W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-p3p-spec@w3.org > August 2005

Re: Base Data Schema definition

From: Lorrie Cranor <lorrie+@cs.cmu.edu>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:13:50 -0400
Message-Id: <3A4266B8-D7C5-4EEE-A9ED-94DDBBB0B85E@cs.cmu.edu>
Cc: "'Rigo Wenning'" <rigo@w3.org>, "'public-p3p-spec'" <public-p3p-spec@w3.org>
To: Giles Hogben <giles.hogben@jrc.it>

OK, back up....

So are you proposing that P3P1.1 P3P policies have a different name  
space than P3P 1.0 policies? If so, then that may be a problem, as we  
were trying to avoid introducing a new name space.

Lorrie


On Aug 23, 2005, at 9:01 AM, Giles Hogben wrote:

>
> No I'm not suggesting that. The import is of the P3P 1.0 schema not  
> the
> P3P1.0 base data schema (which is not an XSD schema and therefore  
> can't be
> imported) because you need to use the yes/no attribute (and we  
> would like to
> use the optional attribute)
>
>
>> **-----Original Message-----
>> **From: public-p3p-spec-request@w3.org
>> **[mailto:public-p3p-spec-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Lorrie Cranor
>> **Sent: 23 August 2005 14:54
>> **To: giles.hogben@jrc.it
>> **Cc: Rigo Wenning; 'public-p3p-spec'
>> **Subject: Re: Base Data Schema definition
>> **
>> **
>> **
>> **So Giles is proposing that the new P3P 1.1 base data schema import
>> **the old P3P 1.0 base data schema by reference? If so, then probably
>> **no reason to reproduce the 1.0 schema in 1.1. But maybe that is not
>> **what you are asking?
>> **
>> **Lorrie
>> **
>> **
>> **On Aug 23, 2005, at 4:00 AM, giles.hogben@jrc.it wrote:
>> **
>> **> xsd:import looks closed to me.
>> **> It validated so the syntax should  be OK.
>> **> Fine to change the namespace.
>> **>
>> **> Not sure I understand the last question. I would leave that up to
>> **> Lorrie.
>> **>
>> **>
>> **> ----- Original Message -----
>> **> From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
>> **> Date: Thursday, August 18, 2005 2:30 pm
>> **> Subject: Base Data Schema definition
>> **>
>> **>
>> **> Giles,
>> **>
>> **> in your new base data schema draft, you start like this:
>> **>
>> **> <xsd:schema
>> **>   xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
>> **>   xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2002/01/BDSP3Pv1.1"
>> **>   xmlns:p3p="http://www.w3.org/2002/01/P3Pv1"
>> **>   xmlns:p3pbds="http://www.w3.org/2002/01/BDSP3Pv1.1"
>> **>   elementFormDefault="qualified"
>> **>   targetNamespace="http://www.w3.org/2002/01/BDSP3Pv1.1">
>> **>      <xsd:import
>> **>       schemaLocation="http://www.w3.org/2002/01/P3Pv1.xsd"
>> **>       namespace="http://www.w3.org/2002/01/P3Pv1" />
>> **>
>> **> I think, the targetNamespace MUST be something different.
>> **It should
>> **> be a
>> **> new namespace. Suggestion is /2005/08/BDS-P3P11
>> **>
>> **> You fail to close <xsd:import>
>> **>
>> **> Does that mean, the old 1.0 Schema should be replaced in the Spec
>> **> as it
>> **> is already in the 1.0 REC and can be imported from there?
>> **Or should we
>> **> provide a combined XML Schema?
>> **>
>> **> Best,
>> **>
>> **> Rigo
>> **>
>> **
>> **
>>
>
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 23 August 2005 13:14:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Tuesday, 23 August 2005 13:14:46 GMT