IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Geojson] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-geojson-03: (with COMMENT)

Tim Schaub <tim.schaub@gmail.com> Thu, 02 June 2016 04:49 UTC

Return-Path: <tim.schaub@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: geojson@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: geojson@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC1BA12D52A; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 21:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 3cBswZ0hyM9s; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 21:49:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x22a.google.com (mail-io0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A48E12B020; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 21:49:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id t40so36572413ioi.0; Wed, 01 Jun 2016 21:49:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=ceLWdlRMXwku7UE5hhvohGwNGNSFGhFG9Wfbgbk9amQ=; b=fyVssBf17EnCfWpC7/u4hsMSfD5ek2stU9+gjp3lROD8Q655vFZ8bOS8TZx70pqVME hWWhsGzX3hFQjKIXLYE9fG4M3LC1to++NZK3CS+ZN8qGv5YyzhblIHkB8WLM0hgYUH1e tCoAyjf+mlNx4UlWIOFysg7lttSiXjWPV0rRLITMyE+Vv5Dxn3GbtU0etQeZMvdI0Cau WOOHWk8E5xoP0D2oJKF7TzOLAXGLWcVhp5mU5D9Bzy2IUvQC+l9FQ5GjjlHTAVhgHl3X dC8KjfDyYURuitQ1VwGlwmrX2JuiF1YfiLySedHhNwuaTjGtuxTV6WQByw+M7L8TOSbw JWOw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=ceLWdlRMXwku7UE5hhvohGwNGNSFGhFG9Wfbgbk9amQ=; b=TmCWEHCUkoddpAl0yTZjdiEO5Rnonb7hEaDqF7mbmSNLjjCna6hhzT6QuccKfewDNL e9aa+DkhK/1GZ/49qZSnarB7VbIklfZPYtwwEnDeuOOb18wSDHySQEs7QjexXmo+weeS EG5jWAN9Xh2uQ2j8IFiCj1WXmo/FAksSK4KpcoM39bJoioCQiLg9tz8j+2neuPfJEo6s OIwQHhc5Dhc92nriFdUrT45NAD7mWI26xpt6D/SfYP5jNm9I1lRze7QKimSIFdB4MUhg MztvRebsVqgsBqnIfK57pRAQebHW8gqN1l7FouiURzu94EBM1mGjgU4yIzLOLMdQifAI iTvA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tKHmWwevDwICXjeEvcyaiHm2umCwW76hT6U+FB6ID6dumqgL2+cMbkRt5cESqo3PnZI/YF2b92YR4YBog==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.15.23 with SMTP id x23mr1287440ioi.36.1464842940724; Wed, 01 Jun 2016 21:49:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.252.197 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 21:49:00 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20160602020613.16111.53924.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <20160602020613.16111.53924.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 21:49:00 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKdrn+dAiUqAx5EOX3xdW4PoYSVZ=KJGfdMgC2fz=7k0UCbENA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tim Schaub <tim.schaub@gmail.com>
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/geojson/vtrnzuXPLy_RfxagzKw0kTqrc3U>
Cc: draft-ietf-geojson@ietf.org, geojson-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, geojson@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Geojson] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-geojson-03: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: geojson@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF GeoJSON WG <geojson.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/geojson>, <mailto:geojson-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/geojson/>
List-Post: <mailto:geojson@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:geojson-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geojson>, <mailto:geojson-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 04:49:10 -0000

Thanks for the comments Ben.  My thoughts on one of them below ...

On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 7:06 PM, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> wrote:
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>

...

> - 3.1.6, 4th bullet: Why SHOULD? Can you imagine situations where it
> would be reasonable to not follow the right-hand rule?

There has been an effort throughout the IETF process to reduce the
likelihood that GeoJSON in use today (pre-IETF GeoJSON) will not be
rejected as invalid by strict-parsers developed in the future.  The
GJ2008 document didn't discuss winding order of rings.  So while it
would be convenient for consumers if they didn't have to check the
winding order (i.e. if the spec said MUST follow the right-hand rule),
I think this is a recommendation only in hopes of improving
interoperability while retaining some backwards compatibility.

I wouldn't be opposed to making this MUST.  People will write and use
lenient parsers until old (left-hand) GeoJSON falls out of use.  With
SHOULD, we'll have mixed-handedness forever.

Tim

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email