[WG-InfoSharing] Actions from the Consent Receipt Call this week
m.lizar at openconsentgroup.com
Tue Mar 28 10:15:33 CDT 2017
We have had some comments, with many people telling me they are going to put comments in themselves. As a result I have been following generally what you have put below and am putting time into crafting a really good work group response.
There ICO Guidance is all over the map and there a lot of elements they bring up but don’t define. As a result I am looking to provide a response that looks to provide future reviews and input, as the work out what guidance to develop.
I am working on this again tonight and will send what i have before morning. Apologies for the delay,
PS - for the ISO questions - I think its important we know what this work is going to accomplish and the path its going to take. Very much agree we would need at least a 1.1, - but we would also require a mapping between the spec and 29100 requirements and this would likely need to be included as a profile for the minimum viable consent receipt specification v.1.1 - (or some equivalent type of action)
> On 27 Mar 2017, at 22:35, Iain Henderson <iainhenderson at mac.com> wrote:
> My main comment for the ICO response would be that we should keep it short and sweet and major on:
> - that Personal Data Receipts (inc Consent) have the potential to be a major step forward in empowering individuals, and that they should endorse the approach
> - that Kantara has an almost approved v 1.0 of a consent receipt spec, and will have a 1.1 later this year in plenty of time for GDPR
> As regards the ISO question, i’m with David, we need to get the spec to 1.1 with as many of the queries raised in the recent review addressed as we can before around Sept 2017.
> Hope that helps.
>> On 24 Mar 2017, at 14:51, Mark OCG <m.lizar at openconsentgroup.com <mailto:m.lizar at openconsentgroup.com>> wrote:
>> Hi Everyone,
>> A couple of items from this weeks call for the list.
>> 1. Please send any or all comments for the ICO Consent Guidance review by Sunday, either directly to me or on the list.
>> 2. In our charter we are currently chartered to move the consent receipt forward to a fast track program at ISO
>> In our call we discussed the current charter and the plan to move the CR spec to ISO. An action was created to ask the workgroup to review the charter and to advise/write up a plan for moving the CR spec forward, and/or updating the charter.
>> https://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/infosharing/Charter+2016 <https://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/infosharing/Charter+2016>
>> David advises as acting editor that we plan the spec work to the point where it usable for moving forward. Explaining that there are key issues and elements in the CR which need to be addressed ideally in v.1.1, before moving the spec work.
>> Best Regards,
>> WG-InfoSharing mailing list
>> WG-InfoSharing at kantarainitiative.org <mailto:WG-InfoSharing at kantarainitiative.org>
> WG-InfoSharing mailing list
> WG-InfoSharing at kantarainitiative.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the WG-InfoSharing