W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking-international@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Agenda: Global considerations F2F meeting 11-12 Berlin

From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 22:38:12 +0100
To: Kimon Zorbas <vp@iabeurope.eu>
Cc: Chris Mejia <chris.mejia@iab.net>, "'public-tracking-international@w3.org'" <public-tracking-international@w3.org>, "'peter@peterswire.net'" <peter@peterswire.net>, "'tlr@w3.org'" <tlr@w3.org>, "Mike Zaneis (IAB US)" <mike@iab.net>, "'lou@aboutads.info'" <lou@aboutads.info>, "'mgroman@networkadvertising.org'" <mgroman@networkadvertising.org>
Message-ID: <1616444.h16nSWsyHn@hegel.sophia.w3.org>
Kimon, 

why not discuss whether we want to discuss how DNT fits into the current 
discussion around the regulation? You rightly point out that before we 
discuss any content, we have to discuss whether we take up that topic at 
all. 

This is why I put it on the Agenda. But if more people want to kick it 
from the Agenda, that's fine by me. If others want to explore the 
options before deciding whether to discuss how we could best fit into 
the future landscape, that's fine too. 

So I do certainly not want to discuss the regulation in general, but 
rather see what DNT means for the regulation and vice versa. 

 --Rigo

On Sunday 24 February 2013 21:03:08 Kimon Zorbas wrote:
> Rigo,
> 
> I am really a bit confused to have a meeting to reflect draft
> legislation. If we want to go down the route, we should then go
> through all potential scenarios that are on the table. Or postpone
> the meeting, until the legislation is past.
> 
> I have echoed concerns from Shane and others on this point and I'm not
> sure I want to participate in speculations.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Kimon
> 
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "Rigo Wenning" <rigo@w3.org>
> To: "Chris Mejia" <chris.mejia@iab.net>
> Cc: "&apos;public-tracking-international@w3.org&apos;"
> <public-tracking-international@w3.org>,
> "&apos;peter@peterswire.net&apos;" <peter@peterswire.net>,
> "&apos;tlr@w3.org&apos;" <tlr@w3.org>, "Mike Zaneis (IAB US)"
> <mike@iab.net>, "&apos;lou@aboutads.info&apos;" <lou@aboutads.info>,
> "&apos;mgroman@networkadvertising.org&apos;"
> <mgroman@networkadvertising.org> Subject: Agenda: Global
> considerations F2F meeting 11-12 Berlin Date: Sun, Feb 24, 2013 9:12
> pm
> 
> 
> 
> Chris,
> 
> are you suggesting to change one agenda item to talk about the APEC
> enforcement agreement? Can you point me to interested stakeholders
> from Asia? That would be great.
> 
> Of course this will start off with the European considerations as the
> agenda is dictated by the Draft EU Regulation and the need for a user
> control mechanism that could work and get the debate to a higher
> level, get usability considerations into the debate etc.
> 
> W3C has a host in Japan and one in China. Asia is normally rather a
> follower in the area of data protection. Once the dust has settled a
> bit over the EU considerations, we will take into account the Asian
> market.
> 
> Australia is special. My friend Malcolm Crompton was federal data
> commissioner there. He urged me to take the APEC guidelines on board.
> 
> So there are plans, but there is little time. I'm grateful for all
> possibilities to get more involvement from Asia that does not involve
> me making things personally, as I have too long a task-list to be
> really effective getting it off the ground.
> 
>  --Rigo
> 
> On Sunday 24 February 2013 18:50:10 Chris Mejia wrote:
> > Since this workshop is entitled "Global Considerations" I'm Just
> > wondering how POVs from Africa, Asia, Pan Pacific/Oceana (including
> > Australia and New Zealand) and South America are going to be
> > represented here? From the agenda, I'd recommend re-titling this
> > particular workshop as "European Considerations" or "Western
> > Considerations" to be more representative of the actual agenda,
> > participation and motive.  Otherwise, Rigo, can you please outline
> > what true global outreach W3C has done (beyond the US and Europe) to
> > assemble this meeting and it's agenda?  I'm not being cheeky, at
> > all.
> > If this is to be a true "global standard" then I dare say that W3C
> > still has quite a bit of work to do in assembling a truly global set
> > of stake holders.
Received on Sunday, 24 February 2013 21:38:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 24 February 2013 21:38:41 GMT