idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-geopriv-civic-address-recommendations-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** It looks like you're using RFC 3978 boilerplate. You should update this to the boilerplate described in the IETF Trust License Policy document (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info), which is required now. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978, Section 5.1 on line 15. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978, Section 5.5, updated by RFC 4748 on line 1145. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 1 on line 1156. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 2 on line 1163. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 3 on line 1169. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a Security Considerations section. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (Oct 27, 2008) is 5658 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) No issues found here. Summary: 2 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 7 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 GEOPRIV K. Wolf 3 Internet-Draft A. Mayrhofer 4 Expires: April 30, 2009 nic.at 5 Oct 27, 2008 7 Considerations for Civic Addresses in PIDF-LO 8 draft-ietf-geopriv-civic-address-recommendations-00 10 Status of this Memo 12 By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any 13 applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware 14 have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes 15 aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. 17 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 18 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 19 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 20 Drafts. 22 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 23 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 24 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 25 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 27 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 28 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 30 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 31 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 33 This Internet-Draft will expire on April 30, 2009. 35 Abstract 37 This document provides a guideline for creating civic address 38 consideration documents for individual countries, as required by RFC 39 4776. Since civic addresses may have a different format in 40 individual countries, such address considerations are necessary in 41 order to map the civic address fields to the PIDF Location Object 42 (PIDF-LO) elements. 44 Table of Contents 46 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 48 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 50 3. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 52 4. Specifying PIDF-LO Element Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 53 4.1. Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 54 4.2. Country Subdivisions A1-A6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 55 4.3. Road and Street Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 56 4.4. House Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 57 4.5. Local Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 58 4.6. Floors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 59 4.7. Address Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 60 4.8. Other Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 62 5. Austria Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 63 5.1. Civic Address Format in Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 64 5.2. Sample Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 65 5.3. Address Codes in Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 66 5.4. Austrian Addresses in PIDF-LO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 67 5.4.1. Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 68 5.4.2. Country Subdivisions A1-A6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 69 5.4.3. A4 Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 70 5.4.4. A5 Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 71 5.4.5. Road and Street Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 72 5.4.6. House Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 73 5.4.7. Local Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 74 5.4.8. Floors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 75 5.4.9. Additional Code Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 76 5.4.10. Other Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 77 5.4.11. Elements not to be used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 78 5.5. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 80 6. Security & Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 82 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 84 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 86 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 87 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 88 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 90 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 91 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 27 93 1. Introduction 95 The "Presence Information Data Format Location Object" (PIDF-LO) 96 [RFC4119] is an an object format for carrying geographical 97 information on the Internet. PIDF-LO can be used to carry civic 98 address information, and supports a range of "civic address types" 99 (CATypes) to describe individual attributes of an civic address (see 100 Section 2.2.1 of RFC 4119 and Section 3.1 of RFC 5139, the revised 101 set of CATypes). 103 In many use cases, PIDF-LOs are populated with data from long- 104 established sources, like postal or governmental building registers, 105 line information databases and yellow / white pages of infrastructure 106 providers, or official residents registers. The structure and format 107 of data from these sources is almost always different from PIDF-LO's 108 CAtypes definition - additionally, structure and format of those 109 sources differs from country to country. 