Re: new charter

Thanks Matthias for leading this and Mike (and others, still catching up on this thread!) for the useful comments.

On Compliance, I think the phrasing of "maintenance mode" is likely to be misunderstood, and that some of the proposed details are more specific than necessary. I believe our agreed plan on the call was that the TCS would not be the focus of our work, but that it was at the stage of gathering implementation feedback and would be progressed if there was sufficient implementation and interest (or moved to Note status to end work if we conclude there isn't interest in implementation). While "maintenance mode" is not a well-defined term at W3C, I expect many people would read that not as gathering implementation experience, but instead as fixing errors in a completed specification.

While it might be useful to provide some non-normative documents that let people know how to implement Do Not Track and about existing compliance regimes, I don't think we need to commit to a particular WG Note in the charter.

Cheers,
Nick

> On Oct 24, 2016, at 2:32 PM, Mike O'Neill <michael.oneill@baycloud.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Matthias,
> 
> Some suggested changes, simplifying and tidying up the Scope section, adding Jeff’s non-normative WG Note idea and David’s comment about being prepared to take TCS to final Rec.
> 
> Scope
> 
> The Working Group will finalise the Recommendation-track specification for a simple machine-readable preference expression mechanism ("Do Not Track”) which enables users to selectively opt-in or opt-out of web tracking.
> This mechanism is documented in our Candidate Recommendation document “Tracking Preference Expression (TPE)” http://www.w3.org/Submission/web-tracking-protection/ <http://www.w3.org/Submission/web-tracking-protection/> and defines mechanisms for user agents to express a preference not to be tracked, elements that allow web-sites to explain their tracking behaviour to users, and an API to monitor the current DNT status and let users give or revoke their consent for tracking to specific sites.
> The main focus of the extended implementation phase (until Summer 2017) is to demonstrate the viability of the TPE to satisfy the requirements of new EU privacy and data protection regulations.
> The working group does not plan to prescribe a specific approach/policy for web-sites to respect a user’s preference, but will contrast the Tracking Compliance and Scope (TCS) document with at least one other compliance approach that is consistent with the TPE and publish a report on this in a non-normative WG Note. The TCS will be put into maintenance mode – i.e. we will continue to collect feedback and implementation experiences on the Tracking Compliance Specification that is currently in Candidate Recommendation state, but be prepared, if it is adopted by one or more sites, to progress it to a final Recommendation.
> 
> Success Criteria / Goals { minor edits & add WG note }
> 
> • Production of stable Recommendation-track specification for the Tracking Preference Expression (TPE)
> • The revised TPE will be aligned with emerging EU privacy regulations and other proposed compliance documents.
> • Production of a non-normative WG note describing and contrasting the TCS and at least 1 other known compliance approach that uses the TPE building blocks.
> • Stretch Goal: We can demonstrate how that TPE can simplify privacy compliance in the EU.
> • Stretch Goal: Endorsement by some EU regulators.
> 
> Deliverables { add WG Note }
> 
> A WG non-normative Note describing and contrasting 2 or more compliance approaches.
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) [mailto:mts-std@schunter.org <mailto:mts-std@schunter.org>]
> Sent: 24 October 2016 09:37
> To: public-tracking@w3.org <mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Revised Charter Proposal - Feedback by Oct 26
> 
> Hi Folks,
> 
> thanks a lot for the lively discussion!
> 
> The intended goal stated in the charter is that the TPE should define
> "not tracking" (i.e. the objective we want to achieve) and a minimal set
> of definitions.
> There can be MANY ways to achieve this goal that can then be referenced
> sing the link to a compliance document..
> 
> If you require specific changes to the charter, I would need them ASAP.
> 
> Regards,
> matthias