- From: Lorrie Cranor <lorrie@research.att.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 14:20:46 -0400
- To: public-p3p-spec@w3.org
As previously announced [1] we had our UA TF call this afternoon.
Brooks and I were the only ones on the call despite several others
telling me they would be there.
We focussed our discussion on the document I sent out with observations
on the the three translations [2]. Brooks and I were mostly in
agreement on the high level observations. We didn't go over the
detailed observations. It would be useful for everyone in this TF to
send in their own observations and raise any points of disagreement
with my observations.
We discussed the list of questions I posed for the TF to consider (at
the end of [2]). To this list Brooks suggested we also consider
guidelines about the display of policy summaries for the site vs. its
cookies, as well as guidelines for displaying information about cookies
on a basis other than URL (for example, if a site has multiple cookies
associated with a given URI that have different policies associated
with them -- currently IE6 does not provide a way to distinguish these
policies).
We spent some time discussing the first question on my list. Both of us
would prefer to converge on a single set of translations, but we're not
sure whether this will be possible.
I would like to get people focussed on this TF ASAP so we can try to
move forward, so let me assign some action items to all UA TF members.
Please try to complete these items and send email to the mailing list
by the end of this week.
ACTION ITEM 1: Please review the translation documents and my
observations about them [2]. Please send to the mailing list any
disagreements you have with my observations and any additional
observations you have that I didn't cover.
ACTION ITEM 2: Please begin discussing the first question in my list of
questions for the TF to consider:
Should we try to converge on a single set of translations? Should
we come up with a long and short translation for each element,
perhaps using the click through approach like NS uses? Should our
guidelines list all acceptable translations they people submit
rather than trying to converge or one or two?
[1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-p3p-spec/2003Apr/0020.html
[2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-p3p-spec/2003Apr/0018.html
[3] http://www.w3.org/P3P/1.1/documents.html#ua
Received on Monday, 21 April 2003 14:19:52 UTC