On Wednesday 08 November 2006 10:30, Lorrie Cranor wrote: > > RESPONSE NEEDED: > > Please review the draft at http://www.w3.org/P3P/2006/WD- > > P3P11-20061006.html (or just the changes if you reviewed the Last > > Call) and send an email to this mailing list indicating a yes or no > > vote for proceeding with a W3C Note publication. YES. I haven't been following the work, nor looked closely at "20061006" but I can't imagine there'd be any harm in publishing it as a NOTE. But I am curious as to what is meant by: >I would urge anyone doing P3P > implementations to include elements from the P3P 1.1 draft, all of > which are backwards compatible with P3P 1.0. Meaning they could be used by a service but ignored by a P3P1.0 client?Received on Wednesday, 8 November 2006 17:10:45 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 8 November 2006 17:10:45 GMT