From nobody Tue Feb 10 13:45:45 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E57D1A1B86 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:45:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F6oicx01oRNZ for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:45:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F4AF1A19FA for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:45:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 882FC20A66 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 16:45:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 10 Feb 2015 16:45:36 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= x-sasl-enc:from:content-type:subject:date:references:to :message-id:mime-version; s=mesmtp; bh=LifcMOgTP8R5BQ6wB7Wj2zRW9 Eo=; b=gPGOICanl+RQGRX5DfDjhS/WA+Vi5Qsc7QFmdJ8MqQ2yOALctOB0dBfsY FI2xrNU9bE5/I0pmRf26K9Ty3ioi3jEOZQ8VdznuYkt8Fgu5OwXLC29Y/zQgXaB3 LL355BwSTWpxK+C+5A4BBLZGUlnprEBOEsJlG65i5fsR0f2ErE= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=x-sasl-enc:from:content-type:subject:date :references:to:message-id:mime-version; s=smtpout; bh=LifcMOgTP8 R5BQ6wB7Wj2zRW9Eo=; b=UZ896sDNOZ/X6Swqgn6hLzTVfqxsO4BLFTrX7MjzEA F+ip6Pl/sXuZPtN7BDAl664LjpMce88uptNP78tM5tg9uBuoZPArtn003g9/ImpX h8ggRhZ8R7WJYamK9ysq6rHur0yF0GMkNozFXK7gbkGIUXJS4exD/BQlhx+Kgrnp U= X-Sasl-enc: Lea/WqpYCelNstXw4822dm7vkPnUsf1CfZ4pFk0rVisg 1423604736 Received: from sjc-alcoop-8817.cisco.com (unknown [128.107.239.234]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 0506FC002A5 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 16:45:35 -0500 (EST) From: Alissa Cooper Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_1B91C1B0-090B-4BB2-A9F7-A17162EB63F8" Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:45:36 -0800 References: <54D3AF68.4070803@berkeley.edu> To: geopriv mailing list Message-Id: <625863E8-3AE1-4ABB-879E-946C958DC1C7@cooperw.in> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Archived-At: Subject: [Geopriv] Fwd: Forming and chartering a GeoJSON WG X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 21:45:43 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_1B91C1B0-090B-4BB2-A9F7-A17162EB63F8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Folks who may have thoughts about this should send them on the dispatch = list ... Begin forwarded message: > From: Erik Wilde > Subject: Re: Forming and chartering a GeoJSON WG > Date: February 5, 2015 at 9:59:04 AM PST > To: dispatch@ietf.org > Cc: Richard Barnes , Sean Gillies = , Alissa Cooper , Barry Leiba = , Pete Resnick , = metazool@fastmail.net >=20 > hello. >=20 > On 2015-02-03 16:40 , Richard Barnes wrote: >> Sorry for the delay here. It looks like the next step here is to = send a >> charter proposal to the DISPATCH mailing list, dispatch@ietf.org >=20 > we have had conversations about establishing an IETF WG for GeoJSON, = which would be chartered with taking the current GeoJSON definition, and = turning it into an IETF RFC. the next step in this process seems to be = proposing a charter. please find the proposed charter in this email to = dispatch@ietf.org, and it also is available online here: >=20 > https://github.com/geojson/draft-geojson/blob/master/charter.md >=20 > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >=20 > Proposed GeoJSON WG Charter >=20 > GeoJSON >=20 > GeoJSON is a geospatial data interchange format based on JavaScript = Object Notation (JSON). It was published at http://geojson.org in 2008. = It has succeeded in streamlining geographic information system standards = and making them accessible to practitioners of modern web development. = GeoJSON today plays an important role in many spatial databases, web = APIs, and open data platforms. >=20 > This WG will work on a GeoJSON Format RFC that specifies the format = more precisely and serves as a better guide for implementers. The work = will start from an Internet-Draft written by the original authors. This = I-D, draft-butler-geojson-04, substantially improves the format = specification. The remaining tasks of the WG are: >=20 > * Further clarification of the GeoJSON format specification. > * Addition of implementation advice based on lessons learned since = 2008. > * geoAddition of more explicit extension advice to the specification. >=20 > The addition of new features to the GeoJSON format is not within the = scope of this WG. One possible exception to this (depending on WG = consensus) is the adoption of JSON Text Sequences as an alternative way = of serializing sets of GeoJSON objects. >=20 > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >=20 > thanks a lot and kind regards, >=20 > dret. >=20 > --=20 > erik wilde | mailto:dret@berkeley.edu - tel:+1-510-2061079 | > | UC Berkeley - School of Information (ISchool) | > | http://dret.net/netdret http://twitter.com/dret | --Apple-Mail=_1B91C1B0-090B-4BB2-A9F7-A17162EB63F8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Folks = who may have thoughts about this should send them on the dispatch list = ...

