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

AGENDA: P3P spec call June 11

From: Lorrie Cranor <lorrie@research.att.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 09:34:31 -0400
To: public-p3p-spec@w3.org
Message-Id: <45B08F88-9691-11D7-93B7-000393DC889A@research.att.com>

The next P3P specification group conference call will be on
Wednesday, June 11, 2003, 11 am - 12 pm US Eastern. Dial-in
information is available at
http://www.w3.org/P3P/Group/Specification/1.1/meetings.html

AGENDA

1. Task force reports
    - P3P beyond HTTP - Joseph Reagle
    - User agent behavior - Lorrie Cranor
    - Compact policies - Brian Zwit and Brooks Dobbs
    - Article 10 vocabulary issues - Giles Hogben
    - Agent and domain relationships - Jack Humphrey
    - Consent choices - Matthias Schunter
    - Converting P3P data schema to XML schema - Giles Hogben
    - Signed P3P policies  - Giles Hogben


2. Discuss user agent guidelines draft -- is working group happy with
    this draft? Should it be added as a part of the P3P1.1 spec? As an
    appendix?
    http://www.w3.org/P3P/2003/ua-guidelines.html


3. Discuss bugzilla 215 - compact policy processing by user agents
    http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=215
Proposal to add the following section:

4.7 Compact Policy Processing by User Agents

P3P user agents SHOULD NOT rely on P3P compact policies that do not
comply with the P3P 1.1 specification or are obviously erroneous. Such
compact policies SHOULD be deemed invalid and the corresponding
cookies treated as if they had no compact policies.


4. Discuss Consent Choices working draft -- do we want to pursue this
    in P3P 1.1 or postpone to P3P 2.0?
    http://www.w3.org/P3P/2003/05-cc-changes-to-P3P.html
    This is also related to Bugzilla 169
    http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=169


5. Discuss bugzilla 170
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=170
Consider expanding definition of CONSEQUENCE field to reflect how it
is actually being used -- in particular to express summary of
STATEMENT as well as value proposition. Alternatively, consider adding
actual structure to CONSEQUENCE element to seperate out summary from
value proposition.

Based on discussion on last call I propose the following new definition:

A short summary (not to exceed 500 characters) of the data practices
described in the statement that can be shown to a human user.

[Note that we do not plan on changing the P3P data schema to reflect
the 500 character limit, however, user agents would be advised to
display no more than 500 characters.  We can also discuss whether 500
characters is the right limit or whether it should be more or less.]


6. Discuss bugzilla 168
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=168

Consider adding human-readable explanation strings to all elements
that don't have them
- could be done for a specific set of elements or generically
- it appears that the way the extension mechanism is defined in the
P3P schema we cannot add such elements in arbitrary places -- for
example, I think we can add them to high-level elements such as
PURPOSE but not as sub-elements of individual PURPOSE elements

It would be helpful if people could identify elements where they
would like to see human-readable strings prior to our call.


7. Set date for next call (June 25?)
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2003 09:32:54 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 17 March 2004 17:46:25 EST