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

RE: Comments on "[P3P]: Beyond HTTP"

From: <Patrick.Hung@csiro.au>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 01:27:44 +1000
Message-ID: <754324CDE8E4EE4498D8E0357D91368501601271@saab-bt.act.cmis.CSIRO.AU>
To: hugo@w3.org, reagle@w3.org
Cc: public-p3p-spec@w3.org

Hi Hugo,

Thanks a lot for your explanation and clarification.

May I ask one more question here. I apologize if I further confuse
you by my misunderstanding... :-)

>When using the http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/bindings/HTTP/ SOAP
>HTTP/1.1 binding, the P3P feature is expressed as an HTTP header as
>  P3P: policy=" URI-Reference "

Based on your description, I believe that I have a picture of how
to define a "feature." Assume my understanding is correct. Then,
it seems that the "feature" is an independent structure that can
be applied/attached into UDDI, SOAP or even WSDL, am I correct?

> A WSDL 1.2 description of a service with such a feature could be (this
> may be slightly inaccurate, but you will get the idea):
>  <feature
>     uri='http://example.org/2003/06/16-p3pf/'>
>  <property
>     uri='http://example.org/2003/06/16-p3pf/id'>
>    <value>http://registry.example.com/P3P/Policy.xml</value>
>  </property>
>  </feature>

If I do not misunderstand it, how can I specify/attach the "feature" into 
UDDI, SOAP or even WSDL? Sorry that I am lazy to check the related

> Hmmm... I think that I was confused. I think that a policy reference
> file is fine as a child of wsdl:definitions, but a reference to a
> policy file, i.e. a policy which would apply to an operation, would be
> more specific.

In many cases, I do imagine that we may need a privacy policy at the
level and then with some other privacy policies at the <wsdl:operation/>
level. Thus,
we may have to do a logical "AND" between the privacy policies in two
different abstraction

Thanks a lot,

Received on Tuesday, 17 June 2003 11:28:06 UTC

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