W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > July 2012

agenda: 25 July 2012 call

From: Aleecia M. McDonald <aleecia@aleecia.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 11:08:01 -0700
Message-Id: <77DC41F3-5909-4785-957E-9E535AAB1A0F@aleecia.com>
To: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Chair:		Aleecia
Main topics:	TSLs; is there new information about first party data use that leads us to take up issue-154; a few User Agent issues

---------------------------
Administrative
---------------------------

1.	Selection of scribe

2.	Quick check that callers are identified

---------------------------
Old business
---------------------------

3.	Review of overdue action items:  https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/overdue

---------------------------
New business
---------------------------

4.	Reminder: express your preferences for f2f timing: http://doodle.com/z3v958wixkpum4h8

5.	Foreshadowing: Coming this week, call for objections on symmetry / minimum number of choices proposals.
	See http://www.w3.org/2012/06/20-dnt-minutes.html for the discussion before ACTION-214 for context if you are curious, but not needed for the call tomorrow.

6.    Discussion of Tracking Selection List document

7.	Discussion of whether we should take up issue-154, which was created as a placeholder in Seattle. 
	("Are First parties allowed to use data (either offline or online) from third parties") -- requires new information to come before the group if we are to take this up. 
	If something new, Matthias and I will discuss on our next editors' call to see if we reopen the underlying issue-17 (Data use by 1st party).
	If nothing new, our prior consensus had been simply "no"

8.	Issue-150 (DNT conflicts from multiple user agents) 
	Note that the mailing list discussion associated with issue-150 very rapidly has nothing to do with conflicting UA signals. You can safely skip re-reading that thread for the purpose of the discussion on the call. The issue itself claims we were opening actions against Ian and Jonathan, yet I see no such actions created. Further, we had decided to let this be up to UAs to sort out.
	PROPOSAL: we ask compliance editors to add a brief sentence in the UA section stating that the spec does not address conflicts. Only one DNT signal may be sent at a time, with details left to the UAs. 

9.	Issue-151 (User Agent Requirement: Be able to handle an exception request)
	Rigo's proposal. Do we want to address this? 
	If so, we'll ask Rigo (or someone else) to write text. If not, we'll close the issue.

10. 	Issue-153 (What are the implications on software that changes requests but does not necessarily initiate them?)
	In other words, do we have anything we want to draft about registry changes or other non-UA actors setting DNT?
	If yes, we'll open an action item(s) for text here. If not, we'll close the issue.

---------------------------

11. 	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, port 6665, #dnt

*****
Received on Tuesday, 24 July 2012 18:08:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:53 UTC