Begin forwarded message:

From: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: Forming and chartering a = GeoJSON WG
Date: = February 5, 2015 at = 9:59:04 AM PST
Cc: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>, Sean Gillies <sean.gillies@gmail.com>, = Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, Barry Leiba = <barryleiba@computer.org>, = Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>= ;, metazool@fastmail.net
=

hello.

On 2015-02-03 16:40 , Richard Barnes = wrote:
Sorry for the delay here.  It = looks like the next step here is to send a
charter proposal to the = DISPATCH mailing list, dispatch@ietf.org
we have had conversations about establishing an IETF WG for GeoJSON, = which would be chartered with taking the current GeoJSON definition, and = turning it into an IETF RFC. the next step in this process seems to be = proposing a charter. please find the proposed charter in this email to = dispatch@ietf.org, and it also = is available online here:

h= ttps://github.com/geojson/draft-geojson/blob/master/charter.md

= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

Proposed GeoJSON WG = Charter

GeoJSON

GeoJSON is a geospatial data interchange = format based on JavaScript Object Notation (JSON). It was published at = http://geojson.org in 2008. It has succeeded in streamlining geographic = information system standards and making them accessible to practitioners = of modern web development. GeoJSON today plays an important role in many = spatial databases, web APIs, and open data platforms.

This WG = will work on a GeoJSON Format RFC that specifies the format more = precisely and serves as a better guide for implementers. The work will = start from an Internet-Draft written by the original authors. This I-D, = draft-butler-geojson-04, substantially improves the format = specification. The remaining tasks of the WG are:

* Further = clarification of the GeoJSON format specification.
* Addition of = implementation advice based on lessons learned since 2008.
* = geoAddition of more explicit extension advice to the = specification.

The addition of new features to the GeoJSON format = is not within the scope of this WG. One possible exception to this = (depending on WG consensus) is the adoption of JSON Text Sequences as an = alternative way of serializing sets of GeoJSON = objects.

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

thanks a lot = and kind regards,

dret.

--
erik wilde | = mailto:dret@berkeley.edu  -  tel:+1-510-2061079 |
=           | UC = Berkeley  -  School of Information (ISchool) |
=           | = http://dret.net/netdret http://twitter.com/dret = |

