<8BC845943058D844ABFC73D2220D4665088A08C8@nics-mail.sbg.nic.at>,
Alexander Mayrhofer <alexander.mayrhofer@nic.at> writes
>> >I second that. Plus, i believe our esteemed chairs have
>> >declared that
>> >out of scope long time ago.
>>
>> Cite, please?
>
>http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/geopriv/current/msg07282.html
That's Richard Barnes saying:
In message <4A267AA7.4070703@bbn.com>, Richard Barnes
<rbarnes@bbn.com> writes
>+1
>
>I'm pretty sure that extraterrestrial coordinates are outside
>the scope of this WG. Those who are interested should feel
>free to propose a charter update in the future.
<http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/geopriv/current/msg07282.html>
His "+1" was to the suggestion:
In message <4A266A77.9000506@danbri.org>, Dan Brickley
<danbri@danbri.org> writes
>Could an escape code or sub-namespace be left in the geo: spec,
>such that future revisions could be made without needing to
>move to a new URI scheme?
<http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/geopriv/current/msg07280.html>
and today he says:
In message <4AA41843.30406@bbn.com>, Richard Barnes
<rbarnes@bbn.com> writes
>If you would like to define GEO URIs for any CRS other than
>GS84 (whether terrestrial or not), the appropriate action at
>his point is to write a Internet-draft defining a new CRS
>parameter value for the current URI scheme. You are welcome to
>write such a document, and propose it to the working group if
>you so desire.
<http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/geopriv/current/msg07817.html>
I also note that the former thread leaves several questions unanswered;
but providing the latter pertains (and is made clear), then I'm happy.
--
Andy Mabbett
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
