- From: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 13:35:52 -0400
- To: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Thanks Justin. It seems odd that such an important definition has only been discussed briefly and (unlike other decisions) hasn't been memorialized yet. I look forward to receiving your written explanation tonight. Thanks. On 4/22/14 1:23 PM, "Justin Brookman" <jbrookman@cdt.org> wrote: >Yes, that is when I explained (briefly) our decision, but the minutes are >not very detailed. The written decision will provide more analysis. >However, the explanatory memo is just a walkthrough of the Chairs' >thinking in evaluating the objections; it doesn't alter the meaning of >the words that were ultimately chosen. The words are what they are. > >On Apr 22, 2014, at 1:09 PM, Alan Chapell ><achapell@chapellassociates.com> wrote: > >> Thanks Justin. Is this the explanation of the chair's decision re: >> context? http://www.w3.org/2014/03/12-dnt-minutes#item02 >> >> Or are there others? >> >> Thanks! >> >> Alan >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 4/22/14 12:55 PM, "Justin Brookman" <jbrookman@cdt.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi Alan, >>> >>> We're aiming to distribute the decision on context tonight, but I don't >>> think there's a reason to discuss on the call tomorrow. The decision >>>has >>> been public (and incorporated into the documents) for some time, and we >>> had explained the rationales for the decisions to the group previously. >>> >>> On Apr 22, 2014, at 12:45 PM, Alan Chapell >>> <achapell@chapellassociates.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks Ninja. I don't see time allocated for a discussion of the >>>>chair's >>>> decision on Context here, although I believe we were told we'd have >>>> something in writing from the chairs this week. Do you know when that >>>> document will be forthcoming? Thanks! >>>> >>>> Alan >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 4/21/14 5:31 PM, "Ninja Marnau" <ninja@w3.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> AGENDA: >>>>> ---------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> 1. Confirmation of scribe. Volunteers welcome! >>>>> >>>>> 2. Offline-caller-identification (see end for instructions) >>>>> >>>>> ---------------------------------- >>>>> --- Issues for this Call --- >>>>> >>>>> 3. TPE Last Call Working Draft >>>>> >>>>> We will take up the following two TCS (Tracking Compliance and Scope) >>>>> issues in parallel as they may be related: >>>>> 4. >>>>> TCS ISSUE-134: Would we additionally permit logs that are retained >>>>>for >>>>> a >>>>> short enough period? >>>>> https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/134 >>>>> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Short_Term >>>>> April 23: M0 (announcement): Initial call for change proposals; All >>>>> change proposals should be drafted >>>>> >>>>> 5. >>>>> TCS ISSUE-208: Requirements on unknowing collection, retention and >>>>>use >>>>> https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/208 >>>>> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Unknowing >>>>> April 23: M0 (announcement): Initial call for change proposals; All >>>>> change proposals should be drafted >>>>> >>>>> 6. >>>>> TCS ISSUE-207: Conditions for dis-regarding (or not) DNT signals >>>>> https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/207 >>>>> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Disregarding >>>>> April 23: M1 (discussion): Initial change proposals have been >>>>> submitted; >>>>> Discussion on change proposals; Call for final list of change >>>>>proposals >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ================ Summary Documentation on Resolving ISSUES >>>>> ================= >>>>> >>>>> PHASES to resolve issues: >>>>> M0 (announcement): Initial call for change proposals; All change >>>>> proposals should be drafted >>>>> M1 (discussion): Initial change proposals have been submitted; >>>>> Discussion on change proposals; Call for final list of change >>>>>proposals >>>>> M2 (discussion): List of change proposals is frozen; Discussion >>>>>whether >>>>> clear consensus emerges for one change proposal >>>>> M3 (announcement): Call for objections to validate / determine >>>>> consensus >>>>> M5 (deadline): Deadline for inputs to call for objections (2 weeks >>>>> after >>>>> M3); Analysis starts >>>>> M7 (announcement): Results are announced >>>>> >>>>> ================ 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 >>>>> >>>>> 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. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 22 April 2014 17:36:28 UTC