Re: TPWG Charter

Dear all,

I second a request to extend the charter. Now that implementers and 
testers have picked up DNT, it is time to further explore use cases that 
we may have overlooked.

Kind regards,
Rob van Eijk

Mike O'Neill schreef op 2016-06-30 19:57:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> With the tightening of the requirement for consent, the right to
> object, right to amend/modify/erase driven by the GDPR in Europe and
> the (initially Transatlantic) PrivacyShield, makes it advisable that
> the charter for this group be extended for at least another year. The
> building-blocks in the TPE, for example the Tracking Status Resource,
> support many of these requirements, and can clearly be enhanced to
> support the others, and this WG is the obvious place where these can
> be discussed and hopefully standardised.
> 
> The rising popularity of Ad Blockers and other Content Blocking
> applications, which can be destructive in the way they arbitrarily
> inhibit aspects of the web platform, also point to the need for
> protocol elements that can communicate user preferences, and the TPE
> or something similar to it would help with this.
> 
> The TPE has been implemented on several clients and servers as
> described in the Implementation Report
> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/TPE_Implementation_Report
> 
> The Tracking Exception API has been supported natively and in user
> agent extensions, and has been supported by thousands of sites,
> including those run by major consumer brand companies, in most
> European countries since 2013. A number of these sites are extending
> their support for the TPE protocol elements in the near future.
> 
> I hope the W3C recognises this and extends the group charter for 
> another year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mike O'Neill
> Technical Director
> Baycloud Systems
> Oxford Centre for Innovation
> New Road
> Oxford
> OX1 1BY
> Tel. 01865 735619
> Fax: 01865 261401

Received on Thursday, 30 June 2016 18:14:29 UTC