111 To make use of such existing data sources, instructions for 112 transposing such data into PIDF-LO format (element mapping) is 113 required. Preferrably, those mapping operations are reversable, so 114 that location receipients like public safety answering points (PSAPs) 115 can reconcile such PIDF-LOs with the original data source. 116 Additionally, for any data source just a single mapping should exist 117 in order to reduce the risk of ambiguous interpretation. 119 Therefore, civic address considerations are necessary for individual 120 countries to ensure uniform usage of PIDF-LO elements. RFC 4776 121 explicitly asks for such documents. This guideline aims to support 122 the creation of such civic address considerations. For some 123 countries RFC4776 already has some considerations on the 124 administrative sub-divisions in Section 3.4. Note that these 125 examples are not compliant to RFC 5139 [RFC5139], since the A6 126 element is not used for street names any more. 128 This guideline document is based on the experience of writing such a 129 civic address considerations document for Austria. Since there were 130 some difficulties when trying to define a mapping for Austrian civic 131 address fields to PIDF-LO, this document summarizes important 132 experience and issues to consider. Even though every country has 133 it's own address format and therefore other problems will occur, this 134 guideline should help to identify difficulties. As examples, 135 Austrian addresses are used. 137 2. Terminology 139 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 140 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 141 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 143 3. Requirements 145 The following requirements apply to defining address mapping 146 considerations: 147 o For any data source, all elements must be considered (even if some 148 of those fields are to be left out of the mapping, the document 149 must describe that). 150 o Any CAtype field registered by the time the document is produced 151 must be considered, and if it is not being used, that fact must be 152 mentioned. In case the set of CAtypes is revised by the IETF, the 153 address consideration document should be updated. Until then, the 154 old mapping procedure must be used. 155 o Address mappings should be reversible, so that location recepients 156 can identify the original records if they have access to the 157 original source 158 o For any element used, at least one example must be provided. 160 4. Specifying PIDF-LO Element Usage 162 The purpose of the civic address consideration document for an 163 individual country is to specify the list of PIDF-LO elements to be 164 used, and the mapping between these elements and the fields of the 165 respective local data source. 167 The motivation for such a civic address consideration is to ensure 168 interoperability. Location recipients certainly want to rely on 169 finding civic address parts in defined elements of PIDF-LO for 170 further processing. Especially when it comes to emergency calling, 171 location information is a critical data where misinterpretation has 172 to be avoided. Therefore, a consistent mapping scheme is required. 173 Since it is not possible to have global PIDF-LO elements which can be 174 unambiguously used in every country in the world, the mapping must be 175 defined on an national level. It has to be ensured, that the mapping 176 is used for all civic addresses in this country. 178 Is is important to identify the civic address fields that can be 179 mapped directly to the corresponding PIDF-LO elements and which civic 180 address parts need special consideration. PIDF-LO elements that are 181 not needed in a specific country, can simply be omitted. The civic 182 address consideration document has to specify clearly that those 183 elements must not be used for representing civic addresses in this 184 country. 186 Even though the list of CAtypes could be extended, it is no feasible 187 to add new elements for any new field in any data source in any 188 country. Therefore, unless new CAtypes are specified by the IETF, 189 just the existing elements can be used. That leaves the following 190 two options in case the CAtypes do not provide a perfect fit for 191 local civic address data (especially in case the local data contains 192 more fields than PIDF-LO provides): 193 1. Concatenate several civic address fields into a single PIDF-LO 194 element (define delimiters if applicable and make sure the 195 separate civic address parts can be retrieved again) 196 2. Use a PIDF-LO element that is unused so far 198 All existing civic address parts must find a place in the PIDF-LO. 199 Even exotic addresses, that might be very rare, must be considered. 200 Civic addresses can be very complex in some countries. So it is very 201 important to identify the data source that is representing all the 202 possible civic addresses in a country. Perhaps this database is 203 maintained by a governmental company, by an authority, or the post. 204 Moreover, it is important, that this data format is accepted by 205 Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) operators and they have access 206 to the data source. Even PSAPs within a country may be organized 207 differently and use different data bases for civic addresses. It is 208 crucial to define the PIDF-LO mapping in a way that all PSAPs can use 209 it. It is disireable to have PSAP operators involved in the process 210 of developing civic address considerations, so that their needs are 211 especially considered. 213 Although the mapping is defined in a national way and the actual 214 meaning of several PIDF-LO elements may not be clear to an outsider, 215 at least the country element tells in what context this PIDF-LO was 216 created. In case of emergency calls, a PIDF-LO would just be passed 217 to a PSAP in the same country as the location generator anyway. 218 However, in border region there might be exceptions and the PIDF-LO 219 is sent to a neighboring country. The PIDF-LO can still be passed on 220 to a PSAP in the right country because of the country element or the 221 PSAP knows the mapping of the neighbor country. 