- From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 19:18:33 +0200
- To: public-p3p-spec <public-p3p-spec@w3.org>
Present: Jack Humphrey Rigo Wenning Patrick Hung Giles Hogben David Stampley Brooks Dobbs P3P beyond HTTP: Patrick reported from the new dynamics developing around the cooperation with WSDL and SOAP-Groups. Much feedback from WSDL Group. Hope to attract more people from the Soap group. Hope to have the new version out soon. Should it bit a stand-alone document? Action Rigo: Provide feedback on the Draft request for comment to WSDL and SOAP 2/ Compact policies Much of the stuff dependend on Jeremy Epling and Brian Zwit. There was not much correspondence so the TF is stalled. We discussed further steps and the actual roadblocks. The performance testing is still outstanding. With policy prefetched and acceptable performance, we might get rid of the compact format and the question about accuracy of the compact format would disappear. But if performance reports are bad, we have to think about the grouping mechanism and the resulting semantics. Brooks and Giles added, that even a grouping mechanism can have some performance impact and that this should be also measured against the full policy approach. We agreed to defer the decision whether we go on with grouping without waiting for performance report by 3-4 weeks Action: Rigo: Try to contact Jeremy XML Data-Schema: Giles presented the Schema and explained. Issues: Do we do DTD? Duplicates in name and business How can we make it compatible to avoid breaking GH: New Schema will have to use new mechansims. Write policies in new format, publish old format Use extension - mechanism Action: Rigo and Giles: numbering and example Arrange meeting with both and Massimo in european time ======================================================== Discussion of the court element Agreement on the proposed language of the court element: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-p3p-spec/2003Oct/0021.html Still discussion on law: BD: want to have time to talk back to our company GH: Discussions about 'may'. In our opinion or 'we believe'. DS: Explanations, agrees to 'we believe'. Suggested new wording: Specifaction-Definition: The Entity making the statement believes that the authority referenced in the description offers recourse for disputes arising in connection with the privacy statement. Suggested wording for user-strings We believe that the authority referenced in the description offers recourse for disputes arising in connection with the privacy statement. Specification Def: The Entity making the statement believes that laws or regulations referenced in the description provide recourse procedures and remedies for disputes arising in connection with the privacy statement. User interface string: We believe that laws or regulations referenced in the description provide recourse and remedies for disputes arising in connection with the privacy statement. Action Rigo: Introduce change to Bugzilla and look up correct definition for in connection with the privacy statement. Next meeting: Wednesday 22 October 2003 Best, -- Rigo Wenning W3C/ERCIM Policy Analyst Privacy Activity Lead mail:rigo@w3.org 2004, Routes des Lucioles http://www.w3.org/ F-06902 Sophia Antipolis
Received on Wednesday, 15 October 2003 13:24:16 UTC