Re: agenda for 1 August 2012 call

Hi Aleecia,

The list did not receive this agenda until 8:30pm ET last night. There's 
a long list of meaty and important topics here, including a propose 
definition of 'tracking'! It is not fair to the participants in the 
group to send this agenda late at night before a meeting, and then to 
just say that people should have had ample time to read and reflect on 
these previously. Even if people have reviewed these texts previously, 
it does not mean they are prepared to discuss and decide on them on a 
moment's notice. This has been happening consistently -- materials for 
calls are not made available until very shortly before the call. This 
makes it difficult for /all/ participants to contribute in meaningful 
ways. Please postpone discussion on these topics until the group has 
truly been given ample time to prepare.

-David


On 7/31/12 8:32 PM, Aleecia M. McDonald wrote:
> Chair:Aleecia
> Main topic:Reviewing pending review texts
>
> ---------------------------
> Administrative
> ---------------------------
>
> 1. Selection of scribe
>
> ---------------------------
> Old business
> ---------------------------
>
> 2. Review of overdue action items: 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/overdue?sort=owner 
> <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/>
>
> 3.Any comments on minutes posted a week ago:
> http://www.w3.org/2012/06/06-dnt-minutes
> http://www.w3.org/2012/06/13-dnt-minutes
> http://www.w3.org/2012/06/20-dnt-minutes
> http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-dnt-minutes
> http://www.w3.org/2012/06/22-dnt-minutes
> http://www.w3.org/2012/07/11-dnt-minutes
>
> 4.Quick check that callers are identified
>
> ---------------------------
> New business
> ---------------------------
>
> 5. Discussion of face-to-face meeting
>
> 6.Discussion of how we move forward on permitted uses
>
> 7.We will work our way through a number of pending review texts, all 
> of which have had ample time for people to read and reflect upon.
>
> (a) *Re-direction, shortened URLs, click analytics -- what kind of 
> tracking is this?* (ISSUE-97 
> <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/97>)
>     (edit)
>     <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/196/edit>ACTION-196
>     <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/196> on
>     Justin Brookman: Draft text on whether url shorteners are first or
>     third parties
> Text: 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Jun/0106.html
>
> (b) *Third parties should be prohibited from acting or representing 
> themselves as first parties.* (ISSUE-123 
> <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/123>)
>     (edit)
>     <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/116/edit>ACTION-116
>     <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/116> on
>     Thomas Lowenthal
> Original text: 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Feb/0618.html
> Proposed edit: 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Mar/0126.html
>
> (c) *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?* 
> (ISSUE-49 <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/49>)
>     (edit)
>     <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/161/edit>ACTION-161
>     <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/161> on
>     Shane Wiley: work on issue-49
> Text: http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/161
>
> (d) ACTION-208 
> <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/208> on Ian 
> Fette: Draft a definition of DNT:0 expression -- issue-148
> Text under discussion (after a few edits): 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Jun/0314.html
> Suggestion for addition 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Jun/0421.html 
> which may not work: 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Jun/0428.html
> Counter-proposal: 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Jun/0313.html
>
> (e) *Specify "absolutely not tracking"* (ISSUE-119 
> <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/119>)
>     (edit)
>     <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/110/edit>ACTION-110
>     <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/110> on
>     Ninja Marnau: Write proposal text for what it means to "not track"
>     Text:
>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Feb/0362.html
>     Counter-proposal from Roy:
>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Feb/0403.html
>     Several people suggested changes, mostly "let's call this
>     something other than 'not tracking' please." One suggestion there:
>     "Exceeds the compliance standard and does not collect and retain
>     any data"
>
>     Buried in this discussion was David Singer's attempt to define
>     tracking: "Tracking is the retention or use, after a transaction
>     is complete, of data records that are, or can be, associated with
>     a single user." (I'd append: ", user agent, or device.")   Unlike
>     every other time someone has made the attempt, the one and only
>     reply was in support. Does that mean we can live with this?
>
>
> ---------------------------
>
> 8. Announce next meeting & adjourn
>
> ================ Infrastructure =================
>
> Zakim teleconference bridge:
> VoIP: sip:zakim@voip.w3.org
> Phone +1.617.761.6200 passcode TRACK (87225)
> IRC Chat: irc.w3.org <http://irc.w3.org/>, port 6665, #dnt
>
> *****