W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-p3p-spec@w3.org > November 2006

Re: RESPONSE NEEDED: P3P 1.1 note publication and working group close

From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 09:48:38 +0100
To: Lorrie Cranor <lorrie+@cs.cmu.edu>
Cc: public-p3p-spec <public-p3p-spec@w3.org>
Message-Id: <200611090948.38902.rigo@w3.org>

Oh, 

I thought my YES was implicit ;)

Rigo


On Wednesday 08 November 2006 16:30, Lorrie Cranor wrote:
> Thanks to all of you who have voted so far. For those of you who
> haven't voted, remember that we need votes by 10 am US eastern time
> this Friday.
>
> Currently, no "no" votes have been received. "Yes" votes have been
> received from:
>
> Lorrie Cranor
> Matthias Schunter
> Giles Hogben
> Ari Schwartz
> Serge Egelman
> Marc Langheinrich
>
> On Oct 27, 2006, at 7:07 AM, Lorrie Cranor wrote:
> > Dear Working Group members,
> >
> > It's been a long time since you've heard much about the P3P 1.1
> > working group activities. Interest in this working group has
> > dwindled as companies have refocussed their priorities. Therefore,
> > W3C management has recommended that we make a final publication of
> > our work and close the working group down.  Although it is somewhat
> > disappointing that we were unable to complete the deliverables in
> > our charter, I agree that the time has come to issue a final
> > publication and move on to other things. The P3P 1.1. working draft
> > is a stable and implementable draft, and should there be interest
> > in the future, all of our work will be documented and a new working
> > group can pick up where we left off. Having been chair of one P3P
> > working group or another for nearly 10 years now this decision
> > comes almost as a relief to me, and I suspect to some of the rest
> > of you who have been contributing to the P3P working groups for
> > many years.
> >
> > As you know, the P3P 1.1 Last Call document was published on
> > February 10, 2006 [1]. A small number of comments were received and
> > documented [2]. No major issues within the scope of P3P 1.1 were
> > raised during last call. I am grateful to Matthias Schunter, who
> > volunteered to take over as editor of the document and address the
> > minor issues and typos. His edited draft is available for your
> > review [3]. You should not find any major changes in this draft. In
> > order to give this draft a final document status, I propose that we
> > publish it as a Working Group Note [4]. This is not a
> > recommendation-track document, but it is something that people can
> > refer to and cite. This is the same status we gave to APPEL. The
> > APPEL note has been the basis of several implementations and it is
> > frequently cited in research papers. I would urge anyone doing P3P
> > implementations to include elements from the P3P 1.1 draft, all of
> > which are backwards compatible with P3P 1.0.
> >
> > Rigo is working on making sure the P3P 1.1 document conforms with
> > W3C Note rules and will send us an editor's draft by November 7,
> > with the goal of publishing the final note within a week after
> > that. In order for that to happen, we need a vote of the working
> > group to move forward with the publication of the note. So...
> >
> > RESPONSE NEEDED:
> > Please review the draft at http://www.w3.org/P3P/2006/WD-
> > P3P11-20061006.html (or just the changes if you reviewed the Last
> > Call) and send an email to this mailing list indicating a yes or no
> > vote for proceeding with a W3C Note publication. I would like to
> > receive all votes by November 10 at 10 am US Eastern time. Even if
> > you haven't been paying attention for a while, I encourage you to
> > vote so that we have a critical mass of people voting.
> >
> > Work on P3P implementations and research does continue in many
> > places. As an editorial board member for several journals and a
> > conference paper reviewer, I see draft papers that cite and use P3P
> > on a regular basis. P3P is already built into two major web
> > browsers, and it has been adopted by a significant number of web
> > sites [5]. My lab at CMU operates a P3P-enabled search engine [6]
> > and I have students who are doing some interesting work to see what
> > impact privacy information provided via our P3P search engine has
> > on consumers' purchase decisions [7]. I believe that the impact of
> > the P3P 1.0 and 1.1 working groups' work will continue to be felt
> > for some time to come. Thanks to all of you for your contributions
> > to this effort over the past decade.
> >
> > Lorrie Cranor
> >
> >
> > 1. http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-P3P11-20060210/Overview.html
> > 2. http://www.w3.org/P3P/2006/05-last-call.html
> > 3. http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#q78
> > 4. http://www.w3.org/P3P/2006/WD-P3P11-20061006.html
> > 5. http://lorrie.cranor.org/pubs/icec06.html
> > 6. http://search.privacybird.com/
> > 7. http://cups.cs.cmu.edu/soups/2006/proceedings/p133_gideon.pdf
> >
> >
> > --
> > Lorrie Faith Cranor, Associate Research Professor
> > Computer Science and Engineering & Public Policy
> > Carnegie Mellon University
> > http://lorrie.cranor.org/
Received on Thursday, 9 November 2006 08:48:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 9 November 2006 08:48:50 GMT