IRC log of dpvcg on 2022-03-02
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 12:51:38 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #dpvcg
- 12:51:38 [RRSAgent]
- logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/03/02-dpvcg-irc
- 12:52:48 [harsh]
- ScribeNick: harsh
- 12:52:51 [harsh]
- Meeting: DPVCG Meeting Call
- 12:52:54 [harsh]
- Chair: harsh
- 12:53:01 [harsh]
- Date: 02 MAR 2022
- 12:53:11 [harsh]
- Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dpvcg/2022Feb/0008.html
- 13:03:17 [harsh]
- Present: harsh, paul, beatriz, julian
- 13:03:20 [harsh]
- Regrets: georg
- 13:22:24 [rigo]
- rigo has joined #dpvcg
- 14:08:07 [harsh]
- Topic: DPV License (FYI)
- 14:08:26 [harsh]
- Ongoing conversation on mailing list https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dpvcg/2022Mar/0002.html
- 14:08:48 [harsh]
- Thread and DPV documentation/repo will be updated once there is some resolution on license
- 14:09:07 [harsh]
- Topic: Modelling Jurisdictions (proposal)
- 14:09:21 [harsh]
- See https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dpvcg/2022Feb/0006.html for info
- 14:09:40 [harsh]
- This uses the location / DPA / laws concepts from DPV to model countries, DPAs, and relevant laws
- 14:10:09 [harsh]
- Currently all countries, EU membership (pre/post Brexit), EEA, EU DPAs, GDPR, and Adequacy decisions are provided
- 14:10:33 [harsh]
- Sources https://github.com/coolharsh55/dpv-x/blob/master/dpv-juris/sources.md include authoritative resources
- 14:10:58 [harsh]
- Volunteers can expand listing to include additional laws, DPAs, and adequacy decisions (or data transfer agreements) between countries outside EU
- 14:11:15 [harsh]
- So far we have received only requests/use-cases related to EU + data transfers, which this is sufficient for
- 14:11:56 [harsh]
- Proposal open for review until MAR-31. Comments will be reviewed and incorporated until then, after which this will be published as an extension to the DPV (e.g. dpv-juris)
- 14:12:02 [harsh]
- Topic: Use-case documentation
- 14:12:48 [harsh]
- It is imperative and important to document the use-cases to both (i) assess DPV in terms of concepts is sufficient to model that use-case; and (ii) to demonstrate usefulness of DPV
- 14:13:19 [harsh]
- Use-case is a term used for a generic description of a situation which will be analysed to identify relevant concepts that the DPV should represent
- 14:13:51 [harsh]
- For descriptions of "how to do X in DPV", consider writing documentation in the form of guides that target a specific domain or application. For e.g. creating ROPA with DPV.
- 14:14:31 [harsh]
- Use-cases should be simple to describe and record. For this reason, the minimal concepts identified to describe an use-case are: ID (assigned by DPVCG after acceptance), title, description, relevant concepts to model, and source (optional)
- 14:14:49 [harsh]
- Anything else can be provided for contextual information and discussion e.g. diagrams, additional descriptions.
- 14:15:45 [harsh]
- Use-cases will be stored on GitHub https://github.com/w3c/dpv/tree/master/use-cases as RDF, and linked to concepts within the specification e.g. Data Transfer -> See relevant use-cases (link to page listing use-cases where data transfers are mentioned as a relevant concept)
- 14:16:13 [harsh]
- Topic: Resolution of proposed concepts
- 14:17:17 [harsh]
- *Consequence*
- 14:17:53 [harsh]
- The use-case is to denote what are the consequences of something not taking place e.g. (i) data not provided could result in service not being provided; (ii) rights not possible to exercise
- 14:18:30 [harsh]
- In this, (i) can be inferred from expressing data is necessary for a service. However, for indicating two, the proposal is to provide a way to indicate something is a consequence of 'failure'
- 14:19:01 [harsh]
- For example, one personal data handling instance specifies another instance as a consequence of failure
- 14:19:27 [harsh]
- No comments or preferences expressed. Harsh will check with proposal submitted (Georg) on the use-case and what concepts are necessary.
