- From: Ninja Marnau <ninja@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 20:32:09 +0100
- To: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <531F64B9.4000505@w3.org>
Dear WG members, tomorrow will be our first WG call after the long break. Please remember to check your local call time since the US has already switched to Summer Time. 12 March 2014: 9am PT, 12pm ET, 5pm CET ---------------------------------- 1. Confirmation of scribe. Volunteers welcome! 2. Offline-caller-identification (see end for instructions) ---------------------------------- --- Issues for this Call --- Note: See more info at the end for details. 3. ISSUE-240: Do we need to define context? https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/49311/tpwg-context-240/results March 12: M7 (announcement): Results are announced 4. ISSUE-241: Distinguish elements for site-internal use and elements that can be re-used by others (1/3) https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/49311/tpwg-qualifiers-241/results March 12: M7 (announcement): Results are announced 5. Proposed editorial changes to the TPE before Last Call: ## Timeline of advancement to Last Call (editorial review phase) ## MIME type (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2014Mar/0017.html) ## Naming of user granted exceptions -> user granted permissions ## Summary of the R flag discussion * **Taking up the work on Tracking Compliance and Scope again: * 6. ISSUE-181: Finalize language regarding multiple first parties https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/181 March 12: M0 (announcement): Initial call for change proposals; All change proposals should be drafted We suggest to close this Issue based on the text used in the definition of party: "In some cases, a resource on the Web will be jointly controlled by two or more distinct parties. Each of those parties is considered a first party if a user would reasonably expect to communicate with all of them when accessing that resource. For example, prominent co-branding on the resource might lead a user to expect that multiple parties are responsible for the content or functionality." (http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html#terminology) 7. ISSUE-209: Description of scope of specification https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/209 March 12: M0 (announcement): Initial call for change proposals; All change proposals should be drafted 8. AoB ================ 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, 11 March 2014 19:32:39 UTC