- From: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@nic-naa.net>
- Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2003 09:51:38 -0400
- To: Lorrie Cranor <lorrie@research.att.com>
- cc: public-p3p-spec@w3.org, brunner@nic-naa.net
> 6. Discuss bugzilla 168
> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=168
>
> Consider adding human-readable explanation strings to all elements
> that don't have them
> - could be done for a specific set of elements or generically
> - it appears that the way the extension mechanism is defined in the
> P3P schema we cannot add such elements in arbitrary places -- for
> example, I think we can add them to high-level elements such as
> PURPOSE but not as sub-elements of individual PURPOSE elements
This problem arose in a different, but related context. There was a late
proposal to add a binary toggle to arbitrary portions of the EPP schema,
and one element of that schema is defined as:
In eppcom-1.0.xsd this type definition exists:
<!--
Non-empty token type.
-->
<simpleType name="minTokenType">
<restriction base="token">
<minLength value="1"/>
</restriction>
</simpleType>
This was used to define the type of the element "email". I never saw a way
to extend such a type declaration.
In general, if one doesn't require what I think of as a "glue layer" between
what I think of as "application interfaces" and "system interfaces", there is
a possibility for subsequent awkwardness -- my years writing UNIX APIs is
showing.
Stuffing the extension "outside" of the element, as you've suggested on the
PURPOSE element (but not its arbitrary sub-elements), works.
Sorry I missed the last call.
Eric
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2003 09:57:02 UTC