Re: Proposed W3C Charter: Privacy Interest Group (PING) (until 2019-08-04)

> On Sep 24, 2019, at 14:09 , Chris Wilson <> wrote:
> As for the PING's process, I do share your concerns (in the email you sent to the list previously) - the workmode in that doc lists strictures that it can't, by itself, enforce.  (E.g. if you want to prevent specifications from going to Recommendation status without earning a green light from PING, you'd have to get that put into the Process document and adopted by the Advisory Committee.  The Advisory Board nominally manages the Process and brings it to the AC for a vote, but in practice years ago we set up a Process Community Group to encourage others to participate in improving the Process, so you can always propose changes there.)

Thanks Chris

my sense is that none of the cross-functional review groups ((TAG, i18n, accessibility, security, privacy) need formal powers at all. In a sense, it’s the responsibility of the AC and (today) the Director to see and weigh their concerns and take them seriously; if (for example) privacy review says “we don’t think you should ship this, it has this terrible problem” and the Director and AC nonetheless approve progression and publication, well, we have learned something about ourselves and how seriously we take privacy problems.

If we’re going to take horizontal concerns seriously, they don’t need formal powers. If we’re not serious, then formal powers won’t help.

David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.

Received on Tuesday, 24 September 2019 23:06:47 UTC