W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-p3p-public-comments@w3.org > April 2000

Feedback on P3P-2000-04-24

From: Renato Iannella <renato@iprsystems.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2000 00:19:15 +1000
To: www-p3p-public-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <63920.3165956355@localhost>


Comments from IPR Systems on the P3P working draft (24 April 2000).
Overall, very pleasing to see this spec evolve. Our comments are primarily
to do with the XML and use of appropriate namespaces.

XML Syntax:

In Example 3.1, the use of the <DATA> element to group many of the other
data elements seems very non-XML-ish. We would image that:
  <DATA ref="#business.name">CatalogExample</DATA>
make more sense as:
  <BusinessName>CatalogExample</BusinessName>

Also the use of elements for fixed vocabulary terms is
also odd: For example:
  <PURPOSE><custom/><develop/></PURPOSE>
seems better as:
  <PURPOSE>custom</PURPOSE>
  <PURPOSE>develop</PURPOSE>

Also, we suggest lowercase for all element names.

It is also not clear why you use RDF/XML syntax for the Policy Reference 
File
and XML syntax for the Policy file?


Schemas:

We are assuming that the specification of new data elements (Section 4
Data Schemas) will be replaced/updated with XML Schema (Structures) work.
This seems to make more sense that yet-another-schema definition.
Also, that the XML Schema Datatypes will replace your sections 4.2 
Primitive Data Types and 4.3.1 Dates


People Elements:

Sections 4.3.2 Names, 4.3.4 Telephones, 4.3.5 Contact Information, and
4.4.1 User Data all seem to be remarkably similar to what vCard defines.
It would seem to be more  feasible to simply use the vCard semantics
(and their XML Namespace) in the policies instead of re-inventing them.


Metadata Architecture:

The P3P spec establishes a metadata framework that should be
reusable for other similar functional requirements. For example, PICS
seems to operate in the same fashion. Has an attempt been made to
generalise this metadata framework?
If so, then RDF must be the major syntax carrier? Is it possible to use RDF 
Schema?

Also, in Section 2.2.1 some comments should be made on the use of the
experimental RFC (HTTP Extension Framework). When is it due to be 
formalised?
Is this the W3C preferred way to associate metadata with a resource?



Cheers...Renato                      <http://purl.net/net/renato>
Chief Scientist, IPR Systems Pty Ltd      <http://iprsystems.com>
...............................unlocking the value of information
Received on Friday, 28 April 2000 10:19:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.1 : Tuesday, 21 September 2004 12:14:16 GMT