223 A consistent mapping is also very important for checking if two 224 PIDF-LO documents describe the same location. When civic address 225 fields are put into different PIDF-LO elements, it may be difficult 226 to recognize two equal addresses. 228 The following sections discuss individual PIDF-LO elements and 229 describe what to consider when defining civic address considerations. 231 4.1. Country 233 The country element must hold the alpha-2 codes from ISO 3166-1 234 [refs.ISO3166-1] in upper case characters as clarified in Section 3.3 235 of RFC 5139 [RFC5139]. 237 This element cannot be redefined on a national basis since it 238 identifies the country itself. This element is used to identify 239 which national mapping for civic addresses has been used in a 240 specific PIDF-LO. 242 Example for Austria: AT 244 4.2. Country Subdivisions A1-A6 246 The elements A1 to A6 are used to hold national subdivision 247 identifiers, with A1 holding the top-level subdivision identifier. 248 A1 may either contain the second part of ISO 3166-2 [refs.ISO3166-2] 249 (see section 3.4 of RFC 5139 [RFC5139]), or values as described in 250 the address consideration document for that country. Elements "A2" 251 to "A6" may contain additional levels of subdivisions (see section 252 2.2.1 of RFC 4119). 254 For A1, an address consideration document for a country should state 255 whether ISO 3166-2 codes are to be used, alternatively it should 256 define a list of valid values to be used (for example, subdivision 257 names). In either case, A1 must not be redefined for any other use 258 than describing top level subdivisions. 260 The document should also specify for each of the A2 - A6 elements 261 whether they are required, optional, or not allowed. For each 262 element that is required or optional, it should define the set of 263 valid values, either by listing them, or referring to such a list. 265 For countries which are already discussed in section 3.4 of RFC 4776, 266 it is recommended to follow those mappings. 268 Example for Austria 270 A1 province (Bundesland) 271 A2 political district name or identifier (politscher Bezirk) 272 A3 commune name or identifier (Gemeinde) 273 A4 village name or identifier (Ortschaft) 274 A5 cadastral municipality name or identifier (Katastralgemeindename 275 or Katastralgemeindenummer) 277 A6 must not be used. For more details see the example in 278 Section 5.4.2. 280 4.3. Road and Street Names 282 PIDF-LO contains the following elements related to road names: RD, 283 RDSEC, RDBR, RDSUBADDR, PRM, POM (section 3.1 and 3.2 of RFC 5139 284 [RFC5139]) and PRD, POD, STS (section 3.4 of [RFC4776]). Note that 285 the use of the A6 element for street names is not valid (Section 3.2 286 of RFC 5139 [RFC5139]). 288 An address considerations document for a country should specify which 289 of those nine elements are required, optional or not allowed. If 290 neccessary, the document may also describe more complicated 291 dependencies (for example, "RD is optional, but required if any other 292 road name element is used"). 294 For any required or optional element, it should describe the relation 295 of those elements to elements of the data source used. If special 296 considerations apply to certain elements, they should be described. 297 Also focus on the element STS, the street suffix. It must be assured 298 that this suffix is used in a consistent way. In case no suffixes 299 are known in a country or it is common to write the street name and 300 the suffix together, it is allowed to forbid the usage of the STS 301 element completely. Suffixes may also be abbreviated. Define the 302 common abbreviations. 304 Example for Austria: 306 RD: street name 308 All other road elements must not be used, street suffix is already 309 included in RD element. Street suffixes must not be abbreviated. 311 4.4. House Numbers 313 PIDF-LO specifies two elements related to house numbers: "house 314 number" (HNO, numeric part only) and "house number suffix" (HNS) (see 315 section 3.4 of RFC 4776). However, in many countries house numbers 316 have a more complex format. In any case, a clear definition on 317 mapping national house numbers to PIDF-LO is needed to minimize 318 confusion potential. 320 An address consideration document for a country should provide the 321 following information with regards to house numbers: If the structure 322 of house numbers in that country fits the HNO/HNS structure, the 323 document must mandate to use those fields as described in RFC 4776. 324 If the structure of house numbers does not directly fit into those 325 two elements, the document must propose rules on how to map origin 326 data into PIDF-LO elements. Besides HNO and HNS, LOC and BLD could 327 be considered for carrying house number information. 329 The document should describe whether abbreviations of house number 330 elements are valid or not. If abbreviations are used, they must be 331 clearly defined. If the house number consists of more than one 332 number or multiple prefixes and suffixes may coexist, a delimiter 333 symbol and a clear rule on how to concatenate all this data into the 334 HNO and HNS element might be necessary. Whenever concatenating data 335 into one field, keep in mind that the location recipient might want 336 to separate the data again. 338 Example from Austria: 340 HNO: concatenate all the data elements of Austrian house numbers into 341 this single PIDF-LO element in a defined order with delimiter symbols 342 (see Section 5.4.6 for the complete definition). 344 HNS: not recommended to be used since there may be multiple suffixes 345 for the different parts of the house number. 347 4.5. Local Names 349 PIDF-LO contains three elements to reflect local names: LMK, LOC, NAM 350 (section 3.4 of RFC 4776). Such local names may be of importance for 351 the identification of a location, and may either coexist with a valid 352 civic address or (in some cases) no address may be assigned so that 353 the local names itself identify the location. In rural regions for 354 example, a farm name may be more common than a street address to 355 identify a location. Therefore, local names may either assist in 356 finding a "street name" type addess, but they might also be the 357 authoritative (and only) location information. 