public-patcg@w3.org from February 2022 by author

Alex Cone

Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)

Alex Cone via GitHub

[proposals] Collection of known research and literature on user perceptions of (novel) privacy enhancing technologies (#10) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Charter needs to allow for competitive solutions not exclusively controlled by browsers (#9) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Possible solutions debate (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Charter needs to allow for competitive solutions not exclusively controlled by browsers (#9) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why should attribution solutions default to on? (#6) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Expansion on Delegation and Privacy Budget Tradeoffs (#8) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Expansion on Delegation and Privacy Budget Tradeoffs (#8) (Thursday, 10 February)

Alex via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Agenda Request - PARAKEET / MaCAW / Masked LARK adoption in Chrome (#16) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Chartering the Working Group (#7) (Tuesday, 8 February)

Alexander Brasil via GitHub

Closed: [proposals] Expansion on Delegation and Privacy Budget Tradeoffs (#8) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Expansion on Delegation and Privacy Budget Tradeoffs (#8) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
[proposals] Expansion on Delegation and Privacy Budget Tradeoffs (#8) (Thursday, 10 February)

Alexandre Nderagakura via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Utility vs Privacy for attribution proposals (#25) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (Notice and consent debate) (#5) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)

Andrew Pascoe via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Wednesday, 9 February)

ansuz via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Friday, 11 February)

Aram Zucker-Scharff via GitHub

Re: [patcg.github.io] clarify deliverables of the group (#4) (Monday, 28 February)
Re: [meetings] First pass at minutes (#31) (Friday, 18 February)
Re: [private-measurement] Collecting Privacy Measurement discussion topics centrally (#2) (Friday, 18 February)
Closed: [private-measurement] Collecting Privacy Measurement discussion topics centrally (#2) (Friday, 18 February)
Closed: [meetings] Private Measurement Review (#17) (Friday, 18 February)
Re: [meetings] Meeting Cadence and Timing? (#4) (Wednesday, 16 February)
[private-measurement] Collecting Privacy Measurement discussion topics centrally (#2) (Wednesday, 16 February)
Closed: [meetings] Should we already have a separate repo for discussing measurement? (#33) (Wednesday, 16 February)
Re: [meetings] Should we already have a separate repo for discussing measurement? (#33) (Wednesday, 16 February)
Closed: [private-measurement] This space is not yet actively hooked up to the w3c listserv (#1) (Wednesday, 16 February)
Re: [private-measurement] This space is not yet actively hooked up to the w3c listserv (#1) (Wednesday, 16 February)
[proposals] new commits pushed by AramZS (Tuesday, 15 February)
[proposals] new commits pushed by AramZS (Tuesday, 15 February)
Re: [meetings] Should we already have a separate repo for discussing measurement? (#33) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [meetings] Should we already have a separate repo for discussing measurement? (#33) (Monday, 14 February)
[meetings] Taking up Topics API for Next Meeting or Future Meeting? (#32) (Friday, 11 February)
[meetings] Pull Request: First pass at minutes (Friday, 11 February)
[meetings] Merged Pull Request: Adding Bucketization-Microsoft slides (Friday, 11 February)
[meetings] Merged Pull Request: Add Aggregate API with PPM slides (Friday, 11 February)
[meetings] Merged Pull Request: Merge Proposal summaries and Masked LARk (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [meetings] Chartering the Working Group (#7) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Friday, 11 February)
Closed: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Friday, 11 February)
Closed: [meetings] Agenda Request - Day 2 Q&A (#14) (Friday, 11 February)
Closed: [meetings] Call for Scribes - 2022-02 Meeting (#22) (Friday, 11 February)
[meetings] Merged Pull Request: Add IRC details to agenda (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Add IRC details to agenda (#27) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Charter needs to allow for competitive solutions not exclusively controlled by browsers (#9) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Thursday, 10 February)
Closed: [meetings] Secret ballots (#26) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Secret ballots (#26) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Possible solutions debate (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Add attribution-tradeoffs-goog.pdf slides (#24) (Thursday, 10 February)
[meetings] Merged Pull Request: Add attribution-tradeoffs-goog.pdf slides (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Call for Scribes - 2022-02 Meeting (#22) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Wednesday, 9 February)
[meetings] Merged Pull Request: Creating a draft of the working agenda (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Creating a draft of the working agenda (#20) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Publish agenda in advance with links to relevant information. (#13) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Wednesday, 9 February)
[meetings] Call for Scribes - 2022-02 Meeting (#22) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Agenda Request - PARAKEET / MaCAW / Masked LARK adoption in Chrome (#16) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Agenda Request - PARAKEET / MaCAW / Masked LARK adoption in Chrome (#16) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Agenda Request - PARAKEET / MaCAW / Masked LARK adoption in Chrome (#16) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Can non-members attend meetings? (#21) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Tuesday, 8 February)
[meetings] Pull Request: Creating a draft of the working agenda (Tuesday, 8 February)
Re: [meetings] Private Measurement Review (#17) (Tuesday, 8 February)
[meetings] Schedule next meeting (#19) (Tuesday, 8 February)
Re: [meetings] Agenda Request - PARAKEET / MaCAW / Masked LARK adoption in Chrome (#16) (Tuesday, 8 February)
Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Tuesday, 8 February)
[meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Tuesday, 8 February)
Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Tuesday, 8 February)
[meetings] Private Measurement Review (#17) (Tuesday, 8 February)
Re: [meetings] Chartering the Working Group (#7) (Tuesday, 8 February)
Re: [meetings] Mechanism for Meeting Minutes (#6) (Tuesday, 8 February)
Closed: [meetings] Mechanism for Meeting Minutes (#6) (Tuesday, 8 February)
Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Monday, 7 February)

