Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 5 Next »


This document is a product of the CISWG Work Group. It records the scenarios and use cases governing the development of consent receipt and guiding associated implementations and deployments.

A Scenario specifying a receipt data schema

This document is currently under active development. Its latest version can always be found here. See the Change History at the end of this document for its revision number.


Mark Lizar

Intellectual Property Notice

The CISWG Work Group operates under Option ABC and the publication of this document is governed by the policies outlined in this option.

Table of Contents

Introduction and Instructions

This document is a product of the CISWG Work Group. It records the scenarios and use cases governing the development of the Consent Receipt Schema (CRS) and guiding associated implementations and deployments.

Please use the scenario template near the end of this document in adding new scenarios and subordinate use cases. Change the status keyword in each scenario and use case title as appropriate, linking to the meeting minutes page explaining the status change:

  • Pending: Initial status when first submitted
  • Accepted: Needs to be accounted for in Consent Receipt Schema V1 and/or its associated compliant implementations
  • Deferred: Relevant to the problem space; may be considered in future versions
  • Rejected: Out of scope

Edit the descriptions of technical issues and scope questions to reflect (or point to) group decisions about how to handle them.

Scenario: unique-title (Pending)

Submitted by: Mark Lizar


The goal of this scenario is to create a specification for a receipt schema and a demonstrator for creating, providing and using a minimum viable consent receipt. 


 Not unlike a receipt you get when you buy something, which you then submit for a third party, either to show a budget and costs, or to report on what was purchased and for how much.   Like costs, consents can be counted, and like purchasing preferences, consent preferences collected.  Better managed preferences result in better user experience. 

 A receipt can also be used for governance, for instance, the Tax authorities can use a receipt to check and see if the sales are hidden, the purchaser can use a receipt to be sure of the cost of goods and compare the change provided and the receipt against the price advertised to make sure of compliance.  

  A receipt can be taken and used with third parties like a token to access other services.


 Specify the existing fields for a consent transaction receipt and list them as a basic template for consent receipts. (Note: This entails formally defined attributes, published and open for comment.)

Develop scenario covering the life cycle of a minimum viable consent receipt for building a demonstrator.  This would involve

  1. Create a consent receipt generator, --> Common Terms, Legal.TXT
  2. Create a consent receipt button,  --> Embed Code, publish legal.txt
  3. Provision a consent to a service user
  4. Service user, uses the receipt  to achieve the use case specified.  


Intended Use

Use Case: Demonstrator (Pending)

Submitted by: Mark Lizar

So far this looks like --> Scenario 1



- Common Terms - links existing policies to consent fields and semantics 

- This creates an embed code that is put behind a consent button,

- this publishes legal.txt to a common place - (Open Notice database)



When a consent is provisioned using the button 

- a receipt is created  at the point of consent, the identity used to provision the consent is used to deliver the consent receipt



Post Consent

- the initial consent is used to identify the parties and collect the preferences and options available, From companies this may be. marketing materials, items on sale, etc.  For people, this may be do not track, proof of age, etc. 

Issue: unique-title

(Provide technical commentary on the issues brought up by this use case.)

Change History

Version Date Comment
Current Version (v. 5) Nov 30, 2013 12:03 Mark Lizar
v. 38 Aug 27, 2017 13:52 Oliver Maerz
v. 37 Sep 11, 2014 22:32 Mark Lizar
v. 36 Sep 11, 2014 22:31 Mark Lizar
v. 35 Sep 11, 2014 21:15 Mark Lizar
v. 34 Sep 11, 2014 18:32 Mark Lizar
v. 33 Sep 10, 2014 12:20 Mark Lizar
v. 32 Aug 10, 2014 11:18 Mark Lizar
v. 31 Aug 10, 2014 10:59 Mark Lizar
v. 30 Aug 07, 2014 11:48 Mark Lizar
v. 29 Aug 07, 2014 11:04 Mark Lizar
v. 28 Dec 18, 2013 21:16 Mark Lizar
v. 27 Dec 18, 2013 21:15 Mark Lizar
v. 26 Dec 05, 2013 11:21 Mark Lizar:
Migration of unmigrated content due to installation of a new plugin
v. 25 Dec 05, 2013 11:21 Mark Lizar:
Migration of unmigrated content due to installation of a new plugin
v. 24 Dec 05, 2013 11:21 Mark Lizar
v. 23 Dec 05, 2013 11:21 Mark Lizar
v. 22 Dec 05, 2013 08:47 Mark Lizar
v. 21 Dec 04, 2013 23:16 Mark Lizar
v. 20 Dec 04, 2013 22:16 Mark Lizar
v. 19 Dec 04, 2013 22:01 Mark Lizar
v. 18 Dec 03, 2013 10:29 Mark Lizar
v. 17 Dec 03, 2013 10:22 Mark Lizar
v. 16 Dec 02, 2013 20:23 Mark Lizar
v. 15 Dec 01, 2013 15:33 Mark Lizar
v. 14 Dec 01, 2013 14:18 Mark Lizar
v. 13 Dec 01, 2013 13:45 Mark Lizar
v. 12 Dec 01, 2013 11:20 Mark Lizar
v. 11 Dec 01, 2013 10:22 Mark Lizar
v. 10 Dec 01, 2013 10:18 Mark Lizar
v. 9 Dec 01, 2013 10:17 Mark Lizar
v. 8 Nov 30, 2013 12:32 Mark Lizar
v. 7 Nov 30, 2013 12:26 Mark Lizar
v. 6 Nov 30, 2013 12:14 Mark Lizar
v. 5 Nov 30, 2013 12:03 Mark Lizar
v. 4 Nov 30, 2013 10:41 Mark Lizar
v. 3 Nov 29, 2013 21:49 Mark Lizar
v. 2 Nov 29, 2013 21:43 Mark Lizar
v. 1 Nov 29, 2013 19:01 Mark Lizar

  • No labels