15:56:33 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dnt
15:56:33 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/05/29-dnt-irc
15:56:35 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
15:56:35 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #dnt
15:56:37 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
15:56:37 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
15:56:38 <trackbot> Meeting: Tracking Protection Working Group Teleconference
15:56:38 <trackbot> Date: 29 May 2013
15:56:41 <npdoty> Zakim, this is TRACK
15:56:41 <Zakim> ok, npdoty; that matches T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM
15:56:47 <npdoty> Zakim, who is on the phone?
15:56:47 <Zakim> On the phone I see +1.202.587.aaaa, JeffWilson, efelten, +1.646.654.aabb
15:56:53 <npdoty> Zakim, aaaa is Jules_Polonetsky
15:56:53 <Zakim> +Jules_Polonetsky; got it
15:56:53 <eberkower> aabb is eberkower
15:56:58 <npdoty> Zakim, aabb is eberkower
15:56:58 <Zakim> +eberkower; got it
15:57:02 <jackhobaugh> jackhobaugh has joined #dnt
15:57:04 <WaltMichel> WaltMichel has joined #DNT
15:57:22 <CraigSpiezle> CraigSpiezle has joined #dnt
15:57:42 <peterswire> peterswire has joined #dnt
15:57:56 <rigo> zakim, code?
15:57:56 <Zakim> the conference code is 87225 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), rigo
15:58:26 <jchester2> jchester2 has joined #dnt
15:58:28 <Chris_IAB> Chris_IAB has joined #dnt
15:58:31 <Zakim> +Wendy
15:58:38 <Zakim> +NAI
15:58:41 <jchester2> hello privacy campers!
15:58:41 <Zakim> +Rigo
15:58:47 <Zakim> + +52661100aacc
15:58:55 <Chris_IAB> just joined
15:58:59 <Yianni> Yianni has joined #DNT
15:59:05 <Zakim> + +1.215.286.aadd
15:59:11 <Zakim> +jchester2
15:59:15 <jchester2> zakim, mute me
15:59:15 <Zakim> jchester2 should now be muted
15:59:28 <Zakim> +npdoty
15:59:38 <Zakim> + +1.202.587.aaee
15:59:50 <peterswire> 202.587  is peter and yianni
15:59:56 <npdoty> Zakim, aaee is peterswire
15:59:58 <Zakim> +peterswire; got it
15:59:59 <Zakim> + +1.646.827.aaff
16:00:02 <npdoty> Zakim, peterswire has Yianni
16:00:02 <Zakim> +Yianni; got it
16:00:05 <phildpearce> phildpearce has joined #dnt
16:00:07 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
16:00:10 <npdoty> Zakim, aadd may be susanisrael
16:00:10 <moneill2> zakim, [IPCaller] is me
16:00:11 <Zakim> +susanisrael?; got it
16:00:11 <Zakim> +moneill2; got it
16:00:12 <paulohm> paulohm has joined #dnt
16:00:27 <Brooks> Brooks has joined #dnt
16:00:27 <fielding> fielding has joined #dnt
16:00:29 <WileyS> WileyS has joined #dnt
16:00:37 <Zakim> +phildpearce
16:00:43 <Zakim> +Peder_Magee
16:00:50 <Zakim> +Fielding
16:01:00 <vinay> vinay has joined #dnt
16:01:08 <magee2023263538> magee2023263538 has joined #dnt
16:01:08 <Chris_IAB> npdoty, yes
16:01:09 <dwainberg> dwainberg has joined #dnt
16:01:10 <Zakim> +WileyS
16:01:11 <rvaneijk> rvaneijk has joined #dnt
16:01:18 <npdoty> Zakim, aacc is Chris_IAB
16:01:18 <Zakim> +Chris_IAB; got it
16:01:20 <Zakim> +rvaneijk
16:01:25 <hwest> hwest has joined #dnt
16:01:26 <Zakim> +paulohm
16:01:32 <Zakim> +vinay
16:01:47 <hefferjr> hefferjr has joined #dnt
16:01:56 <Zakim> +hwest
16:02:01 <ChrisPedigoOPA> ChrisPedigoOPA has joined #dnt
16:02:08 <robsherman> robsherman has joined #dnt
16:02:31 <Zakim> + +1.202.257.aagg
16:02:36 <robsherman> zakim, aagg is robsherman
16:02:36 <Zakim> +robsherman; got it
16:02:39 <npdoty> scribenick: Yianni
16:02:58 <Zakim> +Chris_Pedigo
16:03:04 <Zakim> +Craig_Spiezle
16:03:18 <JC> JC has joined #DNT
16:03:22 <David_MacMillan> David_MacMillan has joined #dnt
16:03:23 <Zakim> +hefferjr
16:03:24 <Yianni> Peter: we are getting started
16:03:31 <adrianba> adrianba has joined #dnt
16:03:33 <npdoty> Zakim, who is on the phone?
