rvaneijk has joined #dnt
18:03:28 [dsinger]
I can live with losing 1/3 too, it's sad but maybe it makes the important clear
18:03:28 [npdoty]
so the concern on 161 may just be confusion or misunderstanding
18:03:31 [Yianni]
objection of Jonathan, way to implement protocal without complying, but message is saying it is not compliant
18:03:52 [dsinger]
means "Construction in process; response headers, the well-known-resource, and compliance may be correct, or may not be; compliance is not (yet)
18:03:52 [aleecia]
Adding a single line of this must only be used for testing might resolve Jonathan's concern
18:03:52 [dsinger]
claimed for this site" or something like
18:03:58 [vincent]
I think this is a different issue
18:04:16 [Yianni]
Wainberg: we should hold off dealing with tech spec for claims of compliance
18:04:16 [justin]
Or maybe just the word "only"
18:04:34 [dsinger]
Jonathan confused this with a different issue, I fear
18:04:40 [aleecia]
18:04:52 [Yianni]
Wainberg: what's the different between I have not fully implemented but I intend to as opposed to I do not plan to implement
18:05:13 [npdoty]
I don't think the proposed flag indicated a commitment to do something in the future, just that it was in progress
18:05:32 [dsinger]
I think this is HUGELY important as it encourages people to work on bring-up, and not fear that they'll be criticized for mistakes while they are working on it
18:05:42 [Yianni]
Roy: no matter what compliance doc says, you don't want the first response to DNT to be legally binding
18:05:52 [aleecia]
This is a way for companies to disclaim not complying. It's a fine thing to do.
18:05:56 [dsinger]
q+ to say what I wrote
18:06:01 [Yianni]
Matthias: It does not have any meaning at this point, may just be a fixed header
18:06:17 [justin]
Of course, there is always the fear that parties will just stay in perpetual BETA to avoid responsibility.
18:06:19 [Yianni]
...use as beta testing with example users, when you are comfortable, you will put the site in projection mode
18:06:24 [aleecia]
I can live with either David or Roy's approach with small preference for Roy's
18:06:32 [Yianni]
Wainberg: I would like to see text, this is on but it does not mean anything, so ignore it
18:06:49 [Yianni]
Matthias: It is okay if Roy puts proposal in text in option block as issue 161
18:07:00 [dsinger]
I'll concede to Roy, but I'd like to find some way to know which way the flag will be after it's turn off (1 or 3), if we can
18:07:05 [aleecia]
Roy, could you also add a quick "this is for testing" line to address Jonathan's concern?
18:07:17 [dsinger]
18:07:17 [justin]
I think dwainberg just articulated jmayer's point for him, in absentia :)
18:07:21 [fielding]
action: fielding to make text proposal on ISSUE-161 in draft with option block
18:07:21 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-359 - Make text proposal on ISSUE-161 in draft with option block [on Roy Fielding - due 2013-02-06].
18:07:27 [Yianni]
Matthias: that's all from my point of view
18:07:30 [aleecia]
It will help others understand what we're doing anyway
18:07:43 [Yianni] there any other topic that we have not discussed that people want to start discussing in Boston?
18:07:56 [fielding]
aleecia, yes
18:08:10 [Yianni]
...If Yes, you can contact Matthias
18:08:12 [aleecia]
Thank you!
18:08:20 [Yianni]
...issue 183: header status for Europe
18:08:28 [npdoty]
18:08:28 [trackbot]
ISSUE-183 -- Additional Tk header status value for EU -- raised
18:08:28 [trackbot]
18:08:30 [Yianni]
...proposal from Mike Oneil
18:08:42 [Yianni] raised an issue that servers would want to indicate they are in the EU
18:09:01 [dsinger]
q+ to say we should have a design meeting on sub-domains (flag needed?) and also-applies-to lists, in Boston
18:09:02 [aleecia]
18:09:05 [Yianni]
Mike: In the EU, not having a DNT set would be equivalent to DNT=1
18:09:18 [aleecia]
Zakim, unmute me
18:09:18 [Zakim]
Aleecia should no longer be muted
18:09:20 [Zakim]
18:09:25 [dwainberg]
ack dwainberg
18:09:47 [Zakim]
18:10:03 [aleecia]
May I, quickly?
