- From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 17:36:51 -0700
- To: "'Matt Womer'" <mdw@w3.org>, <jon.peterson@neustar.biz>, <rai-ads@tools.ietf.org>, <app-ads@tools.ietf.org>
- Cc: "Richard Barnes" <rbarnes@bbn.com>, <rjs@nostrum.com>, <public-ietf-w3c@w3.org>, "Lars Erik Bolstad" <lbolstad@opera.com>, "Angel \(amachin\) Machin" <angel.machin@vodafone.com>
(speaking for myself): Site-level privacy policies ( as proposed in the W3C GeoLocation group) leave users with the choice of not trusting a site for anything (and thus not being able to take advantage of needed services) or trusting a site for everything. Perhaps this is in the interest of dominant search-engine providers and their mobile handset partners, because most users will give up privacy and their demographic information in exchange for valuable services. The IETF GeoPriv policies are probably harder to implement, too. Standards venue shopping, perhaps? But there can't be one answer for the IETF and another answer for W3C. I think the liaison work should have been done much earlier. I made several personal appeals for the GeoLocation group to start with GeoPriv working group specifications, which were ignored. So the fact that the GeoLocation group members have "not thus far been persuaded" should hold no weight: of course they're not persuaded, they'd already made up their minds when the group was chartered. Larry -- http://larry.masinter.net -----Original Message----- From: public-ietf-w3c-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ietf-w3c-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Matt Womer Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 10:16 AM To: jon.peterson@neustar.biz; rai-ads@tools.ietf.org; app-ads@tools.ietf.org Cc: Richard Barnes; rjs@nostrum.com; public-ietf-w3c@w3.org; Lars Erik Bolstad; Angel (amachin) Machin Subject: Re: IETF RAI and APP concerns about location privacy Dear Mr Peterson, Mr Jennings, Mrs Dusseault and Mr Newman, On behalf of the W3C Geolocation Working Group: With regard to your liaison statement of 21 Nov 2008; we acknowledge the design request of the GEOPRIV Working Group and have been discussing it within the Geolocation Working Group. The Geolocation WG withheld publishing the First Public Working Draft of the API document until hearing from GEOPRIV WG members. The Geolocation WG has not thus far been persuaded to adopt the solutions brought forth by the GEOPRIV members. This is being tracked at: http://www.w3.org/2008/geolocation/track/issues/4 We have requested further feedback from the review community in the form of a note in a section of our draft entitled "Privacy considerations for recipients of location information", which is available at: http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-geolocation-API-20081222/#privacy_for_ In addition we are currently tracking feedback on that section at: http://www.w3.org/2008/geolocation/track/issues/5 Sincerely, -Matt Womer Geolocation WG Team Contact
Received on Thursday, 23 April 2009 00:37:30 UTC