Re: [Ecrit] WGLC draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-11 -- end date Oct 13

Randall Gellens <rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org> Wed, 06 October 2021 14:43 UTC

Return-Path: <rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org>
X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00A273A1D12 for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 07:43:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eIhf6BW9UX_H for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 07:43:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from turing.pensive.org (turing.pensive.org [99.111.97.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 874233A1D0D for <ecrit@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 07:43:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.81.0.6] (99.111.97.161) by turing.pensive.org with ESMTP (EIMS X 3.3.9); Wed, 6 Oct 2021 07:43:05 -0700
From: "Randall Gellens" <rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org>
To: "Caron, Guy" <g.caron@bell.ca>
Cc: ECRIT <ecrit@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2021 07:43:03 -0700
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673)
Message-ID: <7B43615D-4AC6-4F39-97EA-14A91BF9C9DC@randy.pensive.org>
In-Reply-To: <32930801ea214802a05f176f1b0330c4@bell.ca>
References: <6AA591C6-B84B-4A7E-936A-10C95C5FA936@randy.pensive.org> <32930801ea214802a05f176f1b0330c4@bell.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ecrit/I_92f_YDqhED-QNmBQgD5tgCoaw>
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] WGLC draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-11 -- end date Oct 13
X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies <ecrit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ecrit/>
List-Post: <mailto:ecrit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2021 14:43:13 -0000

I have comments on a few of Guy's proposed edits; the ones not mentioned 
below I have no opinion on.

(1) Regarding Guy's proposal to delete geodetic location from the 
definition of "Location" as well as the definition of "Geodetic 
Location," I think it would be more confusing to do that.  Note that the 
definition of "Geodetic Location" says "Note: geodetic location  is 
defined here for context, but is not used elsewhere within this 
document."  We could add additional clarifying text if anyone feels it's 
needed, e.g., adding to the "Location" definition text such as "However, 
geodetic location is out of scope of this document."

(2) Regarding Guy's proposed insertion of "proffered" into the 
definition of "Similar Location," I suggest instead adding "queried" as 
I think it's more clear (especially for some English speakers).

(3) In Section 3, in the paragraph starting "In a LoST 
<findServiceResponse>", Guy suggests adding "the" in front of "<HNO>, 
<RD>, <STS>, <POD>, <A3> and <A1> Civic Address Elements".  I disagree; 
the sentence reads better without it.

(4) Also in Section 3, in the paragraph starting "The information 
provided in the request may be enough", Guy suggests changing "alert the 
user to" to "alert the user of".  I disagree, "to" reads better.

(5) Section 4, second paragraph, Guy suggests changing "cannot assume 
that any of them are the correct location" to "cannot assume that any of 
them is the correct location".  I suggest either retaining "are"
or changing to "is" and also adding "one" in front of "any": "cannot 
assume that any one of them is the correct location."



--Randall

On 5 Oct 2021, at 13:44, Caron, Guy wrote:

> I've reviewed -11 and only have editorial changes to propose. Embedded 
> in track-change in the MSWord version attached. I did not recheck the 
> XML schema.
>
> Other than that, I'm fine with advancing this document.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Guy
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Ecrit <ecrit-bounces@ietf.org> De la part de Randall Gellens
> Envoyé : 29 septembre 2021 15:52
> À : ECRIT <ecrit@ietf.org>
> Objet : [EXT][Ecrit] WGLC draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-11 -- end 
> date Oct 13
>
> This starts WGLC for draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-11, a LoST 
> extension to return complete or similar location info.
>
> Please send both comments and messages that you support advancement of 
> the draft to this mailing list before October 13.
>
> Thank you,
>
> --Randall
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ecrit mailing list
> Ecrit@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> External Email: Please use caution when opening links and attachments 
> / Courriel externe: Soyez prudent avec les liens et documents joints