359 Address consideration documents for individual countries should state 360 for each of the LMK, LOC, NAM elements whether they are required, 361 optional, or not to be used. For any required or optional field, it 362 should state potential values (source data) for the element. In case 363 that multiple values for an element may occur, a concatenation / 364 selection strategy should be described. Concatenation using ";" as 365 seperator is recommended. 367 If local name information and "common" address information is both 368 available and used, the document should discuss the relation between 369 those two address information types, and expected behaviour of 370 location receipients. 372 Example from Austria: 374 NAM: contains the "Vulgoname" (local name), multiple local names are 375 separated by a semicolon (if applicable) 376 LMK: contains the farm name (just one name possible) (if applicable) 378 LOC: can be used without restriction for additional location 379 information (as per RFC 4119) 381 The "Vulgoname" is useful to identify the location within its 382 locality, since official addresses especially in rural regions might 383 not be well known. 385 4.6. Floors 387 PIDF-LO defines the element FLR to hold the floor information, but 388 does not further specify its content. Section 2.1 of RFC 3825 389 provides guidance about floor numbering, but is not directly related 390 to PIDF-LO. 392 An address consideration document for a country should clearly 393 specify how to express floors using the FLR element. Following the 394 above mentioned guidance is recommended, however, local nomenclature 395 might require a completely different system. The document should 396 specify whether only numbers, text, or both are allowed in the FLR 397 element. If there are standard values for certain floors, they 398 should be listed. Abbreviations should be avoided, unless they are 399 the primary way of identifying floors. 401 Example from Austria: 403 Numbers and text allowed. The first floor (1) is the 404 first "full" floor above the floor at street level. The floor at 405 street level is EG or 0. There might be 406 intermediate floors, especially between the floor at street level and 407 the "first floor". Such intermediate floors have names like 408 "Mezzanine", "Erster Halbstock" ("first half floor"), "Zweiter 409 Halbstock" ("second half floor"). 411 4.7. Address Codes 413 Address codes are available in several countries in different forms 414 (for estates, buildings or usable units for example). These codes 415 identify an address record, and can be placed in the ADDCODE element 416 in PIDF-LO. Address codes can help the location recipient to 417 determine the location, and to identify the original record in the 418 data source. Depending on the type of code, the code alone may be 419 sufficient as location information within a country. 421 The PIDF-LO country element can be used to identify the name space in 422 which the address code elements are valid. Countries may have more 423 than one type of address codes (multiple namespaces), so it might be 424 necessary to choose the code that is most widely accepted (by PSAPs) 425 or to have identifiers for the different codes. 427 A PIDF-LO containing just the country and ADDCODE elements might 428 provide enough information to retrieve a civic address, given the 429 location recipient has access to the respective source database. 431 A civic address considerations document for a country should specify 432 whether and in which applications the use of ADDCODE elements is 433 allowed. If ADDCODE is used, its relation to the remaining elements 434 must be clearly stated. If several namespaces for address codes 435 exist in a country, a mechanism to distinguish the different code 436 spaces must be described. 438 Examples from Austria: 440 Statistik Austria provides 4 codes: Adresscode (AdrCD), Adresssubcode 441 (AdrsubCD), Objektnummer (ObjNr) and Nutzungseinheitenlaufnummer 442 (NtzLnr). 444 The following format should be used: 446 AdrCD=1234567;AdrsubCD=123;ObjNr=2333211;NtzLnr=0001 448 4.8. Other Elements 450 This section lists all the other PIDF-LO elements, that are not 451 considered so far. 453 To specify the location inside a building, the following elements can 454 be useful: 456 UNIT 458 ROOM 460 SEAT 462 The following elements are related to postal codes: 464 PC 466 PCN 468 POBOX 470 To describe the place-type or the building, the following elements 471 are available: 473 PLC - Place-type (see RFC 4589) 475 BLD - Building (structure) 477 The xml:lang attribute should be present in PIDF-LO XML documents. 479 An address considerations document should specify for any of those 480 elements whether they are required, optional, or must not be used. 481 For any element that is required or optional, the semantics of its 482 contents must be described, if it differs from the PIDF-LO base 483 documents. 485 5. Austria Example 487 The Austrian "Gebaeude- und Wohnungsregistergesetz" (building and 488 habitation registry law) is the legal basis for the obligation to 489 provide a registry of civic addresses, buildings and their usable 490 units (subdivisions of buildings). The registry is operated by 491 "Statistik Austria GmbH", a fully governmental owned company. 492 Responsibility for keeping records in the registry up to date is an 493 obligation to the local administration of the individual townships. 495 The data format definition for the individual records is publicly 496 available (data access itself is however restricted). Hence, an 497 uniform address data base for whole Austria is available. 498 Unfortunately, Austrian civic addresses use a much more complex 499 format compared to civic addresses in PIDF-LO. A detailed 500 description of the Austrian civic address data format is contained in 501 section Section 5.1. 