16:03:33 <Zakim> On the phone I see Jules_Polonetsky, JeffWilson, efelten, eberkower, Wendy, NAI, Rigo, Chris_IAB, susanisrael?, jchester2 (muted), npdoty, peterswire, +1.646.827.aaff, moneill2,
16:03:34 <Yianni> ...agenda for call: number of action items
16:03:37 <Zakim> ... phildpearce, Peder_Magee, Fielding, WileyS, rvaneijk, paulohm, vinay, hwest, robsherman, Chris_Pedigo, Craig_Spiezle, hefferjr
16:03:37 <Zakim> peterswire has Yianni
16:03:37 <Zakim> +mecallahan
16:03:48 <Yianni> ...discuss additional activities around consensus action summary
16:03:48 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
16:03:56 <Yianni> ...clarify pending review stable
16:03:56 <npdoty> Zakim, NAI has jackhobaugh, marcgroman
16:03:56 <Zakim> +jackhobaugh, marcgroman; got it
16:03:58 <mecallahan> mecallahan has joined #dnt
16:04:02 <Zakim> +schunter
16:04:02 <ninjamarnau> ninjamarnau has joined #dnt
16:04:06 <sidstamm> sidstamm has joined #dnt
16:04:06 <Yianni> ...like to thank Nick to clean up open aciton items
16:04:15 <Zakim> +[Mozilla]
16:04:17 <Zakim> + +1.650.365.aahh
16:04:18 <sidstamm> Zakim, Mozilla has sidstamm
16:04:18 <Zakim> +sidstamm; got it
16:04:44 <Yianni> ...in terms of items that have received a lot of back and forth: one of them is action 410
16:04:51 <Zakim> +??P70
16:04:51 <dwainberg> zakim, aaff is dwainberg
16:04:51 <Zakim> +dwainberg; got it
16:04:55 <Yianni> ...Walter and Rob have written about
16:05:00 <wseltzer> zakim, who is here?
16:05:00 <Zakim> On the phone I see Jules_Polonetsky, JeffWilson, efelten, eberkower, Wendy, NAI, Rigo, Chris_IAB, susanisrael?, jchester2 (muted), npdoty, peterswire, dwainberg, moneill2,
16:05:01 <Chapell> Chapell has joined #DNT
16:05:03 <Zakim> ... phildpearce, Peder_Magee, Fielding, WileyS, rvaneijk, paulohm, vinay, hwest, robsherman, Chris_Pedigo, Craig_Spiezle, hefferjr, mecallahan, [Microsoft], schunter, [Mozilla],
16:05:03 <Zakim> ... +1.650.365.aahh, ??P70
16:05:03 <Zakim> peterswire has Yianni
16:05:04 <Zakim> [Mozilla] has sidstamm
16:05:04 <Zakim> NAI has jackhobaugh, marcgroman
16:05:04 <Yianni> ...Walter are you on the call?
16:05:05 <Zakim> On IRC I see sidstamm, ninjamarnau, mecallahan, adrianba, David_MacMillan, JC, robsherman, ChrisPedigoOPA, hefferjr, hwest, rvaneijk, dwainberg, magee2023263538, vinay, WileyS,
16:05:05 <Zakim> ... fielding, Brooks, paulohm, phildpearce, Yianni, Chris_IAB, jchester2
16:05:05 <Zakim> +[Microsoft.a]
16:05:06 <adrianba> zakim, [Microsoft.a] is me
16:05:07 <Zakim> +adrianba; got it
16:05:08 <Zakim> +Amy_Colando
16:05:10 <Yianni> ...Rob are you on the call?
16:05:13 <David_MacMillan> Zakim, aahh is David_MacMillan
16:05:13 <Zakim> +David_MacMillan; got it
16:05:23 <Yianni> ...thank you Rob for your comments
16:05:36 <Yianni> ...Rob could you describe the issue and your understanding
16:06:07 <Yianni> Rob: disagreement with Walter, the issue may not be covering his concerns
16:06:08 <marc> marc has joined #dnt
16:06:25 <Yianni> ...at the moment, it is not a real big issue
16:06:36 <Yianni> ...agree with what Roy has said so far
16:07:05 <Zakim> +Brooks
16:07:14 <Yianni> Peter: Moving issue to closed, Roy did not support any language
16:07:23 <peterswire> q?
16:07:23 <Yianni> ...anyone to speak against closing the issue
16:07:38 <Zakim> +RichardWeaver
16:07:42 <Yianni> ...we will recirculate intent to close
16:07:49 <Yianni> ...we will close issue 184 and action 410
16:07:55 <Zakim> + +1.646.666.aaii
16:07:56 <Richard_comScore> Richard_comScore has joined #dnt
16:08:03 <Chapell> zakim, aaii is chapell
16:08:03 <Zakim> +chapell; got it
16:08:10 <Yianni> ...action 406, new set of names around the yellow state
16:08:12 <npdoty> npdoty has changed the topic to: agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2013May/0125.html
16:08:30 <Yianni> ...red, yellow, green has some advantages
16:08:55 <Zakim> +kulick
16:09:02 <Yianni> ...goal to be understandable, not making any legal judgment, and if we use words used elsewhere, we need to be thoughtful, such as de-identified
16:09:04 <kulick> kulick has joined #dnt
16:09:18 <rigo> action-406?
