This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 171 - standardize STATEMENT name attribute based on IBM extension
Summary: standardize STATEMENT name attribute based on IBM extension
Alias: None
Product: P3P
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Vocabulary extensions (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other other
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: P3P1.1
Assignee: Rigo Wenning
QA Contact:
Depends on:
Reported: 2003-03-10 21:41 UTC by Lorrie Cranor
Modified: 2008-12-02 22:41 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Description Lorrie Cranor 2003-03-10 21:41:00 UTC
The IBM P3P Policy Editor defines a P3P extension to assign a name attribute to the 
STATEMENT element. This is useful for the editor itself, but it has also proven useful for 
user agents when they display policy summaries to users. We should consider making 
this extension an "official" part of the P3P specification -- probably by referencing the 
extension in v1.1 and turning it into a regular attribute (without using the extension 
mechanism ) in future versions.
Comment 1 Lorrie Cranor 2003-05-07 13:01:33 UTC
At the 7 May P3P specification working group conference call we agreed to adopt this 
extension as a P3P 1.1 extension. The editor is assigned to incorporate this into the 
P3P1.1 working draft.
Comment 2 Rigo Wenning 2004-02-04 03:52:58 UTC
While editing the Specification and getting the remarks from Matthias Schunter 
I realized that this was superseded finally by the consent choices draft. 

So I re-open this bug for the 4 feb call.
Comment 3 Rigo Wenning 2004-04-19 11:00:03 UTC 
On March 30th call we were trying to sort out the status of bug 171.  
Looking at section 3.3.2 in the 10 February working draft it appears that this has already been  
solved. The STATEMENT-GROUP element takes a name attribute, and we  
explain that this is equivalent to the IBM extension.  Is there  
something else here I'm missing. If so, please set me straight. If not,  
I'm going to close this bug. 
Having received no remark, I have closed the bug on 19 April