- From: Valentino Volonghi <dialtone@nextroll.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:17:25 -0700
- To: Michael Kleber <kleber@google.com>
- Cc: Jordan Mitchell <Jordan@iabtechlab.com>, "public-web-adv@w3.org" <public-web-adv@w3.org>
Hey Michael, yeah that's exactly the format of what I had in mind and I realize it isn't easy, however after reading your effort it's pretty easy to understand the value from it. On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 1:03 PM Michael Kleber <kleber@google.com> wrote: > > Hi folks: I feel like I attempted to do the kind of thing Valentino is asking for here in the Discourse message where we proposed moving TURTLEDOVE & SPARROW into WICG: > > https://discourse.wicg.io/t/advertising-to-interest-groups-without-tracking/4565 > > I promised that sort of round-up of the state of discussion in our 2020-06-02 meeting, and the resulting discourse post was about 5 pages long, took me a few weeks to compile, and surely still omits things. > > So while I'm supportive of the idea here and happy to contribute to it, this isn't an easy task. > > --Michael > > > > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 3:50 PM Jordan Mitchell <Jordan@iabtechlab.com> wrote: >> >> I very much support this perspective. Very few of our member companies have the dedicated resources necessary to keep abreast of the issues, understand and contextualize them, evaluate and opine. >> >> Jordan Mitchell >> SVP / Head of Consumer Privacy, Identity and Data >> IAB Tech Lab >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Valentino Volonghi <dialtone@nextroll.com> >> Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 9:11 AM >> To: public-web-adv@w3.org >> Subject: Issue digests >> >> hey, >> >> I have a feeling that many participants in our tuesday calls probably don't have the time or haven't yet spent the time to review the issues that have already been created in the various proposals. I also think that it's possible that even if they have checked those issues once or twice, they may not be keeping up to date with the new ones being opened or further comments on others. >> >> I'm wondering if it would be useful to have some form of digest about the topics being discussed at a spec level with a short summary of the conversation in the issues. >> >> If I didn't misunderstand it, Michael Kleber, in the meeting previous to the last one, mentioned that he would want to see broader agreement on these issues before committing to changes in the spec. I think this is a reasonable position and having these digests would allow us to organize smaller sub-groups of members that are interested in discussing and resolving a more common position on each of those issues such as product recommendations, request flows, reporting delays and so on. As well as allowing Google and other vendors to express their high level opinion about the issue as a general item in this group, so we don't waste time working through items that have no chance of being picked up. I think it's quite hard to build consensus on an issue in a 1 hour weekly call with 200 participants. >> >> I'm not sure who would write the digest on the various issues, or what would be the process for it, or even organize those issues in topics (GitHub tags can certainly help the organization), but I think if this group thinks that it would be valuable we can probably discuss how to make this more real. >> >> >> -- >> Valentino Volonghi >> CTO, Founding Team >> dialtone@nextroll.com >> > > > -- > Forewarned is worth an octopus in the bush. > -- Valentino Volonghi CTO, Founding Team dialtone@nextroll.com
Received on Wednesday, 22 July 2020 21:17:49 UTC