Meeting minutes
Meeting minutes: https://
purl for this meeting: https://
GDPR Rights Justifications
<ghurlbot> Issue 63 Add Right Non-fulfilment Justifications for GDPR’s rights (by besteves4)
paul: haven't reviewed it yet
harsh: since beatriz and georg are not here, we will discuss this next time
DPV Resource Paper
delaram: is there a draft yet?
harsh: no, we discussed basing it on the DCAT v2 paper https://
harsh: we need to look at the methodology and implementation sections - we don't have information on that at the moment such as on the use-cases and requirements
paul: we have people using DPV e.g. Signatu uses it internally, I use it for GDPR work
delaram: opportunity to do that now for the paper - why use the DCAT v2 as template?
harsh: seems relevant because DCAT v2 builds on v1 and in DPV we also want to show what we have done since v1
delaram: DQV paper from semantics can also be useful https://
harsh: yes, though that paper is doing introducing first but we can use the second half where it shows citation analysis of implementers
W3id namespaces broken
harsh: the namespaces e.g. dpv-gdpr and dpv-owl are broken since we updated the layout and structure in the repo. Will fix them.
AI Act
<ghurlbot> Issue 106 Propose concepts from the AI Act (by coolharsh55)
delaram: working on concepts, segregating them based on the extension - AI Act, tech - and then working on the definitions
harsh: discussing concepts in tabs in spreadsheet. To add prefix to concepts and get them in the correct order/form so we can start generating the HTML documentation for them as we go along. For new concepts e.g. in AI Act referencing parent concept in Tech extension that doesn't exist - its okay to add concepts as parents assuming they are accepted and add a corresponding concept to the Tech tab
delaram: will move the concepts around for by next week
harsh: status for risk levels under the AI Act - do we define them as specific concepts e.g. high-risk and non-high-risk?
delaram: does such assertions e.g. not high risk need to be documented i.e. is this part of the AI Act?
harsh: yes, because it helps show you have done the assessment e.g. DPIA requried - Yes or Not - and then it helps evaluation by checking the assessment by referring to the documentation done on this
paul: example of a data breach - the level of the breach has to be assessed and documented and then there may or may not be a notification
harsh: good example. For the risk level should we define custom levels for the AI act based on the prohibited uses, high-risk etc.?
delaram: seems so - it includes prohibited system. Further work required here.
Misc
CFP Solid Symp.
harsh: CFP for work relating to DPV and Solid shared by beatriz on the mailing list - https://
Agenda/Invite missing
delaram: agenda not received for today's meeting
harsh: will send today's agenda again now and then next week's agenda - tytti to confirm if this is not working
Next Meeting
Next meeting will be in 1 week, on WED MAR-06 15:00 WET / 16:00 CET.
Topics for discussion are 1) DPV resource paper - harsh, beatriz 2) AI Act discussion - delaram 3) Rights Justification - beatriz, georg, paul 4) DPV v2 and admin - harsh 5) DPIA stuff - tytti