= --Apple-Mail=_1B91C1B0-090B-4BB2-A9F7-A17162EB63F8-- From nobody Thu Feb 12 06:43:51 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17C8F1A8A8A for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 06:43:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.983 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.983 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id k_Pn9QhUaF_6 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 06:43:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from cirse-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.142]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 928A11A8938 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 06:43:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id t1CEhUW8013472 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 15:43:30 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id D9FC1206F6B for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 15:44:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet2.intra.cea.fr (muguet2.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.7]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0CAE206F02 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 15:44:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (is010446-4.intra.cea.fr [10.8.33.116]) by muguet2.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id t1CEh5am027096 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 15:43:30 +0100 Message-ID: <54DCBBF9.8010705@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 15:43:05 +0100 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: geopriv@ietf.org References: <54D3AF68.4070803@berkeley.edu> <625863E8-3AE1-4ABB-879E-946C958DC1C7@cooperw.in> In-Reply-To: <625863E8-3AE1-4ABB-879E-946C958DC1C7@cooperw.in> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Geopriv] Fwd: Forming and chartering a GeoJSON WG X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 14:43:39 -0000 The abstract of this draft-butler-geojson-05 says: > This document recommends a single coordinate reference system based > on WGS 84. Other coordinate reference systems are not recommended. I think the draft should be revised in this sense. JSON/IP will reach a number of reference systems in wide use, non-WGS-84, which deserve direct use instead of through conversion. Alex Le 10/02/2015 22:45, Alissa Cooper a écrit : > Folks who may have thoughts about this should send them on the dispatch > list ... > > Begin forwarded message: > >> *From: *Erik Wilde > >> *Subject: **Re: Forming and chartering a GeoJSON WG* >> *Date: *February 5, 2015 at 9:59:04 AM PST >> *To: *dispatch@ietf.org >> *Cc: *Richard Barnes >, Sean Gillies >> >, Alissa >> Cooper >, Barry Leiba >> >, Pete >> Resnick > >, metazool@fastmail.net >> >> >> hello. >> >> On 2015-02-03 16:40 , Richard Barnes wrote: >>> Sorry for the delay here. It looks like the next step here is to send a >>> charter proposal to the DISPATCH mailing list, dispatch@ietf.org >>> >> >> we have had conversations about establishing an IETF WG for GeoJSON, >> which would be chartered with taking the current GeoJSON definition, >> and turning it into an IETF RFC. the next step in this process seems >> to be proposing a charter. please find the proposed charter in this >> email to dispatch@ietf.org , and it also is >> available online here: >> >> https://github.com/geojson/draft-geojson/blob/master/charter.md >> >> ============================================================== >> >> Proposed GeoJSON WG Charter >> >> GeoJSON >> >> GeoJSON is a geospatial data interchange format based on JavaScript >> Object Notation (JSON). It was published at http://geojson.org in >> 2008. It has succeeded in streamlining geographic information system >> standards and making them accessible to practitioners of modern web >> development. GeoJSON today plays an important role in many spatial >> databases, web APIs, and open data platforms. >> >> This WG will work on a GeoJSON Format RFC that specifies the format >> more precisely and serves as a better guide for implementers. The work >> will start from an Internet-Draft written by the original authors. >> This I-D, draft-butler-geojson-04, substantially improves the format >> specification. The remaining tasks of the WG are: >> >> * Further clarification of the GeoJSON format specification. >> * Addition of implementation advice based on lessons learned since 2008. >> * geoAddition of more explicit extension advice to the specification. >> >> The addition of new features to the GeoJSON format is not within the >> scope of this WG. One possible exception to this (depending on WG >> consensus) is the adoption of JSON Text Sequences as an alternative >> way of serializing sets of GeoJSON objects. >> >> ============================================================== >> >> thanks a lot and kind regards, >> >> dret. >> >> -- >> erik wilde | mailto:dret@berkeley.edu - tel:+1-510-2061079 | >> | UC Berkeley - School of Information (ISchool) | >> | http://dret.net/netdret http://twitter.com/dret | > > > > _______________________________________________ > Geopriv mailing list > Geopriv@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv > From nobody Thu Feb 12 13:36:37 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEC391A702B for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:36:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LyieqdSCl8Iy for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:36:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5FD81A1B65 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:36:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2395A20834 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 