Re: Civic Address for V2

On Mar 19, 2009, at 11:12 PM, Richard Barnes wrote:

>> I do not think we have any use cases that require comparing  
>> addresses for equality.  We clearly did not for the v1 addressing  
>> (coords).
> Neither of these statements is really true, if you think about it.


I guess I was thinking that we are not adding operators in the API  
that allows for comparisons between Coords.  And similarly, we do not  
want to add that to the V2 API.

>> Secondly, we are not designing this API for someone like your or me  
>> or anyone on this mailing list that can understand thirty+ fields...
> I appreciate the need for simplicity.  However, based on the input we
> got in GEOPRIV from organizations that deal with addresses in
> mission-critical applications (especially NENA, who do 9-1-1  
> standards),
> the RFC 4119 format is about as simple as the format can be made and
> still map sensibly to authoritative address sources, even just in  
> the US.

RIght, the question really is -- is this a use case for the spec we  
are designing or is this out of scope.


Received on Monday, 23 March 2009 17:08:35 UTC