18:10:04 [dsinger]
zakim, [IPcaller] is me
18:10:04 [Zakim]
+dsinger; got it
18:10:06 [Yianni]
Matthias: want to push for global consideration piece
18:10:14 [Yianni]
...I would like to discuss first in European context
18:10:14 [npdoty]
18:10:32 [Yianni]
...if certain part of protocal need extension, then can come back to TPE for European improvements
18:10:43 [Yianni]
...Is that okay with you? (Mike - Yes)
18:10:44 [dsinger]
18:10:46 [schunter1]
18:10:55 [schunter1]
18:11:11 [Yianni]
Singer: I think it will be worth while (112, 167) - design issues
18:11:13 [npdoty]
18:11:13 [trackbot]
ISSUE-112 -- How are sub-domains handled for site-specific exceptions? -- open
18:11:13 [trackbot]
18:11:16 [npdoty]
18:11:16 [trackbot]
ISSUE-167 -- Multiple site exceptions -- raised
18:11:16 [trackbot]
18:11:26 [Yianni]
...working with Nick to work on design issues for Boston
18:11:48 [Yianni]
Matthias: 168 is also another side group, does it make sense to keep 3 seperate
18:11:57 [npdoty]
ack dsinger
18:11:57 [Zakim]
dsinger, you wanted to say we should have a design meeting on sub-domains (flag needed?) and also-applies-to lists, in Boston
18:12:01 [schunter1]
18:12:03 [schunter1]
18:12:05 [fielding]
no, please no more parallel sessions
18:12:07 [schunter1]
ack aleecia
18:12:33 [Yianni]
Aleecia: I'm fine with moving Mike's to global, not where server is located, what matters is where the person is located
18:12:45 [fielding]
ditto what aleecia said, though that only applies for those of us who do business in EU
18:12:45 [Yianni] only matters where the user is located
18:12:52 [rvaneijk]
rvaneijk has joined #dnt
18:13:09 [npdoty]
aleecia, moneill2, was the proposal that the flag indicated server location? or to indicate a level of compliance that would satisfy a certain EU regulation?
18:13:19 [Yianni]
Aleecia: suggesting we do not add anything because user already knows where they are located
18:13:27 [Yianni]
Matthias: we can close the meeting a bit earlier
18:13:32 [dsinger]
we have the user's nationality and location, the party's nationality, service location, and probably a few more to thgro into the mix...
18:13:37 [Yianni]
...I will work on a more detailed agenda with Peter
18:14:01 [Yianni]
...Monday and Tuesday for compliance, TPE for Wednesday
18:14:04 [Wileys]
Matthias, can you send that out in email?
18:14:08 [npdoty]
18:14:16 [Wileys]
Agenda, yes
18:14:20 [npdoty]
18:14:21 [Yianni]
...any final remarks, questions?
18:14:30 [Wileys]
18:14:35 [Yianni]
...will send out a detailed agenda when Matthias has it
18:14:36 [Wileys]
Thank you!
18:14:41 [fielding]
note there is a process requirement on agenda
18:14:58 [Yianni]
...hopefully we will have agenda by the end of the week
18:15:28 [Yianni]
Peter: it depends, we can provide some more detailed things sooner, understanding that it may shift
18:15:35 [Wileys]
Shifting is okay - document requirements are critical to know ASAP
18:15:58 [Zakim]
18:16:00 [Zakim]
18:16:02 [Zakim]
18:16:04 [fielding]
umm, agenda must be published before meeting … see process
18:16:05 [Zakim]
18:16:13 [Zakim]
18:16:17 [phildpearce]
18:16:17 [Yianni]
Matthias: thanks and see you next week, if not in Boston
18:16:20 [johnsimpson]
Will there be call-in arrangements?
