- From: Fernando Ribeiro <webmaster@fernandoribeiro.eti.br>
- Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 20:50:17 -0300
- To: "Richard L. Barnes" <rbarnes@bbn.com>
- Cc: public-geolocation@w3.org
- Message-ID: <AANLkTi=46tkkyR83dkcdGkM=HNWHwNcTgAiRz-+wGc51@mail.gmail.com>
Richard, I'd prefer to write the draft collectively in the WG and submit it to the IETF later, what do you think? Thanks, On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Richard L. Barnes <rbarnes@bbn.com> wrote: > Fernando: I think you might be in the wrong place. This group doesn't do > RFCs. You may want to look here: > <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/geopriv/> > The IETF GEOPRIV working group did look at working on an HTTP header some > time ago, but never actually finalized anything. As you note, though, that > was several years ago, and now might be a good time to raise the issue > again. You're welcome to submit an Internet-draft. > > Of course, the W3C also does work defining HTTP headers, so maybe it could > be added to the scope of this WG as well. > > It does seem like a Geolocation HTTP header could be a useful optimization. > It's already the case that: > 1. Several current UAs allow persistent permissions for a site, and > 2. Many sites send Geolocation back in XHRs already > > Given these conditions, it seems like you could save an HTTP round-trip to > the client by simply having the UA send a Geolocation header with requests > to authorized sites, rather than the page having to send it back in an XHR. > If you wanted to be slightly less liberal, you could also define an option > in the API that would allow pages to request this functionality. > > --Richard > > > > > > On Feb 20, 2011, at 12:34 PM, Fernando Ribeiro wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > Has this working already evaluated submitting a RFC for a standard HTTP > header for geolocation information, as suggested in its charter? > > > > There was a draft some years ago ( > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-daviel-http-geo-header-05), when handful > things like the geo: scheme (http://geouri.org/) hadn't been developed > yet. > > > > With location-based applications being more common by the hour, I think > this header is urgent to minimize the number of incompatible implementations > in the wild. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Fernando > >
Received on Monday, 28 February 2011 23:52:15 UTC