503 A guideline of how to use PIDF-LO for Austrian addresses is necessary 504 in order to avoid misinterpretations. This is especially important 505 if the PIDF-LO is conveyed during an emergency call to a Public 506 Safety Answering Point (PSAP). A precise location information is 507 needed in case of emergency to send out responders without any delay 508 to the correct location of the caller. If every data-provider uses 509 its own address mapping to PIDF-LO, confusion and misunderstandings 510 are bound to happen. However, ideally any PSAP should have full 511 access to the data by Statistik Austria. PSAPs must be able to rely 512 that location information is always provided the same way by all 513 data-providers. To address the idiosyncrasies in Austria, the civic 514 address elements are discussed subsequently. 516 5.1. Civic Address Format in Austria 518 Statistik Austria data describes estates, buildings and usable units 519 [refs.merkmalskatalog]. On a single estate there may be any number 520 of buildings. Apartment houses that have more than one staircase, 521 are split up in separate buildings at every staircase. In every 522 building, there may be several usable units. For example, an 523 apartment house may have several apartments, counting as separate 524 usable units. Moreover, one building may have more than one address, 525 but at least one address. Below, the address elements for estates 526 (Table 1), buildings (Table 2) and usable units (Table 3) are shown. 528 +-------------------------+-------------------------------+---------+ 529 | Statistik Austria name | Explaination | PIDF-LO | 530 | | | Element | 531 +-------------------------+-------------------------------+---------+ 532 | Adresscode | address identifier | ADDCODE | 533 | | | | 534 | Gemeindename, | commune name and identifier | A3 | 535 | Gemeindekennziffer | | | 536 | | | | 537 | Ortschaftsname, | village name and identifier | A4 | 538 | Ortschaftskennziffer | | | 539 | | | | 540 | Strassenname, | street name and identifier | RD | 541 | Strassenkennziffer | | | 542 | | | | 543 | Katastralgemeindename, | cadastral municipality and | A5 | 544 | Katastralgemeindenummer | identifier | | 545 | | | | 546 | Hausnummerntext | text in front of the house | HNO | 547 | | number | | 548 | | | | 549 | Hausnummer - 1. Teil - | first part of the house | HNO | 550 | Nummer | number, numeric | | 551 | | | | 552 | Hausnummer - 1. Teil - | first part of the house | HNO | 553 | Buchstabe | number, character | | 554 | | | | 555 | Hausnummer - | links first and Bis part of | HNO | 556 | Verbindungszeichen Teil | house number | | 557 | 1 -> Bis | | | 558 | | | | 559 | Hausnummer - Bis-Nummer | number of bis part of house | HNO | 560 | | number | | 561 | | | | 562 | Hausnummer - | character of bis part of | HNO | 563 | Bis-Buchstabe | house number | | 564 | | | | 565 | Hausnummernbereich | indicates if all house | HNO | 566 | | numbers specified or just odd | | 567 | | or even numbers are stated | | 568 | | | | 569 | Postleitzahl | postal code | PC | 570 | | | | 571 | Postleitzahlengebiet | postal community code | PCN | 572 | | | | 573 | Vulgoname | local name | NAM | 574 | | | | 575 | Hofname | farm name | LMK | 576 +-------------------------+-------------------------------+---------+ 578 Table 1: Civic Address Elements for Estates 580 +------------------------+--------------------------------+---------+ 581 | Statistik Austria name | Explaination | PIDF-LO | 582 | | | Element | 583 +------------------------+--------------------------------+---------+ 584 | Adressubcode | address subcode | ADDCODE | 585 | | | | 586 | Objektnummer | object code | ADDCODE | 587 | | | | 588 | Hausnummer - | links Bis and second part of | HNO | 589 | Verbindungszeichen | house number | | 590 | Teil Bis -> Teil 2 | | | 591 | | | | 592 | Hausnummer - 2. Teil - | second part of the house | HNO | 593 | Nummer | number, numeric | | 594 | | | | 595 | Hausnummer - 2. Teil - | second part of the house | HNO | 596 | Buchstabe | number, character | | 597 | | | | 598 | Hausnummer - | links second and third part of | HNO | 599 | Verbindungszeichen | house number | | 600 | Teil 2-> Teil 3 | | | 601 | | | | 602 | Hausnummer - 3. Teil - | third part of the house | HNO | 603 | Nummer | number, numeric | | 604 | | | | 605 | Hausnummer - 3. Teil - | third part of the house | HNO | 606 | Buchstabe | number, character | | 607 | | | | 608 | Gebaeudeunterscheidung | for differentiation of | HNO | 609 | | buildings, e.g. Maierweg 27 | | 610 | | Hotel vers. Maierweg 27 | | 611 | | Appartmenthaus | | 612 | | | | 613 +------------------------+--------------------------------+---------+ 615 Table 2: Additional Civic Address Elements for Buildings 617 +-----------------------------+---------------------------+---------+ 618 | Statistik Austria name | Explaination | PIDF-LO | 619 | | | Element | 620 +-----------------------------+---------------------------+---------+ 621 | Nutzungseinheitenlaufnummer | usable unit code | ADDCODE | 622 | | | | 623 | Tuernummer | door number | HNO | 624 | | | | 625 | Topnummer | unit number | HNO | 626 | | | | 627 | Lagebeschreibung | for verbal description | HNO | 628 | | | | 629 | Lage | describes if the usable | FLR | 630 | | unit is in the basement, | | 631 | | mezzanine, attic floor, | | 632 | | ... (but not the floor | | 633 | | number) | | 634 | | | | 635 | Stockwerk | floor | FLR | 636 | | | | 637 +-----------------------------+---------------------------+---------+ 639 Table 3: Additional Civic Address Elements for usable units 641 Note: "Floors" in Austria (as in most parts of Europe) are counted 642 differently compared to the US. The "1st floor" in Austria is 643 actually the floor above the floor at street level (2nd floor in US), 644 not considering the fact that in old buildings there might be even 645 more floors between street level and 1st floor, like "mezzanine", 646 "2nd mezzanine". So, an Austrian "1st floor" could well be the "4th 647 floor" according to US nomenclature. 649 According to Statistik Austria [refs.adrwarten], 81.5% of Austrian 650 addresses are of the simple type Musterstrasse 1 (Musterstrasse is an 651 example street name). 