W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-p3p-spec@w3.org > July 2003

MINUTES: 16 July 2003 P3P spec call

From: Lorrie Cranor <lorrie@research.att.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 12:13:00 -0400
To: public-p3p-spec@w3.org
Message-Id: <5ED1D952-B7A8-11D7-B21F-000393DC889A@research.att.com>

Minutes of the 16 July 2003 P3P spec wg call

Lorrie Cranor
Rigo Wenning
Brooks Dobbs
Rob Horn
Patrick Hung
Joseph Reagle

(Regrets: Giles, Jack, Matthias)

1. Task force reports
    - P3P beyond HTTP - Joseph Reagle

Rigo did his action item and posted the information about the 
previously discussed P3P XML element. Discussion is continuing on the 
mailing list. If time permits, Joseph will try to capture this in his 
draft, at least as an item for further discussion. Joseph has concerns 
about declaring a new XML element that would need to be widely adopted. 
Joseph and Patrick will also discuss the possibility of Patrick taking 
over editing this TF document after Joseph's departure.

    - User agent behavior - Lorrie Cranor

User agent task force has been making good progress. We recently got a 
lot of feedback on the translation and are in the process of discussing 

    - Compact policies - Brian Zwit and Brooks Dobbs

Brooks will schedule a task force call ASAP.

    - Article 10 vocabulary issues - Giles Hogben

Giles was not on the call, but Lorrie reported that Giles had been in 
discussion with Diana about his proposed draft. Diana said the Article 
10 group did not have time to discuss the draft in detail at their last 
meeting but the overall impression was that it did not address all 
their concerns. Lorrie and Giles have discussed with Diana that this 
draft is intended to address short term issues that can be dealt with 
in P3P 1.1 and that other concerns will continue to be discussed in the 
longer term. Giles will try to get them to provide more substantive 
feedback on his draft as soon as possible (hopefully by September).

2. Discussion of Ari's identified/identifiable/link
    clarification draft.

Overall people like this draft. Some folks had a few specific nits that 
they will send to the mailing list. Rigo had some concerns about 
conflicts with EU definitions and he will try to explain more on the 
mailing list. In general, people wanted to see more specific examples, 
especially with respect to data linked to cookies. Brooks has many 
ideas for examples to include and said Ari should contact him about 

3. Discussion of Jack's Agent/Domain TF draft

There were some questions about the goals of this proposal. People 
thought it was useful for companies to be able to declare that all of 
their multiple domains are owned by a single company and comply with 
the same policy, but there was less interest in being able to declare 
that companies belong to an ad network. The reason browsers are 
treating these as third party cookies is that is how consumers seem to 
want to see them treated.

People saw some potential uses for the idea of the KNOWN-HOSTS element 
(although it needs to be expressed using the extension mechanism). 
There was less enthusiasm for allowing INCLUDE and EXCLUDE to include 
host name. That substantially complicates parsing and caching issues 
without bringing obvious advantages. There was a recognition that the 
CP aspect of this proposal was most important for practical reasons, 
and yet it seemed not to scale well in the third-party  ad network 

4. Our next call will be on July 23. (If you can't make it please let 
Lorrie know in advance so she can plan the agenda accordingly)
Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2003 12:10:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:02:17 UTC