GEOPRIV Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO) Usage Clarification, Considerations, and Recommendations
Draft of message to be sent after approval:
From: The IESG <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: IETF-Announce <email@example.com> Cc: Internet Architecture Board <firstname.lastname@example.org>, RFC Editor <email@example.com>, geopriv mailing list <firstname.lastname@example.org>, geopriv chair <email@example.com> Subject: Protocol Action: 'GEOPRIV PIDF-LO Usage Clarification, Considerations and Recommendations' to Proposed Standard The IESG has approved the following document: - 'GEOPRIV PIDF-LO Usage Clarification, Considerations and Recommendations ' <draft-ietf-geopriv-pdif-lo-profile-14.txt> as a Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Geographic Location/Privacy Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Cullen Jennings and Jon Peterson. A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-geopriv-pdif-lo-profile-14.txt
Technical Summary The Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO) specification provides a flexible and versatile means to represent location information. There are, however, circumstances that arise when information needs to be constrained in how it is represented. In these circumstances the range of options that need to be implemented are reduced. There is growing interest in being able to use location information contained in a PIDF-LO for routing applications. To allow successful interoperability between applications, location information needs to be normative and more tightly constrained than is currently specified in the RFC 4119 (PIDF-LO). This document makes recommendations on how to constrain, represent and interpret locations in a PIDF-LO. It further recommends a subset of GML that is mandatory to implement by applications involved in location based routing. Working Group Summary This document reflects a strong consensus of the GEOPRIV working group. Document Quality The document was well reviewed within the working group and received comment from SIMPLE participants (specifically about ensuring it took the presence data model into consideration) Personnel Robert Sparks is the Document Shepherd. Cullen Jennings is the responsible AD. The document has no IANA considerations.