Hi Gershon and all:
A few corrections to the minutes. I mentioned that privacy traditionally has been thought of as non functional. But so far the UML work that I presented to the TC for consideration has been treating privacy requirements as functional. The quality attributes form the different perspective (not the functional view).
Further, I raised several questions that I would like to see included in the minutes so that TC members can think on them and we can reason through them as a group as we consider the terminology issue:
(1) Why would data collection and retention limit etc. be treated as functional requirements whereas the tactics for privacy are treated as quality attributes?
(2) Should data minimization be separated from data protection in the taxonomy if we did adopt a quality attributes route?
(3) Can we add functional privacy requirements to the privacy by design use case template so that embedding "privacy" becomes explicit to software engineers without their having to find subject matter experts in privacy (addition - as is happening now or not :)
Many thanks,
Dawn.