16:09:18 <trackbot> ACTION-406 -- Rob van Eijk to porpose a new set of names around yellow state -- due 2013-05-29 -- OPEN
16:09:18 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/406
16:09:19 <WileyS> We should also try to avoid technology specific terms, such as "hashed", and focus on principles
16:09:29 <jeffwilson> jeffwilson has joined #dnt
16:09:29 <Yianni> ...Rob in addition to substantive questions, where are we in naming
16:10:01 <Yianni> Rob: Shane and I have basic disagreement, on role of administrative safeguards
16:10:09 <Yianni> ...unlinkability is about adding new data
16:10:23 <WileyS> Tech + Operational + Administrative can equal "de-identified" (unlinkablity is different and must stand on its own)
16:10:25 <Zakim> -robsherman
16:10:28 <Yianni> ...identifiability is different from unlinkability, taking account of all means to identify a natural person
16:10:40 <Yianni> ...important to get language right
16:10:46 <rigo> RE: identifiability is not linkability. linkability is the possibility to add new data to an existing profile
16:10:59 <Yianni> ...FTC and NAI notion of de-identification is a process, start with looking at raw data
16:11:15 <Yianni> ...first step consists of taking out directly identifiable elements, email address
16:11:26 <Yianni> ...second step, partially de-identified level
16:11:48 <WileyS> Important to note "reasonably identifiable" in the EU context
16:11:49 <Yianni> ...not reasonable linked, need to take extra effort t otake out indirect identifiers
16:11:56 <peterswire> q?
16:12:01 <Yianni> ...to accomplish full de-identified process, i have proposed a three state model
16:12:18 <jchester2> This is a very important proposal, and we thank Rob for this.
16:12:22 <Yianni> ...raw data, to get from raw data to yellow or de-identified, you need data scrubbing
16:12:34 <Yianni> ...to get to full de-identified, you need to do something else
16:12:42 <WileyS> Yahoo! has been using a tri-state deidentification process for nearly 7 years - heavily reviewed with DPAs and A29WP
16:12:54 <Yianni> ...de-identification is a way to look at end result, how difficult is it for a party to identify to a user or device
16:13:04 <Yianni> ...a hahed pseudonym could make it very difficult
16:13:13 <jchester2> Shane:  So what Yahoo is using to target users, such as with Genome, is all Yellow?
16:13:18 <Yianni> ...it is a way to address reasonable requirements of adequate level of protection
16:13:40 <Yianni> ...an adequate level of data proteciton is different from concept of unlinkability
16:13:46 <Yianni> ...Rob will post in IRC
16:14:06 <WileyS> Jeff - no, that data is the raw state for non-opted-out users (but the raw events are scored and only the score remains for targeting - not the event level data)
16:14:23 <Yianni> ...main difficulty is to determine that data that has gone through first step of de-identificaiton under strong assumption of organization safeguards is that enough to count as full de-identification
16:14:31 <Yianni> Peter: how do we describe these
16:14:39 <rvaneijk> PII: This standard refers to the ISO 29100 (privacy framework) definition of personally identifiable information (PII): any information that (a) can be used to identify the PII principal to whom such information relates, or (b) is or might be directly or indirectly linked to a PII principal. NOTE To determine whether a PII principal is identifiable, account should be taken of all the means which can reasonably be used by the privacy stakeholder holding the[CUT]
16:14:40 <npdoty> is the difference that Shane and Rob disagree on the use of organizational safeguards between red and yellow state or between yellow and green state?
16:14:44 <Yianni> ...we have long standing concern of technical or administrative measures
16:14:50 <Yianni> ...have a question about naming
16:14:56 <jchester2> But it also must be discussed in terms of what it may mean for a meaningful DNT standard.
16:15:00 <Yianni> ...first step, take out direct identifiers
16:15:08 <Yianni> ...second step, take out indirectly idenfifiers
16:15:12 <efelten> What's the dividing line between "direct" and "non-direct" identifiers?
16:15:13 <Yianni> ...first, not directly identifiable
16:15:17 <moneill2> +q
16:15:20 <Yianni> ...second, not indirectly identifiable
16:15:21 <WileyS> "reasonable" is important
16:15:28 <Yianni> ...could put reasonably in front
16:15:40 <Yianni> ...direct identifiers have an intuitive meaning, Peters name in it
16:15:44 <jchester2> Peter:  Why can't we use the sample color labels, which a user can better understand?
16:15:50 <peterswire> q?
16:15:57 <Yianni> ...offer that as a thought or suggestion
16:15:59 <npdoty> ack moneill
16:16:19 <Yianni> Mike Oneil: differences between unlinkability and de-identified is not just about direct and indirect
16:16:21 <rigo> q?
16:16:22 <WileyS> I'm fine with "not directly identifiable" (aka de-identified) and "not indirectly identifiable" (aka unlinkable)
16:16:32 <Yianni> ...if data point from same person can be linked
16:16:34 <rigo> q+
16:16:40 <efelten> If we are going to distinguish between "direct" and "indirect" we need to define what the difference is. Not enough to just give a few examples.
16:16:41 <Yianni> ...with yellow, there is the potential about being re-identified
16:16:57 <Yianni> Peter: 2 different tasks, one what do we name the state?
16:16:59 <peterswire> q?
16:17:06 <Yianni> ...second task, is it good enough to fit into the state
16:17:10 <efelten> +q
16:17:14 <npdoty> ack ri
16:17:24 <Yianni> Rigo: I think we have several functions, I wanted us to think in functions
16:17:36 <Yianni> ...the names we use are replacements for functions we have
16:18:00 <Yianni> ...if I have a profile without a name but can single out that person in anyway, I can still distriminate against that person
16:18:04 <rvaneijk> q+
16:18:13 <WileyS> Potential, or risk, is a core element of the middle state - organizations are committing to not re-identify (and bolstering this with technical, operational, and administrative controls).  This is an "accountability" based approach.  Very similar to many other organizational committments to users.
