DNT: Agenda for April 24 DNT Call (focused on TPE)

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

Administrative

Chair:  Matthias Schunter

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

1.  Confirmation of scribe – glad to accept volunteer  -- (thanks to 
Brad Kulick who volunteered for April 24)

2. Offline-caller-identification:

If you intend to join the phone call, youmusteither associate your phone 
number with your IRC username once you've joined the call (command: 
"Zakim, [ID] is [name]" e.g., "Zakim, ??P19 is schunter" in my case), or 
let Nick know your phone number ahead of  time. If you are not 
comfortable with the Zakim IRC syntax for associating your phone number, 
please email your name and phone number to npdoty@w3.org 
<mailto:npdoty@w3.org>. We want to reduce (in fact, eliminate) the time 
spent on the call identifying phone numbers. Note that if your number is 
not identified and you do not respond to off-the-phone reminders via 
IRC, you will be dropped from the call.


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

TPE Working Draft

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


- Please review the updated TPE spec and send us additional edits needed 
before publishing our next WD


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

TPE related discussions

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

Goal for each ISSUE is to assign actions to make progress towards 
agreed-upon text.
-----


ISSUE-195: Flows and signals for handling out of band consent
https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/195

The current TPE spec declares a signal "C" that indicates that the site 
does not follow the TPE rules declared for "1" or "3" since it [is 
certain that] it has received out of band consent for the currently 
visiting user. If this signal is sent, then the site MUST post more info 
accessible via "edit" link.

Roy has proposed text (a flag "P") and Ronan may provide an alternative 
text.
---
ISSUE-168: What is the correct way for sub-services to signal that they 
are taking advantage of a transferred exception?
https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/168
Description: In section 6.7 of the TPE (transfer of exception to another 
third party) there is a requirement to signal that this has happened, 
but the suggested value doesn't seem right, and may not be in line with 
the final set of qualifiers. A suitable signal should be found.

EXCEPTION TRANSFER (ISSUE-168)
- The scenario is that a 3rd party (ad network) receives an exception
   and (by definition) this includes its underlying services used (e.g,
ad publisher).
- The 3rd party will signal "C" (it has received consent)
- The question is what signal these sub-services to the 3rd party should
use.
- Potential options are:
    - "C" (may surprise users since they did not receive direct consent)
    - "CS" (Service provider to a party who has received consent)
    - More options to discuss

8.  Announce next meeting
               & adjourn

================ Infrastructure =================

Zakim teleconference bridge:

VoIP: sip:zakim@voip.w3.org <file://localhost/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

*****