- From: <tarod@softhome.net>
- Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2002 14:10:51 GMT
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Thank you for your attention again, Brian.
<!DOCTYPE rdf:RDF [
<!ENTITY rdf "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
<!ENTITY p3p "http://www.w3.org/2002/01/p3prdfv1#">
]>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="&rdf;"
xmlns:p3p ="&p3p;">
<p3p:Policy rdf:about="X">
<p3p:disputeResolution rdf:resource="Y"/>
</p3p:Policy>
<p3p:DisputeResolution rdf:about="Y"/>
</rdf:RDF>
Is it correct?
Marc
Brian McBride writes:
> Hi Tarod,
>
> At 12:11 04/02/2002 +0000, tarod@softhome.net wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>
> >So, we can have a Policy with his attribute disputeResolution referring one
> >generic DisputeResolution, so we don't know what kind of resolution we
> >have, but the model will say that the model is correct, and it's not!!!
>
> Can you provide an example of (a fragment of) a P3P policy in RDF which
> conforms to the RDF schema for P3P, but you believe is illegal.
>
> Brian
>
Received on Monday, 4 February 2002 09:08:52 UTC