[Geopriv] Comments on the Civil-02 ID (on CA Types)

From: James M. Polk ^lt;jmpolk@cisco.com>
Date: Fri Jul 02 2004 - 17:39:21 EDT

In reviewing the pidf-lo-02 and the civil-02 IDs, I have discovered minor
inconsistencies.

Specifically with the unnamed or labeled chart (which should be, BTW) on
page 9 and 10 of civil-02 -- it is less complete than the chart in
pidf-lo-02 ID recently submitted by Jon Peterson that's in IETF LC.

pidf-lo-02 references "PC" for 'Postal Code' and "FLR" for 'Floor' in that
ID's chart (on its page 6 and 7, that is also not labeled, which it should
be for outside referencing to it).

I believe the two charts should be consistent to each other, with the
civil-02 ID being the one that's less complete, it should have the
appropriate text added.

cheers,
James

                                *******************
                 Truth is not to be argued... it is to be presented

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
Received on Fri, 02 Jul 2004 16:39:21 -0500

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Jul 02 2004 - 18:01:02 EDT