Re: draft-mayrhofer-geopriv-geo-uri-00

Mr Kim Sanders <Mr.Kim.Sanders@shaw.ca> Thu, 22 May 2008 04:16 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 584FE3A6827; Wed, 21 May 2008 21:16:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 914733A6827 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 May 2008 21:16:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L1bcH1NdhC97 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 May 2008 21:16:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pd2mo2so.prod.shaw.ca (idcmail-mo1so.shaw.ca [24.71.223.10]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FE323A6825 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 May 2008 21:16:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pd2mr4so.prod.shaw.ca (pd2mr4so-qfe3.prod.shaw.ca [10.0.141.107]) by l-daemon (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0K19006DV581G5C0@l-daemon> for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 21 May 2008 22:16:49 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from pn2ml5so.prod.shaw.ca ([10.0.121.149]) by pd2mr4so.prod.shaw.ca (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-7.05 (built Sep 5 2006)) with ESMTP id <0K19005BC5801780@pd2mr4so.prod.shaw.ca> for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 21 May 2008 22:16:49 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from D693GRB1 ([68.146.172.146]) by l-daemon (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with SMTP id <0K1900LTH57ZWW40@l-daemon> for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 21 May 2008 22:16:48 -0600 (MDT)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 22:16:48 -0600
From: Mr Kim Sanders <Mr.Kim.Sanders@shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: draft-mayrhofer-geopriv-geo-uri-00
To: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
Message-id: <000c01c8bbc2$a76c95e0$6600a8c0@D693GRB1>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <1265635667.20080521103209@pobox.com>
Cc: Bill McQuillan <McQuilWP@pobox.com>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

While I cannot comment specifically about RFC style, I can say (from my 
study of the use of language globally) that there are several conventions in 
use for numerical notation using the numerals 0-9, depending on usage.
- The point/period/full stop may be used to separate whole numbers from 
values smaller than 1; alternatively, the comma may be.
- Then comes the possible issue of separation on either side of the decimal, 
whether every second, every third, or every fourth place.
- If the decimal point is used, to use your terminology, then one may find a 
space or a comma as a separator on either or both sides of the decimal.
- If the decimal comma is used, then one may find a space or point as a 
separator on either or both sides of the decimal.
By the way, the word is jarring, not jaring, according to laws governing 
regular English spelling conventions worldwide.  Jaring implies a verb jare, 
the way I understand the use of English, regardless of location.
/Kim.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill McQuillan" <McQuilWP@pobox.com>
To: "IETF Discussion" <ietf@ietf.org>
Cc: "Christian Spanring" <spanring@oir.at>
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 11:32 AM
Subject: draft-mayrhofer-geopriv-geo-uri-00


> While reading through this ID: A Uniform Resource Identifier for 
> Geographic
> Locations ('geo' URI), I found several minor issues.
>
>
> Section 2. Introduction
>   [use of WGS84 reference system]
>
> I wonder if it might be more forward thinking to allow for the optional
> specification of the reference system being used. Perhaps this could be 
> one
> of the "URI parameters" mentioned in section 4.7
>
>
> Section 4.4.1 Component Description
>   The number of decimal places indicates the precision of the value.
>   One degree equals 111.319,45m at the equator (40.075,004km / 360
>   degree).  Five decimal places (0.00001 degree) seem to imply a for
>   civil use sufficient accuracy.
>
> To my American eye the decimal notation (partially) used here was jaring.
> Searching (briefly) for some sort of presentation standard in an RFC or
> other technical document was unsuccessful. Is the use of "." and ","
> standardized in the representation of real numbers in RFCs?
>
>
> Section 6. GML Mappings
>
> There seems to be no explanation of what GML is, not even a Reference
> document.
>
>
> Section 9.1.  Invalid Locations
>
> Is there a recommended way to represent the poles? Dare I suggest <geo:90>
> and <geo:-90>? If that is too much of a special case, should the longitude
> always be zero or can it be anything between -180.00000 and 180.00000?
>
>
> Section 9.2.  Location Privcay
>
> Typo: .................Privacy
>
> -- 
> Bill McQuillan <McQuilWP@pobox.com>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IETF mailing list
> IETF@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf 

_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf