Subject: RE: [Geopriv] ENUM input request

From: "Thomson, Martin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 15:13:19 -0600

While I agree with Andy about use cases, the point of international application is exactly the sort of concern that the civic draft can help with.  Austria appears to have a fairly simple addressing scheme, like Australia, but there are other places that don't look anything like that.  Japan is the obvious one (from DHCP civic):

   JP (Japan): A1=metropolis (To, Fu) or prefecture (Ken, Do); A2=city
      (Shi) or rural area (Gun); A3=ward (Ku) or village (Mura); A4=town
      (Chou or Machi); A5=city district (Choume); A6=block (Banchi or
      Ban).

I'm sure that we will encounter many more such cases, but that sort of thing is what Geopriv is good at handling.  Maybe the ENUM group would prefer to avoid those complications.  That would be their choice, of course.

In terms of usability, slotting data into PIDF-LO isn't that hard, providing that someone has done the interpretation work for you.  A user interface would get 0/10 marks from me if it looked like:

  A1: ______ A2: _______ ... and so on

These things need to be localized.  Just like language settings, each field would have a name that is meaningful to the user.  A fair number of fields wouldn't even appear.

I share Andy's concern with some of the extra fields; I really don't see how PLC, LOC, ROOM or SEAT would apply for that sort of use case.  Again, that's input we could provide to assist in their decision.

Martin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
> Of Otmar Lendl
> Sent: Thursday, 15 December 2005 11:29 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [Geopriv] ENUM input request
> 
> On 2005/12/15 12:12, Andrew Newton <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > >
> > >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-enum-validation-
> > >token-00.txt
> > >
> 
> >
> > Theirs) The address is entered via a web page by the registrant
> > wanting to map their PSTN telephone number to their SIP phone.  Most
> > likely, they have a bill from their telephone company handy and can
> > enter in the address exactly as it appears on the bill.  The address
> > is used for comparison purposes (does it match what is on record) to
> > validate the assignment of the TN.  And there is a good chance that
> > the validation entity is automated.
> 
> Correct. Our main focus was to be compatible to the data formats used
> in the directory assistance DB and the telco's own provisioning database.
> 
> We researched the data-format used by the respective bodies here
> in Austria to arrive at the scheme we have in the I-D.
> 
> What we don't know is what address elements are used in other countries'
> white pages and similar databases. That's the point where any input
> from geopriv is appreciated.
> 
> /ol
> --
> < Otmar Lendl ([email-masked]) | nic.at Systems Engineer >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message is for the designated recipient only and may
contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.  
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
immediately and delete the original.  Any unauthorized use of
this email is prohibited.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[mf2]

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv