W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > October 2011

Re: Agenda for 2011-10-12 DNT Workgroup Meeting

From: Ninja Marnau <nmarnau@datenschutzzentrum.de>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:14:28 +0200
Message-ID: <4E944134.4000505@datenschutzzentrum.de>
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Hi,

in case you find the link to the minutes of last week's call not working 
like me, it has to be:

http://www.w3.org/2011/10/05-dnt-minutes.html

Best regards,
Ninja



Am 11.10.2011 14:50, schrieb Matthias Schunter:
> Hi Team,
>
> enclosed is the agenda for tomorrow's call.
>
> After a summary of the ongoing discussions on 1st parties and their
> behavior under DNT, we will focus on the DNT protocol (Roy Fielding
> being the corresponding editor) with a particular focus on the
> response message.
>
> Feel free to post response proposals on the mailing list and/or
> discuss existing proposals.
>
>
> Regards,
> matthias
>
> ================ Infrastructure =================
>
> Zakim teleconference bridge:
> VoIP:    sip:zakim@voip.w3.org
> Phone +1617761.6200 passcode TRACK (87225)
> IRC Chat:
> IRC: irc.w3.org, port 6665, #dnt
>
> ================ Agenda for 2011-10-12 WG Call =================
>
> Details: See calendar at
>   https://www.google.com/calendar/embed?src=is1g67kems9ijeroa7ud7dhhg4%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/Los_Angeles
>
> ------------
> Administrative
> ------------
>
> 1. Selection of scribe
>
> 2. Any comments on minutes from the last call:
> http://www.w3.org/2011/10/04-dnt-minutes.html
>
> 3. Announcement: Division of Work between the Chairs:
>
>
> ------------
> Old business
> ------------
>
> 4.  Review of action items:
> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/
>
> 5. Summary of discussions on 1st and 3rd parties addition to
> strawman-proposals
>
>
> ---------------------------
> New business: Tracking Preferences Expression
>
> Chair:  Matthias Schunter
> Editor: Roy Fielding
> ---------------------------
>
> ---------------------------
> 6. Response Headers
>
>
>    A) ISSUES
> 	ISSUE-81	Do we need a response at all from server?
> 	ISSUE-51	Should 1st party have any response to DNT signal
> 	ISSUE-79	Should a server respond if a user sent DNT:0?
> 	ISSUE-76	Should a server echo the DNT header to confirm receipt?
> 	ISSUE-48	Response from the server could both acknowledge receipt of a
> value and (separately) whether the server will honor it
> 	ISSUE-87	Should there be an option for the server to respond with "I
> don't know what my policy is"
> 	ISSUE-47	Should the response from the server point to a URI of a
> policy (or an existing protocol) rather than a single bit in the protocol?
> 	ISSUE-80	Instead of responding with a Link: header URI, does it make
> sense to use a well-known location for this policy?
>
>    B) Presentation of Proposals on the table
>
>
>    C) Discussion
>
>    D) Steps towards a strawman
>      - Homework/Actions
> 	- Tasks for the editor
>
>
> ---------------------------
> 9. Announce next meeting&  Adjourn
>
>

-- 

Ninja Marnau
mail: NMarnau@datenschutzzentrum.de - http://www.datenschutzzentrum.de
Telefon: +49 431/988-1285, Fax +49 431/988-1223
Unabhaengiges Landeszentrum fuer Datenschutz Schleswig-Holstein
Independent Centre for Privacy Protection Schleswig-Holstein
Received on Tuesday, 11 October 2011 13:10:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:41 UTC