16:53:02 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dnt
16:53:02 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/01/30-dnt-irc
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> +npdoty
16:54:08 <Zakim> +Aleecia
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> +[IPcaller]
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> +Fielding
16:57:47 <Zakim> +??P27
16:57:56 <schunter> Zakim, ??P27 is schunter
16:57:56 <Zakim> +schunter; got it
16:58:04 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
16:58:14 <dsinger> zakim, [ipcaller] is me
16:58:14 <Zakim> +dsinger; got it
16:58:18 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
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> +[Mozilla]
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> +JeffWilson
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> +Brooks
16:59:25 <schunter1> schunter1 has joined #dnt
16:59:30 <Zakim> +dwainberg
16:59:31 <Zakim> -JeffWilson
16:59:33 <hefferjr> hefferjr has joined #dnt
16:59:35 <schunter1> Do we have a scribe for today?
16:59:39 <Zakim> +RichardWeaver
16:59:52 <Zakim> +yianni
17:00:03 <jchester2> jchester2 has joined #dnt
17:00:03 <hwest> hwest has joined #dnt
17:00:06 <Zakim> +hefferjr
17:00:11 <Zakim> +BillScannell
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: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2013Jan/att-0139/wednesday_call.013011b.pptx.pdf
17:00:29 <efelten> efelten has joined #dnt
17:00:31 <Zakim> +vinay
17:00:41 <Zakim> +jchester2
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> +efelten_
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> +vincent
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> +Chris_Pedigo
17:01:57 <Zakim> + +33.6.08.75.aadd
17:02:03 <aleecia> Nope
17:02:07 <mecallahan> mecallahan has joined #dnt
17:02:07 <Zakim> + +1.202.331.aaee
17:02:08 <aleecia> Sorry
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> hello
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> +[CDT]
17:02:37 <Zakim> +Alan
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> -schunter
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> +??P27
17:03:54 <schunter1> Zakim, ??P27
17:03:54 <Zakim> I don't understand '??P27', schunter1
17:04:08 <Zakim> +JeffWilson
17:04:11 <Zakim> + +1.202.253.aagg
17:04:13 <Zakim> +samsilberman
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> +BerinSzoka
17:04:56 <Yianni> ...Nick doing caller identification
17:04:59 <Zakim> +WileyS
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> -dsinger
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> +[Microsoft]
17:06:58 <Yianni> ...slides are one person's attempt to summarize different perspectives
17:07:04 <Zakim> +kulick
17:07:09 <dsinger_> dsinger_ has joined #dnt
17:07:13 <Zakim> +David_MacMillan
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> +[IPcaller]
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> ..support 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> +johnsimpson
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> ...it 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> ...meet 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> -Amy_Colando
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... : http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2013Jan/att-0139/wednesday_call.013011b.pptx.pdf
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> s/Huxting/Hustinx/
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> -hwest
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> ...mobile 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> ...services 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> -[Mozilla]
17:29:41 <Zakim> +SusanIsrael
17:29:44 <sidstamm> sidstamm has left #dnt
17:29:45 <Zakim> -Amy_Colando
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> q
17:33:03 <npdoty> q?
17:33:11 <jchester2> +q
17:33:12 <Yianni> ...Any questions or comments?
17:33:12 <schunter1> q?
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> s/tride/tried/
17:35:15 <npdoty> q?
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> s/Rever?/Verveer/
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> ...no 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> q?
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> ...it is easy to do, we just have not figured how the annoucement would happen
17:45:28 <Zakim> -Chris_Pedigo
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> -MikeZ
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> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/products/2
17:47:00 <Zakim> -jchester2
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> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/products/2
17:47:25 <npdoty> or the bottom half of this list: http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/raised?sort=product
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> Issue-161?
17:47:44 <trackbot> ISSUE-161 -- Do we need a tracking status value for partial compliance or rejecting DNT? -- raised
17:47:44 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/161
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> issue-151?
17:47:58 <trackbot> ISSUE-151 -- User Agent Requirement: Be able to handle an exception request -- raised
17:47:58 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/151
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> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/151
17:48:31 <fielding> we need the new text in TPE first … is that done now?
17:48:39 <schunter1> q?
17:48:41 <aleecia> Required is too strong
17:48:42 <BrendanIAB> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/raised <- 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> Issue-152?
17:50:17 <trackbot> ISSUE-152 -- User Agent Compliance: feedback for out-of-band consent -- raised
17:50:17 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/152
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> q+
17:51:07 <schunter1> q?