16:18:23 <Yianni> ...data protection function, and goal of what we do here, because people are discriminated because they are singled out
16:18:32 <Yianni> ...if we go to yellow, we need at least a pool of 50 people
16:18:33 <Chris_IAB> wait, who's discriminating?
16:18:41 <Yianni> ...not too much of a controversy about it
16:18:41 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
16:18:49 <Yianni> Peter: does that inform your view on the naming?
16:18:49 <WileyS> Rigo, no issues there - please provide wording to match the concern.
16:18:52 <Walter> zakim, ipcaller is Walter
16:18:52 <Zakim> +Walter; got it
16:18:54 <ninjamarnau> Thanks Rigo. "singling out" is the important issue imo.
16:19:08 <Zakim> + +1.650.465.aajj
16:19:13 <Yianni> Rigo: shouldn't care too much about the name, just do not want to allow discrimination
16:19:15 <Zakim> -David_MacMillan
16:19:22 <Yianni> Peter: name can confuse or lead to assumptions
16:19:24 <kj> kj has joined #dnt
16:19:36 <jchester2> +q
16:19:40 <Yianni> Ed Felten: if we are relying on a difference between direct or indirect, we need a technical definition
16:19:43 <David_MacMillan> zakim, aajj is David_MacMillan
16:19:44 <Zakim> +David_MacMillan; got it
16:19:45 <Yianni> ...very difficult line to draw
16:19:46 <WileyS> Ninja and Rigo - your callout is well aligned with the intentions of the tri-state proposal
16:19:59 <npdoty> ack efelten
16:20:06 <Yianni> Peter: one problem with label is that any labels will have difficult line drawing
16:20:13 <Yianni> ...are there better summary terms
16:20:17 <npdoty> ack rvan
16:20:23 <jchester2> zakim, unmute me
16:20:23 <Zakim> jchester2 should no longer be muted
16:20:49 <Yianni> Rob: one response to Rigo, we should first try to get 3 stages rights, then we have a foundation to build on, what permitted uses are allowed in what state
16:20:59 <peterswire> q?
16:21:05 <Yianni> ...second, linkability is the key element, the second element is data retention
16:21:06 <npdoty> ack jche
16:21:11 <rigo> WileyS, Rob, ok, not interfering too much with your plan to tackle one thing at a time
16:21:13 <rvaneijk> first get the 3 states right  it allows to have a discuuion about the permitted uses Linkability is key Data retention
16:21:34 <Yianni> Jeff Chester: I don't see a distinction, you do not need a name, it is direct not indirect at all
16:21:48 <rigo> WileyS: what is the current location in the Spec for that wording?
16:21:51 <Yianni> ...agree with Rob, that if we get this right, we can move forward
16:21:53 <peterswire> q?
16:21:53 <jchester2> zakim, mute me
16:21:54 <Zakim> jchester2 should now be muted
16:21:59 <npdoty> jchester: a persistent identifier can be used for targeting
16:22:00 <Yianni> ...personally like the red, yellow, green
16:22:04 <WileyS> Rob - correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we agree on the states and the process, and only disagree on naming.  Fair?
16:22:20 <moneill2> +q
16:22:37 <WileyS> Jeff, once a record has been made "not directly identifiable" then it can no longer be used for targeting.
16:22:37 <peterswire> q?
16:22:50 <ninjamarnau> WileyS, I do not mind the tri-state. My concerns are about the measures and requirements in the yellow state. whatever we call this state.
16:22:51 <Yianni> Rob: differeneces between getting to one state or another, describing state is in terms of requirements
16:23:01 <npdoty> ack mone
16:23:23 <Yianni> Mike Oneil: getting to one word is the problem, yellow state is de-id but still linked, green state is unlinked
16:23:33 <Yianni> ...we should use both linked and unlinked, de-identified and identified
16:23:37 <WileyS> Ninja - that's fair.  The goal of the yellow state is force this data to only be used for analytical purposes - no active use in production situations (profiling, targeting, etc.).
16:24:02 <Yianni> Peter: action item for 2 weeks, Peter would write up, glad to help, directly and indirectly identified language
16:24:12 <Yianni> ...other proposals red, yellow, green, jeff supporting
16:24:23 <Yianni> ...Jeff would you write up an action item text describing names for that
16:24:34 <Chris_IAB> peterswire, npdoty, many (most) of us from industry won't be able to make next week's call due to a DAA event
16:24:38 <WileyS> I'm fine with pictorally displaying red, yellow, green but I think we need more meaningful terms for policy discussions.
16:24:39 <Yianni> ...trying to get text generated, understand problem of drawing lines between the two
16:24:42 <vincent> vincent has joined #dnt
16:24:45 <jchester2> What does Rob plan to do on the states?
16:24:45 <Yianni> ...open to other language names
16:24:53 <Yianni> ...I will provide direct and indirect language
16:25:06 <npdoty> action: swire to draft directly/indirectly -identified language proposal
16:25:07 <trackbot> Created ACTION-412 - Draft directly/indirectly -identified language proposal [on Peter Swire - due 2013-06-05].
16:25:07 <WileyS> s/pictorally/pictorially
16:25:08 <Zakim> +vincent
16:25:12 <peterswire> q?
