W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-geolocation@w3.org > March 2009

Re: Civic Address for V2

From: Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 15:08:34 +0000
Message-ID: <708552fb0903030708o1ec42b31g198c7cafd7df2ae9@mail.gmail.com>
To: Marc Linsner <mlinsner@cisco.com>
Cc: Richard Barnes <rbarnes@bbn.com>, Alec Berntson <alecb@windows.microsoft.com>, "public-geolocation@w3.org" <public-geolocation@w3.org>
Hi Marc,

On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Marc Linsner <mlinsner@cisco.com> wrote:
> Andrei,
> I'm curious how you propose to reconcile the differences between this
> proposed object and RFC5139?
> A client on any IEEE network (Ethernet, 802.11, WiMAX), residential
> broadband, enterprise, and any client a router hop away from a 3G/4G network
> will be receiving a RFC5139 location object from the network.

A W3C Geolocation implementation that would receive the RFC5139
address would simply convert it to the format in our spec. We could
perhaps provide an Appendix with an example that shows how to do the
conversion? I don't know right now what the mapping would be, but it's
something we can certainly work on. What do you think?

All the best,
Received on Tuesday, 3 March 2009 15:09:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:50:54 UTC