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

Re: AGENDA: P3P spec call June 11

From: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@nic-naa.net>
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2003 09:51:38 -0400
Message-Id: <200306041351.h54DpcNr011514@nic-naa.net>
To: Lorrie Cranor <lorrie@research.att.com>
cc: public-p3p-spec@w3.org, brunner@nic-naa.net

> 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

This problem arose in a different, but related context. There was a late
proposal to add a binary toggle to arbitrary portions of the EPP schema,
and one element of that schema is defined as:

In eppcom-1.0.xsd this type definition exists:

<!--
Non-empty token type.
-->
  <simpleType name="minTokenType">
      <restriction base="token">
	 <minLength value="1"/>
      </restriction>
  </simpleType>

This was used to define the type of the element "email". I never saw a way
to extend such a type declaration.

In general, if one doesn't require what I think of as a "glue layer" between
what I think of as "application interfaces" and "system interfaces", there is
a possibility for subsequent awkwardness -- my years writing UNIX APIs is
showing.

Stuffing the extension "outside" of the element, as you've suggested on the
PURPOSE element (but not its arbitrary sub-elements), works.

Sorry I missed the last call.
Eric
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2003 09:57:02 EDT

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