Meeting minutes
Repository: w3c/dpv
Agenda: https://
Meeting minutes: https://
Persistent ID for current minutes: https://
Previous minutes: https://
Admin
DPVCG Charter
<ghurlbot> Issue 399 Establish DPVCG Charter (by coolharsh55)
Vote on approving draft Charter at https://
To vote on the charter, please indicate the vote on the github issue w3c/
HarshPandit: we only have 6 votes so far which is not representative of the groups' participation so please vote before the next meeting
Submit to LOV
<ghurlbot> Issue 353 v2.2 LOV submission (by coolharsh55)
BeatrizEsteves: sent an email for submission of DPV vocabs to maintainers, awaiting response
ArthitSuriyawongkul: what is the process? also relevant for my other work
BeatrizEsteves: first submission is manual where you go to the webpage and submit url, which featches metadata and then the maintainers will approve it; Issue it the website is for one-time submissions and isn't set up for multiple iterations e.g. DPV 2.3 will give error that DPV already exists; another issue is that we have so many extensions that all will need to be submitted manually which is a lot of work as they are missing in LOV
BeatrizEsteves: proposal from us is that first time we do manual submission, but then after update we just inform the maintainers that we have an update and they automatically update the vocabs in LOV
DPV v2.3 release schedule
HarshPandit: do we release what we have?
BeatrizEsteves: yes +1, and we can have a draft note in the spec for what is being worked
JulianFlake: +1
ArthitSuriyawongkul: +1, it is a good time to release as the major change is the change in the layout of the specs and there is actually not a lot of new concepts
TyttiRintamaki: +1
StratisKoulierakis: +1
JulioHernandez: +1
agreed
Updates
ISO taxonomy
<ghurlbot> Issue 26 DPV-ISO providing concepts from ISO terminology and standards (by coolharsh55)
HarshPandit: agreed with Stratis to create folder structure for ISO basic concepts; there are copyright and IP issues if we copy+paste stuff from documents so we should be careful;
HarshPandit: for GDPR we are interested in codes of conducts and certifications e.g. Luxembourgish ones; we will meet and identify a proposal / idea
code of conduct approved by EDPB https://
certifications and seals approved by EDPB https://
EHDS
<ghurlbot> Issue 238 Update EHDS extension with practical concepts (by coolharsh55)
meeting scheduled for 9 WET / 10 CET JAN-20 meeting with Beatriz, Julian, Harsh, Gabriela, Stratis
AI Act
<ghurlbot> Issue 229 Update EU-AIAct extension with practical concepts (by coolharsh55)
no further updates
HarshPandit: meeting with Georg Friday to review the concepts. Once we have consensus, we will polish and propose them for inclusion.
NIS2
<ghurlbot> Issue 222 Update NIS2 extension with practical concepts (by coolharsh55)
no updates
DE-GDNG
<ghurlbot> Issue 387 Extension for the German GDNG (by chhdraeger)
JulianFlake: their use-case seem to deviate from GDNG as they concern additional details which are to be aligned with GDNG; there is a larger gap between their use case and the legal framework / synthetic reference use case
AOB
GDPR Art.88b
HarshPandit: Had a meeting with the Commission where they were interested to know the status of DPV (it is stable, maturing, we are interested in standards track) and also usability (no IP issues with W3C license). We also discussed where DPV would fit in the consent manager under Art.88b e.g. our purpose list is good and can be used to state what is being asked. Also important considerations on who decides the acceptability/enforceability of these as the law does not make it clear and it may also create new dark patterns with nudges and taking over settings. I have informed them that I will share a paper later with more details on these.
BeatrizEsteves: A couple of years ago, SEMIC did a pilot to use Solid for a specific use case. Could be interesting to see if we could do something similar using DPV for consent managers.
HarshPandit: I mentioned SEMIC as potentially adopting a part of DPV for formal approval/use but was informed that SEMIC is only for public bodies/work and not for broader standards work
BeatrizEsteves: It was a pilot, so maybe they can do another pilot with DPV
ISO/IEC 27560 revision
HarshPandit: Harsh and Jan are reviewing comments for a new version of the standard. So far the comments are positive and stakeholders actually want more detail, particular for the AI appendix that notes use of AI in the records
Proposed Concepts
HarshPandit: Proposals on mailing list from Georg re. "data sender" and "data origin": https://
HarshPandit: we have DataImporter/DataExporter which might be helpful here
BeatrizEsteves: we would be working on this here as part of PLASMA and trust envelopes, so will report back when ready
W3C TPAC
BeatrizEsteves: TPAC this year will be in Dublin on the week of 26-30 October. The idea for the ODRL CG is to have a workshop before that to start working on a charter for a ODRL WG and then formally present the charter at TPAC to kick-start a WG for a ODRL 3.0
Data Act
HarshPandit: we (with Beatriz) reached out to the UPM team working on concepts from the Data Act. Their paper extends some ODRL and DPV concepts. The idea is to have them slowly contribute concepts from their work into DPV. This is also being developed within the context of the HARNESS project so Beatriz and Harsh will be involved.
DAOnt oeg-upm/
Next Meeting
The next meeting will be on JAN-14 Wednesday 13:30WET/14:30CET