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

Thanks, WG, for your review. Hearing support on the list, on the call and
at TPAC, we have consensus to publish a Note Draft of the differential
privacy considerations document, and interest in issues and further work
after that.

Tara and Pete, please go ahead with creating a repo in the w3c organization
for this document, and then we can make sure it has the right text and
formatting to be published as a Note Draft.

Cheers,
Nick

On Sun, Nov 9, 2025 at 12:58 PM Shankar Garikapati <sgarikapati@lyft.com>
wrote:

> 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
>>>
>>