James -
Thanks for the question. The only issue I see is that 3.1.1 contains a
variety of schema corrections. 3.0 is currently not used by developers for
this reason. I am not sure of the implications to 4119 as I am not as
familiar with the IETF procedures as you and others are.
This also raises the question of what to do with 4119 and related
documents now that GML 3.2.1 is the official version - and also now an ISO
standard: ISO 19136.
Thoughts
Carl
> Carl
>
> RFC 4119 says that GML 3.0 is the mandatory to implement version,
> while the PIDF-LO profile document allows later releases of GML.
>
> With that in mind - which reference, in your mind, is the more
> appropriate one to reference?
>
> (I'd lean towards 3.0, because of the 4119 mandate, but could be wrong).
>
> James
>
> At 04:15 PM 7/21/2008, creed at opengeospatial.org wrote:
>>Robert -
>>
>>One minor nigly - the reference for GML as stated in the document:
>>
>> OpenGIS, "OpenGIS Geography Markup Language (GML)
>> Implementation Specification, Version 3.00, OGC 02 023r4",
>> http://www.opengeospatial.org/docs/02-023r4.pdf, January 2003.
>>
>>Should be:
>>
>>Open Geospatial Consortium, "OpenGIS Geography Markup Language (GML)
>> Implementation Standard, Version 3.1.1, OGC 03 105r1",
>> http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=4700,
>>January 2003.
>>
>>This is the version that the PIDF-LO geodetic GML application schema
>>references.
>>
>>I suspect the reference also needs to be corrected in a couple of other
>>IETF documents.
>>
>>Regards
>>
>>Carl Reed
>>OGC
>>
>> > Note that we have hit the end of this WGLC period. There was
>> > frighteningly little response to the call.
>> >
>> > Did people get to read this document and understand the changes that
>> > were made since we sent it up last? Please reply.
>> >
>> > Based on offline communication, I believe Hannes has one last thing to
>> > double-check on. Unless there's controversy, I expect we will re-
>> > request publication soon.
>> >
>> > I'd be a _lot_ more comfortable with that if there were some list
>> > evidence that this version of the document has received sufficient
>> > review.
>> >
>> > RjS
>> >
>> >
>> > On Jul 11, 2008, at 1:44 PM, Robert Sparks wrote:
>> >
>> >> Please send a note to the list when you've looked at this.
>> >> "Good to go" comments are important to capture.
>> >>
>> >> RjS
>> >>
>> >> On Jun 30, 2008, at 3:32 PM, Robert Sparks wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> All -
>> >>>
>> >>> This is a GEOPRIV Working group last call for comments on:
>> >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-17.txt
>> >>>
>> >>> This document has undergone extensive revision since this group
>> >>> requested its publication.
>> >>> This version should represent closure on the many discussions that
>> >>> have taken place during its IETF and IESG review.
>> >>>
>> >>> Please give this document careful attention.
>> >>>
>> >>> Given that everyone is also preparing new drafts and getting ready
>> >>> for Dublin's meeting, this WGLC will last 3 weeks.
>> >>> Please have your comments in by July 20.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>>
>> >>> RjS
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Geopriv mailing list
>> >>> Geopriv at ietf.org
>> >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
>> >>
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Geopriv mailing list
>> > Geopriv at ietf.org
>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
>> >
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Geopriv mailing list
>>Geopriv at ietf.org
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
>
>
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
