Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9)

Hello all, after reviewing discussion here and talking through a structure with @seanturner we think that the best approach is to move in the direction discussed here. We'll have an introduction in our first meeting and a short period to go through work mode and review agenda (details soon to be entered into the Github repo) and will set into the agenda: *five* 30m slots with three on day 1 and two on day 2 and some flexibility in the schedule if we see additional folks stand up to speak to this. 

We would then follow this up on day 2 with 30m-1h to [review discussed constraints, conditions and comparisons](https://github.com/patcg/meetings/issues/17) to paraphrase @erik-anderson and @martinthomson here. (I will open up an issue to track that part of the agenda).

I think we can look at 3 of the five slots taken by existing proposal authors

- @benjaminsavage
- @csharrison
- @erik-anderson

I believe that even though he is not a formal member of this group, @johnwilander will be in attendance as an expert observer and open to answering questions during a dedicated time slot, leaving 1 more time slot open. We can include @rmirisola's presentation of #12 or, if participants here feel that Prio and related concepts represent a unique enough approach perhaps @marianapr can talk through them with this group or suggest someone who would. 

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by AramZS
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/patcg/meetings/issues/9#issuecomment-1033075477 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2022 21:23:41 UTC