bedfordsean via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why should attribution solutions default to on? (#6) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Call for Scribes - 2022-02 Meeting (#22) (Wednesday, 9 February)

Ben Savage

Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Friday, 11 February)

benjaminsavage via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Wednesday, 16 February)
Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Tuesday, 15 February)
Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Saturday, 12 February)
Re: [meetings] Chartering the Working Group (#7) (Wednesday, 9 February)

betuldurak via GitHub

[private-measurement] Generate Test Cases for Evaluations (#7) (Thursday, 24 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Friday, 11 February)
[meetings] Closed Pull Request: Adding Bucketization-Microsoft slides (Friday, 11 February)
[meetings] Pull Request: Adding Bucketization-Microsoft slides (Friday, 11 February)

Bosko Milekic via GitHub

[private-measurement] Utility vs Privacy for attribution proposals (#3) (Friday, 18 February)
Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [meetings] Utility vs Privacy for attribution proposals (#25) (Sunday, 13 February)
Re: [meetings] Utility vs Privacy for attribution proposals (#25) (Saturday, 12 February)
[meetings] Utility vs Privacy for attribution proposals (#25) (Thursday, 10 February)

Brad Chen via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (Notice and consent debate) (#5) (Friday, 11 February)

Brad Lassey via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Chartering the Working Group (#7) (Wednesday, 9 February)

Brian May via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Should we already have a separate repo for discussing measurement? (#33) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [meetings] Utility vs Privacy for attribution proposals (#25) (Sunday, 13 February)
Re: [meetings] Utility vs Privacy for attribution proposals (#25) (Sunday, 13 February)
Re: [meetings] Taking up Topics API for Next Meeting or Future Meeting? (#32) (Saturday, 12 February)
Re: [meetings] Utility vs Privacy for attribution proposals (#25) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Expansion on Delegation and Privacy Budget Tradeoffs (#8) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Agenda Request - PARAKEET / MaCAW / Masked LARK adoption in Chrome (#16) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Chartering the Working Group (#7) (Wednesday, 9 February)

Charlie Harrison via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Expansion on Delegation and Privacy Budget Tradeoffs (#8) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Expansion on Delegation and Privacy Budget Tradeoffs (#8) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Expansion on Delegation and Privacy Budget Tradeoffs (#8) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
[meetings] Pull Request: Add attribution-tradeoffs-goog.pdf slides (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Monday, 7 February)
Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Friday, 4 February)

Christopher Wood via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Tuesday, 15 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)

Davide Rosamilia

Re: Event Invitation: Private Advertising Technology CG Meeting (Monday, 7 February)

Don Marti via GitHub

[private-measurement] Feature Discussion: High Risk Contexts (#6) (Sunday, 20 February)
Re: [meetings] Taking up Topics API for Next Meeting or Future Meeting? (#32) (Saturday, 12 February)
Re: [meetings] Taking up Topics API for Next Meeting or Future Meeting? (#32) (Saturday, 12 February)

ekr via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Chartering the Working Group (#7) (Wednesday, 23 February)
[admin] Proposed PATWG Charter (#3) (Wednesday, 23 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Chartering the Working Group (#7) (Tuesday, 8 February)
Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Monday, 7 February)

