Ian, All,
On Jun 26, 2008, at 4:00 PM, ext Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Arthur Barstow wrote:
The IRC channel for this meeting will be [not #webapps] to facilitate
removing any Member-confidential material from the IRC log.
And this is why I object to there being a member-only mailing list.
I think it's terrible that *even as a fully paid-up member of the
group* I
can't just leave my IRC client logging and get all the IRC activity
of the
group automatically.
Surely you can log any channel you can join.
What could there possibly be to hide? It's not like people are
going to
say confidential things to each other, the people who would _most
benefit_
from confidential information are the very people on the group who
would
hear it (the competition interested enough to attend the call).
To provide others some context for your e-mail, here is a complete
copy of this non-technical process issue I sent to the WG's Member-
confidential list:
[[
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-webapps/2008AprJun/
0015.html>
As an employee of a W3C Member company and as a co-Chair of the Web
Apps WG I take the W3C's Member confidentiality requirement very
seriously. I also fully support all of a meeting's discussions and
minutes being Publicly available *except* for any portion of the
meeting that includes Member confidential discussions/disclosures/etc.
It's great to see #webapps being used by the Public (=individuals
from non-W3C Members) but that has a side-effect that individuals
that are not W3C Members, and hence not bound by the W3C's
Confidentiality requirement, could "see" member-confidential
information in the meeting channel.
The [off] logging mechanism can indeed facilitate removing parts of a
channel's traffic from being logged (e.g. by krijn's logger).
However, if a non-W3C Member is logged into the channel, then they
can still read any confidential information that is entered into IRC
i.e. there is a confidentiality leak.
Given the requirements to: a) minimize the risk of leaking
confidential information; b) to be able to record any member-
confidential discussions that may occur, it seems like holding our
meeting in a member-confidential channel is a reasonable approach
(and then to publish all of the non-confidential information to the
Public). Of course I'm open to other proposal that meet these
requirements.
]]
Although you apparently don't feel obligated to comply with the W3C's
Member Confidentiality requirements [PD-Conf] (otherwise you would
not have quoted my e-mail above to member-webapps on the Public
list), I hope other WG members adhere to their obligation.
Regarding "hiding" above, I want to clarify the types of Member-
confidential information that is potentially relevant to discuss
within the WG. In the past (=WAF WG), it was useful for the WG
members to discuss Member-confidential information such as Charter
discussions on the [Member-only] AC list and a couple of items from
[Member-only] Chairs list.
If by "hide" above you mean something like sharing a Member's private/
secret information, I don't think it is appropriate to discuss that
type of information in a WG meeting.
-Regards, Art Barstow
[PD-Conf] <http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/
comm.html#confidentiality-levels>
