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

Re: ISSUE-3 (civic-addressing): Exposing civic addresses in the API

From: Henning Schulzrinne <hgs@cs.columbia.edu>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 20:59:21 -0400
Message-Id: <732CA641-3393-4896-AD0B-B275ABE5694A@cs.columbia.edu>
To: Geolocation Working Group WG <public-geolocation@w3.org>
This seems like an incomplete list of proposals, given that a number  
of people have also proposed the RFC 4119 list.

On Mar 25, 2009, at 2:15 PM, Geolocation Working Group Issue Tracker  
wrote:

>
> ISSUE-3 (civic-addressing): Exposing civic addresses in the API
>
> http://www.w3.org/2008/geolocation/track/issues/3
>
> Raised by: Matt Womer
> On product:
>
> We've discussed including different notions of location in the API,  
> most notably "civic addresses".
>
> Civic addresses currently are being included in 'v2' or 'level 2'   
> of the recommendation.
>
> Proposals for civic addresses have included:
>
> * multiple forms of location simultaneously (@@url?)
>
> * civic addresses optionally: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-geolocation/2008Jun/0058.html
>
> * Microsoft/Alec Bernston's proposal: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-geolocation/2009Feb/0000.html
>
> The latter informed the first editor's draft of v2 as mentioned here:
>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-geolocation/2009Mar/0072.html
>
>
> The main issue thus far has been in what format the address is  
> represented.
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2009 00:59:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:33:52 UTC