ePrivacy amendments - first impressions?

<fielding> moneill2, which document are we talking about? link?

<fielding> https://t.co/mePis8Cuve

<Bert> Mike gives an intro to the ePrivacy proposal of the EU parliament.

Shane, purposes are mentioned in ePR

+q

bert, internationalisation?

<Bert> https://github.com/w3c/dnt/issues/61

Roy, no need because its referred to HTTP - separate request

Roy, internationalisation maybe more important if we put in purposes into spec

<Bert> https://github.com/w3c/dnt/issues/62

Roy: no requirement

<Bert> https://github.com/w3c/dnt/issues/63

issue 63

Roy, server will use whatever language is used for the page

Bert, does TPE already say to use UTF8

<Bert> https://github.com/w3c/dnt/issues/64

bert, issue 64 who is fred roy alraedy dealt with it

roy, nothing we need to do

bert, 64 resolved no further action

<Bert> https://github.com/w3c/dnt/issues/60

RESOLUTION: close issue 64 with no change.

Shane, lawyers say purposes definately required

shane, industry should not have to adjust multiple domains, one domain per purpose

shane, we seem to have covered most of the grounds so should be done pretty fast

bert, should we have some text to be going on with

roy, no problem giving thorough examination while CR goes through, then new text could go in iin next realease

<wileys> Correction in the notes: Shane said “industry should NOT have to adjust multiple domains where one domain equals one purpose”

roy, implementation is the important issue

shane, conversations are ongoing

roy, backroom deals more likely than converstaion on this list

shane, multiple purposes necessary, industry not asking browsers till that is sorted, chicken&egg

<fielding> I mean, in terms of getting implementation folks to work on the spec or extensions to the spec, asking them to attend the WG meetings is a non-starter.

bert, how do we tell people what we are discussing

roy, that is what issue list is for

<wileys> +q

<fielding> I already closed 64 and 60 is still open

<Bert> (Discussion about how to use the extenstion syntax without making other, future extensions impossible.)

<Bert> https://github.com/w3c/dnt/issues/65

roy, issue 65 - no need to change protocol,

<fielding> AFAICT, no change needed at this time, but also no hurry to close this one until we have time to discuss with Rob on call

bert, no more to discuus, conculsion we discuss issue 60 on email and next week

<fielding> resent+ moneill

<fielding> scribe: moneill2

<fielding> trackbot, end meeting

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.152  of Date: 2017/02/06 11:04:15  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/should have to/should not have to/
Succeeded: s/RESOLVED: close issue 60 with no change/RESOLVED: close issue 64 with no change/
Succeeded: s/etensions/extensions/
Succeeded: s/untile/until/
Default Present: fielding, wileys, Bert, Brendan, jnovak, moneill
Present: fielding wileys Bert Brendan jnovak moneill
Found Scribe: moneill2

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 23 Oct 2017
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2017/10/23-dnt-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.