Re: Geopriv WG - meeting 5-6 Jun, other news

At 10:00 PM -0400 5/21/02, Richard Shockey wrote:

>> It may be worth keeping in mind some example usages. For
>> instance, there is an existing draft on requesting and disclosing
>> location information within HTTP. In that context, a web browser
>> (perhaps on a cell phone) requests a document and is asked for its
>> location. There is a wide range of possibilities in how it answers
>> that request, depending in many ways on what we end up with here
>> in geopriv.
>
> application specific ...
>
> well please do not go down the road of discussing this in the
> context of HTTP it may be an example but that leads to
> considerations that IMHO are not in scope ... been there done that.
> I was involved in the Internet Print Protocol work group for many
> years ... we have a admonition in the IETF on the use of HTTP as
> the substrate for any protocol. READ IT WILL NOT HAPPEN . I
> continue to advocate that any discussion of transport for either
> the privacy or location object or their interaction is out of scope.

I agree that HTTP is a lousy choice for a transport protocol, but
that has nothing to do with our discussion. We are not working on a
transport protocol, and transport issues are out of scope.

My point is that it can be helpful to keep in mind some idea of how
our work will be used within other protocols, in order to know what
information we need to have in our object(s).
Received on Wed May 22 16:44:29 2002