Erik Anderson via GitHub

[meetings] Should we already have a separate repo for discussing measurement? (#33) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [meetings] Agenda Request - PARAKEET / MaCAW / Masked LARK adoption in Chrome (#16) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Private Measurement Review (#17) (Tuesday, 8 February)
Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Tuesday, 8 February)
Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Thursday, 3 February)

Erik Taubeneck via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Possible solutions debate (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Chartering the Working Group (#7) (Wednesday, 9 February)

George via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Wednesday, 9 February)

James Aylett via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Saturday, 12 February)
Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Wednesday, 9 February)

James Rosewell via GitHub

[private-measurement] Why should attribution solutions default to on? (Default to on debate) (#5) (Friday, 18 February)
[private-measurement] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#4) (Friday, 18 February)
[patcg.github.io] Charter needs to allow for competitive solutions not exclusively controlled by browsers (#5) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Notice and consent debate (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Secret ballots (#26) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Possible solutions debate (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Charter needs to allow for competitive solutions not exclusively controlled by browsers (#9) (Thursday, 10 February)
[proposals] Charter needs to allow for competitive solutions not exclusively controlled by browsers (#9) (Thursday, 10 February)
[meetings] Secret ballots (#26) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Notice and consent debate (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Possible solutions debate (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
[proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
[proposals] Why should attribution solutions default to on? (#6) (Thursday, 10 February)
[proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)

jdelhommeau via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Wednesday, 23 February)
Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (Notice and consent debate) (#5) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)

Jeffrey Yasskin via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Secret ballots (#26) (Thursday, 10 February)
[meetings] Can non-members attend meetings? (#21) (Wednesday, 9 February)

Joel Pfeiffer via GitHub

[meetings] Pull Request: Proposal summaries and lark (Friday, 11 February)

Josh Karlin via GitHub

[proposals] Interest Based Advertising with the Topics API (#4) (Wednesday, 2 February)

joshuakoran via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (Notice and consent debate) (#5) (Thursday, 17 February)

Kim Laine via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)

Kiran Gopinath

Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)

kirangopinath71 via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Friday, 11 February)

Lexi Robinson via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Saturday, 12 February)

lmarkou1 via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Utility vs Privacy for attribution proposals (#25) (Thursday, 10 February)

Lukasz Olejnik via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Thursday, 10 February)

Lukasz Wlodarczyk via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Chartering the Working Group (#7) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Agenda Request - PARAKEET / MaCAW / Masked LARK adoption in Chrome (#16) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Agenda Request - PARAKEET / MaCAW / Masked LARK adoption in Chrome (#16) (Wednesday, 9 February)

marianapr via GitHub

[meetings] Pull Request: Add Aggregate API with PPM slides (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Wednesday, 9 February)

Mark Kent via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Call for Scribes - 2022-02 Meeting (#22) (Wednesday, 9 February)

Martin Pál via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Friday, 11 February)

Martin Thomson via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Taking up Topics API for Next Meeting or Future Meeting? (#32) (Thursday, 17 February)
Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Tuesday, 15 February)
Re: [patcg.github.io] chair selection is complex and open to abuse (#1) (Sunday, 13 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
[meetings] Pull Request: Add IRC details to agenda (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [patcg.github.io] chair selection is complex and open to abuse (#1) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Charter needs to allow for competitive solutions not exclusively controlled by browsers (#9) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Can non-members attend meetings? (#21) (Thursday, 10 February)
[meetings] Pull Request: Slides from Mozilla/Strategy presentation (Wednesday, 9 February)

Mearca via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Friday, 11 February)

medicinalcocaine3434 via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Sunday, 13 February)

Michael Kleber via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Agenda Request - PARAKEET / MaCAW / Masked LARK adoption in Chrome (#16) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Creating a draft of the working agenda (#20) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Call for Scribes - 2022-02 Meeting (#22) (Wednesday, 9 February)

Michal Bryc via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)

Mike O'Neill via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (Notice and consent debate) (#5) (Wednesday, 23 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (Notice and consent debate) (#5) (Thursday, 17 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (Notice and consent debate) (#5) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (Notice and consent debate) (#5) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (Notice and consent debate) (#5) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Notice and consent debate (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)

