Re: [sipcore] geo URI and conveyance: conclusion?

  A clearer summary of what I'm trying to say: if you expect "geo:" URIs 
to be used in SIP location conveyance, you'll need to explicitly add 
text saying so.

The bit about them being forbidden was based on assertions from people 
who know far more about geopriv than I do -- they asserted that it 
lacked the "priv" half of "geopriv," and therefore wasn't appropriate. 
Martin (or Richard, I can't recall) has proposed some ways this might be 
fixable, and I have no opinion on that topic.

/a

On 7/27/10 10:25 AM, James M. Polk wrote:
> Adam
>
> So what are you saying?
>
> You seems to be implying something, but I can't tell if it's what I 
> said, what Martin said or something in between?
>
> Can you give one clarifying statement about what you understand this 
> issue to be solved as?
>
> James
>
> At 04:04 PM 7/26/2010, Adam Roach wrote:
>
>>  It's not entirely different from what we were talking about, but 
>> it's not the main thrust, either. At least, not with respect to the 
>> point *I* was trying to make.
>>
>> The analogy I was making with "data:" URLs was an attempt to debunk 
>> the notion that the syntactic use of "anyURI" somehow implicitly 
>> allowed the use of a "geo:" URI. The comparison I made was to the 
>> myriad header fields in SIP that allow any URI -- such as Alert-Info 
>> -- but for which it would be patently ridiculous to include a "data:" 
>> URL.
>>
>> /a
>>
>> On 7/26/10 6:02 PM, James M. Polk wrote:
>>> I'm not fighting you, but that's not how I remember the exchange 
>>> between Jon and Adam.
>>>
>>> james
>>>
>>> At 10:47 AM 7/26/2010, Richard L. Barnes wrote:
>>>> I wouldn't say it was explicitly ruled out.  We just noticed that it
>>>> was inconsistent with the requirements RFC 3693/5808 in this context.
>>>> What we're discussing now is how to make GEO URIs satisfy those
>>>> requirements.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jul 26, 2010, at 5:10 PM, James M. Polk wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> At 08:28 AM 7/26/2010, Thomson, Martin wrote:
>>>>>> I missed the conclusions regarding geo URI.  I got the bit where we
>>>>>> decided that we needed to have _some_ text, but I'm not sure what
>>>>>> we decided what the text might look like.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Help me?
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe the agreement in the room was to explicitly avoid it
>>>>> (i.e., "MUST NOT appear in the Geolocation header value (i.e.,
>>>>> locationValue)"). As it's too close to being a data-URL (per Adam).
>>>>>
>>>>> James
>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> sipcore mailing list
>>>>>> sipcore@ietf.org
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> sipcore mailing list
>>>>> sipcore@ietf.org
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipcore mailing list
>>> sipcore@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore
>