16:36:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 12 Feb 2015 16:36:28 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= x-sasl-enc:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to :date:cc:message-id:references:to; s=mesmtp; bh=geDBAvt1uBxa4a5m m+mmeCdMik0=; b=UMKWyKHDtnpzsk7gUfXl49nhj+BJL3BVv2u6aKOgyuSb0gI0 dfs+B2e8eFyKrIjpytu6L1fsC5/BMUNN4SBxsEY4trPh72+asuWVCVPAaAeJfum8 MywCNpsTLxHFriKuKToKNlDKKAYwEjg9t6nulW9uBXnwWE0gaBpAQ3cpOdk= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=x-sasl-enc:content-type:mime-version :subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; s= smtpout; bh=geDBAvt1uBxa4a5mm+mmeCdMik0=; b=C/Hkl/Gw2OPTfohJQaCF FQr30KsCFLw4LHOiQ1vUu0sRoX2DofmHJPYhmz3V24Q0l7HhlQkMm0nPJ/p6X8Zj ERQ1gBqRPF6asq0VSiaumhpNquha6XTDdAsF6jPhLNq/KGJCS5Kd6Xpi6EtE+H38 A4TWYMWw+6vFYJhzdiI8ju8= X-Sasl-enc: lFv2W+ZKJ/0q+8pE9ygHqDWbafeluemV6ZKnwJYGL9Ez 1423776987 Received: from sjc-alcoop-8817.cisco.com (unknown [128.107.239.233]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 651BCC00295; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 16:36:27 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5A9BA0FD-14E6-4BE7-9700-E62EDC0DD86E" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) From: Alissa Cooper In-Reply-To: <54DCBBF9.8010705@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:36:26 -0800 Message-Id: <7036DD56-A189-48AB-AF5D-0D00DFA69C14@cooperw.in> References: <54D3AF68.4070803@berkeley.edu> <625863E8-3AE1-4ABB-879E-946C958DC1C7@cooperw.in> <54DCBBF9.8010705@gmail.com> To: Alexandru Petrescu X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Archived-At: Cc: geopriv@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Geopriv] Forming and chartering a GeoJSON WG X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 21:36:35 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_5A9BA0FD-14E6-4BE7-9700-E62EDC0DD86E Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Please send your comments to dispatch@ietf.org. On Feb 12, 2015, at 6:43 AM, Alexandru Petrescu = wrote: > The abstract of this draft-butler-geojson-05 says: >> This document recommends a single coordinate reference system based >> on WGS 84. Other coordinate reference systems are not recommended. >=20 > I think the draft should be revised in this sense. >=20 > JSON/IP will reach a number of reference systems in wide use, = non-WGS-84, which deserve direct use instead of through conversion. >=20 > Alex >=20 >=20 > Le 10/02/2015 22:45, Alissa Cooper a =E9crit : >> Folks who may have thoughts about this should send them on the = dispatch >> list ... >>=20 >> Begin forwarded message: >>=20 >>> *From: *Erik Wilde > >>> *Subject: **Re: Forming and chartering a GeoJSON WG* >>> *Date: *February 5, 2015 at 9:59:04 AM PST >>> *To: *dispatch@ietf.org >>> *Cc: *Richard Barnes >, Sean Gillies >>> >, Alissa >>> Cooper >, Barry Leiba >>> >, Pete >>> Resnick >> >, metazool@fastmail.net >>> >>>=20 >>> hello. >>>=20 >>> On 2015-02-03 16:40 , Richard Barnes wrote: >>>> Sorry for the delay here. It looks like the next step here is to = send a >>>> charter proposal to the DISPATCH mailing list, dispatch@ietf.org >>>> >>>=20 >>> we have had conversations about establishing an IETF WG for GeoJSON, >>> which would be chartered with taking the current GeoJSON definition, >>> and turning it into an IETF RFC. the next step in this process seems >>> to be proposing a charter. please find the proposed charter in this >>> email to dispatch@ietf.org , and it also = is >>> available online here: >>>=20 >>> https://github.com/geojson/draft-geojson/blob/master/charter.md >>>=20 >>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >>>=20 >>> Proposed GeoJSON WG Charter >>>=20 >>> GeoJSON >>>=20 >>> GeoJSON is a geospatial data interchange format based on JavaScript >>> Object Notation (JSON). It was published at http://geojson.org in >>> 2008. It has succeeded in streamlining geographic information system >>> standards and making them accessible to practitioners of modern web >>> development. GeoJSON today plays an important role in many spatial >>> databases, web APIs, and open data platforms. >>>=20 >>> This WG will work on a GeoJSON Format RFC that specifies the format >>> more precisely and serves as a better guide for implementers. The = work >>> will start from an Internet-Draft written by the original authors. >>> This I-D, draft-butler-geojson-04, substantially improves the format >>> specification. The remaining tasks of the WG are: >>>=20 >>> * Further clarification of the GeoJSON format specification. >>> * Addition of implementation advice based on lessons learned since = 2008. >>> * geoAddition of more explicit extension advice to the = specification. >>>=20 >>> The addition of new features to the GeoJSON format is not within the >>> scope of this WG. One possible exception to this (depending on WG >>> consensus) is the adoption of JSON Text Sequences as an alternative >>> way of serializing sets of GeoJSON objects. >>>=20 >>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >>>=20 >>> thanks a lot and kind regards, >>>=20 >>> dret. >>>=20 >>> -- >>> erik wilde | mailto:dret@berkeley.edu - tel:+1-510-2061079 | >>> | UC Berkeley - School of Information (ISchool) | >>> | http://dret.net/netdret http://twitter.com/dret | >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Geopriv mailing list >> Geopriv@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv >>=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Geopriv mailing list > Geopriv@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv --Apple-Mail=_5A9BA0FD-14E6-4BE7-9700-E62EDC0DD86E Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Please send your comments to dispatch@ietf.org.

On Feb 12, 2015, at 6:43 AM, Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com<= /a>> wrote:

The abstract of this = draft-butler-geojson-05 says:
This document = recommends a single coordinate reference system based
  on = WGS 84.  Other coordinate reference systems are not = recommended.

I think the draft should be revised in = this sense.

JSON/IP will reach a number of reference systems in = wide use, non-WGS-84, which deserve direct use instead of through = conversion.

Alex


Le 10/02/2015 22:45, Alissa Cooper a = =E9crit :
Folks who may have thoughts about = this should send them on the dispatch
list ...

Begin forwarded = message:

*From: *Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu <mailto:dret@berkeley.edu>>
= *Subject: **Re: Forming and chartering a GeoJSON WG*
*Date: *February = 5, 2015 at 9:59:04 AM PST
*To: *dispatch@ietf.org <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
*Cc:= *Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx <mailto:rlb@ipv.sx>>, Sean = Gillies
<sean.gillies@gmail.com <mailto:sean.gillies@gmail.com&g= t;>, Alissa
Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in <mailto:alissa@cooperw.in>>, = Barry Leiba
<barryleiba@computer.org <mailto:barryleiba@computer.org= >>, Pete
Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com<mailto:presnick@qti.qualcomm.com= >>, metazool@fastmail.net
<mailto:metazool@fastmail.net>=

hello.

On 2015-02-03 16:40 , Richard Barnes = wrote:
Sorry for the delay here.  It = looks like the next step here is to send a
charter proposal to the = DISPATCH mailing list, dispatch@ietf.org
<mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>

we have had conversations about establishing an IETF WG for = GeoJSON,
which would be chartered with taking the current GeoJSON = definition,
and turning it into an IETF RFC. the next step in this = process seems
to be proposing a charter. please find the proposed = charter in this
email to dispatch@ietf.org <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>, and = it also is
available online here:

h= ttps://github.com/geojson/draft-geojson/blob/master/charter.md

= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

Proposed GeoJSON WG = Charter

GeoJSON

GeoJSON is a geospatial data interchange = format based on JavaScript
Object Notation (JSON). It was published = at http://geojson.org in
2008. It has succeeded in streamlining = geographic information system
standards and making them accessible to = practitioners of modern web
development. GeoJSON today plays an = important role in many spatial
databases, web APIs, and open data = platforms.

