W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Tracking Protection Working Group Extended

From: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 09:45:32 -0500
To: <public-tracking@w3.org>, Peter Swire <peter@peterswire.net>
CC: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CD410F42.2B0C8%achapell@chapellassociates.com>
I recognize that there was some discussion on this topic this morning in
Boston. And the message from TLR was a) sorry, we simply forgot to mention
this issue to the group prior to announcing the renewal and b) that any
objection to renewal should have been made late last year.

I guess one of the issues that I'm having is that I was asked to stand
down by Rigo and others in late q4 - and filing an objection to charter
renewal at that time would have seen to be antagonistic to the new era of
good feelings that W3C leadership was trying to foster and likely
perceived as my trying to blow up the process.

The way this was handled by the W3C and the co-chars is very disappointing.

On 2/12/13 8:37 PM, "Alan Chapell" <achapell@chapellassociates.com> wrote:

>Peter / Thomas - 
>Was the charter renewal discussed by the WG prior to renewal?
>I don't remember it being raised. And it seems rather odd to me that it
>wasn't mentioned over the past few days given that we were all together.
>In previous charter renewals, there was at least some discussion both on
>the list and during the f2f.  I'd be surprised if I were the only person
>uncomfortable with how this appears to have unfolded this time.
>Aside from the potential process issue, this may create a substantive
>issue. We haven't required UA's to clearly describe the DNT functionality
>- an issue that I've raised repeatedly and one that has not been given
>much consideration to date IMO. If the rationale for this is related to
>the charter (I.e., we won't dictate UI), then the charter absolutely
>should have been subject to some discussion prior to renewal. I'd
>appreciate hearing your thoughts.
>On 2/12/13 7:41 PM, "Ian Jacobs" <ij@w3.org> wrote:
>>Dear Advisory Committee representative,
>>The Tracking Protection Working Group charter [1] is hereby extended
>>until 30 April 2014.
>>Launched in September 2011, the Tracking Protection Working Group has
>>focused on and delivered Working Drafts for two of its three chartered
>>* Tracking Preference Expression
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/tracking-dnt/
>>* Tracking Compliance and Scope
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/tracking-compliance/
>>The Working Group is working against a schedule that is expected to
>>the Tracking Preference Expression and Tracking Compliance and Scope
>>specifications to Last Call by July 2013, and to conclude its chartered
>>work by 30 April 2014.
>>Details about the schedule are available in a blog post [2] by Working
>>Group co-chair Peter Swire.
>>At the same time, the charter [3] of the Tracking Preference Expression
>>PAG [4] has been extended until 30 June 2013.
>>More information about the Tracking Protection Working Group can be
>>on its home page [5].
>>If you have any questions or need further information, please contact
>>Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>.
>>This extension follows section 6.2.5 of the W3C Process Document:
>>For Tim Berners-Lee, W3C Director, and
>>Thomas Roessler, Technology and Society Domain Lead;
>>Ian Jacobs, Head of W3C Communications
>>[1] http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/charter.html
>>[2] http://www.w3.org/QA/2013/02/full_steam_on_do_not_track.html
>>[3] http://www.w3.org/2012/06/dnt-pag-charter.html
>>[4] https://www.w3.org/2012/dnt-pag/
>>[5] http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/
>>Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)    http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/
>>Tel:                                      +1 718 260 9447
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2013 14:46:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:39:22 UTC