Nick Doty via GitHub

Re: [patcg.github.io] clarify deliverables of the group (#4) (Monday, 28 February)
[patcg.github.io] Pull Request: clarify charter scope (Monday, 28 February)
Re: [meetings] Taking up Topics API for Next Meeting or Future Meeting? (#32) (Thursday, 17 February)
Re: [patcg.github.io] chair selection is complex and open to abuse (#1) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [patcg.github.io] clarify scope is not just browser features (#3) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [patcg.github.io] chair selection is complex and open to abuse (#1) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Can non-members attend meetings? (#21) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Call for Scribes - 2022-02 Meeting (#22) (Wednesday, 9 February)

nlongcn via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (Notice and consent debate) (#5) (Wednesday, 23 February)

Paul Farrow via GitHub

[meetings] Agenda Request - (#16) (Friday, 4 February)

pjl-google via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Friday, 11 February)

Raimundo Mirisola via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [meetings] Take up Private Attribution Proposals (#9) (Wednesday, 9 February)

Robin Berjon via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (Notice and consent debate) (#5) (Monday, 28 February)
Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Monday, 28 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (Notice and consent debate) (#5) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (Notice and consent debate) (#5) (Friday, 11 February)
Re: [proposals] Collection of known research and literature on user perceptions of (novel) privacy enhancing technologies (#10) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (Notice and consent debate) (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Notice and consent debate (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Notice and consent debate (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why would notice and consent not be adequate? (#5) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Privacy Principles for Web Advertising Features - Editorial Group (#18) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Chartering the Working Group (#7) (Wednesday, 9 February)

Rotem Dar

Re: Event Invitation: Private Advertising Technology CG Meeting (Tuesday, 8 February)

Sam Sneddon via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Friday, 11 February)

Sanjay Saravanan via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Utility vs Privacy for attribution proposals (#25) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Why are multi-party computation solutions the only ones that should be considered? (#7) (Thursday, 10 February)

Santi Darmandrail via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Monday, 14 February)
Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Monday, 14 February)

Sean Turner

Re: Event Invitation: Private Advertising Technology CG Meeting (Tuesday, 8 February)

Sean Turner via GitHub

[meetings] April 2022 Meeting (#34) (Thursday, 24 February)
Re: [admin] Meeting cadence (#2) (Thursday, 10 February)
Closed: [admin] Meeting cadence (#2) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [admin] Review and improve security/privacy disclosure policy (#1) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Charter needs to allow for competitive solutions not exclusively controlled by browsers (#9) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [proposals] Charter needs to allow for competitive solutions not exclusively controlled by browsers (#9) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Can non-members attend meetings? (#21) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [patcg.github.io] clarify deliverables of the group (#4) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [patcg.github.io] clarify scope is not just browser features (#3) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [patcg.github.io] notify the group via the mailing list (#2) (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [patcg.github.io] chair selection is complex and open to abuse (#1) (Thursday, 10 February)
[meetings] Merged Pull Request: Slides from Mozilla/Strategy presentation (Thursday, 10 February)
Re: [meetings] Can non-members attend meetings? (#21) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Call for Scribes - 2022-02 Meeting (#22) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Call for Scribes - 2022-02 Meeting (#22) (Wednesday, 9 February)
Re: [meetings] Consider recording meetings (#10) (Wednesday, 2 February)
Closed: [meetings] Consider recording meetings (#10) (Wednesday, 2 February)
Re: [meetings] January 2022 Meeting (#5) (Wednesday, 2 February)

Sergey Tumakha via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Call for Scribes - 2022-02 Meeting (#22) (Wednesday, 9 February)

Shivan Kaul Sahib via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Saturday, 12 February)
Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Saturday, 12 February)

Simon J Harris via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Chartering the Working Group (#7) (Wednesday, 9 February)

Stefan Haase via GitHub

Re: [proposals] Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA) (#2) (Wednesday, 16 February)

W3C Calendar

Event Invitation: Private Advertising Technology CG Meeting (Wednesday, 2 February)

Wendy Seltzer via GitHub

Re: [meetings] Chartering the Working Group (#7) (Wednesday, 9 February)

Last message date: Monday, 28 February 2022 23:31:23 UTC