Re: Deadline for raising issues extended to October 06.

Yes, though they are supposed to be in final form then.  Sorry for confusion and keep asking questions --- we're all trying to get used to this new process.

"Jack L. Hobaugh Jr" <jack@networkadvertising.org> wrote:

>Dear Chairs,
>
>
>There is still some confusion among the TPWG members regarding deadlines.
>
>
>Please confirm that participants have through October 9 to submit change proposals against Issue-5 and Issue-10.
>
>
>Best regards,
>
>
>Jack
>
>
>Jack L. Hobaugh Jr
>Network Advertising Initiative | Counsel & Senior Director of Technology 
>
>1634 Eye St. NW, Suite 750 Washington, DC 20006
>P: 202-347-5341 | jack@networkadvertising.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On Oct 2, 2013, at 3:17 PM, David Wainberg <dwainberg@appnexus.com> wrote:
>
>
>So Oct 9?
>
>Sorry for being pushy, but I and probably others are still getting our minds around all the deadlines and new process. After my mix up with publishing the WD, I want to be absolutely sure I'm not confused about any other deadlines. Thanks much for your patience.
>
>-David
>
>On 2013-10-02 3:12 PM, Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) wrote:
>
>Hi David,
>
>the deadlines for issues 5, 10, 25, 25, 170, and newly added 16 remain unchanged as documented in the agenda for this and next week.
>
>Matthias
>
>On 02/10/2013 21:08, David Wainberg wrote:
>
>Thanks, Matthias. My understanding has been that we can submit change proposals against issues 5,10,24,25, and 170 through EOD today. So that remains the case?
>
>On 2013-10-02 3:06 PM, Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) wrote:
>
>Hi David,
>
>
>thanks for asking. 
>
>The extension only allows to continue to raise new issues.
>
>This extension does not affect issues 5, 10, 24, 25, 170 or any other issue that are sufficiently documented already:
> https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/products/5
>
>It also does not affect the deadline on October 16 for finalising the documentation for all issues or the deadlines we set in the agenda for processing our issues.
>
>Does this resolve your question?
>
>
>Regards,
>matthias
>
>
>
>On 02/10/2013 20:36, David Wainberg wrote:
>
>Hi Matthias,
>
>Thanks much to you and the other chairs for this. One question. Does the extension apply to making change proposals against the subset of issues, 5, 10, 24, 25, and 170?
>
>Best,
>
>David
>
>On 2013-10-02 2:28 PM, Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) wrote:
>
>Hi Susan,
>
>thanks a lot for raising this concern. We have discussed this request among the chairs and we realized that it will not
>impact our ability to get started with processing issues.
>
>As a consequence, we changed the deadline for raising new issues to Sunday, October 06. By this date, all issues that are important for the compliance draft should be attached to the "Compliance-current" product and therefore be documented (with whatever state) in this list:
>  http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/products/5
>
>We have updated the list of important dates at:
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG#Tracking_Protection_Working_Group
>
>In addition to these important (general) dates, we will annouce additional deadlines for each individual ISSUE in the agenda (like we have done so far: "initial call for change proposals, final call for change proposals, ...").
>
>I hope this resolves your concern.
>
>
>Regards,
>matthias
>
>
>On 02/10/2013 20:15, Israel, Susan wrote:
>
><!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face  {font-family:"Cambria Math";  panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} @font-face  {font-family:Calibri;  panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal  {margin:0in;  margin-bottom:.0001pt;  font-size:11.0pt;  font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink  {mso-style-priority:99;  color:blue;  text-decoration:underline;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed  {mso-style-priority:99;  color:purple;  text-decoration:underline;} p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph  {mso-style-priority:34;  margin-top:0in;  margin-right:0in;  margin-bottom:0in;  margin-left:.5in;  margin-bottom:.0001pt;  font-size:11.0pt;  font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";} span.EmailStyle17  {mso-style-type:personal-compose;  font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";  color:windowtext;} ..MsoChpDefault  {mso-style-type:export-only;} @page WordSection1  {size:8.5in 11.0in;  margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;} div.WordSection1  {page:WordSection1;} /* List Definitions */ @list l0  {mso-list-id:535242941;  mso-list-type:hybrid;  mso-list-template-ids:1197126744 901963244 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;} @list l0:level1  {mso-level-tab-stop:none;  mso-level-number-position:left;  margin-left:.75in;  text-indent:-.25in;} ol  {margin-bottom:0in;} ul  {margin-bottom:0in;} --> 
>
>For the benefit of the list, here is a restatement of a couple of questions raised during the call.  
>
> 
>
>1.       Since we are a bit confused about deadlines and the status of issues on the existing list, would it be possible to  extend the deadline for raising  issues, which seems to be today,  until Friday? 
>
> 
>
>2.       Would it be possible to send a simple and complete list of the relevant upcoming deadlines, as they currently stand,  to the list?  Some of us seem to have missed or become confused about some nuances here.   
>
> 
>
>Perhaps a simple restatement would help us spend less time on  the process questions.  Thanks. 
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>