16:25:14 <Yianni> ...Mike you said several pieces, if you have other naming approaches, we will look at in two weeks
16:25:22 <npdoty> action-412 due 06-10
16:25:22 <trackbot> Set ACTION-412 Draft directly/indirectly -identified language proposal due date to 06-10.
16:25:40 <Yianni> Peter: Jeff Chester action 411 on issue 10
16:25:47 <jchester2> zakim, unmute me
16:25:47 <Zakim> jchester2 should no longer be muted
16:26:06 <Yianni> Jeff Chester: we have nothing to say, I think at this point we have to let it pass
16:26:13 <jchester2> zakim, mute me
16:26:13 <Zakim> jchester2 should now be muted
16:26:19 <Yianni> Peter: we will move to pending review stable
16:26:31 <Yianni> ...shift to pending review stable
16:26:31 <npdoty> item would still be pending review (so keep reviewing it!), not closed.
16:26:43 <Yianni> Recognizing the interdependence of many issues within the compliance spec, we are introducing a new issue category “Pending Review Stable.”  The category will fall between “Pending Review” and “Closed.”  “Pending Review Stable” means that discussions of the issue will cease until other issues are stable.  When the Editors decide to add proposed text to the Tracking Compliance and Scope, the issue will move from open to pending review. When the [CUT]
16:27:00 <Yianni> Peter: this is language we circulated to group some time ago
16:27:02 <npdoty> note for nick: move ISSUE 10 to Pending Review Stable, with note
16:27:21 <Yianni> ...we are trying to clean up action items and merge issues when possible, so website will accurately show we things are at today
16:27:29 <Yianni> ...that will allow us to focus on remaining items
16:27:38 <Yianni> ...idea of pending review stable is interdependence of many issues
16:27:55 <npdoty> [continued] When the Chairs decide the text is stable, a note will be added to the issue-tracker stating the issue is “Pending Review Stable.” There could potentially be multiple stable options when the Chairs decide an issue is “Pending Review Stable.”  Discussion of an issue in “Pending Review Stable” can re-start if there is a new proposal that gains significant support.
16:27:56 <jmayer> jmayer has joined #dnt
16:28:02 <Zakim> +Jonathan_Mayer
16:28:15 <Yianni> ...5 or 6 interrelated issues, hard to finalize until they know how different sets of issues fit together
16:28:38 <Yianni> ...there would still be pending review, and pending review stable would not be closed
16:28:54 <Yianni> ...pending review stable is that discussion of issues would cease until we could look at whole package
16:29:00 <jchester2> Jonathan.  Do you have any comments on action 411, issue 10.  We just allowed it to move to pending review before you joined call.
16:29:28 <Yianni> ...if Editors add proposed text it goes from open to pending review, then when language is stable, we will add a note of pending review stable
16:29:43 <peterswire> q?
16:29:50 <Yianni> ...we do not expect to discuss a pending review stable unless a new proposal is made with substantial support
16:30:11 <peterswire> q?
16:30:15 <johnsimpson> johnsimpson has joined #dnt
16:30:21 <Yianni> ...hope would be if we have lots of issues in pending review stable, we could look at things in a whole package
16:30:57 <Yianni> ...going back to action item lists, we have other actions scheduled to be done by this date
16:31:08 <npdoty> action-402?
16:31:08 <trackbot> ACTION-402 -- Shane Wiley to work with Dan to follow up on defining the "yellow" to "green" transaction with strong enough measures -- due 2013-05-28 -- OPEN
16:31:08 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/402
16:31:11 <rvaneijk> Yianni, I put the notes on the mailinglist, it is too big to past in IRC.
16:31:11 <Yianni> ...action 402 - shane and dan, three states
16:31:47 <fielding> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/overdue
16:31:58 <Yianni> Shane: we take language of Dan as is, we will be adding a few additional non-normative examples that do not go to as strong a technical measure to meet end point
16:32:01 <jmayer> +q
16:32:11 <Zakim> +johnsimpson
16:32:15 <Yianni> ...the question is moving from red to yellow, from raw to not directly identifiable
16:32:23 <johnsimpson> apologies for joining late
16:32:26 <Yianni> ...we will need new language for next week
16:32:26 <jmayer> -q
16:32:33 <Yianni> Peter: extend new language until two weeks
16:32:39 <npdoty> action-402 due 06-10
16:32:40 <trackbot> Set ACTION-402 Work with Dan to follow up on defining the "yellow" to "green" transaction with strong enough measures due date to 06-10.
16:32:48 <Yianni> Shane: we have plan to assemble language, just need to get the language in fron of Dan
16:32:55 <jchester2> I apologize.  Have to go testify at USTR on data protection issues.
16:33:03 <Zakim> -jchester2
16:33:12 <rigo> action-403?
16:33:12 <trackbot> ACTION-403 -- Justin Brookman to write language on red / yellow / green -- due 2013-05-15 -- OPEN
16:33:12 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/403
16:33:19 <Yianni> Peter: on action list, Shane had 402, Justin is assigned to 403
16:33:20 <rvaneijk> Yianni: URL is here http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2013May/0135.html
16:33:28 <Yianni> Thanks Rob
16:33:44 <Yianni> Shane: Justin has a mission with respect to 403 for him to resolve
16:34:06 <Yianni> Peter: could you coordinate with Justin
16:34:32 <npdoty> justin may have a separate issue with red-yellow-green, so will maintain his own action
16:34:37 <Yianni> Shane: Justin has a very unique concern, maybe more appropriate for Dan to work with Justin, they have same concern
16:34:48 <rigo> WileyS: Justin added this action-403 for himself to have a specific angle on the question of red/yellow/green and suggest to wait until he gets back. Suggest to add Dan to it as he may have same concerns
16:35:16 <Yianni> Peter: rigo any update on audience measurement
16:35:39 <Yianni> Rigo: Susan will go back to Jeff Chester where we will figure out what the issues are to try to get a better understanding
16:35:51 <Yianni> ...tricky issue is common understanding of what we are talking about
16:35:57 <rvaneijk> q+
16:36:03 <Yianni> ...after this call, I will have a call with Susan
16:36:08 <peterswire> q?
