RE: AW:[Geopriv] Quickrandomcommentsondraft-ietf-geopriv-pdif-lo-profile-00

["Marc Berryman" <[e-mail]>]

Re: hint: contact your local postal authority

Oh my gosh, you must be kidding. The USPS is not a viable option for
addressing when it comes to 9-1-1 and emergency services. First, Postal
Communities have little relation to Jurisdictional Communities. You
could have a postal address of Houston, TX and actually live in the city
of Jersey Village, or Missouri City, or Bellaire, or a few others. Each
of these cities have their own PSAP and their own law, fire, and EMS
services.
 
Below are some of favorite problems with the USPS addressing, all taken
from USPS Pub No. 28

USPS Pub No. 28 States in part:
232 (my favorite example)
Street Name - Information found in the primary name field of the ZIP+4
File is used as the street name. The ZIP+4 File indicates the preferred
primary street name to ensure that the correctly designated primary
street record is matched  during the address standardization processes.
	The Street Name is the official name as designated by the local
addressing authority - NOT the Zip+4 File!!

213.3 
Allows for alternate Location and 215 the Dual Address issue
	Not useful, and could be confusing, for emergency responders
235 
Numeric street names, for example, 7TH ST or SEVENTH ST, should be
output on the mail piece exactly as they appear in the ZIP+4 File.
	The Street Name is the official name as designated by the local
addressing authority.

Then there are the Rural Routes, P.O. Boxes, General Delivery addresses
and so on. I think you begin to see the Post Office is not a valid
source of addressing information.

Geo addresses would be measured e.g. GPS or from WiFi type devices. Rick
Jones pointed out to me that there is an interesting article at this
link:
http://news.com.com/Intel+experiments+with+Wi-Fi+as+GPS+substitute/2100-
7351_3-5785565.html?part=rss&tag=5785565&subj=news
It tells how WiFi can obtain Geo coordinates AND valid altitude
measurements, which gets around the statement I made earlier about GPS
does not have valid altitude measurements. The WiFi apparently has
overcome that issue.

Marc




-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On
Behalf Of Henning Schulzrinne
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 1:04 PM
To: Marc Linsner
Cc: 'GEOPRIV'
Subject: Re: AW:[Geopriv]
Quickrandomcommentsondraft-ietf-geopriv-pdif-lo-profile-00


>>
>> I have no objection to providing geo where available; I fail,
>> however, to see why in any practical case, providing geo and
>> complete civic for cases where floors matter (office
>> buildings, apartment buildings) would pose any hardship or
>> incremental cost.
>>
>
> MSAG has no cost?

It is not clear to me that MSAG is a long-term viable solution to  
anything. (Ask Brian to give you his sermon on this topic; he'll give  
you a much better spiel than I can.) There are likely to be better  
ones, already paid for (hint: contact your local postal authority).  
Since addressing letters and packages to geo coordinates is still a  
ways off, the cost of that database has already been paid, so the  
incremental cost is close to zero.

Secondly, it is naive to believe that geo does not require  
validation. Given how easy it is to screw up random-looking numbers,  
you need validation for geo to make sure that the coordinates that  
look precise to the tenth digit actually represent what you wanted to  
represent.

You might ask the Canadian soldiers that got bombed by friendly (US)  
forces about the problem of mistaken geo coordinates (that is, the  
ones still around to be  asked).

Henning




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

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