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

Re: P3P XML Generic Attribute

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 21:20:33 -0700
Message-Id: <9181D6B6-14F3-11D9-88DC-000A95BD86C0@mnot.net>
Cc: public-p3p-spec@w3.org
To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>

Hi Rigo,

Could you point out where the differences are in this text, as opposed 
to the original? It doesn't appear to have changed much.

Also, accepting that P3P policies are applied to resources/behaviours, 
and not data, it seems that the text isn't currently self-consistent;

> P3P 1.0  was designed to associate XML-encoded privacy policies with 
> URIs,  sets of URIs, or cookies. P3P 1.0 it well suited for use with 
> HTML  and XHTML content transmitted over [HTTP] . However,  P3P 1.0 
> cannot be used in situations where content is not associated  with a 
> URI, for example, some applications of Web Services and XMLP/Soap. In 
> addition,  P3P 1.0 cannot be used in situations where policies apply 
> to only a  subset of the content associated with a given URI. For 
> example,  while P3P 1.0 can be used to apply a P3P policy to an entire 
> form  specified by XForms, it  cannot be used to apply the policy to 
> only a single form field.

Note the repeated use of 'content.'

If it is agreed that P3P policies do in fact apply to resources, and 
not content (i.e., representations), this should be something like:

> P3P 1.0  was designed to associate XML-encoded privacy policies with 
> resources identified by one or more URIs and the handling of cookies. 
> Thus, P3P 1.0 it well suited for use with [HTTP] interfaces. However, 
> P3P 1.0 cannot be used in situations where behaviour is not associated 
> with a URI; for example, some applications of Web Services and SOAP. 
> In addition, P3P 1.0 cannot be used in situations where policies apply 
> to a subset of the behaviours associated with a given URI. For 
> example, while P3P 1.0 can be used to apply a P3P policy to the 
> handling of an entire XForms form, it  cannot be used to apply the 
> policy to the handling of a single form field.

Note that the name of the protocol is not "XMLP/Soap," but "SOAP." 
Also, I question that example, because WSDL 2.0 does in fact specify a 
mechanism for associating a URI with particular constructs [1].


Cheers,

1. http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-wsdl20-20040803/#wsdl-uri-references



On Sep 30, 2004, at 1:08 PM, Rigo Wenning wrote:

> Dear Mark,
>
> we had a discussion earlier this year about the P3P XML Generic
> Attribute. There was no conclusion of our discussion that started
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-p3p-spec/2004Apr/0016.html
>
> So please have a look at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/P3P11/#generic_attribute
>
> and please tell us, whether you are satisfied with the wording proposed
> there.
>
> Best,
> -- 
> Rigo Wenning            W3C/ERCIM
> Staff Counsel           Privacy Activity Lead
> mail:rigo@w3.org        2004, Routes des Lucioles
> http://www.w3.org/      F-06902 Sophia Antipolis
>
>

--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Sunday, 3 October 2004 04:20:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.2 : Sunday, 3 October 2004 04:20:37 GMT