Tracking Protection Working Group Teleconference

06 November 2017

Meeting Minutes

moneill2: Would like to understand Rob's issue, but Rob is not here today.

wileys: We have agreement to discuss multiple purposes though an extension and the well-known location or the TSR.

moneill2: Isn't TSR and well-known location the same thing? well-known returns a JSON record.

schunter: One field in the TSR is a pointer to a human-readable text.

moneill2: We can say the extension can only be used with DNT:0.

wileys: Agree, but didn't Rob have an issue for DNT:1?

moneill2: Art 8 on analytics may be an exception.

schunter: So consensus seems to be to allow up to a certain number (16) of purposes.

moneill2: Value in DNT header should identify a human-readable policy via the TSR.

schunter: We want some convergence of purposes in the long term.

moneill2: Yes, also consider that they will have to be in different languages in Europe.

moneill2: What interest do you see, Shane?

wileys: Chicken and egg.
… Recent browser features seen as adverse by online ad industry, so conversation is not good. Their concern is that browsers will implement in a way that is negative for them. So they need a word from browsers. Then some at least will be willing ot move on UGE support.
… It is very sensitive right now. Difficult to get commitment on either side.

moneill2: IAB?

wileys: Yes
… Will take all of 2018 to get there. Will be slow and piecemeal in the beginning.

moneill2: Will have to see what the Trilogues in Europe will give.

wileys: The sooner this group can make a standard the better. Then they can pursue it and go with it to the browser makers.
… Whatis needed to get an extension? Won't be ready before the end of the year.
… MAybe we can get another CR our this year, but not a REC before Q1 2018.

<wileys> There will be convergance in some areas but I think we need to keep the flexibility for each company to do what it needs to be compliant

schunter: If we don't get more support, it will be a hard battle. With new members joining, we have more possibilities.
… We need some prototypes. Maybe after 6 months of experience we can do a version 1.1.

moneill2: We can maybe get a few people involved to get some interoperability.

wileys: I'll ask the IAB to contact you, Matthias.

schunter: Bert, is my estimate of WG extension chances correct?

Bert: Yes, your plan is good, need a publication and show member interest.

wileys: If we can get at least one browser implem, the dominoes will start to fall.

schunter: Don't expect impelementations of the multiple purposes before 6 montsh, even if we publish soon.
… We need stronger evidence.

wileys: Google may be in a position, because they do browser *and* ads.
… Getting Mozilla back in would be good. But they would probably not be the ones asking for multiple purposes.

schunter: Get @@ on the WG?

wileys: I can try to find out?

schunter: If they make some statement, that may convince the Director.
… If we say we want to publish a spec that we believe is not enough, we won't convince the Director.

wileys: Not so black and white. It is very close.
… Asking people to install extensions is not a path forward.

moneill2: People use extensions to try out things.

<wileys> Flash and SL are both dying slow deaths

schunter: Say Deutsche Telekom makes a plugin. It shows interest, even if it is not fancy.

wileys: We need browsers to step up more, before ad industry wants to invest.

schunter: We need some evidence, interest to show to W3C.

wileys: Let me try if I can get some people to come.
… And I'll have more to talk about next week.

schunter: Some user group engagement. Maybe even one of them can join.

schunter: What other options are the sites exploring? Cookies?

wileys: Yes, and server-to-server protocols. But they are hoping DNT can provide a solution.
… If browsers do DNT, it'll be much cheaper for them.

Discussion about time and sequence of work on extensions.

Can somebody form IABEU be Invited Expert?

Bert: There has to be a conflict-of-interest check, for the rest it is up to use who to invite.

schunter: We may need an extension of 2 months to finish the REC.
… Publishing a REC will give us a good situation to ask for a new charter.

Disucssion about implementation report and tests.

Format of report.

moneill2: What about EFF implementation, Privacy Badger?

at: We are still planning on implementing.

schunter: By end of year would be perfect.

at: I will talk with the team to see what the planning is.

schunter: And Mike should work with Bert on starting an implem. report.

moneill2: I'll see Martin Kurze tomorrow, I'll ask him what he plans to implement.

Next meeting is next week.

wileys: About the extension, we'll need to see what Rob's issue means. It may make it go in a different direction.

Minutes formatted by Bert Bos's scribe.perl version 2.35 (2017/11/06 00:28:38), a reimplementation of David Booth's scribe.perl. See CVS log.


No scribenick or scribe found. Guessed: bert