update: action-324, public compliance texts (issue-45)

From the call today:
	- there is active discussion but it is not clear that it will change any of the options below
	- Rigo has concerns at the regulatory level, but that seems more like objections to some proposals, rather than anything that changes the particular framework of the discussion
	- adding a 4th option of silence 
	- holding off one week since NY and some of DC is without power

Next up:
	- barring surprises we will enter a formal review period for these four options, starting a week from today, ending two days later
	- given how much advance notice everyone has, we should not need a lengthy time to write up objections. 

Four current options:

(0) Silence
(1)	 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Oct/0612.html which is revised action-246 from David Wainberg

TPE: Add a required "compliance" field to the tracking status resource 
in the TPE, where the value indicates the compliance regime under which 
the server is honoring the DNT signal. In 5.5.3 of the TPE:

/    A status-object MUST have a member named /_/compliance/_/that 
contains a single compliance mode token//./


/Compliance mode tokens //must be associated with a legislative or 
regulatory regime in a relevant jurisdiction, or with a relevant and 
established self-regulatory regime./
(2) 	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Feb/0001.html which is action-61 from Tom Lowenthal

The response header is a clear commitment, which comes with all the
associated regulatory consequences. When an organization sends the
response header, they are making a specifically articulated promise
about their conduct in response to this request from this user.

With a required response header, nothing else is required to satisfy
this issue.
(3) 	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Jan/0266.html which is action-62 from Jonathan Mayer (and possibly Shane)

Operative text:
A party MUST make a public commitment that it complies with this standard.

Non-normative discussion:
A "public commitment" may consist of a statement in a privacy policy, a response header, or any other reasonable means.  This standard does not require a specific form of "public commitment."  

Received on Wednesday, 31 October 2012 17:51:15 UTC