Subject: [Geopriv] PIDF-LO-Profile Going forward

From: "Winterbottom, James" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 01:52:55 -0500

Hi All,

Hannes, Martin and I have been having discussions on how to move forward
with the PIDF-LO-Profile draft largely based on discussions that came
out of the last IETF meeting. The thoughts that we have come up with are
as follows:

1)     Keep the cardinality rules that describe how to put things into a
PIDF-LO document, and to select things out of one, if the document
contains multiple locations.

2)     Specify which CRSs MUST be support

3)     Restrict the shape definitions to 4 types:

a.      Point

b.      Circle, specified as point and radius

c.      2D polygon

d.      Rectangular prism where 3D is required (largely to accommodate
RFC-3825 shape def)

4)     Remove all other shape descriptions, comparisons etc

5)     Indicate that Goedetic precision required for routing will be
determined based on regional or jurisdictional constraints, and may also
be application based.

6)     Indicate the required population of specific civic elements for
routing will be based on regional or jurisdictional  constraints, and
may also be application based.

7)     Keep the appendix describing how to transform RFC-3825 formatted
data into a PIDF-LO.

If anybody has any concerns or additional ideas for the document please
post the list.

Cheers

James

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message is for the designated recipient only and may
contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.  
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
immediately and delete the original.  Any unauthorized use of
this email is prohibited.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[mf2]

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv