Re: DNT: Agenda for Call March 6

In response to Rob's reasonable concerns, here are responses:

1.  Rob Sherman had been assigned to have text for last week on multiple first parties.  After taking more time to review, he has informed me that he is not revising his proposed text for Action 273.  He has done additional background research on the issue, but not changed the text from what everyone had seen previously.  He will recirculate the previous text.

2. Chris Pedigo had text that we discussed last week on Action 368, on definition of "service provider" or "data processor."  He has done mild edits to the text, and indicated to me that it is ready to go, along with short non-normative text.  He should post that this afternoon.

3.  For append, Aleecia McDonald has an action item scheduled for two weeks from now, Action 373.  It is on the "open issues" list of the Working Group.

As part of working through open items, I am trying to create a steady flow of helpful text, and setting this up in a way for orderly discussion.  I regularly reach out to the people who have agreed to do action items, and try to move things along so that everyone can see text as soon as it exists in good shape.

For the three items here, there is no change to previous text, mild change to previous text, and standard posting of the scheduled discussion on append.

I thank every member of the group who is producing text, and will redouble my efforts to (gently, politely, insistently) get text posted and move things along.

Peter



Professor Peter P. Swire
C. William O'Neill Professor of Law
    Ohio State University
240.994.4142
www.peterswire.net

From: Rob van Eijk <rob@blaeu.com<mailto:rob@blaeu.com>>
Date: Tuesday, March 5, 2013 2:26 PM
To: Peter Swire <peter@peterswire.net<mailto:peter@peterswire.net>>, "public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org> WG" <public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: DNT: Agenda for Call March 6

Peter,

I have 3 procedural questions:

Action 273 is pending review, however the revised text has not been circulated to the list. I think it is fair to leave at least 1 week between text circulation on the mailing list and discussing it in the plenairy weekly calls to allow for discussion on the list and to allow for the need to discuss text internally before taking an official position in a discussion. Is it possible to accomodate this?

Likewise is action 368 with status open, and no text circulated. Ergo, no time/chance to prepare the discussion in time.

Lastly, with regards to apparently scheduled discussions (eg . related append issues to action 368). I may have overlooked a URL, but if there are items planned ahead, it would be good to know. Please send a URL,

Regards,
Rob


Peter Swire <peter@peterswire.net<mailto:peter@peterswire.net>> wrote:
Wednesday call March 6, 2013

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

Chair:  Peter Swire
---------------------------

1.  Confirmation of scribe – glad to accept volunteer in advance

2.  Offline-caller-identification:
If you intend to join the phone call, you must either 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.


3. Update on next face-to-face.

---------------------------
TPE: Matthias Schunter
---------------------------


4.   TPE matters (15 minutes)

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

Discuss Assigned Compliance Actions

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

5.  Action 273 (Rob Sherman).  Rob has updated text for multiple first parties.  Discussion will include reference to “joint marketing” under Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.


6. Action 368 (Chris Pedigo), update “service provider” or “data processor” definition.  (Discussion of related “append” issue is scheduled to occur in two weeks).


7. Action 371 (Dan Auerbach).  Dan has circulated proposed text and non-normative language.

8.  Issue 10, definition of “first party.”  Text from the editors, with focus on clarity of writing rather than major discussion on scope.


9. If time, review of other outstanding assigned actions.

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

10.  Announce next meeting & adjourn


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

Zakim teleconference bridge:
VoIP:    sip:zakim@voip.w3.org<file:///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

*****

*****



Professor Peter P. Swire
C. William O'Neill Professor of Law
    Ohio State University
240.994.4142
www.peterswire.net




Professor Peter P. Swire
C. William O'Neill Professor of Law
    Ohio State University
240.994.4142
www.peterswire.net