Monday, 30 April 2012
- Re: ACTION-172: Write up more detailed list of use cases for origin/origin exceptions
- RE: ACTION-172: Write up more detailed list of use cases for origin/origin exceptions
- Re: explicit-explicit exception pairs
- Re: explicit-explicit exception pairs
- Re: explicit-explicit exception pairs
- Re: explicit-explicit exception pairs
- Re: explicit-explicit exception pairs
- Re: explicit-explicit exception pairs
- Re: explicit-explicit exception pairs
- Re: explicit-explicit exception pairs
- An update on ISSUE-111: How user-agent can signal DNT exceptions to the site (ACTION-188)
- Re: ACTION-172: Write up more detailed list of use cases for origin/origin exceptions
- Re: An alternative to site-specific user granted exceptions (Issue-111)
- Re: explicit-explicit exception pairs
- Re: explicit-explicit exception pairs
- Re: explicit-explicit exception pairs
- ACTION-172: Write up more detailed list of use cases for origin/origin exceptions
Sunday, 29 April 2012
Saturday, 28 April 2012
- Re: Action-157: Update logged-in consent proposal
- Re: Action-157: Update logged-in consent proposal
- RE: Action-157: Update logged-in consent proposal
Friday, 27 April 2012
- Re: Action-157: Update logged-in consent proposal
- RE: An alternative to site-specific user granted exceptions (Issue-111)
- Re: Action-157: Update logged-in consent proposal
- RE: An alternative to site-specific user granted exceptions (Issue-111)
Wednesday, 25 April 2012
Thursday, 26 April 2012
- Re: Action-157: Update logged-in consent proposal
- W3C F2F logistics for Bellevue, WA
- RE: on users and user-agents and parties
- Re: on users and user-agents and parties
Wednesday, 25 April 2012
- on users and user-agents and parties
- tracking-ISSUE-143 (Reciprocal Consent): Activating a Tracking Preference must require explicit, informed consent from a user [Tracking Preference Expression (DNT)]
- Re: Geolocation compliance (ACTION-165)
- Re: Geolocation compliance (ACTION-165)
- RE: Action-157: Update logged-in consent proposal
- Re: Action-157: Update logged-in consent proposal
- Re: An alternative to site-specific user granted exceptions (Issue-111)
- next face-to-face meeting: June 20-22, Seattle
- F2F logistics
- ISSUE-142: How should protocol data be allowed to be used in the first N weeks?
- notes from TPE breakout section
- Re: Geolocation compliance (ACTION-165)
- RE: Geolocation compliance (ACTION-165)
- Re: explicit-explicit exception pairs
- RE: An alternative to site-specific user granted exceptions (Issue-111)
- Re: An alternative to site-specific user granted exceptions (Issue-111)
- Re: explicit-explicit exception pairs
- Re: Geolocation compliance (ACTION-165)
- Re: Geolocation compliance (ACTION-165)
- Action-157: Update logged-in consent proposal
- ISSUE-49: Third party as first party - is a third party that collects data on behalf of the first party treated the same way as the first party?
- Geolocation compliance (ACTION-165)
Tuesday, 24 April 2012
- explicit-explicit exception pairs
- Agenda for 24 April, 2012 call
- CVS commit email list
- Minutes from DC, April 2012
Friday, 20 April 2012
- RE: An alternative to site-specific user granted exceptions (Issue-111)
- RE: first party resource
- reminder: doodle poll for f2f
Thursday, 19 April 2012
Wednesday, 18 April 2012
- post-call housekeeping & upcoming discussions
- Re: first party resource
- Re: first party resource
- agenda: 18 April 2012 call
- tracking-ISSUE-141: Do a review of the Tracking Protection WG deliverables according to http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec [Tracking Preference Expression (DNT)]
Tuesday, 17 April 2012
- Re: ISSUE-130: Web-wide exceptions - iare there objections to permitting those?
- RE: ISSUE-130: Web-wide exceptions - iare there objections to permitting those?
