15:38:25 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dnt
15:38:25 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/03/12-dnt-irc
15:38:27 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
15:38:29 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be TRACK
15:38:29 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM scheduled to start in 22 minutes
15:38:30 <trackbot> Meeting: Tracking Protection Working Group Teleconference
15:38:30 <trackbot> Date: 12 March 2014
15:39:07 <ninja> Chairs: CarlCargill, justin, schunter
15:39:15 <ninja> Regrets: dsinger
15:39:24 <ninja> agenda?
15:44:18 <WaltMichel> WaltMichel has joined #DNT
15:47:55 <Chris_IAB> Chris_IAB has joined #dnt
15:50:00 <jeff> jeff has joined #dnt
15:52:56 <JackHobaugh> JackHobaugh has joined #dnt
15:53:37 <npdoty> npdoty has joined #dnt
15:54:13 <Zakim> T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM has now started
15:54:18 <Zakim> +Chris_IAB
15:54:30 <Chris_IAB> just joined the conf bridge from NYC
15:54:47 <walter> ninja: have a flu, can't call in today
15:55:02 <Zakim> +npdoty
15:55:08 <Zakim> +WaltMichel
15:55:17 <npdoty> Regrets+ walter
15:56:01 <Chris_IAB> npdoty, super
15:57:43 <Zakim> +RichardWeaver
15:57:57 <ninja> zakim, call ninja-mobile
15:57:58 <Zakim> ok, ninja; the call is being made
15:58:00 <Richard_comScore> Richard_comScore has joined #dnt
15:58:00 <Zakim> +Ninja
15:58:15 <Zakim> +Jeff
15:58:46 <Zakim> +hefferjr
15:59:13 <robsherman> robsherman has joined #dnt
15:59:39 <Zakim> +MECallahan
15:59:41 <ninja> zakim, who is here?
15:59:41 <Zakim> On the phone I see Chris_IAB, npdoty, WaltMichel, RichardWeaver, Ninja, Jeff, hefferjr, MECallahan
15:59:44 <Zakim> On IRC I see robsherman, Richard_comScore, npdoty, JackHobaugh, jeff, Chris_IAB, WaltMichel, RRSAgent, dsinger, schunter1, Zakim, ninja, walter, hober, wseltzer, trackbot
15:59:46 <dwainberg> dwainberg has joined #dnt
15:59:52 <Ari> Ari has joined #dnt
15:59:58 <mecallahan> mecallahan has joined #dnt
16:00:00 <Zakim> +Ari
16:00:26 <Zakim> +dwainberg
16:00:50 <robsherman1> robsherman1 has joined #dnt
16:00:56 <Zakim> + +1.202.370.aaaa
16:00:59 <justin> justin has joined #dnt
16:01:03 <robsherman1> zakim, aaaa is robsherman
16:01:04 <Zakim> +robsherman; got it
16:01:09 <Zakim> + +1.202.785.aabb
16:01:28 <fielding> fielding has joined #dnt
16:01:33 <moneill2> moneill2 has joined #dnt
16:01:41 <JackHobaugh> Zakim, aabb is JackHobaugh
16:01:41 <Zakim> +JackHobaugh; got it
16:01:55 <rvaneijk> rvaneijk has joined #dnt
16:01:57 <Zakim> +[CDT]
16:01:58 <Zakim> +Fielding
16:01:59 <justin> zakim, who is on the phone?
