Proposals should clearly state business factors and user risks

[AramZS]

Split from #46

[AramZS]

Not sure we are ready to merge or dismiss this one yet?

[npdoty]

Does "business factors" refer to use cases, like what functionality is provided by any particular specification? Does "user risk" refer to privacy and security implications?

There is a paragraph above this one that requires documenting privacy and security implications.

I'm not sure I've ever seen it listed as a separate requirement in a charter, but I think W3C specifications do typically describe use cases, or, more often, that use cases are detailed in other group deliverables. Some charters note that non-normative use case and requirements documents may be published by the group in the course of their work.

[ShivanKaul]

I think we should disambiguate "business factors" as well, but in favour of having some text along these lines.

[AramZS]

After discussion this needs (as per the ongoing thread) additional reworking, but may result in something we do indeed want to add

[npdoty]

I would suggest that rather than documenting some balance (against what alternative scenario?), we instead: 1) note that we will both document privacy implications and address privacy issues; 2) document how advertising business use cases are addressed in each deliverable; 3) document how more private advertising technology in the deliverable can mitigate privacy issues by helping to migrate away from invasive mechanisms.

[AramZS]

We will return to this Thursday. Please place any changes before then.

[martinthomson]

I would be OK with a formalization of Nick's proposed list. Or the text I proposed.

[ShivanKaul]

@npdoty Points 1 & 2 from your list seem fine, but I'm not sure why we need 3.