- Media requests
- An alternative to site-specific user granted exceptions (Issue-111)
- Re: Tracking Preference Expression Spec Suggestion
Monday, 16 April 2012
- Re: Tracking Preference Expression Spec Suggestion
- Re: Tracking Preference Expression Spec Suggestion
Sunday, 15 April 2012
- Re: Behavior of user agents after granting exceptions
- Re: AW: Re: Behavior of user agents after granting exceptions
- AW: Re: Behavior of user agents after granting exceptions
- Re: Behavior of user agents after granting exceptions
- Re: Behavior of user agents after granting exceptions
Saturday, 14 April 2012
- Re: Behavior of user agents after granting exceptions
- Re: Behavior of user agents after granting exceptions
Friday, 13 April 2012
- Re: Behavior of user agents after granting exceptions
- Re: Behavior of user agents after granting exceptions
- Re: Behavior of user agents after granting exceptions
- Re: Behavior of user agents after granting exceptions
- Re: Behavior of user agents after granting exceptions
- RE: action-159 Draft shorter language to describe conditions for consent
- Behavior of user agents after granting exceptions
- RE: Permitted behavior of third parties under user-granted exceptions?
- Permitted behavior of third parties under user-granted exceptions?
- tracking-ISSUE-140: Do we need site-specific exceptions? [Tracking Preference Expression (DNT)]
- Clarification for ACTION-170: What is the use case?
Thursday, 12 April 2012
- Re: ISSUE-139: Should we have Web-Wide Exception via a Well-Known URI?
- ISSUE-139: Should we have Web-Wide Exception via a Well-Known URI?
- tracking-ISSUE-138: Web-Wide Exception Well Known URI [Tracking Preference Expression (DNT)]
- Notes from the Exception Working Group [ISSUE-113, ISSUE-128, ISSUE-129, ISSUE-130]
- Re: action-159 Draft shorter language to describe conditions for consent
- Re: action-159 Draft shorter language to describe conditions for consent
- Tracking Preference Expression Spec Suggestion
- RE: action-159 Draft shorter language to describe conditions for consent
- Re: action-159 Draft shorter language to describe conditions for consent
- ISSUE-137: Does hybrid tracking status need to distinguish between first party (1) and outsourcing service provider acting as a first party (s)
- RE: action-159 Draft shorter language to describe conditions for consent
- Re: action-159 Draft shorter language to describe conditions for consent
- Re: action-159 Draft shorter language to describe conditions for consent
- RE: action-159 Draft shorter language to describe conditions for consent
- tracking-ISSUE-136 (depends): Resolve dependencies of the TPE on the compliance specification [Tracking Preference Expression (DNT)]
- Wish you a successful f2f meeting!
- Re: action-159 Draft shorter language to describe conditions for consent
- Re: ISSUE-130: Web-wide exceptions - iare there objections to permitting those?
Wednesday, 11 April 2012
- Re: navigator.doNotTrack
- Re: navigator.doNotTrack
- Privacy Harms
- Re: navigator.doNotTrack
- RE: Possible User Harms Through Multi-Site Data Collection (Group 2)
- Re: Possible User Harms Through Multi-Site Data Collection (Group 2)
- Possible User Harms Through Multi-Site Data Collection (Group 2)
- Re: navigator.doNotTrack
- Re: ISSUE-130: Web-wide exceptions - iare there objections to permitting those?
- Re: ISSUE-130: Web-wide exceptions - iare there objections to permitting those?
- Fwd: Impromptu Tech Policy Happy Hour - Weds 4/11
- RE: ISSUE-60: proposed to close
- Re: ISSUE-60: proposed to close
- RE: ISSUE-60: proposed to close
- Re: ISSUE-60: proposed to close
- ISSUE-135: Draft Global Considerations document
- ISSUE-60: proposed to close
- ISSUE-134: Would we additionally permit logs that are retained for a short enough period?
- Use cases for consideration as "Ongoing Security Concerns" for 3rd parties
- Re: navigator.doNotTrack
- Re: navigator.doNotTrack
- navigator.doNotTrack
- Re: first party resource
- Re: Alternative 6
- Re: first party resource
Tuesday, 10 April 2012
- Alternative 6
- first party resource
- ISSUE-133: What effect does legal liability or consistent data practices between affiliates have on the definition of breadth of a party?
