[patwg-charter] Charter scope and guaranteeing availability of input data (#16)

jwrosewell has just created a new issue for https://github.com/patcg/patwg-charter:

== Charter scope and guaranteeing availability of input data ==
The W3C should limit its work on browser standards to [modular ]()web features and not restrict the application of such features for specific industries. To do otherwise is to alter the W3C’s [founder’s design principles](https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Principles.html) of a web for all that is designed with simplicity, modularity, evolvability and decentralization. Our work must not concentrate control over innovation and the economics of the web into the hands of the smallest, third priority constituent (behind users and publishers), even if web browser will understandably be the stakeholder group with the most influence in these forums.

There is much I agree with in Manu Sporny’s 2017 [analysis](http://manu.sporny.org/2017/w3c-web-payments/) of Payments, which predates my involved in the W3C. I encourage everyone to read this analysis prior to the meeting to avoid repeating the same set of problems here. As we progress a charter for W3C membership approval we should be mindful of these views are not yet included in the debate so far.

To address these issues this group charter should be limited in scope to;

a) the creation of proposals and charters for other groups to develop modular web features where they do not exist today; and
b) the creation of proposals to improve privacy (whether for advertising or any other digital content matching systems) using modular web features only; and
c) ensure the availability of the input data needed for such decentralized processing such that evolvable, innovative, new competing solutions can emerge.

This direction will ensure that web authors (both publishers and advertisers) will have choice, while we improve privacy for individuals. 
We have seen recent examples of such choice.

1. Some publishers have chosen to adopt Seller Defined Audiences (SDA) and limit possibilities for advertisers concerning measurement, reporting, and attribution. That is the choice of the publisher. The advertisers will attribute value based on results they can achieve with this new information as well as the elimination of other data. The market will decide how SDA evolves alongside alternative solutions.
2. Some publishers have decided to require individuals to disclose their directly identifiable personal data (“identity”) in order to access their content. Other publishers require not only this but direct payment from users as well. This too is a publisher choice. Those users who are comfortable and have the necessary means are free to engage with such publishers.

In both cases the offerings inadvertently favour the larger publishers with existing brand presence. To ensure a vibrant web that supports smaller publishers and new entrants, we need additional solutions too. Given these smaller publishers and new entrants are yet to be represented directly in the debate, we should to the best of our ability ensure their interests are considered by the charter.

Updating the charter in this way enables those proposing Topics, FLEDGE, IPA, and others to be developed under the umbrella of the W3C without splintering the web. For example; if a publisher who supports SDA wished to use FLEDGE or IPA to handle attribution alongside SDA that would be their choice. If a publisher wished to use some alternative approach based on laws and economics as well as technology, such as [SWAN.community](https://swan.community/), then they would be free to do so. Of course, their visitors must also consent to the accessing on an ad-funded basis, just as they must consent to disclosing their identity and submitting direct payments to more established publishers.

If we were to ensure the design principles above are included in this chart, then web browsers could focus their engineering on only new modular web features (if any) required these use cases. For the wider industry the “distraction tax” associated with so many “web browser mandated” proposals will be reduced. In short, we will be supporting competitive digital markets that are enhancing privacy for people accessing ad-funded web content and leaving opportunities open to evolve even better solutions.

Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/patcg/patwg-charter/issues/16 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Monday, 4 April 2022 18:36:32 UTC