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> q?
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> q-
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> ...website 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> ...now 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> s/cann/can/
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> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/168
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> issue-168?
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> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/168
17:55:06 <Yianni> Matthias: signal they are taking advantage of transfer exception
17:55:08 <Zakim> -[Microsoft]
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> ...it 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> q+
17:58:12 <npdoty> is there a difference between 162 and 161?
17:58:21 <Yianni> ...you 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> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/161
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> Excellent
17:59:20 <Zakim> -samsilberman
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> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/162
17:59:52 <npdoty> q+
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> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Sep/0148.html
18:00:12 <dsinger> to Roy: but let's discuss
18:00:13 <fielding> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Sep/0148.html
18:00:15 <aleecia> Action for david?
18:00:15 <trackbot> Error finding 'for'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/users>.
18:00:19 <aleecia> :-)
18:00:20 <schunter1> q?
18:00:24 <dsinger> q-
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> ...do we need some additiona text before we can clearly discuss
18:00:53 <Zakim> -AnnaLong?
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> ...do 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> q+
18:02:36 <npdoty> q-
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> Sure
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> q-
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> ...is 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> issue-183?
18:08:28 <trackbot> ISSUE-183 -- Additional Tk header status value for EU -- raised
18:08:28 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/183
18:08:30 <Yianni> ...proposal from Mike Oneil
18:08:42 <Yianni> ...you 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> q+
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> -dsinger
18:09:25 <dwainberg> ack dwainberg
18:09:47 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
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> q?
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> q?
18:10:46 <schunter1> 1?
18:10:55 <schunter1> q?
18:11:11 <Yianni> Singer: I think it will be worth while (112, 167) - design issues
18:11:13 <npdoty> issue-112?
18:11:13 <trackbot> ISSUE-112 -- How are sub-domains handled for site-specific exceptions? -- open
18:11:13 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/112
18:11:16 <npdoty> issue-167?
18:11:16 <trackbot> ISSUE-167 -- Multiple site exceptions -- raised
18:11:16 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/167
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> q
18:12:03 <schunter1> q?
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> ...it 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> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/49311/tpwgmit2013/
18:14:16 <Wileys> Agenda, yes
18:14:20 <npdoty> q+
18:14:21 <Yianni> ...any final remarks, questions?
18:14:30 <Wileys> ETA?
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> -Aleecia
18:16:00 <Zakim> -BerinSzoka
18:16:02 <Zakim> -David_MacMillan
18:16:04 <fielding> umm, agenda must be published before meeting … see process
18:16:05 <Zakim> -RichardWeaver
18:16:13 <Zakim> -efelten_
18:16:17 <phildpearce> Thanks
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> -BrendanIAB?
18:16:37 <Zakim> -JeffWilson
18:16:38 <Zakim> -Lmastria_DAA
18:16:38 <Zakim> - +1.202.639.aacc
18:16:39 <Zakim> -moneill2
18:16:39 <Zakim> - +1.202.331.aaee
18:16:39 <Zakim> -adrianba
18:16:40 <Zakim> -kulick
18:16:40 <Zakim> -BillScannell
18:16:40 <Zakim> -johnsimpson
18:16:40 <Zakim> -Marc-GroupM
18:16:40 <Zakim> -dsinger
18:16:40 <Zakim> -peterswire
18:16:41 <Zakim> -npdoty
18:16:41 <Zakim> -eberkower
18:16:41 <Zakim> -SusanIsrael
18:16:41 <Zakim> -schunter1
18:16:41 <Zakim> - +44.772.301.aakk
18:16:41 <Zakim> -dwainberg
18:16:42 <Zakim> -vinay
18:16:42 <Zakim> -Brooks
18:16:44 <Zakim> -[CDT]
18:16:44 <johnsimpson> johnsimpson has left #dnt
18:16:47 <Zakim> -yianni
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, +33.6.08.75.aadd, +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> -Alan
18:16:55 <Zakim> -hefferjr
18:16:55 <Zakim> -vincent
18:17:15 <npdoty> rrsagent, draft minutes
18:17:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/01/30-dnt-minutes.html 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 http://www.w3.org/2013/01/30-dnt-actions.rdf :
18:18:12 <RRSAgent> ACTION: doty to draft proposal that we close 152 with no UA requirements [1]
18:18:12 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/01/30-dnt-irc#T17-54-37
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 http://www.w3.org/2013/01/30-dnt-irc#T18-07-21
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, +33.6.08.75.aadd,
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,