W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > May 2012

RE: 5.2.2 Policy representation

From: JC Cannon <jccannon@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 15:18:09 +0000
To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, Tracking Protection Working Group <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BB17D596C94A854E9EE4171D33BBCC810D4D59@TK5EX14MBXC136.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Rigo,

Do we really want to mix P3P and DNT? Or are you saying this is one option for defining the policy file?

Thanks,
JC

-----Original Message-----
From: Rigo Wenning [mailto:rigo@w3.org] 
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 1:44 AM
To: Tracking Protection Working Group
Subject: 5.2.2 Policy representation

Dear all, 

I would like to raise an issue on policy representation

the current text for Policies reads:

An optional member named policy may be provided with a string value containing a URI-reference to a human-readable document that describes the tracking policy for this site. The content of such a policy document is beyond the scope of this protocol and only supplemental to what is described by this machine-readable tracking status representation.

I suggest the following wording:

An optional member named policy may be provided with a string value containing a URI-reference to a P3P Policy File[1] that describes the tracking policy for this site. The content of such a policy document is beyond the scope of this protocol and only supplemental to what is described by this machine-readable tracking status representation.

1.http://www.w3.org/TR/P3P11/#P3P_markup

Rationale:

By linking to a P3P Policy file, the <Policies> Element therein contains an attribute called "discuri" that indicates the location of the human readable policy. This would allow a site to declare a policy in a machine readable form and in a human readable form. The link to the Specification makes clear that both can not contradict. 

Best, 

Rigo
Received on Friday, 4 May 2012 15:18:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:28 UTC