- From: <Patrick.Hung@csiro.au>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 01:27:44 +1000
- To: hugo@w3.org, reagle@w3.org
- Cc: public-p3p-spec@w3.org
Hi Hugo, Thanks a lot for your explanation and clarification. May I ask one more question here. I apologize if I further confuse you by my misunderstanding... :-) >When using the http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/bindings/HTTP/ SOAP >HTTP/1.1 binding, the P3P feature is expressed as an HTTP header as >follows: > > P3P: policy=" URI-Reference " Based on your description, I believe that I have a picture of how to define a "feature." Assume my understanding is correct. Then, it seems that the "feature" is an independent structure that can be applied/attached into UDDI, SOAP or even WSDL, am I correct? > A WSDL 1.2 description of a service with such a feature could be (this > may be slightly inaccurate, but you will get the idea): > > <feature > uri='http://example.org/2003/06/16-p3pf/'> > <property > uri='http://example.org/2003/06/16-p3pf/id'> > <value>http://registry.example.com/P3P/Policy.xml</value> > </property> > </feature> If I do not misunderstand it, how can I specify/attach the "feature" into UDDI, SOAP or even WSDL? Sorry that I am lazy to check the related specifications. > Hmmm... I think that I was confused. I think that a policy reference > file is fine as a child of wsdl:definitions, but a reference to a > policy file, i.e. a policy which would apply to an operation, would be > more specific. In many cases, I do imagine that we may need a privacy policy at the <wsdl:definitions/> level and then with some other privacy policies at the <wsdl:operation/> level. Thus, we may have to do a logical "AND" between the privacy policies in two different abstraction levels. Thanks a lot, Patrick.
Received on Tuesday, 17 June 2003 11:28:06 UTC