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

Re: extension of time on audience measurement suggested amendments

From: Rob van Eijk <rob@blaeu.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 20:07:30 +0200
To: peter@peterswire.net
Cc: public-tracking@w3.org
Message-ID: <13b6a7e642dfbe914740ed9e49af3cb7@xs4all.nl>

Dear Peter,

Could you please confirm whether we will have a NoGo discussion?


Rob van Eijk schreef op 2013-07-20 01:14:
> Dear Peter,
> Dear Matthias,
> Dear group members,
> Peter wrote:
> I ask that you consider that in terms of what level of time I can 
> devote to DNT in the coming days.
> This Wednesday is going to be an important last conference call. We
> are nearing our self imposed deadline. With audience measurement off
> the agenda of the call this week, I would like to ask you to consider
> dedicating the call to discuss the process of how to continue and
> which W3C instruments we are going to use.
> In April I wrote an open letter to the group
> (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2013Apr/0167.html).
> I proposed three ways to move forward. 1. for a firm decision towards
> collection limitation or 2. for a firm decision towards use limitation
> with clear and specific added value to the existing self regulatory
> solutions or 3. a firm decision towards for a NoGo (i.e. a premature
> or controlled closure of the whole multi stakeholder exercise).
> 3 Months later, we have made a firm decision for collection limitation
> through the call for objections procedure. However, with the self
> imposed deadline in sight, that decision doesn't rule out the option
> for a controlled shutdown of the group.
> There are many issues that come to mind in a NoGO scenario. My point
> is, we need to discuss these issues during the plenary conference call
> IMHO. Dedicating the call to discussing our options for the TPE, the
> current Editor's Working Draft, the June Draft as possible outcomes in
> case of a both a NoGo scenario needs to be discussed now. For example
> getting TPE to Last Call may well be worth it in a NoGo scenario. We
> need to discuss the process of NoGo this week.
> There are also many issues that come to mind in a deferred scenario.
> In the event we defer, we have to hammer through a multitude of
> unresolved issues. Perhaps a process of going through the 23 Change
> Proposals by having a weekly call for objections may get us to a
> result. Perhaps this may lead us to a compliance outcome where no
> stakeholder is happy with. Trying to bridge the two positions may show
> once again that the two positions are so far apart that in terms of
> game theory no optimal solution is possible. My point is, we need to
> discuss the process of a deferral this week.
> In April I was optimistic. There was a window of opportunity for the
> stakeholders of the advertising industry to do the right things to
> convince the privacy advocates of the added value that DNT will bring
> to their self regulatory solutions. That window is closing fast and I
> sincerely hope we use the time left wisely.
> Regards,
> Rob
> Peter Swire schreef op 2013-07-19 03:40:
> Hello to the group:
> After consulting with W3C staff, we are extending the timetable for
> amendments to ISSUE-25, audience measurement, for one week.
> Amendments are now due by Friday, July 26.
> People have been working hard in the group, including on the W3C side.
> Based on the differing opinions shown on this past Wednesday's call,
> we will not finalize anything on audience measurement before this
> Wednesday's call.
> There are emails to the list asking for responses from W3C on various
> issues, and criticizing us for not having responded enough this week.
> For myself, I am bandwidth constrained right now. I taught four hours
> of seminar for my supposedly full-time professor job today, and teach
> four more hours this Sunday. The packers come to my house on Monday to
> move all of my things to Atlanta next week. The week after I get
> married. I ask that you consider that in terms of what level of time I
> can devote to DNT in the coming days.
> Thank you,
> Peter
> Prof. Peter P. Swire
> C. William O'Neill Professor of Law
> Ohio State University
> 240.994.4142
> www.peterswire.net
> Beginning August 2013:
> Nancy J. and Lawrence P. Huang Professor
> Law and Ethics Program
> Scheller College of Business
> Georgia Institute of Technology
Received on Saturday, 20 July 2013 18:08:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:45:17 UTC