- ISSUE-152: Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: on negotiating site exceptions
- table of 5 proposals
- ISSUE-132: Should the spec speak to intermediaries or hosting providers to modify any responses/statements about DNT compliance?
- Issues mentioned in the TPE document, or non-closed in the database and applying to TPE
- Re: on negotiating site exceptions
- ISSUE-131: What should implementations look like to satisfy our exit criteria for CR?
Monday, 9 April 2012
- Re: ISSUE-130: Web-wide exceptions - iare there objections to permitting those?
- Re: on negotiating site exceptions
- social: drinks & dinners
- Re: on negotiating site exceptions
- Re: is a site-wide exception 'safe'?
- RE: W3C TPWG Process Follow UP
- RE: Parties and Necessary Business Uses
- Re: Parties and Necessary Business Uses
- RE: Parties and Necessary Business Uses
- RE: Parties and Necessary Business Uses
- RE: Parties and Necessary Business Uses
Sunday, 8 April 2012
- Re: is a site-wide exception 'safe'?
- Re: is a site-wide exception 'safe'?
- is a site-wide exception 'safe'?
Saturday, 7 April 2012
- Re: Parties and Necessary Business Uses
- Re: on negotiating site exceptions
- tree killer version: all 5 compliance proposals
- Updated response to Aleecia's Template, Issue-10, Issue-17, Issue-19, Issue-22, Issue-24, Issue-25, Issue-31, Issue-49, Issue-73
- deeper look at agenda items
- Re: Parties and Necessary Business Uses
- RE: Parties and Necessary Business Uses
- Re: Parties and Necessary Business Uses
- Re: Parties and Necessary Business Uses
- EFF/Mozilla/Stanford Proposal
- RE: Parties and Necessary Business Uses
- RE: on negotiating site exceptions
- Parties and Necessary Business Uses
- CDT's proposals re: template for parties and business uses
- 'do not cross-site track' response to Aleecia's outline
- Fwd: ACTION-120 Web Wide Exemptions and JavaScript
Friday, 6 April 2012
- Re: W3C TPWG Process Follow UP
- Re: on negotiating site exceptions
- Aleecia's Template for Issue-10, Issue-17, Issue 19
- Re: on negotiating site exceptions
- RE: on negotiating site exceptions
- RE: on negotiating site exceptions
- reporters and observers
- Re: on negotiating site exceptions
- Tracking Status Hybrid
- Re: ISSUE-130: Web-wide exceptions - iare there objections to permitting those?
- process clarifications
- Re: Parties and First Party vs. Third Party (ISSUE-10)
Thursday, 5 April 2012
- RE: Parties and First Party vs. Third Party (ISSUE-10)
- Re: Parties and First Party vs. Third Party (ISSUE-10)
- Re: Parties and First Party vs. Third Party (ISSUE-10)
- RE: ISSUE-130: Web-wide exceptions - iare there objections to permitting those?
- RE: ISSUE-130: Web-wide exceptions - iare there objections to permitting those?
- Re: Parties and First Party vs. Third Party (ISSUE-10)
- Re: Parties and First Party vs. Third Party (ISSUE-10)
- Re: ISSUE-130: Web-wide exceptions - iare there objections to permitting those?
- Re: W3C TPWG Process Follow UP
- W3C TPWG Process Follow UP
Wednesday, 4 April 2012
- AW: Data mining as a means to protect privacy in social networks
- TPE: Input for our discussions in DC
- TPE Call for text proposals: ISSUE-128: HTTP error status code to signal that tracking is required?
Tuesday, 3 April 2012
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Agenda for 2012-04-04 call
- f2f logistics and agenda, please indicate if you're attending
Monday, 2 April 2012
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: Are blanked exceptions usable in the EU? [ISSUE-129]
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Fw: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- Re: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent
- RE: ACTION-152 - Write up logged-in-means-out-of-band-consent