- From: Greg Norcie <gnorcie@cdt.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 13:35:38 -0400
- To: Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>
- Cc: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>, "public-privacy (W3C mailing list)" <public-privacy@w3.org>, "public-dwbp-comments@w3.org" <public-dwbp-comments@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAMJgV7ZtUx1TDp0O9uMGjchqhf=466VkqjgWbNAaqomU1JRcOw@mail.gmail.com>
Thanks Eric, Can you let me know when you're done? Then I can take a look and better judge how (if at all) the rewording changed things. While I respect your initative, it might be better to finalize the checklist before we make a matrix out of it rather than develop in parallel. /********************************************/ 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 11:55 AM, Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 17:36:25 UTC