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: Lorrie Cranor <lorrie+@cs.cmu.edu>
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 11:35:20 -0500
Message-Id: <7B3840E2-3391-461E-8DA9-A78FD6857C93@cs.cmu.edu>
Cc: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
To: public-p3p-spec <public-p3p-spec@w3.org>

The final vote was 9 "yes" and 0 "no" votes. Votes were received from:

Lorrie Cranor
Matthias Schunter
Giles Hogben
Ari Schwartz
Serge Egelman
Marc Langheinrich
Rigo Wenning
Joseph Reagle
Jeremy Epling

Rigo will proceed with publishing the note.

On Nov 8, 2006, at 10:30 AM, 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...
>> 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 Friday, 10 November 2006 16:35:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:02:20 UTC