- From: Lorrie Cranor <lorrie@research.att.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 09:40:26 -0400
- To: "Elena" <elena.dasseni@txt.it>, <www-p3p-dev@w3.org>
Yes, the parameter order counts. A P3P parser is not expected to have semantic knowledge about the strings within an <INCLUDE> -- it's just doing string comparisons. If the parameters are in a different order than the string comparison will not result in a match. In general, as explained in section 2.3.2.1.1, the first POLICY-REF that matches is the one that applies. Lorrie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Elena" <elena.dasseni@txt.it> To: <www-p3p-dev@w3.org> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 6:14 AM Subject: form action uri parameters matching Hi, I've got a question on the the following paragraph, concerning the comparison of an action URI with parameters and the URI specified in the <INCLUDE> (<EXCLUDE>) node of a policy reference file: Note that if a form is handled through use of the GET method, then the action URI reflects the choice of form elements selected by the user. In some cases, it will be possible to make use of the wildcard syntax allowed in policy reference files to specify different policies for different uses of the same form action-handler URI. Therefore, user agents MUST include the query-string portion of URIs when making comparisons with INCLUDE and EXCLUDE elements in policy reference files. I've got a questioLet's suppose that, when clicking the submit button of the form, the request is the following: http://host/URI?name=Elena&surname=Dasseni&city=Milan Let's also suppose we have the following PRF at http://host/w3c/p3p.xml : <META xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2002/01/P3Pv1"> <POLICY-REFERENCES> <EXPIRY max-age="86400"/> <POLICY-REF about=http://www.website.com/policy1.xml> <INCLUDE>/URI?*surname=*&name=*</INCLUDE> </POLICY-REF> <POLICY-REF about=http://www.website.com/policy2.xml> <INCLUDE>/URI?*name=*&surname=*&city=*</INCLUDE> </POLICY-REF> </POLICY-REFERENCES> </META> Both My doubts are: 1) does the parameters order count?If so, then I should say the first INCLUDE does not match. 2) if not, then both the INCLUDEs match: shall I apply the rule that the first POLICY-REF node matching the request URI has to be taken into account, and do not consider the second policy-ref, or shall I apply the second one,which is more precise? Thank you very much. elena
Received on Thursday, 11 July 2002 09:50:43 UTC