16:36:16 <npdoty> ack rvan
16:36:41 <Yianni> Rob: in the text Rigo and Susan are working on, the data is not applied to individual, audience attribution is not what we are dealing with
16:36:53 <Yianni> ...I am worried about the application of the data to the individual
16:37:00 <hefferjr> q+
16:37:08 <Yianni> Rigo: I know about concern, Susan said this is not what we are talking about
16:37:14 <peterswire> q?
16:37:18 <Yianni> ...audience attribution is not what we are talking about
16:37:27 <npdoty> ack hefferjr
16:37:40 <Yianni> Ronan.. make sure Neilson is included in audience measurement discussion
16:37:54 <Zakim> +Dan_Auerbach
16:38:01 <npdoty> rigo and susan, can you CC Ronan on email thread?
16:38:04 <Yianni> Rigo: whatever we do will be in full and open scrutiny
16:38:24 <Yianni> Peter: RIchard you wanted to keep action 370 open
16:38:27 <dan_auerbach> dan_auerbach has joined #dnt
16:38:32 <rigo> action-370?
16:38:32 <trackbot> ACTION-370 -- Richard Weaver to propose narrower "market research" use (with David Stark, Justin, Susan, Ronan, Rachel, Chris_M, EBerkower) -- due 2013-02-27 -- CLOSED
16:38:32 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/370
16:38:46 <Yianni> ...would you be comfortable closing action 370, for narrowing audience measurement
16:39:00 <Yianni> ...if audience measurement is in another action item, we are okay with closing
16:39:01 <npdoty> action-404?
16:39:01 <trackbot> ACTION-404 -- Susan Israel to further Fact finding on scope of audience measurement and the DAA exception (one page of text) -- due 2013-05-29 -- OPEN
16:39:01 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/404
16:39:28 <npdoty> q+
16:39:34 <Yianni> Richard: we want to make sure that we are clearlly talking  about audience measurement and not market research
16:39:43 <Yianni> Peter: we will not close action 370
16:40:28 <Yianni> Nick: on action 370, we will leave action item open if you want to add proposed text
16:40:45 <Yianni> ...we have an issue open, we only keep an action open if someone plans to take an action
16:40:58 <Yianni> Richard: we just don't want to close the door
16:41:05 <npdoty> sounds good, will follow up offline
16:41:22 <Yianni> Peter: next one on list is action 407
16:41:27 <npdoty> action-370: don't want the issue to drop, as ESOMAR folks may be interested in a refined proposal based on what comes up
16:41:27 <trackbot> Notes added to ACTION-370 Propose narrower "market research" use (with David Stark, Justin, Susan, Ronan, Rachel, Chris_M, EBerkower).
16:41:28 <Yianni> ...text around browser education
16:41:50 <Yianni> Chris: Alan and I have not had a chance to work on,
16:41:56 <Yianni> ...requesting an extra week
16:42:10 <Yianni> Peter: have that action due two weeks from now
16:42:18 <Yianni> ...David on for action 408
16:42:30 <npdoty> action-407 due 06-10
16:42:30 <trackbot> Set ACTION-407 (with Alan Chapell) to draft text regarding browser education as discussed in Sunnyvale (Item 6 in Draft Framework, also in consensus action summary) due date to 06-10.
16:42:35 <Yianni> David: waiting for feedback
16:42:37 <Zakim> -RichardWeaver
16:42:39 <npdoty> action-408 due 06-10
16:42:39 <trackbot> Set ACTION-408 Review security/fraud text (with chris mejia and dan auerbach) due date to 06-10.
16:42:44 <Yianni> Peter: assign for two weeks
16:42:59 <Yianni> Nick: lost about other action, will do action 409 later today
16:43:04 <npdoty> action-409: Nick will update today
16:43:04 <trackbot> Notes added to ACTION-409 Circulate (with yianni, tlr, peter) regarding "graduated response" and old actions.
16:43:05 <Yianni> Peter: completes list of action items
16:43:20 <npdoty> Topic: Activity on Consensus Action items
16:43:25 <Yianni> ...next thing on agenda is additional items on consensus action summary
16:43:41 <Yianni> ...there will be a call on data retention
16:43:58 <Yianni> ...other issues are audience measurement
16:44:07 <peterswire> q?
16:44:10 <npdoty> q-
16:44:18 <Yianni> ...any other things we should be assigning on item 2 of action summary
16:44:47 <Yianni> ...the other issues, meaning of de-id have been discussed today, we have gone through procedural issues of pending review stable
16:45:10 <rvaneijk> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/31
16:45:12 <rigo> issue-31?