5% of all addresses have an additional 652 character, like Musterstrasse 1b. 1% of Austrian addresses look like 653 Musterstrasse 21A - 23A. For 8% of addresses, an additional separator 654 is necessary, like Musterstrasse 10 Haus 1 Stiege 2 or Musterstrasse 655 20 Gruppe A Reihe 1 Parzelle 13 or Musterstrasse 30 Weg 1 Parzelle 656 10. Very seldom, there are so called special addresses (0.03%), for 657 example Musterstrasse gegenueber 3a, meaning this address is actually 658 vis-a-vis of house number 3A. Rather surprisingly, 4.47% of Austrian 659 addresses contain the identifier of the estate since no house number 660 is assigned at all, for example: Musterstrasse GNR 1234, or 661 Musterstrasse GNR .12/4 Kirche (this type of addresses is common for 662 churches) or a real example in Stockerau: Kolomaniwoerth GNR 1583. 663 This identifier is stored by Statistik Austria as Hausnummerntext. 664 Otherwise one could misinterpret this number as a house number, what 665 would be definitely wrong. 667 5.2. Sample Addresses 669 In order to clarify the Austrian civic address format, this section 670 provides some exemplary addresses: 672 1234 Musterstadt, Hauptstrasse 1a - 5a Block 1b Haus 2c Stiege 1 673 Postleitzahl: 1234 674 Stadt: Musterstadt 675 Strasse: Hauptstrasse 676 Hausnummer - 1. Teil - Nummer: 1 677 Hausnummer - 1. Teil - Buchstabe: a 678 Hausnummer - Verbindungszeichen Teil 1 -> Bis: - 679 Hausnummer - 2. Teil - Nummer: 5 680 Hausnummer - 2. Teil - Buchstabe: a 681 Hausnummer - Verbindungszeichen Teil Bis -> Teil 2: Block 682 Hausnummer - 2. Teil - Nummer: 1 683 Hausnummer - 2. Teil - Buchstabe: b 684 Hausnummer - Verbindungszeichen Teil 2-> Teil 3: Haus 685 Hausnummer - 3. Teil - Nummer: 2 686 Hausnummer - 3. Teil - Buchstabe: c 687 Gebaeudeunterscheidung: Stiege 1 689 1234 Musterstadt, Musterstrasse 13 Hotel 690 Postleitzahl: 1234 691 Stadt: Musterstadt 692 Strasse: Musterstrasse 693 Hausnummer - 1. Teil - Nummer: 13 694 Gebaeudeunterscheidung: Hotel 696 6020 Innsbruck, Anichstrasse vor 35 697 Postleitzahl: 6020 698 Stadt: Innsbruck 699 Strasse: Anichstrasse 700 Hausnummerntext: vor ("in front of") 701 Hausnummer: 35 703 6173 Oberperfuss, Riedl 3097 (Pfarrkirche) 704 Postleitzahl: 6173 705 Stadt: Oberperfuss 706 Strasse: Riedl 707 Hausnummerntext: 3097 708 (since the estate identifier is 81305 3097 where 81305 is the 709 Katastralgemeindenummer (cadastral municipality) and no house 710 number is assigned) 711 Vulgoname: Pfarrkirche 713 5.3. Address Codes in Austria 715 Statistik Austria registers 4 codes: Adresscode, Adresssubcode, 716 Objektnummer and the Nutzungseinheitenlaufnummer. The Adresscode (7 717 digits) is a unique code for an address in Austria. The 718 Adressregister maps the Adresscode to the civic address. If there is 719 a building located at an address, there is also an Adresssubcode (3 720 digits) assigned. Every building at an address has its own 721 Adresssubcode (assigned sequentially starting with 001, 002, 003 and 722 so on) in order to distinguish between buildings at the same address. 723 Furthermore, every building located in Austria has its own unique 724 code, the Objektnummer (7 digits). This code identifies the building 725 independent of the Adresscode. That's because addresses are subject 726 to change while the building may persist. To differ multiple usable 727 units inside a building, the Nutzungseinheitenlaufnummer (4 digits) 728 is used. This code is also assigned in sequential order for each 729 building. 731 Besides, every address and building is geocoded by Statistik Austria. 732 Hence, if every PIDF-LO location object would carry data in the 733 format of Statistik Austria and every PSAP would use the database of 734 Statistik Austria for mapping, a time saving, definite mapping 735 without irregularities could be achieved. 737 Besides these codes, Statistik Austria maintains reference numbers 738 for communes, localities or streets, to mention just a few. 740 5.4. Austrian Addresses in PIDF-LO 742 A good number of Austrian addresses do not fit into the PIDF-LO 743 format, as described above. So the following subsection define the 744 mapping procedure. 746 5.4.1. Country 748 The country element for Austria must be set to AT, since this is the 749 ISO 3166-1 [refs.ISO3166-1] alpha-2 code for Austria. 751 AT 753 The usage of the ISO 3166 code is demanded by RFC 4119 [RFC4119] and 754 RFC 5139 [RFC5139] proposes to use upper case characters only. 756 5.4.2. Country Subdivisions A1-A6 757 A1 province (Bundesland), Section 5.4.2.1 758 A2 political district name or identifier (politscher Bezirk), 759 Section 5.4.2.2 760 A3 commune name or identifier (Gemeinde), Section 5.4.2.3 761 A4 village name or identifier (Ortschaft), Section 5.4.2.4 762 A5 cadastral municipality name or identifier (Katastralgemeindename 763 or Katastralgemeindenummer), Section 5.4.2.5 765 Element A6 must not be used. 767 Last, there is an exception to mention concerning the Austrian 768 capital Vienna (Wien). The city of Vienna is equal to its political 769 district and even the province is called Vienna. Nevertheless, 770 Vienna is separated in 23 districts within the same political 771 district. Consequently, an address in Vienna would look like: 773 AT 774 Wien 775 Wien 776 Wien 777 Favoriten or 10 778 Inzersdorf Stadt 780 The element A4, holding the city division, can hold the name or the 781 number of the district. 783 5.4.2.1. A1 Element 785 As proposed in RFC 5139 [RFC5139], for the PIDF-LO element A1, the 786 second part of ISO 3166-2 [refs.ISO3166-2] can be used. However, in 787 Austria it is also common to write out the names of the states. 788 Table 4 shows the possible values of the A1 element for Austrian 789 states. 