ecrit@ietf.org
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [Ecrit] Profiles (was: Consensus Call) - namespaces

Subject: RE: [Ecrit] Profiles (was: Consensus Call) - namespaces
From: "Marc Linsner"
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 12:23:43 -0400
 

> > BTW, since the proposal for relative location is an 
> *addition* to the 
> > civic location, why are you considering it compound?
> 
> Together, they are two different types of information.  Is 
> there something wrong with that?  Is there something wrong 
> with calling it compound?

I am/was deriving the definition of *compound* from the 3825 illustration of
'part geo, part civic'.  Hence, relative location is *all* civic, therefore
didn't fit the derived definition.  But, it's certainly obvious by now that
I'm not a XML schema junkie.  Actually, I don't view relative location as
'different' from elements like: seat, cubicle, room, etc.  I intend to
define the scope/applicability of the relative loc better in the next
version of the draft.

-Marc-


_______________________________________________
Ecrit mailing list
Ecrit@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>