16:45:12 <trackbot> ISSUE-31 -- Minimization -- to what extent will minimization be required for use of a particular exemption? (conditional exemptions) -- open
16:45:12 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/31
16:45:51 <npdoty> jmayer, I think you had a concern on minimization and how to handle it as an issue?
16:46:21 <johnsimpson> q?
16:46:25 <Yianni> Peter: minimization language is an open issue
16:46:32 <fielding> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-compliance.html#data-minimization-and-transparency
16:46:34 <npdoty> I think that the draft has relatively stable text on minimization and general requirements: http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-compliance#permitted-use-requirements
16:46:38 <rigo> q+
16:46:41 <Yianni> ...the idea here would be a follow up seperate issue on data retention
16:47:02 <Yianni> Rigo: I think there are distinct issues here
16:47:24 <Yianni> ...Ian Fette had an issue of even being exposed to data that you didn't want before you could clean them up
16:47:35 <Yianni> ...he talked about an issue of short retention
16:47:47 <Yianni> ...we do not consider this controversal, this is issue 31
16:48:09 <fielding> my only concern with that text is the last word "unlinkable"
16:48:17 <Yianni> ...data minimization is critical to Rob, reason to collect and retain data
16:48:43 <npdoty> fielding, we would certainly want to update it based on updated definitions throughout the document
16:49:02 <rvaneijk> q+
16:49:04 <Yianni> Peter: Rigo do you a suggestion of how to list this
16:49:09 <npdoty> ack rigo
16:49:24 <Yianni> Rigo: would suggest to close issue 31, after hearing from Rob and Shane
16:49:32 <npdoty> ack rvan
16:49:51 <Yianni> Rob: data retention is something connected to each permitted use, might be different data retention for each permitted use
16:50:06 <Yianni> ...is data retention tied to any other issues?
16:50:32 <npdoty> issue-134?
16:50:32 <trackbot> ISSUE-134 -- Would we additionally permit logs that are retained for a short enough period? -- open
16:50:32 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/134
16:50:49 <npdoty> in terms of short-term retention of logs, that's consolidated into issue-134
16:50:51 <Yianni> Peter: follow up with Thomas about short term retention is not lost
16:50:59 <Yianni> ...if it is part of broader discussion then it will go into that
16:51:21 <Yianni> ...last item I have on the list is a question of keeping issue 188 and 191 to deal with de-identification
16:51:31 <npdoty> issue-188?
16:51:31 <trackbot> ISSUE-188 -- Definition of de-identified (or previously, unlinkable) data -- open
16:51:31 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/188
16:51:31 <Yianni> ...seperate issue for normative text and for non-normative text
16:51:33 <npdoty> issue-191?
16:51:33 <trackbot> ISSUE-191 -- Non-normative Discussion of De-Identification -- raised
16:51:33 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/191
16:51:34 <rigo> suggestion is to note in ISSUE-31 that it is superseded by ISSUE-134
16:51:43 <Yianni> ...Jonathan Mayer asked to keep the issues seperate
16:52:01 <Yianni> Jonathan: happy to provide input
16:52:26 <npdoty> issue-31: might be related to issue-134 around short-term retention of logs
16:52:26 <trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-31 Minimization -- to what extent will minimization be required for use of a particular exemption? (conditional exemptions).
16:52:32 <Yianni> Jonathan: Explained in email, issue is in defining de-id there is a substantive standard, what is the aim of de-identification
16:52:52 <Yianni> ...to make it hard or impossible.  Then non-normative examples that are essentia to illustrating the standard
16:53:15 <Yianni> ...we could have no non-normative examples, or detailed non-normative examples
16:53:40 <Yianni> ...Dan and Shane are far apart on non-normative examples
16:53:43 <peterswire> q?
16:53:44 <rigo> AFAI understand, normative and non-normative considerations of de-identification are different tasks and should be continued
16:54:11 <dan_auerbach> hey i'm on the call now. what is the red/yellow/green ISSUE?
16:54:11 <Yianni> ...the non-normative is an important issue seperate from normative language
16:54:21 <npdoty> issue-188?
16:54:21 <trackbot> ISSUE-188 -- Definition of de-identified (or previously, unlinkable) data -- open
16:54:21 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/188
16:54:23 <npdoty> issue-191?
16:54:23 <trackbot> ISSUE-191 -- Non-normative Discussion of De-Identification -- raised
16:54:23 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/191
16:54:38 <Yianni> Peter: I hope that within our group that people that will tell these two seperate things
16:54:39 <npdoty> Shane, would you say your action 402 is more related to the non-normative examples?
16:54:39 <dan_auerbach> i don't feel strongly about combining into one or not, so long as the substance of both issues is accounted for
16:54:45 <WileyS> Agree with Jonathan - we'll likely not find agreement here as Jonathan and Dan want pure technical solutions and are not willing to accept anything that relies on technical, operational, and administrative controls as a fair solution.