This WG will work on a GeoJSON Format RFC that = specifies the format
more precisely and serves as a better guide for = implementers. The work
will start from an Internet-Draft written by = the original authors.
This I-D, draft-butler-geojson-04, = substantially improves the format
specification. The remaining tasks = of the WG are:

* Further clarification of the GeoJSON format = specification.
* Addition of implementation advice based on lessons = learned since 2008.
* geoAddition of more explicit extension advice = to the specification.

The addition of new features to the GeoJSON = format is not within the
scope of this WG. One possible exception to = this (depending on WG
consensus) is the adoption of JSON Text = Sequences as an alternative
way of serializing sets of GeoJSON = objects.

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

thanks a lot = and kind regards,

dret.

--
erik wilde | = mailto:dret@berkeley.edu  -  tel:+1-510-2061079 = |
         | UC Berkeley =  -  School of Information (ISchool) = |
         | = http://dret.net/netdret http://twitter.com/dret = |



____________________________________________= ___
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.= org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv



_________________= ______________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.or= g/mailman/listinfo/geopriv

= --Apple-Mail=_5A9BA0FD-14E6-4BE7-9700-E62EDC0DD86E-- From nobody Thu Feb 26 15:27:09 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03C101A8939; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 15:27:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.912 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sIvFONEIrZ5W; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 15:26:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1900:3001:11::31]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2DE91A8938; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 15:26:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 068E0181D1B; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 15:26:26 -0800 (PST) To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org X-PHP-Originating-Script: 6000:ams_util_lib.php From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Message-Id: <20150226232626.068E0181D1B@rfc-editor.org> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 15:26:26 -0800 (PST) Archived-At: Cc: geopriv@ietf.org, drafts-update-ref@iana.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [Geopriv] RFC 7459 on Representation of Uncertainty and Confidence in the Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO) X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 23:27:06 -0000 A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 7459 Title: Representation of Uncertainty and Confidence in the Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO) Author: M. Thomson, J. Winterbottom Status: Standards Track Stream: IETF Date: February 2015 Mailbox: martin.thomson@gmail.com, a.james.winterbottom@gmail.com Pages: 39 Characters: 80144 Updates: RFC 3693, RFC 4119, RFC 5491 I-D Tag: draft-ietf-geopriv-uncertainty-04.txt URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7459 This document defines key concepts of uncertainty and confidence as they pertain to location information. Methods for the manipulation of location estimates that include uncertainty information are outlined. This document normatively updates the definition of location information representations defined in RFCs 4119 and 5491. It also deprecates related terminology defined in RFC 3693. This document is a product of the Geographic Location/Privacy Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Official Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC From nobody Fri Feb 27 01:05:51 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4D551A9152 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 01:05:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.31 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.31 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TyH0aJagvSUf for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 01:05:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.nominet.org.uk (mx2.nominet.org.uk [213.248.242.