18:16:26 [aleecia]
Two weeks in advance for in person as I recall
18:16:28 [Yianni]
Nick: will follow up with registration emails either today or tomorrow
18:16:28 [Zakim]
18:16:37 [Zakim]
18:16:38 [Zakim]
18:16:38 [Zakim]
- +1.202.639.aacc
18:16:39 [Zakim]
18:16:39 [Zakim]
- +1.202.331.aaee
18:16:39 [Zakim]
18:16:40 [Zakim]
18:16:40 [Zakim]
18:16:40 [Zakim]
18:16:40 [Zakim]
18:16:40 [Zakim]
18:16:40 [Zakim]
18:16:41 [Zakim]
18:16:41 [Zakim]
18:16:41 [Zakim]
18:16:41 [Zakim]
18:16:41 [Zakim]
- +44.772.301.aakk
18:16:41 [Zakim]
18:16:42 [Zakim]
18:16:42 [Zakim]
18:16:44 [Zakim]
18:16:44 [johnsimpson]
johnsimpson has left #dnt
18:16:47 [Zakim]
18:16:48 [npdoty]
Zakim, list attendees
18:16:48 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been npdoty, Aleecia, +1.240.994.aaaa, peterswire, moneill2, Fielding, schunter, dsinger, BrendanIAB?, sidstamm, JeffWilson, Brooks, dwainberg,
18:16:51 [Zakim]
... RichardWeaver, yianni, hefferjr, BillScannell, vinay, jchester2, +1.202.643.aabb, efelten_, vincent, +1.202.639.aacc, Chris_Pedigo, +, +1.202.331.aaee,
18:16:51 [Zakim]
... Marc-GroupM, [CDT], Alan, +49.173.259.aaff, +1.202.253.aagg, samsilberman, schunter1, BerinSzoka, WileyS, hwest, +1.425.614.aahh, +1.202.344.aaii, adrianba, +1.206.658.aajj,
18:16:52 [Wileys]
Aleecia - that was my understanding as well - meaning this past Monday
18:16:55 [Zakim]
... [Microsoft], kulick, David_MacMillan, MikeZ, +44.772.301.aakk, +1.646.654.aall, eberkower, johnsimpson, +1.646.825.aamm, +1.206.658.aann, +1.919.388.aaoo, marcg, AnnaLong?,
18:16:55 [Zakim]
... SusanIsrael
18:16:55 [Zakim]
18:16:55 [Zakim]
18:16:55 [Zakim]
18:17:15 [npdoty]
rrsagent, draft minutes
18:17:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate npdoty
18:17:17 [aleecia]
I'm just glad Wednesday is a half day
18:17:33 [aleecia]
I'll actually get to see my husband on the 14th
18:18:12 [npdoty]
rrsagent, bye
18:18:12 [RRSAgent]
I see 2 open action items saved in :
18:18:12 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: doty to draft proposal that we close 152 with no UA requirements [1]
18:18:12 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
18:18:12 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: fielding to make text proposal on ISSUE-161 in draft with option block [2]
18:18:12 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
18:18:14 [npdoty]
Zakim, bye
18:18:14 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees were npdoty, Aleecia, +1.240.994.aaaa, peterswire, moneill2, Fielding, schunter, dsinger, BrendanIAB?, sidstamm, JeffWilson, Brooks,
18:18:14 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #dnt
18:18:17 [Zakim]
... dwainberg, RichardWeaver, yianni, hefferjr, BillScannell, vinay, jchester2, +1.202.643.aabb, efelten_, vincent, +1.202.639.aacc, Chris_Pedigo, +,
18:18:17 [Zakim]
... +1.202.331.aaee, Marc-GroupM, [CDT], Alan, +49.173.259.aaff, +1.202.253.aagg, samsilberman, schunter1, BerinSzoka, WileyS, hwest, +1.425.614.aahh, +1.202.344.aaii, adrianba,