- From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 16:30:46 +0200
- To: public-p3p-spec <public-p3p-spec@w3.org>
Minutes for the P3P 1.1 Specification WG call Present: Matthias Schunter David Stampley Brooks Dobbs Joseph Reagle Jeff Edelen Rigo Wenning Lorrie Cranor Giles Hogben 1/ Reports from the different Task-Forces a/ P3P beyond HTTP - Joseph Reagle good feedback from hugo haas. Document in decent form, pushed it out for comments doesn't make sense to use a polref-file. Would be better to use a WSDL-description PRF has expiration-date not in WSDL this week will send pointer to web services ig to get more feedback Rigo asked back about XForms and the generic XML binding that was initially thought of by Steven Pemberton. Lorrie said, at that time there was discussion whether we want an enhanced PRF or just an XML-Element like <XML lang=""> for privacy. ACTION Rigo: Send feedback to the mailing-list to p3p-beyond to include a general XML-binding b/ User agent behavior - Lorrie Cranor Lorrie reported from the last UA TF teleconference on Monday, where the TF got down the issues list and made progress in the table of UA expressions People should look at it, read the meetings of mondays call and provide feedback Some further issues being discussed on the next call. c/ Compact policies nothing new d/ Article 10 vocabulary issues - Giles Hogben Giles mentioned three issue that were discussed so far: aa. Verification for disputes for security seal link to a URI that has a seal for security - practices. This is already possible, added some text bb. Cookie cookies-policies have to be honored at set-time and at replay dd. jurisdiction indication to express which jurisdiction is governing data exchange Suggestions about those changes are now under way to be discussed with the European Commission and possibly with the Art. 29 WP e/ Nothing new about using XML-Schema TF 2/ Kiel workshop report (Rigo Wenning) Rigo gave a report on the Kiel Workshop. 16 people attended. Included good representation from industry and universities, mostly from Europe. Discussion of preference language. Interest in having a preference language working group develop a language completely distinct from APPEL -- basically a profile for XPATH or XQUERY. Some questions about how to capture "behavior" concept and how to integrate with backend. Discussion of consent mechanism. Need to have better support for nailing down consent Discussion of cookies and CP. Jeremy said MS is doing performance testing right now using browser with XML parser and hopes to have some data to report soon if he gets permission to make this info public. Limitation that P3P makes statements about URIs and not other resources. P3P is not designed as access control mechanism. It makes sense from a business-perspective to have better privacy mechanisms in back-end systems. High level discussion about whether standardization of the backend makes sense. More discussion needed. Some of this discussion may occur at workshop in Australia in September. HP Brussels showed a new application of a trusted platform that allows users to recall data in case of policy violation. They said this has more functionality than DRM. Giles contacted the minute-taker after the conf and reminded that we forgot to mention that access should be tied to the statement instead of the whole policy. This is also a consideration for the consent/choices TF. 3/ UA guidelines should be included as section 6 no objections 4/ Consent Choices Draft We still need feedback from implementers needed whether they will implement it. Giles said, he already used similar techniques and would implement. Then the question turned to the IBM Policy Editor. Matthias said that the situation is somewhat unclear at the moment, kind of pending. Martin does not put too much effort in it anymore. Lorrie confirmed that there is definitely interest in mainting the editor (IBM or not) Matthias asked whether Microsoft will extend support beyond cookies in IE7? Lorrie only got some vague response. Brooks reported of talks with different entities inside Microsoft it was agreed that this is something useful. ACTION; Matthias call Jeremy Epling to ask if they would implement consent-choices Matthias mentioned that he is absent in July 5. Discuss bugzilla 170 Lorrie included a new wording of the consequence-field definition, but hadn't received feedback so far. Joseph said, that he is unhappy about the change of meaning as we keep the same element-name. We should note that in the Draft. We compared the definition and found that the old definition was more narrow, but that it is not a complete change. Lorrie confirmed, that she will add some words about status and history to the Draft. ACTION: Lorrie draft a sentence or two to explain the evolution 6. Initial discussion of Ari's identified/identifiable/link Ari not on the call everybody should sent feedback to Ari. Rigo mentioned that the initial understanding and discussion was based on the definition of the EU-Directive which was seen as too wide. Lorrie asked for simplicity and explained that the purpose of this document is to explain in an easy way for people to figure out which element to use in what context as this seems to be complicated. 7. Set date for next call (July 9?) Next call will be on July 9 2003 Best, Rigo
Received on Thursday, 26 June 2003 10:30:53 UTC