16:54:59 <npdoty> note to nick: make sure there are clear links between issues 188 and 191
16:54:59 <Yianni> ...make sure we have linking between two issues
16:55:14 <Yianni> ...we have more time, if anyone wants to bring anything up
16:55:16 <WileyS> Nick - to be honest I hoping to provide draft text for both on 402 (normative and non-normative)
16:55:20 <Yianni> ...next week Matthias will chair
16:55:26 <Yianni> ...in two weeks we will be back on compliance
16:55:38 <Yianni> ...I hope people are trying to figure out overall packages they can live with
16:55:43 <rigo> dan, the red/yellow/green is the discussion between Rob and Shane on reducing identification data into pseudonymity and unlinkability
16:55:43 <Zakim> -Chris_Pedigo
16:55:44 <Zakim> -mecallahan
16:55:46 <WileyS> Nick - but agree with Jonathan while we'll likely agree on normative, we'll not agree on non-normative
16:55:46 <Zakim> -Dan_Auerbach
16:55:46 <Zakim> -kulick
16:55:46 <Zakim> -peterswire
16:55:46 <Yianni> ...thank you for your good work
16:55:47 <Zakim> -Craig_Spiezle
16:55:47 <Zakim> -JeffWilson
16:55:48 <Zakim> -paulohm
16:55:48 <Zakim> -Peder_Magee
16:55:49 <Zakim> -moneill2
16:55:49 <Zakim> -susanisrael?
16:55:49 <Zakim> -rvaneijk
16:55:50 <Zakim> -David_MacMillan
16:55:50 <Zakim> -Chris_IAB
16:55:51 <Zakim> -[Mozilla]
16:55:51 <Zakim> -Brooks
16:55:52 <Zakim> -hwest
16:55:52 <Zakim> -Rigo
16:55:52 <Zakim> -Amy_Colando
16:55:52 <Zakim> -??P70
16:55:53 <Zakim> -vincent
16:55:53 <Zakim> -Jules_Polonetsky
16:55:53 <Zakim> -WileyS
16:55:53 <Zakim> -adrianba
16:55:53 <Zakim> -efelten
16:55:53 <Zakim> -johnsimpson
16:55:53 <Zakim> -eberkower
16:55:54 <Zakim> -vinay
16:56:00 <Zakim> -dwainberg
16:56:01 <Zakim> -NAI
16:56:02 <Zakim> -[Microsoft]
16:56:03 <Zakim> -chapell
16:56:07 <Zakim> -schunter
16:56:08 <Zakim> -Walter
16:56:08 <Zakim> -npdoty
16:56:09 <johnsimpson> johnsimpson has left #dnt
16:56:24 <Zakim> -phildpearce
16:56:25 <Zakim> -Fielding
16:56:42 <npdoty> Zakim, list attendees
16:56:43 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been +1.202.587.aaaa, JeffWilson, efelten, +1.646.654.aabb, Jules_Polonetsky, eberkower, Wendy, Rigo, +52661100aacc, +1.215.286.aadd, jchester2,
16:56:46 <Zakim> ... npdoty, +1.202.587.aaee, +1.646.827.aaff, Yianni, susanisrael?, moneill2, phildpearce, Peder_Magee, Fielding, WileyS, Chris_IAB, rvaneijk, paulohm, vinay, hwest,
16:56:46 <Zakim> ... +1.202.257.aagg, robsherman, Chris_Pedigo, Craig_Spiezle, hefferjr, mecallahan, [Microsoft], jackhobaugh, marcgroman, schunter, +1.650.365.aahh, sidstamm, dwainberg, adrianba,
16:56:49 <Zakim> ... Amy_Colando, David_MacMillan, Brooks, RichardWeaver, +1.646.666.aaii, chapell, kulick, Walter, +1.650.465.aajj, vincent, Jonathan_Mayer, johnsimpson, Dan_Auerbach
16:56:51 <npdoty> rrsagent, please draft the minutes
16:56:51 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/05/29-dnt-minutes.html npdoty
16:57:25 <Zakim> -Wendy
17:01:10 <Zakim> -hefferjr
17:07:57 <robsherman> robsherman has joined #dnt
17:12:38 <robsherman> robsherman has joined #dnt
17:16:23 <kulick> kulick has joined #dnt
17:35:00 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, Jonathan_Mayer, in T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM
17:35:03 <Zakim> T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM has ended
17:35:03 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.202.587.aaaa, JeffWilson, efelten, +1.646.654.aabb, Jules_Polonetsky, eberkower, Wendy, Rigo, +52661100aacc, +1.215.286.aadd, jchester2, npdoty, +1.202.587.aaee,
17:35:03 <Zakim> ... +1.646.827.aaff, Yianni, susanisrael?, moneill2, phildpearce, Peder_Magee, Fielding, WileyS, Chris_IAB, rvaneijk, paulohm, vinay, hwest, +1.202.257.aagg, robsherman,
17:35:04 <Zakim> ... Chris_Pedigo, Craig_Spiezle, hefferjr, mecallahan, [Microsoft], jackhobaugh, marcgroman, schunter, +1.650.365.aahh, sidstamm, dwainberg, adrianba, Amy_Colando, David_MacMillan,
17:35:04 <Zakim> ... Brooks, RichardWeaver, +1.646.666.aaii, chapell, kulick, Walter, +1.650.465.aajj, vincent, Jonathan_Mayer, johnsimpson, Dan_Auerbach
17:38:06 <robsherman> robsherman has joined #dnt
18:10:50 <robsherman1> robsherman1 has joined #dnt
18:40:03 <npdoty> Zakim, bye
18:40:03 <Zakim> Zakim has left #dnt
18:40:04 <npdoty> rrsagent, bye
18:40:04 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/29-dnt-actions.rdf :
18:40:04 <RRSAgent> ACTION: swire to draft directly/indirectly -identified language proposal [1]
18:40:04 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/29-dnt-irc#T16-25-06