W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-p3p-spec@w3.org > March 2004

RE: alternate domain relationships proposal

From: Giles Hogben <giles.hogben@jrc.it>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:58:35 +0100
To: "'Humphrey Jack'" <JHumphrey@coremetrics.com>, "'public-p3p-spec'" <public-p3p-spec@w3.org>
Message-ID: <007701c40bfe$07e28160$362abf8b@cs.jrc.it>

There seems to be something wrong with the initial argument:

The existing P3P spec says:

"A policy referenced in a policy reference file can be applied only to URIs
on the DNS (Domain Name System) host that references it. Thus, for example,
a policy reference file at the well-known location of host www.example.com
can apply policies only to resources on www.example.com."

So when you say

"forinstance.com is configured to return the HTTP header

    P3P: policyref="http://www.example.com/w3c/p3p.xml"

This policyref can only apply to files on www.example.com 

Have I missed something in this discussion?

>**-----Original Message-----
>**From: public-p3p-spec-request@w3.org 
>**[mailto:public-p3p-spec-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Humphrey, Jack
>**Sent: 17 March 2004 07:48
>**To: 'public-p3p-spec'
>**Subject: alternate domain relationships proposal
>**Based on our discussion last week, here is a draft of an 
>**alternate proposal for a new "our-host" extension element 
>**(renamed to distinguish from the previous proposal's 
>**"known-host") with a different semantic meaning. Also 
>**included is an extension to the compact policy P3P header to 
>**support the same mechanism for compact policies.
>**Please review this new proposal and compare to the previous 
>**proposal. Is it more straightforward? Might it be less 
>**confusing for implementers and user agent developers?
>**Thanks. I will probably be late to the call and may have 
>**some trouble participating verbally, as I will be coming 
>**from a dental appointment.
Received on Wednesday, 17 March 2004 03:58:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:02:18 UTC