16:01:59 <ninja> zakim, take up agendum 1
16:02:00 <Zakim> On the phone I see Chris_IAB, npdoty, WaltMichel, RichardWeaver, Ninja, Jeff, hefferjr, MECallahan, Ari, dwainberg, robsherman, JackHobaugh, [CDT], Fielding
16:02:00 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Confirmation of scribe. Volunteers welcome!" taken up [from ninja]
16:02:03 <justin> zakim, cdt has me
16:02:05 <Zakim> +justin; got it
16:02:20 <Zakim> +eberkower
16:02:32 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
16:02:34 <eberkower> eberkower has joined #dnt
16:02:48 <robsherman2> robsherman2 has joined #dnt
16:02:52 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
16:02:53 <Zakim> +Carl_Cargill
16:02:59 <ninja> zakim, pick a scribe
16:02:59 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose MECallahan
16:03:18 <WileyS> WileyS has joined #dnt
16:03:19 <eberkower> Zakim, mute me please
16:03:19 <Zakim> eberkower should now be muted
16:03:28 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
16:03:35 <mecallahan> i have to come in and out, i dont thinki can scribe
16:03:45 <moneill2> zakim, [ipcaller] is me
16:03:45 <Zakim> +moneill2; got it
16:03:49 <npdoty> Zakim, pick a scribe
16:03:49 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose [CDT]
16:03:52 <npdoty> Zakim, pick a scribe
16:03:52 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose WaltMichel
16:03:58 <matt> matt has joined #dnt
16:04:00 <Zakim> +MattHayes
16:04:18 <carlcargill> carlcargill has joined #dnt
16:04:19 <Zakim> +SusanIsrael
16:04:24 <susanisrael> susanisrael has joined #dnt
16:04:31 <npdoty> scribenick: mecallahan
16:04:33 <npdoty> Zakim, pick a scribe
16:04:33 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Carl_Cargill
16:04:36 <npdoty> Zakim, pick a scribe
16:04:36 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Fielding
16:04:57 <npdoty> Zakim, pick a scribe
16:04:57 <ninja> zakim, take up agendum 3
16:04:59 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose MECallahan
16:04:59 <Zakim> agendum 3. "ISSUE-240: Do we need to define context?" taken up [from ninja]
16:05:00 <mecallahan> justin: thanks.
16:05:04 <Zakim> +rvaneijk
16:05:09 <kj> kj has joined #dnt
16:05:11 <mecallahan> ... chairs meeting face to face next week.
16:05:22 <mecallahan> ...working to get TPE to last call, adn start to think about compliance document.
16:05:33 <sidstamm> sidstamm has joined #dnt
16:05:39 <mecallahan> brookman:  re: last call for TPE.
16:05:42 <Zakim> +WileyS
16:05:42 <ninja> ISSUE-240: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/49311/tpwg-context-240/results
16:05:42 <trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-240 Do we need to define context?.
16:05:50 <mecallahan> ...brookman posting document.
16:05:52 <kulick> kulick has joined #dnt
16:05:52 <Brooks> Brooks has joined #dnt
16:06:06 <npdoty> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/49311/tpwg-context-240/results
16:06:10 <vinay> vinay has joined #dnt
16:06:34 <mecallahan> ....brookman:  in the end, Roy mdoified his definition substantially, close to definition to party.  there were mulitple options.  adopted Roy's definition of context.
16:06:38 <vinay> is anyone else having problems dialing-in?
16:06:43 <Zakim> +kulick
16:06:48 <npdoty> s/context/tracking/
16:06:51 <Zakim> +Brooks
16:07:17 <mecallahan> ....with regard to context definition, the objections remained strong on the objections on PARTY.
16:07:17 <fielding> I think Justin meant Roy's definition of tracking
16:07:21 <vinay> i'll call from my cell phone
16:07:33 <Zakim> +vinay
16:07:41 <mecallahan> brookman felt the Option A and Option C were similar, but they decided to define context in the same way.
16:07:46 <Chapell> Chapell has joined #DNT
16:07:48 <Zakim> +[Mozilla]
16:07:52 <ninja> Option C (with a small editorial change): "A context is a set of resources that are controlled by the same party or jointly controlled by a set of parties."
16:07:54 <mecallahan> ... Chairs will issue written opinion shortly.
16:07:54 <sidstamm> Zakim, Mozilla has me
16:07:54 <Zakim> +sidstamm; got it
16:08:40 <ninja> q+
16:09:03 <npdoty> ack ninja
16:09:38 <Zakim> +Wendy
16:09:40 <mecallahan> wainberg asked clarification, brookman described process.  ninja spoke on behalf of matthias, matthias's editorial change shown above at 12;07.
16:09:48 <Zakim> +Chapell
16:10:20 <mecallahan> matthias had run this editorial change past rob sherman and chris pedigo, and both were ok with it.