- 14:20:39 [harsh]
- Note -> ODRL already models consequence and failure relations. Unless these are analysed and found to be non-compatible with the use-case, DPV should not repeat their semantics
- 14:20:45 [harsh]
- ---
- 14:20:52 [harsh]
- *Technologies*
- 14:21:06 [harsh]
- We have a rudimentary list of technologies e.g. database, apps, OS, cookies
- 14:21:35 [harsh]
- Instead of DPV provisioning an ad-hoc incomplete list of technologies, these should be provided as a separate extension similar to dpv-pd that can grow at its own pace
- 14:21:48 [harsh]
- Agreement on providing technologies as a separate extension (dpv-tech)
- 14:21:51 [harsh]
- ---
- 14:21:55 [harsh]
- *Data Breach*
- 14:22:31 [harsh]
- Instead of modelling data breach as a singular concept, DPV should look towards modelling all concepts relevant to data breaches e.g. records, what data was affected, actors involved, notification to authorities and data subjects
- 14:23:02 [harsh]
- These should be provisioned as a separate extension to avoid mixing DPV concepts (e.g. entities and actors) with data breach specific concepts
- 14:23:37 [harsh]
- We invite proposals for modelling data breaches via the public mailing list
- 14:23:39 [harsh]
- ---
- 14:23:50 [harsh]
- *Benefits and Beneficiary*
- 14:24:17 [harsh]
- We have benefits and beneficiary as a proposed set of concepts from the inception of DPV in 2018. The intention was to indicate who 'benefits' from some data being processed i.e. the company or the user.
- 14:24:52 [harsh]
- Prior discussions on this stopped at trying to determine the opposite concept from benefit e.g. harm or detriment, and how to indicate these along with "who is harmed"
- 14:25:36 [harsh]
- Current (today's) proposal is to model these as 'impacts' and indicate the entity being impacted. For e.g. for benefits, this becomes the beneficiary. For harms, this becomes the person harmed.
- 14:25:43 [harsh]
- ---
- 14:25:50 [harsh]
- *Risk Concepts*
- 14:27:42 [harsh]
- DPV models risks and mitigations as broad concepts (`Concept hasRisk Risk`) (`RiskMitigationMeasure mitigatesRisk Risk`) (`Risk isMitigatedByMeasure RiskMitigationMeasure`) and (`Concept hasRiskMitigationMeasure RiskMitigationMeasure`)
- 14:28:16 [harsh]
- To model additional information, such as likelihood, frequency, consequence and impacts of risks (e.g. data breaches) - this requires concepts associated with risk assessment and risk management
- 14:28:45 [harsh]
- We invite proposals for an extension to the DPV to model risk related concepts (as above, including impacts such as benefits) to be shared via the public mailing list
- 14:28:59 [harsh]
- ---
- 14:29:05 [harsh]
- *Order of Things*
- 14:29:40 [harsh]
- The use-case was how to express order of 'things' i.e. whether they occur before or after something. This is more generic than modelling activities that take place in a sequence as part of a workflow.
- 14:30:21 [harsh]
- The proposal was to provide concepts `isBefore` and `isAfter` to indicate something comes before or after within some (unspecified) context. This could be temporal, spatial, or another context.
- 14:30:42 [harsh]
- These were chosen to be more simple and lesser ambiguous than alternatives `followsFrom`
- 14:30:47 [harsh]
- ---
- 14:30:58 [harsh]
- *isRequiredFor relation expressing requirement for obligation~
- 14:31:35 [harsh]
- s/~/*
- 14:31:57 [harsh]
- Julian had proposed a concept `isRequiredFor` to indicate a measure was required for some legal obligation or requirement
- 14:32:22 [harsh]
- However, this is complex to represent as such requirements could be applicable to things other than technical measures e.g. legal basis, purposes, processing
- 14:32:39 [harsh]
- Additionally, this would necessitate DPV to model legal obligations, compliance processes and status.
- 14:33:04 [harsh]
- This requires more clear proposals with description for what concepts are necessary and how they should fit within the existing model (of concepts in DPV)
- 14:33:15 [harsh]
- Proposals are welcome to be shared through the public mailing list
- 14:33:25 [harsh]
- Topic: Next Meeting
- 14:33:36 [harsh]
- We will continue discussion on the resolution of proposed concepts next week
- 14:33:55 [harsh]
- Next meeting will take place on MAR-09 13:00 WET / 14:00 CET
- 14:33:57 [harsh]
- zakim, bye
- 14:33:57 [Zakim]
- leaving. As of this point the attendees have been harsh, paul, beatriz, julian
- 14:33:57 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #dpvcg
- 14:34:06 [harsh]
- rrsagent, publish minutes v2
- 14:34:06 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/03/02-dpvcg-minutes.html harsh
- 14:34:11 [harsh]
- rrsagent, set logs world-visible
- 14:35:05 [harsh]
- rrsagent, bye
- 14:35:05 [RRSAgent]
- I see no action items