- From: Ari Schwartz <ari@cdt.org>
- Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 14:04:00 -0400
- To: <www-p3p-policy@w3.org>
I'd like to echo Lorrie's point here. I have implemented P3P on small sites and have discussed implementation plans with large companies and government agencies. P3P is much easier to implement on small sites. Ari At 8:23 AM -0400 9/5/02, Lorrie Cranor wrote: >I hope in the future that we see search engines >that allow users to specify privacy preferences and >weight the results accordingly. I don't think it would >give more weight to big corporate sites. Take a look >at W3C's list of P3P-enabled sites >http://www.w3.org/P3P/compliant_sites -- it includes lots >of small companies, non-profits and individuals. >You don't have to be a big company to P3P-enable. >In fact, it's usually much easier for small sites to >P3P-enable than it is for big companies. > >Lorrie > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> >To: "Graeme Eastman" <graeme@eastman.com.au> >Cc: <www-p3p-policy@w3.org> >Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 7:15 AM >Subject: Re: p3p and search engines > > >> >> On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 06:41:04PM +0800, >> Graeme Eastman <graeme@eastman.com.au> wrote >> a message of 24 lines which said: >> >> > It would seem entirely logical to me that a search engine would give >more >> > weight to sites that had proper a privacy policy as it is more likely to >be >> > a current and responsible site, and therefore potentially more useful to >a >> > user. >> >> It could mean also that it is a site with more manpower. Giving a >> higher ranking to P3P-enabled sites would favor big corporations over >> small companies, not-for-profit societies and individual users. The >> search engines already favor too much the Big Official Corporate >> Sites. >> >> -- ------------------------------------ Ari Schwartz Associate Director Center for Democracy and Technology 1634 I Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20006 202 637 9800 fax 202 637 0968 ari@cdt.org http://www.cdt.org ------------------------------------
Received on Thursday, 5 September 2002 14:19:18 UTC