791 +-------------------+--------------------------------+ 792 | Bundesland | second part of ISO 3166-2 code | 793 +-------------------+--------------------------------+ 794 | Burgenland | 1 | 795 | | | 796 | Kaernten | 2 | 797 | | | 798 | Niederoesterreich | 3 | 799 | | | 800 | Oberoesterreich | 4 | 801 | | | 802 | Salzburg | 5 | 803 | | | 804 | Steiermark | 6 | 805 | | | 806 | Tirol | 7 | 807 | | | 808 | Vorarlberg | 8 | 809 | | | 810 | Wien | 9 | 811 +-------------------+--------------------------------+ 813 Table 4: A1 element format for Austria 815 5.4.2.2. A2 Element 817 Names of the Austrian political districts are available at Statistik 818 Austria [refs.bezirke]. These names, the unique code for the 819 politcal district or both can be used for the A2 element. If the 820 content of the A2 elment is numeric, obviously the code is provieded 821 (there is no political district in Austria with a number in its 822 name). In case both, the name and the code are provided, they are 823 seperated by a semicolon, and the name must be listed first. 825 The district of "Bruck an der Leitha" could be represented by: 827 Bruck an der Leitha or 307 or 828 Bruck an der Leitha;307 830 5.4.2.3. A3 Element 832 The element A3 holds the Gemeindename (commune name) or the 833 identifier of the Gemeinde, or both separated by a semicolon (the 834 name must be listed first). If the content of the A3 element 835 consists of a number only, it is obvious that just the identifier is 836 provided. Statistik Austria maintains a table with the Gemeindenamen 837 and identifiers [refs.gemeinden], which must be used as the content 838 for the A3 element, no other spelling is allowed. 840 Sample: 842 Neusiedl am See 843 or 844 10713 845 or 846 Neusiedl am See;10713 848 5.4.3. A4 Element 850 The element A4 holds the Ortschaftsname (village name), the 851 Ortschaftskennziffer (the identifier), or both separated by a 852 semicolon (the name must be listed first). If the content of the A4 853 element consists of a number only, it is obvious that just the 854 identifier is provided since there are no Ortschaftsnamen in Austria 855 which contain a number. Statistik Austria maintains a table with the 856 Ortschaftsnamen and identifiers [refs.ortschaften], which must be 857 used as the content for the A4 element, no other spelling is allowed. 859 Sample: 861 Wilfleinsdorf or 03448 or Wilfleinsdorf;03448 863 5.4.4. A5 Element 865 The element A5 holds the Katastralgemeindename (cadastral 866 municipality), the Katastralgemeindekennziffer (the identifier), or 867 both separated by a semicolon (the name must be listed first). If 868 the content of the A5 element consists of a number only, it is 869 obvious that just the identifier is provided since there are no 870 Katastragemeindenamen in Austria which contain a number. 872 Sample (Vienna, Fuenfhaus): 874 Oberbaumgarten or 1208 or 875 Oberbaumgarten;1208 877 5.4.5. Road and Street Names 879 The PIDF-LO element RD holds the complete street name, including the 880 street suffix. No abbreviations are allowed. No other elements are 881 needed for streets and must not be used. 883 5.4.6. House Numbers 885 Statistik Austria lists 14 data fields related to the house number of 886 a building plus another 5 fields for distinction of different usable 887 units inside a building (including the floor, which has a separate 888 element in PIDF-LO). Unfortunately, PIDF-LO only defines a single 889 house number element (HNO, numeric part only) and a house number 890 suffix element (HNS). Therefore, the rules of the HNO element have 891 to be violated in order to accomodate all data: All house number data 892 is concatenate into a single HNO element, even though it is expected 893 to hold numeric part only. 895 If the location recipient does not need to separate the data elements 896 again, the house number parts may be simply concatenated with spaces 897 in between (no spaces between the numeric part of a house number and 898 its related character). However, if the location recipient needs to 899 get back the original data, it is necessary to use a semicolon as 900 delimiter symbol (Austrian house numbers do not contain semicolons). 901 The house number parts MUST be provided in the order as they are 902 listed by the Statistik Austria document [refs.merkmalskatalog]. For 903 user interface representation, the semicolon separated format can be 904 transformed by replacing semicolons by spaces (multiple spaces should 905 be combined) and no space should be present between a numeric part of 906 a house number part and its related character. 908 It is recommended, not to use the HNS element for Austrian addresses, 909 since there are addresses that do not have just a single suffix. For 910 example, the address Lazarettgasse 13A could be mapped by: 912 13 A 914 However, the building at Lazarettgasse has the house number 13A - 915 13C. Consequently, just the HNO element should be used: 917 13A - 13C 919 And even for addresses with a house number consisting of a single 920 number and a single prefix, just HNO should be used because of 921 uniformity: 923 13A 925 Addresses with a house number text would look like: 927 vor 1 - 1A 929 with no HNS element. 931 The same example with semicolon as delimiter symbol would look like: 933 vor;1;;-;1;A;;;;;;;;;;; 935 5.4.7. Local Names 937 NAM: contains the Vulgoname (local name), multiple local names are 938 separated by a semicolon (if applicable) 940 LMK: contains the farm name (just one name possible) (if applicable) 942 LOC: can be used without restriction for additional location 943 information (as per RFC 4119) 945 5.4.8. Floors 947 The floor element may contain numbers or text describing the floor. 948 The first floor (1) is the floor above the floor at street 949 level. The floor at street level is EG or 0. 950 Other floors may have names like mezzanine, for example. The 951 Statistik Austria data elements Lage and Stockwerk are concatenated 952 if necessary. 954 5.4.9. Additional Code Element 956 The element additional code may be used to hold the codes provided by 957 Statistik Austria. There is an Adresscode, Adressubcode, 958 Objektnummer and a Nutzungseinheitenlaufnummer. These unique codes 959 identify the location. Actually, these codes alone would be enough, 960 but requires that the location recipient has access to the database 961 of Statistik Austria. 