- From: David Wainberg <david@networkadvertising.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 17:07:43 -0500
- To: "Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation)" <mts-std@schunter.org>
- CC: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <50B539AF.6090406@networkadvertising.org>
Hi Matthias, I think the v02 agenda did not take into account my comments on V01: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Nov/0315.html Cheers, David On 11/27/12 2:26 PM, Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) wrote: > > V02: Added agenda item #6 at the end > --- > > Hi Team, > > enclosed V01 of our agenda for Wednesday. > Comments are welcome! (in particular if I overlooked any information > on the issues listed). > > Regards, > matthias > > > > --------------------------- > Administrative > --------------------------- > > 1. Selection of scribe > > --------------------------- > Old business > --------------------------- > > 2. Review of overdue action items: > http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/overdue?sort=owne > <http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/overdue?sort=owner> > > 3.Quick check that callers are identified > > --------------------------- > 4. ISSUES marked PENDING REVIEW > --------------------------- > > Goal: > - Agree on adding the proposed text (or create action for writing > alternative text) > > ISSUE-21: Enable external audit of DNT compliance > https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/21 > Are we OK with adding the text proposal by Kevin to our spec: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Feb/0000.html > > ISSUE-113: How to handle sub-domains (ISSUE-112)? > http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/112 > > On these issues IMHO the status is as follows: > - If a site-wide exception is requested, all subdomains are > automatically included > - This issue is only relevant for explicit/explicit lists of domains > (if the site uses them) > - An original proposal (from Ian) used cookie-like handling > - The current approach requires explicit listing of all sub-domains > - Is this current approach OK or do we need to text alternatives? > > ISSUE-137: Does hybrid tracking status need to distinguish between > first party (1) and outsourcing service provider acting as a first > party (s) > http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/137 > > IMHO: > - The minutes at http://www.w3.org/2012/10/05-dnt-minutes > contain some text on ISSUE-137 > - No action is assigned > - TODO: Discuss and define way forward > > ISSUE-138: Web-Wide Exception Well Known URI > https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/138 > Review non-normative text by Nick and agree that it is OK to put > into the spec. > > ISSUE-153: What are the implications on software that changes requests > but does not necessarily initiate them? > https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/153 > Proposed text (by david and nick): "Software outside of the user > agent that causes a DNT header to be sent (or modifies existing > headers) MUST NOT > do so without following the requirements of this section; such > software is responsible for assuring the expressed preference reflects > the user's intent." > > --------------------------- > 5. ISSUES marked OPEN > --------------------------- > > Goal: review open issues at > https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/products/2 > and assign actions to them > > ISSUE-164: Should the 'same-party' attribute be mandatory? > http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/164 > > My understanding of the minutes is that we agreed in Amsterdam: > - keep a MAY (optional) > - Say that if a site that loads additional content "to be used in 1st > party context" (flag: 1) > from other domains, this content may not work properly unless this > domain is desclared as "same-party" > - If this approach is still OK, I suggest to create an action to > textify it. > > --------------------------- > 6. Next steps on the compliance doc (Aleecia, last 30mins) > > 7. 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 > > ***** >
Received on Tuesday, 27 November 2012 22:08:15 UTC