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68DD51A9151 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 01:05:45 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: s=main2.dk.nominet.selector; d=nominet.org.uk; c=nofws; q=dns; h=X-IronPort-AV:X-IPAS-Result:Received:Received:From:To: Subject:Thread-Topic:Thread-Index:Date:Message-ID: References:In-Reply-To:Accept-Language:Content-Language: X-MS-Has-Attach:X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:x-originating-ip: Content-Type:Content-ID:Content-Transfer-Encoding: MIME-Version; b=fljoBsObh7ZBRoQLViKyFXC4kCw+yxmMtE5XXqtraT7PWBGr4PQcyfbA MVgvQmmuHLHPCxvxwFcGSROsIHAWSc59Il3hXC7dIx0oY2pxpmCnvl+Ue zzzywGglXDAh9/epB7I8u5soKduSkzY+XuJhI4ARv8UC5NozySkYQ7+GI KWImQZ95S5NCWYAFZOiQH3FYak20HzjWVDb0cxCgogCVJb1ioYyOgejhK sJXPliSsRqnm7qGHq1RCGjP7yStFc; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nominet.org.uk; i=@nominet.org.uk; q=dns/txt; s=main2.dkim.nominet.selector; t=1425027946; x=1456563946; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=Ik4Yokn4QMvdmRW7lZk0T+Vyx3LYYiRm14kneOxdcOA=; b=wm5EY2bvWE0TYAiYqMEuPLEDm95TxXxe/UnGqQ765/tg1nJ6zKjMB0Qx k/PmdRdFVwH5AOVXS7pe8rW9NrxLV/wajPRkA7FI2kx8X8i5JdfptJN1Q LPuQK6FfveF5coneG0F8BOkzx16Yaivia1NLZBJqDJ0bAXdrgh5pDV3Yf JwkbA3FK7yODsQiDEXyEySjWCma3Ci7camS7varUHdWMmeh+KerLYXosw Su+T3G6bNa2xme2ySB91DtPvUgsS+; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.09,658,1418083200"; d="scan'208";a="16177872" X-IPAS-Result: A2DOBQBXMvBU/5HF+NVbgmAiUloEvBaFdIV0AoEfTQEBAQEBAXyEDwEBAQECAToZKwsCAQgUBB4FCyERJQIEE4gbAwkJAwnRHQ2FTAEBAQEGAQEBAQEBAQEWBIsSgT2BB4FXIDqDF4EUBZdzjw+GCSOCDyOBPG8BgQo5fwEBAQ Received: from wds-exc2.okna.nominet.org.uk ([213.248.197.145]) by mx2.nominet.org.uk with ESMTP; 27 Feb 2015 09:05:44 +0000 Received: from WDS-EXC1.okna.nominet.org.uk ([fe80::1593:1394:a91f:8f5f]) by wds-exc2.okna.nominet.org.uk ([fe80::7577:eaca:5241:25d4%16]) with mapi id 14.03.0224.002; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:05:44 +0000 From: Ray Bellis To: geopriv mailing list Thread-Topic: [Geopriv] RFC 7459 on Representation of Uncertainty and Confidence in the Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO) Thread-Index: AQHQUhvM8CE+3+At5EuE4bk4ucZb250ENOgA Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:05:42 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20150226232626.068E0181D1B@rfc-editor.org> In-Reply-To: <20150226232626.068E0181D1B@rfc-editor.org> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [192.168.2.1] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <0B4BBBA114E9A2479D0A5A837FF7814A@okna.nominet.org.uk> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Geopriv] RFC 7459 on Representation of Uncertainty and Confidence in the Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO) X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:05:49 -0000 > On 26 Feb 2015, at 23:26, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org wrote: >=20 > A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. >=20 >=20 > RFC 7459 >=20 > Title: Representation of Uncertainty and Confidence=20 > in the Presence Information Data Format=20 > Location Object (PIDF-LO)=20 > Author: M. Thomson, J. Winterbottom > Status: Standards Track > Stream: IETF > Date: February 2015 > Mailbox: martin.thomson@gmail.com,=20 > a.james.winterbottom@gmail.com > Pages: 39 > Characters: 80144 > Updates: RFC 3693, RFC 4119, RFC 5491 >=20 > I-D Tag: draft-ietf-geopriv-uncertainty-04.txt >=20 > URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7459 >=20 > This document defines key concepts of uncertainty and confidence as > they pertain to location information. Methods for the manipulation > of location estimates that include uncertainty information are > outlined. >=20 > This document normatively updates the definition of location > information representations defined in RFCs 4119 and 5491. It also > deprecates related terminology defined in RFC 3693. >=20 > This document is a product of the Geographic Location/Privacy Working Gro= up of the IETF. Congratulation guys - the publication of this document marks the conclusion= of all GeoPriv WG items (notwithstanding we shut the group itself down as = soon as this doc hit the RFC Editor's Queue). Ray