IRC log of dnt on 2014-03-12

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:38:25 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #dnt
15:38:25 [RRSAgent]
logging to
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]
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]
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]
15:55:08 [Zakim]
15:55:17 [npdoty]
Regrets+ walter
15:56:01 [Chris_IAB]
npdoty, super
15:57:43 [Zakim]
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]
15:58:15 [Zakim]
15:58:46 [Zakim]
15:59:13 [robsherman]
robsherman has joined #dnt
15:59:39 [Zakim]
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]
16:00:26 [Zakim]
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]
16:01:58 [Zakim]
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]
16:02:32 [Zakim]
16:02:34 [eberkower]
eberkower has joined #dnt
16:02:48 [robsherman2]
robsherman2 has joined #dnt
16:02:52 [Zakim]
16:02:53 [Zakim]
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]
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]
16:04:18 [carlcargill]
carlcargill has joined #dnt
16:04:19 [Zakim]
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]
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]
16:05:42 [ninja]
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]
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]
16:06:48 [npdoty]
16:06:51 [Zakim]
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]
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]
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]
16:09:03 [npdoty]
ack ninja
16:09:38 [Zakim]
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]
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]
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]
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]
16:14:16 [mecallahan]
...editors want a few weeks to implement the changes, and implement the changes.
16:14:28 [Chris_IAB]
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 <>.
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]
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]
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]
16:18:30 [Zakim]
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]
16:20:21 [moneill2]
16:20:22 [npdoty]
Mike O'Neill raised this during Compliance discussion:
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]
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]
16:22:56 [mecallahan]
ninja question: since matthias did most of the dicussion, maybe wait for matthias?
16:23:31 [ninja]
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]
16:25:00 [npdoty]
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]
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]
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]
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]
16:31:43 [npdoty]
wiki page on proposals:
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]
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]
16:36:15 [fielding]
…, but easily corrected
16:36:19 [npdoty]
16:36:23 [schunter1]
Zakim, ??P48 is schunter
16:36:24 [Zakim]
+schunter; got it
16:36:31 [Brooks]
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]
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]
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]
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]
16:45:23 [Zakim]
16:45:24 [Zakim]
16:45:25 [Zakim]
16:45:25 [Zakim]
16:45:26 [Zakim]
16:45:27 [Zakim]
16:45:27 [Zakim]
16:45:28 [Zakim]
16:45:28 [Zakim]
16:45:30 [Zakim]
16:45:31 [Zakim]
16:45:32 [Zakim]
16:45:33 [Zakim]
16:45:34 [Zakim]
16:45:35 [Zakim]
16:45:37 [Zakim]
16:45:37 [Zakim]
16:45:43 [Zakim]
16:45:43 [Zakim]
16:45:44 [npdoty]
... will try to keep these calls shorter going forward
16:45:45 [Zakim]
16:45:48 [npdoty]
16:45:49 [Zakim]
16:45:53 [Zakim]
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]
16:46:01 [npdoty]
rrsagent, please draft the minutes
16:46:01 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate npdoty
16:46:05 [Zakim]
16:47:30 [Zakim]
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 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