963 If the additional code in a PIDF-LO document is going to hold the 964 codes from Statistik Austria, the following format should be used: 966 AdrCD=1234567;AdrsubCD=123;ObjNr=2333211;NtzLnr=0001 968 It is not necessary to provide all codes, but there are some 969 restrictions: The Adresssubcode cannot be used without an Adresscode. 970 More restrictions are definded by Statistik Austria. By setting the 971 country element to AT (see Section 4.1), indicating an Austrian 972 address, the Additional Code element is expected to hold codes from 973 Statistik Austria only. When creating PIDF-LO documents using 974 address codes by Statistik Austria, the country and ADDCODE elements 975 are mandatory. 977 5.4.10. Other Elements 979 The elements PC and PCN can hold the data form Statistik Austria, the 980 POBOX can be used if the post assigned a post office box. At least 981 the PC element should be present. 983 PC: Postleitzahl (postal code) 985 PCN: Postleitzahlengebiet (postal community name) 987 POBOX: Postfach 989 The elements UNIT, ROOM, SEAT, PLC and BLD may be used without 990 further restriction. 992 5.4.11. Elements not to be used 994 A6 995 STS 996 HNS 997 PRD 998 POD 999 RDBR 1000 RDSUBBR 1001 PRM 1002 POM 1004 5.5. Example 1006 This section shows an example mapping of an Austrian address mapping 1007 to PIDF-LO element. 1009 1010 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 AT 1020 Wien 1021 Wien 1022 Wien 1023 9 1024 Lazarettgasse 1025 ;13;A;-;13;C;;;;;;;;;;;; 1026 1090 1027 1028 1029 1030 yes 1031 2007-11-10T12:00:00Z 1032 1033 1034 1035 2007-11-09T12:00:00Z 1036 1037 1039 6. Security & Privacy Considerations 1041 RFC 4119 contains general security considerations for handling PIDF- 1042 LOs. In addition to that, it has to be considered that data from the 1043 Austrian building and habitation unit registry are generally not 1044 public, so restrictions as imposed on the original data set MUST also 1045 be imposed on the resulting PIDF-LO document. 1047 7. IANA Considerations 1049 At this stage, this document contains no considerations for IANA. 1051 8. Acknowledgements 1053 The authors wish to thank Gregor Jaenin for contributing insights 1054 about the Austrian civic address data format. 1056 9. References 1058 9.1. Normative References 1060 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 1061 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 1063 [RFC4119] Peterson, J., "A Presence-based GEOPRIV Location Object 1064 Format", RFC 4119, December 2005. 1066 [RFC4776] Schulzrinne, H., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol 1067 (DHCPv4 and DHCPv6) Option for Civic Addresses 1068 Configuration Information", RFC 4776, November 2006. 1070 [RFC5139] Thomson, M. and J. Winterbottom, "Revised Civic Location 1071 Format for Presence Information Data Format Location 1072 Object (PIDF-LO)", RFC 5139, February 2008. 1074 9.2. Informative References 1076 [refs.adrwarten] 1077 Statistik Austria, "Handbuch Adress-GWR-Online Teil A 1078 Theoretisches Handbuch Kapitel 2 Warten von Adressen im 1079 Adress-GWR-Online", Jan 2005. 1081 [refs.merkmalskatalog] 1082 Statistik Austria, "Handbuch Adress-GWR-Online Teil C 1083 Anhang 2 Merkmalskatalog", Sept 2004. 1085 [refs.ISO3166-1] 1086 International Organization for Standardization, "Codes for 1087 the representation of names of countries and their 1088 subdivisions - Part 1: Country codes", ISO Standard 3166- 1089 1:1997, 1997. 1091 [refs.ISO3166-2] 1092 International Organization for Standardization, "Codes for 1093 the representation of names of countries and their 1094 subdivisions - Part 2: Country subdivision code", ISO 1095 Standard 3166-2:1998, 1998. 1097 [refs.bezirke] 1098 Statistik Austria, "Politische Bezirke, Gebietsstand 1099 2008", Feb 2008. 1101 [refs.gemeinden] 1102 Statistik Austria, "Gemeindeliste sortiert nach 1103 Gemeindekennziffer, Gebietsstand 2008", Feb 2008. 1105 [refs.ortschaften] 1106 Statistik Austria, "Gemeinden mit Ortschaften und 1107 Postleitzahlen, Gebietsstand 2008", Feb 2008. 1109 Authors' Addresses 1111 Karl Heinz Wolf 1112 nic.at GmbH 1113 Karlsplatz 1/2/9 1114 Wien A-1010 1115 Austria 1117 Phone: +43 1 5056416 37 1118 Email: karlheinz.wolf@nic.at 1119 URI: http://www.nic.at/ 1121 Alexander Mayrhofer 1122 nic.at GmbH 1123 Karlsplatz 1/2/9 1124 Wien A-1010 1125 Austria 1127 Phone: +43 1 5056416 34 1128 Email: alexander.mayrhofer@nic.at 1129 URI: http://www.nic.at/ 1131 Full Copyright Statement 1133 Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008). 1135 This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions 1136 contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors 1137 retain all their rights. 1139 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an 1140 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS 1141 OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND 1142 THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS 1143 OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF 1144 THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED 1145 WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 1147 Intellectual Property 1149 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 1150 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to 1151 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 1152 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 1153 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has 1154 made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information 1155 on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be 1156 found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. 1158 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any 1159 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an 1160 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of 1161 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this 1162 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at 1163 http://www.ietf.org/ipr. 1165 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 1166 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 1167 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement 1168 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at 1169 ietf-ipr@ietf.org.