16:10:24 <fielding> That is a reasonable editorial change.
16:10:33 <mecallahan> brookman to send context editorial change to the list.
16:10:39 <justin> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/49311/tpwg-qualifiers-241/results
16:10:44 <ninja> zakim, take up agendum 4
16:10:44 <Zakim> agendum 4. "ISSUE-241: Distinguish elements for site-internal use and elements  that can be re-used by others (1/3)" taken up [from ninja]
16:10:48 <justin> q?
16:11:21 <mecallahan> wainberg asked about written opinions on 3 calls for objectiion; brookman said that was forthcoming.
16:12:03 <mecallahan> wainberg asked about optionD, whether that was considered.  Brookman said that would be addressed in the written opinion.
16:12:26 <WileyS> If the editorial change is met with objections - does that delay the Last Call while the CfO is processed?
16:13:23 <fielding> WileyS, in general, objections do not delay a last call -- they merely have to be noted as such.
16:13:33 <mecallahan> Issue 241:  written opinion forthcoming.   objection to including this probably stronger.  down the road, may make sense to put back in.
16:13:35 <WileyS> Thank you Roy
16:13:52 <ninja> zakim, take up agendum 5
16:13:52 <Zakim> agendum 5. "Proposed editorial changes to the TPE before Last Call" taken up
16:13:58 <mecallahan> brookman:  TIMING -- communicated results of hte call for objections to the editors earlier.
16:14:08 <JackHobaugh> So which option was chosen for Issue-241?
16:14:10 <Zakim> +Amy_Colando
16:14:16 <mecallahan> ...editors want a few weeks to implement the changes, and implement the changes.
16:14:28 <Chris_IAB> q+
16:14:33 <fielding> action on fielding to incorporate changes for defn of context
16:14:34 <trackbot> Error finding 'on'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/users>.
16:14:41 <mecallahan> ...expect March 26 date for the editors.
16:14:53 <npdoty> JackHobaugh, justin indicated less strong objection to Option B: no change
16:15:09 <fielding> action fielding to incorporate changes for defn of context
16:15:09 <trackbot> Created ACTION-437 - Incorporate changes for defn of context [on Roy Fielding - due 2014-03-19].
16:15:17 <mecallahan> chris_IAB:  what option for 241?  Brookman:  no change.
16:15:19 <justin> ack chris
16:15:22 <justin> q?
16:15:44 <fielding> ACTION-437 due 2014-03-26
16:15:44 <trackbot> Set ACTION-437 Incorporate changes for defn of context due date to 2014-03-26.
16:16:02 <mecallahan> on march 26, chairs will share document with the group and then vote to bring to last call.
16:16:09 <mecallahan> brookman:  anything else on the timing?
16:16:25 <mecallahan> brookman:  a few editorial changes have been suggested.
16:16:31 <justin> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2014Mar/0017.html
16:16:37 <rvaneijk> Ninja, could W3C please confirm the TPE planning on the mailinglist?
16:17:08 <mecallahan> npdoty:  editorial changes:  track status.
16:17:13 <fielding> action fielding to remove issue box for qualifiers
16:17:13 <trackbot> Created ACTION-438 - Remove issue box for qualifiers [on Roy Fielding - due 2014-03-19].
16:17:21 <ninja> rvaneijk, good suggestion. We will do so. Although it's not set in stone.
16:17:37 <fielding> action fielding to find a media type for the tracking status representation
16:17:37 <trackbot> Created ACTION-439 - Find a media type for the tracking status representation [on Roy Fielding - due 2014-03-19].
16:17:51 <fielding> mine
16:18:30 <Zakim> +Chris_Pedigo
16:18:30 <npdoty> I'm sure we won't object, but if fielding can share his conclusion with the mailing list, that'd be great
16:19:32 <mecallahan> npdoty:  editorial change.  suggestion that we describe exceptions API, user provided a special permission, change from DNT0 to DNT1.  may want to give permission for particular sites.
16:19:52 <mecallahan> editorial change cont:  suggestion to call it "permission" for that function names and section title names.
