Andrew -
Thank you.
I would be most happy to share this dialogue with the GML experts. That
said, as DHCP is a binary encoding and GML is an XML schema encoding, it
might be better to look to GML and related OGC/ISO standards for guidance
as to how to provide the proper clarification statements in 3825.
Regards
Carl
> John Schnizlein wrote:
>>
>> Why you would claim not to have been in the discussions?
>
> At this point, I will put my chair hat on and say that there is no need to
> go down this particular dark alley.
>
> So far, I am only hearing one person claiming that 3825 is inadequate and
> many other voices suggesting that it merely needs clarification.
> Certainly,
> 3825 would not be the first RFC in IETF history needing clarification.
>
> As part of any clarification effort, I think the community would be well
> served to have 3825 to GML conversion examples. Not having fully digested
> the requisite amount of morning coffee, I cannot easily judge if GML can
> express uncertainty about a point. That would "certainly" be helpful.
>
> And as Henning has suggested, we would also be well served by documented
> and
> agreed upon definitions of these terms.
>
> -andy
>
>
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
Received on Mon, 11 Sep 2006 11:10:38 -0400 (EDT)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Sep 11 2006 - 11:24:01 EDT