W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking-international@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Agenda: Global considerations F2F meeting 11-12 Berlin

From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 19:11 +0100
To: Haakon Bratsberg <haakonfb@opera.com>
Cc: public-tracking-international@w3.org
Message-ID: <1930504.tJLGcMlBqO@hegel.sophia.w3.org>
On Monday 25 February 2013 11:06:38 Haakon Bratsberg wrote:
> I agree with Alan that we should schedule some time to the drafting of
> TPWG recommendations.

I consider the slots of 
 -first party & third party 
 -DNT:0 definition 
to be of that type. 

But before being able to have recommended wording, we need to generate 
some kind of agreement on whether we want to go down that route. The 
charter gives us some wiggle room that we will have to fill. 

> Re Kimon's concerns; I'm concerned about speculations on detailed
> outcomes of the EU revision of the data protection regulation, but I
> agree with Rigo that we need to discuss how DNT fits into this
> debate.

I leave the speculations (and the speculoos) on outcomes of the EU 
regulation to the coffee break. It may be that everybody agrees in the 
coffee break that we should spend some official time on it. But for the 
moment I see violent agreement that  
> @Rigo: It is not clear to me what "Data classes for DNT :0 - Editor
> and next steps"  is about.

Definition of DNT:0 needs a clear extensible object. So this mainly is a 
discussion about the definition of DNT:0. I have changed it to say that 

But it may be to add an explanatory text as we advance in our common 
understanding of the points. 

Received on Monday, 25 February 2013 18:11:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:40:17 UTC