Re: Our work this week

Peter,  

If I understand correctly, you are requesting well-reasoned written opinions on the proposed chairs' decision.  There remain many unanswered questions, however, about both the DAA proposal (e.g. http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Questions_re_DAA_proposal) and the implications of the chairs selecting a base text (e.g. http://www.w3.org/2013/07/03-dnt-minutes and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2013Jul/0077.html).

I would be glad to contribute a written opinion, even with the 100 hour deadline.  But I do not know how to write an opinion when the proposed decision remains ambiguous.

Jonathan

P.S. Congrats on the move!


On Monday, July 8, 2013 at 4:17 AM, Peter Swire wrote:

> Hello to the Working Group:
>  
> I hope that everyone had a good Fourth of July weekend.
>  
> Below, I am recirculating the work plan, which notably includes our Wednesday call this week and a deadline for comments this Friday at 5:00 p.m. pacific time.
>  
> There have been a number of questions to the DAA group about aspects of the proposal.  The DAA group has written me that they are working on answers, and I expect Q&A and discussion around that to be an important part of the Wednesday call.  Time permitting, we may also move to other change proposals, and I expect to circulate an agenda on Tuesday.
>  
> Thank you, and I look forward to a productive week for the group.
>  
> Peter
>  
> P.S.  Today, my fiancee and I are at the new house, and the moving truck with her furniture is being unloaded.  I will have limited ability today to respond to emails, and perhaps limited connectivity because the house does not yet have wireless.
>  
>  
> Prof. Peter P. Swire
> C. William O'Neill Professor of Law
> Ohio State University
> 240.994.4142
> www.peterswire.net (http://www.peterswire.net)
>  
> Beginning August 2013:
> Nancy J. and Lawrence P. Huang Professor
> Law and Ethics Program
> Scheller College of Business
> Georgia Institute of Technology
>  
>  
> From: Peter Swire <peter@peterswire.net (mailto:peter@peterswire.net)>
> Date: Tuesday, July 2, 2013 12:16 PM
> To: "public-tracking@w3.org (mailto:public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org (mailto:public-tracking@w3.org)>
> Subject: Work Plan for July
>  
> To the Working Group:
>   
> This email builds on our recent communications about next steps in the Working Group:
>   
>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2013Jun/0518.html
>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2013Jun/0220.html
>   
> We will use this week’s and next week’s calls to refine a key decision, and related sets of issues.  Having reviewed all the change proposals, I believe there are two general paths to develop a standard:
>   
> 1.  We can use the June Draft as the base, and evaluate the various change proposals against that Draft.
>   
> 2.  We can use the DAA proposal as a baseline.  We could use it to address (and close) a number of critical issues.  The DAA proposal has been presented to us as a package, and we will consider it as such.
>   
> Along either path, we will need to evaluate key issuesincluding de-identification and provisions on unique identifiers, as discussed in the previous email about our work plan.  The DAA proposal also makes specific choices on the definition of tracking and the scope of first and third party compliance provisions.  Different, but potentially important, change proposals have been offered by Alan Chappell, John Simpson, and Jeff Chester, particularly with respect to the treatment in a third-party context of information gathered in a first-party context.
>   
> In the July 3 call, the DAA will summarize its package, including on de-identification, unique identifiers, and first and third party compliance.  We will continue those discussions on July 10, in part to assure that people have more time to evaluate these issues and to return from vacation where that applies.
>   
> Consistent with the WG’s longstanding decision policy and as outlined by Nick, perfecting amendments to the DAA proposal are due by nooneastern on Tuesday, July 9. The July 10 call will give us a chance to discuss any such amendments.  Assuming there is no consensus on the June Draft vs. the DAA approach (which I believe is a safe assumption given our experience in the group) written submissions containing reasoned objectionswill be due by 5 p.m. U.S. Pacific time on Friday, July 12.  That date is sixteen days after the deadline for submission of change proposals, offering time for members of the Group to consider the proposals and offer comments.
>   
> The chairs will then work promptly on a Chairs Decision.  The group will discuss and review this decision before the end of July.  Time permitting, we may also discuss other change proposals, within the structure of this overall decision on a path forward.
>   
> I look forward to discussing these issues with you on July 3 and July 10.
>   
> Peter
>  
>  
>  
> Prof. Peter P. Swire
> C. William O'Neill Professor of Law
> Ohio State University
> 240.994.4142
> www.peterswire.net (http://www.peterswire.net)
>  
> Beginning August 2013:
> Nancy J. and Lawrence P. Huang Professor
> Law and Ethics Program
> Scheller College of Business
> Georgia Institute of Technology
>