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 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