Subject: [Geopriv] Draft publication request for draft-ietf-geopriv-civic-address-recommendations

From: Richard Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 21:58:53 -0500

Please submit comments on the below publication request to the list by
Friday, 27 Feb.
--RB

---------------
The GEOPRIV working group requests publication of draft-ietf-geopriv-
civic-address-recommendations-02 as a BCP.

(1.a) The Document Shepherd for 
draft-ietf-geopriv-civic-address-recommendations is Richard Barnes.    I 
have reviewed this version of the document and believe it is ready for 
IESG consideration.

(1.b) The document appears to have had adequate review from people that 
both deal with civic addresses in different countries and are familiar 
with the RFC 4776/5139 civic address format.

(1.c) I don't believe the document requires focused review from a 
different perspective.  The focus of the document is mapping local data 
sources (often in different languages) into a common XML format. Calling 
attention to it from the XML and internalization communities during IETF 
last call would be appropriate.

(1.d) I am not aware of any special concerns the IESG needs to take into 
consideration.  No IPR disclosures have been filed against this document.

(1.e) There seems to be solid WG consensus behind this document. 
Comments on the mailing list have been consistently supportive, and when 
it was last presented at a GEOPRIV meeting (at IETF 72), several 
participants spoke in favor.

(1.f) I am not aware of any extreme discontent over this document.

(1.g) The document satisfies the idnits requirements.

(1.h) References are split into normative and informative.  All 
normative references are RFCs.

(1.i) The IANA considerations section requests the creation of a 
registry to store pointers to local civic address standards, consistent 
with the discussion in the main body of the document.  The document does 
not specify protocol extensions.  The IANA registry to be created is 
clearly identified and described.  The shepherd has discussed the expert 
review requirement with Cullen Jennings, the responsible AD.

(1.j) The only formal language used in the document is XML.  The 
shepherd has validated the one complete document (a PIDF-LO example) 
using the tools at validate.openlaboratory.net, and the snippets given 
as examples illustrate correct syntax.

(1.k) Announcement Text

Technical Summary

This document provides a guideline for creating civic address 
consideration documents for individual countries, as required by RFC 
4776.  Since civic addresses may have a different format in individual 
countries, such address considerations are necessary in order to map the 
civic address fields to the PIDF Location Object (PIDF-LO) elements.

Working Group Summary

This document was reviewed by the GEOPRIV working group, where it has 
reached consensus for publication as an IETF RFC.

Document Quality

XML examples in the document validate against relevant schemas.

The document itself defines one implementation of its recommendations: 
In addition to defining guidelines for mappings between local civic 
address standards and the format of RFC 4776, the document describes 
such a mapping for addresses within Austria.