16:20:15 <moneill2> +1
16:20:21 <moneill2> +q
16:20:22 <npdoty> Mike O'Neill raised this during Compliance discussion: http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/212
16:20:29 <WileyS> No concern with UGE -> UGP
16:20:33 <mecallahan> brookman:  dsinger noted permission is used differently in the compliance document, need to reconcile the definitions.
16:20:42 <justin> thanks wileys!
16:20:57 <npdoty> +1 to dsinger that we would want to change the language in compliance to match up
16:20:59 <mecallahan> moneill notes there already is a permission API on the working group.   suggested using "tracking permissions" as a phrase.
16:21:06 <npdoty> ack moneill
16:21:23 <mecallahan> brookman: yes, need to revise compliance document.
16:21:38 <mecallahan> brookman:  last written opinion:  R flag.
16:21:39 <Zakim> -SusanIsrael
16:21:46 <npdoty> MSFT has implemented it early/already, so we should check with them in case there's been a lot of uptake already
16:22:36 <ninja> q+
16:22:56 <mecallahan> ninja question:  since matthias did most of the dicussion, maybe wait for matthias?
16:23:31 <ninja> q-
16:23:50 <mecallahan> brookman:  yes, lets wait on this issue for matthias.
16:24:03 <mecallahan> jack: offers to take questions, thinks the proposal is fairly clear.
16:24:14 <mecallahan> brookman to jack:  what is it supposed to do?
16:24:25 <mecallahan> jack:  takes out ambiguitiy  of T flag.
16:24:47 <mecallahan> jack:  doesnt say what is really happening at the server, since that is the complianhce document/adjaceent format.
16:24:50 <npdoty> q+
16:25:00 <npdoty> q-
16:25:06 <mecallahan> brookman:  but that functionality already in the response.
16:25:20 <npdoty> was just going to repeat that point, that the compliance field in the same tracking status resource does indicate that
16:25:20 <mecallahan> npdoty -- FYI mecallahan has to leave in 5 minutes.
16:25:34 <npdoty> Zakim, please choose a scribe
16:25:34 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose [CDT]
16:25:36 <npdoty> Zakim, please choose a scribe
16:25:36 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose npdoty
16:25:51 <mecallahan> jack:  more precise to have a document that refers to the response.  need to be more precise/definitive.
16:25:58 <mecallahan> jack this R flag is more precise.
16:26:15 <mecallahan> brookman:  how does R flag help?
16:26:26 <fielding> T is defined with more preciseness than R, so I don't understand that.
16:26:36 <mecallahan> jack:  since we havent implemented yet, jack is anticipating how to comply.
16:26:55 <mecallahan> jack:  doesnt think T flag will slow things down, and would unaccpetable for a user.
16:26:56 <npdoty> loading the tracking status resource will be uncommon, and won't ever block the loading of the page we expect
16:27:27 <mecallahan> brookman:  lets park this discussion until matthias joins.
16:27:35 <mecallahan> npdoty -- you are up!
16:27:39 <npdoty> scribenick: npdoty
16:27:39 <ninja> zakim, take up agendum 6
16:27:39 <Zakim> agendum 6. "ISSUE-181: Finalize language regarding multiple first parties" taken up [from ninja]
16:28:13 <npdoty> justin: take up work on compliance, have done a lot of work on compliance in the past few years
16:28:27 <ninja> https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/181
16:28:30 <npdoty> ... have heard from group members that we do want to take these up, some issues we might be quite close on
16:28:49 <npdoty> ... get started with a couple issues that might not be particularly difficult
16:28:58 <npdoty> ... issue-181 on finalizing multiple first parties
16:29:06 <ninja> text in the party definition: “In some cases, a resource on the Web will be jointly controlled by two or more distinct parties. Each of those parties is considered a first party if a user would reasonably expect to communicate with all of them when accessing that resource. For example, prominent co-branding on the resource might lead a user to expect that multiple parties are responsible for the content or functionality.”
16:29:17 <Zakim> -Chapell
16:29:35 <npdoty> ... I think we might be done with this issue now. would call on robsherman to see if this is resolved
16:29:48 <npdoty> robsherman: agree that that was a legacy issue, fine with closing the issue now
16:29:51 <npdoty> justin: +1
16:29:59 <npdoty> ... send to the list and make sure there's no objections to it
16:30:12 <npdoty> ... any questions/comments on the teleconference?
16:30:25 <npdoty> ... have some issues that are pending review/open that might be stale and can be merged or closed
16:30:49 <npdoty> ... and there might be some more serious issues that will take more time (deidentification, say)
16:31:02 <justin> https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/209
16:31:05 <ninja> zakim, take up agendum 7
16:31:05 <Zakim> agendum 7. "ISSUE-209: Description of scope of specification" taken up [from ninja]
16:31:08 <npdoty> justin: keeping calls closer to an hour would be great for everyone
16:31:29 <npdoty> justin: scope discussion would be a good way to start discussing Compliance again
16:31:36 <justin> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-compliance.html#scope-and-goals
16:31:43 <npdoty> wiki page on proposals: http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Scope
16:32:36 <fielding> action fielding finish editorial changes for defn of tracking now that we have a defn of context
16:32:36 <trackbot> Created ACTION-440 - Finish editorial changes for defn of tracking now that we have a defn of context [on Roy Fielding - due 2014-03-19].
16:33:02 <npdoty> justin: amyc has a proposal without the additional paragraph [and with a third-party qualifier]
16:33:18 <npdoty> ... suggestion from Brooks about an additional sentence on laying the groundwork
16:33:45 <npdoty> justin: in the past we've had a much longer scope section
16:34:17 <fielding> q+
16:34:26 <npdoty> Brooks: logical consistency problem regarding scope, if the TPE doesn't force the allow tracking function
16:34:43 <justin> ack fielding
16:34:52 <npdoty> justin: we've generally worked on the functionality in the TPE for indicating allowing, so it makes sense
16:35:11 <npdoty> fielding: haven't updated the Compliance document since past CfOs, suggest that the editors go through and update the draft
16:35:41 <npdoty> justin: fair point, will check with chairs, Heather (editor on Compliance) to bring compliance into accord
16:35:49 <fielding> I mean the editorial bits are now inconsistent with the decisions on definitions
16:36:09 <Zakim> +??P48
16:36:15 <fielding> …, but easily corrected
16:36:19 <npdoty> q+
16:36:23 <schunter1> Zakim, ??P48 is schunter
16:36:24 <Zakim> +schunter; got it
16:36:31 <Brooks> q+
16:36:40 <justin> ack npd
16:37:09 <npdoty> npdoty: can Brooks check with Amy?
16:37:16 <justin> ack brooks
16:37:26 <npdoty> Brooks: has been a while, I can check with Amy. Amy: yes, would need to refresh, but happy to talk
16:37:33 <Zakim> -dwainberg
16:38:11 <npdoty> Brooks: if there isn't a choice between 0 and 1, then the scope can't refer to a choice
16:38:17 <fielding> I don't see the point -- we don't have any requirements on black or white
16:38:27 <npdoty> justin: but the TPE does mean that you're allowed to choose DNT
16:38:37 <npdoty> Brooks: but the scope should only talk about MUST requirements
16:39:05 <npdoty> justin: the TPE is designed to allow you to do that
16:39:30 <npdoty> Brooks: misleading to say we give you a choice between black and white, when it's not a MUST to provide both options
16:39:47 <Zakim> -Chris_Pedigo
16:39:51 <npdoty> ... we've been inconsistent about what no choice means
16:39:52 <fielding> TPE defines what is communicated. Compliance defines what is conforming behavior after that communication has been received.
16:39:57 <npdoty> schunter: don't recall colors in TPE
16:40:45 <npdoty> Brooks: about choosing a preference with respect to tracking, only provides the option to not track
16:41:23 <npdoty> schunter: in tracking status resource, have a T & N (previously 0 and 1), we now detail compliance
16:41:32 <npdoty> Brooks: I'm still talking about the user agent side
16:41:53 <npdoty> schunter: the UA can send 0 and 1 that are defined in the TPE
16:41:56 <fielding> We have no need for a section called "Scope"
16:42:11 <fielding> We should have a section called "Introduction"
16:42:15 <npdoty> Brooks: scope is really important, has to be things that are enforced
16:43:01 <npdoty> justin: do you want to propose something for scope that matches past decisions?
