--Richard
On Nov 30, 2010, at 7:39 PM, geopriv issue tracker wrote:
> #41: David Harrington's DISCUSS
>
>
> Comment(by bernard_aboba@…):
>
> Proposed Resolution:
>
> In 2.2.1.2, s/same response. This is not useful since/same response,
> since/
>
> Replace Section 2.4.3 with the following:
>
> A value of two for Altitude Type indicates that the Altitude value is
> measured in floors. This value is relevant only in relation to a
> building; the value is relative to the ground level of the building.
>
> In this definition, numbering starts at ground level, which is floor
> 0 regardless of local convention. Floors located below ground level
> could be represented by negative values. Larger values represent floors
> that are above (higher in altitude) floors with lower values.
>
> Non-integer values can be used to represent intermediate or sub-
> floors, such as mezzanine levels. Example: a
> mezzanine between floor 1 and floor 2 could be represented as a value
> = 1.1. Example: (2) mezzanines between floor 4 and floor 5 could be
> represented as values = 4.1 and 4.2 respectively.
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------+------------------------------------
> Reporter: bernard_aboba@… | Owner: bernard_aboba@…
> Type: defect | Status: new
> Priority: major | Milestone: draft-ietf-geopriv-3825bis
> Component: rfc3825bis | Version: 1.0
> Severity: Submitted WG Document | Keywords:
> ---------------------------------------+------------------------------------
>
> Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/geopriv/trac/ticket/41#comment:2>
> geopriv <http://tools.ietf.org/geopriv/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list
> Geopriv@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
