<as individual> Use 5194, which is based on OGC's GML in preference to 6350. Among other things, you may need the ability to encode uncertainty of location.
You could consider the Geo URI (RFC5870), but it has the same uncertainty problem. Brian On Sep 25, 2012, at 1:41 PM, [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> wrote: I scanned through the data which has to be carried by PAWS, and it looks to me that there are two RFCs which we may consider re-using: RFC5491 defines the xml encoding for geo-location, I did not find a JSON encoding for it. The other one is vCard, RFC6350. There is a so called xCard, RFC6351, the xml representation of vCard, but again, I have not found a JSON encoding for vCard. vCard seems to be able to handle contact information, schedule, etc, but there are obviously other data fields, like antenna parameters, which need to be defined in PAWS. First, I’d like to get some opinions on whether the reuse of the data structures defined in the above two RFCs is generally considered a good idea or not. If we want to reuse them, we’ll need to define a JSON encoding for those. The alternative is to define the whole data structure with JSON encoding in PAWS. I’d like to hear opinions on which way is more feasible. - Gabor _______________________________________________ paws mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
_______________________________________________ paws mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
