- From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 11:51:12 +0200
- To: public-p3p-spec@w3.org
- Cc: "Giles Hogben" <giles.hogben@jrc.it>, <massimo@w3.org>, "'Lorrie Cranor'" <lorrie+@cs.cmu.edu>
Received on Tuesday, 22 June 2004 05:51:25 UTC
Giles, can you come up with some example XML code for your assertions? I think we need more explanatory text if we want to convince people. Rigo Am Tuesday 22 June 2004 11:26 verlautbarte Giles Hogben : > I think there is a slight misunderstanding of the extent of the > breaking of backward compatibility. > It is only broken in a small way, which should not affect anyone. > This also does not break the backward compatibility guidelines as the > BDS is not part of the P3P 1.0 Schema anyway. > > 1. Old Base Data Schema data element syntax can still be used > 2. Extended elements can still be written in the old format. > > The only thing which breaks backward compatibility (with only some > implementations) is that custom elements written with the new format > cannot be validated against the old style schema. They can still be > written in the old syntax, with a new style syntax alongside in an > extension element to provide validation where possible.
Received on Tuesday, 22 June 2004 05:51:25 UTC