16:43:26 <npdoty> Brooks: leave it to someone else to define scope now that you've decided that you can only have one option
16:43:43 <justin> q?
16:44:18 <npdoty> justin: up to you all, whether we even need a Scope section or Introduction
16:44:46 <npdoty> justin: need to log off, but if we want to take up the R discussion again
16:44:52 <npdoty> schunter: better to take it to the list
16:45:05 <npdoty> justin: next week we'll work on narrowing issues that are before us
16:45:14 <npdoty> ... chairs will be meeting to talk about how to handle the harder issues going forward
16:45:19 <npdoty> ... any general questions?
16:45:22 <Zakim> -MECallahan
16:45:23 <Zakim> -[CDT]
16:45:24 <Zakim> -Carl_Cargill
16:45:25 <Zakim> -RichardWeaver
16:45:25 <Zakim> -vinay
16:45:26 <Zakim> -rvaneijk
16:45:27 <Zakim> -[Mozilla]
16:45:27 <Zakim> -kulick
16:45:28 <Zakim> -WileyS
16:45:28 <Zakim> -Brooks
16:45:30 <Zakim> -hefferjr
16:45:31 <Zakim> -JackHobaugh
16:45:32 <Zakim> -Ari
16:45:33 <Zakim> -Chris_IAB
16:45:34 <Zakim> -MattHayes
16:45:35 <Zakim> -robsherman
16:45:37 <Zakim> -WaltMichel
16:45:37 <Zakim> -Fielding
16:45:43 <Zakim> -moneill2
16:45:43 <Zakim> -npdoty
16:45:44 <npdoty> ... will try to keep these calls shorter going forward
16:45:45 <Zakim> -eberkower
16:45:48 <npdoty> [adjourned]
16:45:49 <Zakim> -Ninja
16:45:53 <Zakim> -Amy_Colando
16:45:53 <npdoty> Zakim, list attendees
16:45:54 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Chris_IAB, npdoty, WaltMichel, RichardWeaver, Ninja, Jeff, hefferjr, MECallahan, Ari, dwainberg, +1.202.370.aaaa, robsherman,
16:45:54 <Zakim> ... +1.202.785.aabb, JackHobaugh, Fielding, justin, eberkower, Carl_Cargill, moneill2, MattHayes, SusanIsrael, rvaneijk, WileyS, kulick, Brooks, vinay, sidstamm, Wendy, Chapell,
16:45:54 <Zakim> ... Amy_Colando, Chris_Pedigo, schunter
16:45:58 <Zakim> -Wendy
16:46:01 <npdoty> rrsagent, please draft the minutes
16:46:01 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/03/12-dnt-minutes.html npdoty
16:46:05 <Zakim> -schunter
16:47:30 <Zakim> -Jeff
16:47:31 <Zakim> T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM has ended
16:47:31 <Zakim> Attendees were Chris_IAB, npdoty, WaltMichel, RichardWeaver, Ninja, Jeff, hefferjr, MECallahan, Ari, dwainberg, +1.202.370.aaaa, robsherman, +1.202.785.aabb, JackHobaugh, Fielding,
16:47:31 <Zakim> ... justin, eberkower, Carl_Cargill, moneill2, MattHayes, SusanIsrael, rvaneijk, WileyS, kulick, Brooks, vinay, sidstamm, Wendy, Chapell, Amy_Colando, Chris_Pedigo, schunter
16:47:49 <ninja> rrsagent, create logs
16:47:49 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'create logs', ninja.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
16:48:07 <ninja> rrsagent, draft logs
16:48:07 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'draft logs', ninja.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
16:48:18 <npdoty> rrsagent, please draft the minutes
16:48:18 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/03/12-dnt-minutes.html npdoty
16:48:28 <npdoty> Zakim, bye
16:48:28 <Zakim> Zakim has left #dnt
16:48:32 <npdoty> rrsagent, bye
16:48:32 <RRSAgent> I see no action items