W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-media@w3.org > April 2017

Re: W3C Director's Blog on EME

From: Cory Doctorow <cory@eff.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2017 08:56:20 -0700
To: Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "'public-html-media@w3.org'" <public-html-media@w3.org>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <6369cdd3-47a7-8011-170d-9b457fa48101@eff.org>
Hey, Philippe! Now that the vote on EME publication has concluded, I was
wondering whether the W3C staff will change the confidentiality level of
the outcome of this vote too, and publish it so that other stakeholders
can track the progress from the last disclosure to now?



On 03/09/2017 09:28 AM, Cory Doctorow wrote:
> Thank you for the clarification, Philippe.
> Cory
> On 03/09/2017 09:18 AM, Philippe Le Hégaret wrote:
>> On 3/9/2017 10:11 AM, Cory Doctorow wrote:
>>> Regarding confidentiality:
>>> I understood that member-confidentiality was a duty of all W3C
>>> participants, not just members.
>>> Is the process that W3C staff are free to disclose member-confidential
>>> material when they feel it is warranted, without consulting the affected
>>> members, but members are not?
>> The W3C staff can indeed change the confidentiality level of information.
>>> Are there any guidelines on which circumstances warrant unilateral
>>> waiver of member confidentiality, or is it a purely ad hoc process?
>>> Is this documented anywhere?
>> [[
>> This document clearly indicates which information must be available to
>> Members or the public, even though that information was initially
>> communicated on Team-only or Member-only channels. Only the Team and
>> parties authorized by the Team change the level of confidentiality of
>> this information. When doing so:
>> *    The Team must use a version of the information that was expressly
>> provided by the author for the new confidentiality level. In Calls for
>> Review and other similar messages, the Team should remind recipients to
>> provide such alternatives.
>> *    The Team must not attribute the version for the new confidentiality
>> level to the author without the author's consent.
>> *    If the author has not conveyed to the Team a version that is
>> suitable for another confidentiality level, the Team may make available
>> a version that reasonably communicates what is required, while
>> respecting the original level of confidentiality, and without
>> attribution to the original author.
>> ]]
>> https://www.w3.org/2017/Process-20170301/#confidentiality-change
>>> I ask because I've been repeatedly warned -- even when no breach
>>> occurred -- that member confidentiality is paramount to the
>>> organization, and having reviewed the process guidance at the firm and
>>> urgent suggestion of both the W3C CEO and communications director, I
>>> didn't see anything about this.
>> This has been part of our Process for quite a while now, so I'm
>> surprised no one pointed you to it before.
>>> Can members petition the W3C to make other member-confidential material
>>> public, or is this a purely internal matter? I would certainly make such
>>> petitions if I knew they were part of the process, and I'd love to know
>>> more about that process.
>> The Process doesn't say that you cannot ask the Team to request a change
>> of confidentiality, within the limits established by the Process. It's
>> safe to assume that, without author's consent, we would be very
>> selective or even reluctant. In addition, at this time, I doubt we'd be
>> interested in disclosing a lot of information from the previous poll
>> since we're focusing on the next steps. While there was a significant
>> number of objections as I mentioned before (and not everyone share the
>> opinions or way forward in those objections by the way), there was also
>> a even more significant number of support to move forward. We all know
>> there are organizations on both sides.
>> Philippe

Received on Sunday, 16 April 2017 15:56:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 15:49:19 UTC