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

Re: [BH] The most generic binding

From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 16:12:17 -0400
To: "Steven Pemberton" <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Cc: "public-p3p-spec" <public-p3p-spec@w3.org>, w3c-html-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <200307181612.17946.reagle@w3.org>

On Wednesday 16 July 2003 17:01, Steven Pemberton wrote:
> I think the confusion is that the wrong mail has been quoted. My mail
> suggesting binding a P3P Policy to an arbitrary element is at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-forms/2002AprJun/0247.html

Thank you Steven, it's useful to see the original source when trying to 
figure out what the issue is! <smile/>

> The problem is, there can be several <submit> elements, and each 
> submit could have a different policy associated with it.
> I propose removing the <privacy> element, and adding a p3p attribute 
> to the <submission> element to identify the policy reference file for 
> the submission:
>    <submission action="/submit" method="post" 
>     p3p="http://..." id="sbmt"/>

I'll note that since this email was sent over a year ago, you presently 
don't appear [1] to do either of these. Instead,
(a) XForms doesn't have any special mechanisms for the policy association, 
instead you reference the existing methods [2] (well known location, link 
tag, HTTP header).
(b) Orthogonally, a P3P data element type can be bound [3] to an XForms 
instance data node. I assume there must be a one-to-one mapping for each, 
so the binding list could get rather exhaustive.

Even your suggestion above did *not* require a per element (e.g., 
"user.personname.given") policy association, only a per submission 

Received on Friday, 18 July 2003 16:13:19 UTC

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