Re: privacywg call for consensus: Considerations for Reviewing Differential Privacy Systems note draft

Reviewed the document — it looks good to me. I also support proceeding with
publication as a note draft!

Shankar

On Sun, Nov 9, 2025 at 5:08 AM Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> I support publication as a Note Draft.
>
> best regards,
>
> Ted Hardie
>
> (And thanks for the additional color on this process; it is very helpful
> to me as a newcomer)
>
> On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 11:35 AM Nick Doty <ndoty@cdt.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Privacy WG,
>>
>> This is a call for consensus, to confirm the conclusion from the last
>> Privacy Working Group meeting, that the Privacy Working Group should work
>> on differential privacy guidance, starting with publishing a Note Draft of
>> the doc,
>> Considerations for Reviewing Differential Privacy Systems (for
>> Non-Differential Privacy Experts):
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pE3p6TVsERPln00PLXj6j9rTdoG3PmiNHhv3NtXDtEU/
>>
>> Description of the Note Draft status in the Process:
>> https://www.w3.org/policies/process/#note-draft
>> Note Draft would not indicate that the contents have the consensus
>> agreement of the Working Group.
>>
>> This would also configure auto-publishing of this document (as Note
>> Draft) when updates are made, with ongoing review by the group and at least
>> one formal review by the group around TPAC each year. And the Working Group
>> could decide by consensus at some point whether it's ready to be published
>> as a Note.
>>
>> Pete, as editor, and W3C Team can work on converting to appropriate
>> format and creating a corresponding repo. (In fact, they can start that
>> process now in any case.)
>>
>> I believe the editors have worked through some feedback already (via
>> Slack channel discussions) but in any case publishing a draft and creating
>> a repo would be a starting point for opening issues and pull requests
>> through GitHub for more detailed further discussion of issues with the
>> document. Work is ongoing, this isn't a call for consensus on the document
>> as complete.
>>
>> Please reply on the list by Monday, November 17th if you support or
>> object to publication of a Note Draft of Considerations for Reviewing
>> Differential Privacy Systems.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Nick, for the Privacy WG co-chairs
>>
>> P.S. Our group doesn't have a formal process, a "call for adoption" as in
>> some other bodies, to say, we're working on this formally. If Note Draft is
>> a model that works well, we might also do this for drafts in progress on
>> credentials and permissions. We could also agree that we're working on this
>> but have it set up as an Editor's Draft, with a GitHub repo, and decide
>> later as a separate step that it's ready enough for public review as a Note
>> Draft. I believe some other W3C groups have used that as a
>> call-for-adoption-like process, but there's no community-wide pattern yet.
>>
>> --
>> Nick Doty | https://npdoty.name
>> Senior Technologist
>> Center for Democracy & Technology | https://cdt.org
>>
>