Re: Request for review of Data on the Web Best Practices

All,

Here is a view only spreadsheet [1] that I promised to start compiling
questionaire information to assess the DWBP document.  I've granted
read/write access to the Phil, the BP editors, Annette Greiner who is a
major contributor.  If you would like editing access let me know.

I alerted Greg to the fact that in order to put some questions into
spreadsheet form I reduced or altered wording.  If the meaning is changed
please recommend something more suitable.


Thanks,

Eric Stephan

References
[1]
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Cr6b313LzFa4Y8ImlMJila8zRsN54_ekAZTycK7tchQ/edit?usp=sharing

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 6:47 AM, Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> Hi Phil,
>
> >>Also wanted to say - if you want to join the PING call and discuss this
> a bit in a less asynchronous manner, it's happening tomorrow, I've C/Ped
> the details below:
>
> +1
>
> Eric S
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 5:47 AM, Greg Norcie <gnorcie@cdt.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Phil,
>>
>> Also wanted to say - if you want to join the PING call and discuss this a
>> bit in a less asynchronous manner, it's happening tomorrow, I've C/Ped the
>> details below:
>>
>>
>> Privacy Interest Group Meetings
>>   Next call: 26th May 2016
>>   9am PT, 12pm ET, 6pm CET
>>
>>      WebEx meeting
>>
>> https://mit.webex.com/mit/j.php?MTID=meda7c1b71d647aefa4377d4610c67648
>>
>>      +1 617-324-0000
>>      meeting number: 648 986 475
>>
>> Please also join us in IRC in the #privacy room.
>>      Server: irc.w3.org
>>      Username: <your name>
>>      Port: 6667 or 6665
>>      Channel: #privacy
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/Privacy/
>>
>>
>> /********************************************/
>> Greg Norcie (norcie@cdt.org)
>> Staff Technologist
>> Center for Democracy & Technology
>> District of Columbia office
>> (p) 202-637-9800
>> PGP: http://norcie.com/pgp.txt
>>
>> /*******************************************/
>>
>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 3:23 AM, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Looks like you got that gig then, Eric - thank you!
>>>
>>> As you know, Eric, it's the privacy issues that you raised about data
>>> and metadata that are the potential overlap. I don't imagine the PING folks
>>> will have a lot to say about persistent identifiers, API calls etc. so I
>>> hope that we can minimise what we're asking Greg and his colleagues to do.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Phil.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 24/05/2016 20:41, Eric Stephan wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Greg, Phil, and DWBP WG,
>>>>
>>>> It almost seems like a matrix (table) of privacy questions and the best
>>>> practices would be useful, blank cells could reflect non-applicability.
>>>> What do you think?  If it is useful, I am happy to help.
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>
>>>> Eric Stephan
>>>> Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Greg Norcie <gnorcie@cdt.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Phil,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for reaching out! Sorry to hear about your tight deadline.
>>>>>
>>>>> In order to speed things up, as a first, step, could you or someone
>>>>> from
>>>>> the HTML5 team please use the PING Privacy Questionnaire[1] to do an
>>>>> initial self review of your standard? (We would also love to get
>>>>> feedback
>>>>> on how the privacy questionnaire can be improved :) )
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd be happy to work with you and your team to identify any remaining
>>>>> issues that may be present in addition to those uncovered by the self
>>>>> review.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a PING call on 5/26 as well in case you want to join in and
>>>>> discuss further.
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://gregnorc.github.io/ping-privacy-questions/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> /********************************************/
>>>>> Greg Norcie (norcie@cdt.org)
>>>>> Staff Technologist
>>>>> Center for Democracy & Technology
>>>>> District of Columbia office
>>>>> (p) 202-637-9800
>>>>> PGP: http://norcie.com/pgp.txt
>>>>>
>>>>> /*******************************************/
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Ping members,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group has published three
>>>>>> documents that are close to completion, two of which we'd be grateful
>>>>>> if
>>>>>> you could review. In general, privacy issues don't arise in this work
>>>>>> but:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. The Data on the Web Best Practices document itself has references
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> privacy in its introduction [1] and in a section on data enrichment
>>>>>> [2].
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. The WG's charter [3] includes the line: "Ensure that the privacy
>>>>>> concerns are properly included in the Quality and Granularity
>>>>>> vocabulary."
>>>>>> The vocabulary in question is at [4] and we would be grateful if you
>>>>>> could
>>>>>> confirm that no specific privacy issues are raised by that work (I
>>>>>> think it
>>>>>> unlikely but I may be missing something).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The WG plans to make the transition to CR for its BP doc (which is Rec
>>>>>> Track) during next month so we're setting a (very) tight deadline on
>>>>>> comments of 12 June.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you for your help,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Phil.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-dwbp-20160519/#intro
>>>>>> [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-dwbp-20160519/#enrichment
>>>>>> [3] https://www.w3.org/2013/05/odbp-charter#coordination
>>>>>> [4] https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-vocab-dqv-20160519/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Phil Archer
>>>>>> W3C Data Activity Lead
>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://philarcher.org
>>>>>> +44 (0)7887 767755
>>>>>> @philarcher1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> Phil Archer
>>> W3C Data Activity Lead
>>> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/
>>>
>>> http://philarcher.org
>>> +44 (0)7887 767755
>>> @philarcher1
>>>
>>
>>
>

Received on Wednesday, 25 May 2016 15:55:48 UTC