- From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
- Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 12:54:10 -0700
- To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>, <urn-ietf@lists.netsol.com>
- Cc: <uri@w3.org>
There's actually been quite a bit of activity in IETF on spatial location designations of all sorts, beyond the one reference I gave before: BOF & pointer to its mail archives: http://www-nrc.nokia.com/ip-location/ Newly chartered IETF working group: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/geopriv-charter.html including Internet draft for initial requirements http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosen-geopriv-requirements-00.txt The working group and discussions around it have had quite a focus on the privacy issues surrounding protocols that might trade geographic information about the devices (and thus users) at the endpoints. Note that the geopriv charter says: " the working group will select an already standardized format to recommend for use in representing location per se" so the assumption is that there are other (non-IETF) standards that the IETF group will make reference too. I wouldn't want to see the "geo" URN scheme choose a different representation than the geopriv working group, at least without some analysis and justification. Larry -- http://larry.masinter.net
Received on Sunday, 9 September 2001 15:55:06 UTC