DaPIS: An Ontology-Based Data Protection Icon Set

Privacy policies are known to be impenetrable and lengthy texts that are hardly read and poorly understood. This is why the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) introduces provisions to enhance information transparency including icons as visual means to clarify data practices. However, the research on the creation and evaluation of graphical symbols for the communication of legal concepts, which are generally abstract and unfamiliar to laypeople, is still in its infancy. Moreover, detailed visual representations can support users’ comprehension of the underlying concepts, but at the expense of simplicity and usability. This Chapter describes a methodology for the creation and evaluation of DaPIS, a machine-readable Data Protection Icon Set that was designed following human-centered methods drawn from the emerging discipline of Legal Design. Participatory design methods have ensured that the perspectives of legal experts, designers and other relevant stakeholders are combined in a fruitful dialogue, while user studies have empirically determined strengths and weaknesses of the icon set as communicative means for the legal sphere. Inputs from other disciplines were also fundamental: canonical principles drawn from aesthetics, ergonomics and semiotics were included in the methodology. Moreover, DaPIS is modelled on PrOnto, an ontology of the GDPR, thus offering a comprehensive solution for the Semantic Web. In combination with the description of a privacy policy in the legal standard XML Akoma Ntoso, such an approach makes the icons machine-readable and automatically retrievable. Icons can thus serve as information markers in lengthy privacy statements and support an efficient navigation of the document. In this way, different representations of legal information can be mapped and connected to enhance its comprehensibility: the lawyer-readable, the machine-readable, and the human-readable layers.

[1]  R. Bird,et al.  Promoting Business Success Through Contract Visualization , 2011 .

[2]  Helena Haapio,et al.  Cooperation through clarity , 2016 .

[3]  Jean-Marc Jézéquel,et al.  Design Patterns with Contracts , 1999 .

[4]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  Legal Ontology for Modelling GDPR Concepts and Norms , 2018, JURIX.

[5]  Angelo Di Iorio,et al.  Integration of legal datasets: from meta-model to implementation , 2013, IIWAS '13.

[6]  Lorrie Faith Cranor,et al.  A Design Space for Effective Privacy Notices , 2015, SOUPS.

[7]  Helena Haapio,et al.  Proactive Legal Design: Embedding Values in the Design of Legal Artefacts , 2019 .

[8]  Helena Haapio,et al.  Contract Continuum: From Text to Images, Comics, and Code , 2017 .

[9]  Monica Palmirani,et al.  Legal Design Patterns: towards a new language for legal information design , 2019 .

[10]  Stefania Passera Beyond the Wall of Text: How Information Design Can Make Contracts User-Friendly , 2015, HCI.

[11]  Shara Monteleone Addressing the 'Failure' of Informed Consent in Online Data Protection: Learning the Lessons from Behaviour-Aware Regulation , 2015 .

[12]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  PrOnto: Privacy Ontology for Legal Reasoning , 2018, EGOVIS.

[13]  Harm J. G. Zwaga,et al.  Visual Information For Everyday Use : Design And Research Perspectives , 1999 .

[14]  Arianna Rossi Legal Design for the General Data Protection Regulation. A Methodology for the Visualization and Communication of Legal Concepts , 2019 .

[15]  Monica Palmirani,et al.  A Methodological Framework to Design a Machine-Readable Privacy Icon Set , 2018 .

[16]  Maja van der Velden,et al.  Participatory Design and Design for Values , 2015 .

[17]  Ian Alexander,et al.  An introduction to qualitative research , 2000, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[18]  Helena Haapio,et al.  When Design Met Law: Design Patterns for Information Transparency , 2019 .

[19]  A. Oehler,et al.  Good Consumer Information: the Information Paradigm at its (Dead) End? , 2017 .

[20]  Fabio Vitali,et al.  UNDO: The United Nations System Document Ontology , 2017, International Semantic Web Conference.

[21]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Evaluating ontological decisions with OntoClean , 2002, CACM.

[22]  Benjamin Fabian,et al.  Large-scale readability analysis of privacy policies , 2017, WI.

[23]  Lorenzo Valeri,et al.  Review of the European Data Protection Directive , 2009 .

[24]  O. Ben-shahar,et al.  More Than You Wanted to Know: The Failure of Mandated Disclosure , 2014 .

[25]  Fabio Vitali,et al.  The Publishing Workflow Ontology (PWO) , 2017, Semantic Web.

[26]  Daniel J. Solove,et al.  Privacy Self-Management and the Consent Dilemma , 2012 .

[27]  Helena Haapio,et al.  Contracts as interfaces: Exploring visual representation patterns in contract design , 2019 .

[28]  Monica Palmirani,et al.  Legal Design Patterns for Privacy , 2018 .

[29]  H. Nissenbaum A Contextual Approach to Privacy Online , 2011, Daedalus.

[30]  Michael S. Wogalter,et al.  Handbook of Warnings , 2006 .

[31]  Monica Palmirani,et al.  From Words to Images Through Legal Visualization , 2015, AICOL.

[32]  Fabio Vitali,et al.  Akoma-Ntoso for Legal Documents , 2011 .