Subject: Comments on draft-cuellar-geopriv-lo-ml-00.txt

From: "Rosen, Brian" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 14:02:20 -0400

At last, something to work from!  Thanks Jorge.

One of my big concerns is that I want the ability to denote
that the RM and the Rule are defined contractually.
To do so, I need a way to denote that it is contractual,
and of course I need a pointer to the contract.  The
latter, I hope in most cases, is a URI, but we probably
need some way to indicate that there was a written agreement
which is not on-line.  I think that the URI is not
to be confused with the Identity of the RM, but you could
say that every contract identifies the parties, so that the
identity of the RM is contained in the contract, and thus
the RM identity element could be the URI of the contract.
I'm not real happy with that idea, but it could work.

Similarly, we need way to specify the rule.  Seems to me
that it could be a URI that was expected to be the contract
URI with a bookmark.  In most cases, that's really what you
want.  It may be satisfactory to know that if you have
a contractual relationship defining the rules, that
you could just use ApplicableRuleURI, but again you need
to cover the case where it really is a reference to the
contract, which presumably is just a string ("Paragraph 3a")

Other comments:

Is one precision enough?  I would think that you need several.
I suspect that there is separate precision for each element.

You are completely missing the datum

There are reasonable definitions of civil.  Henning has one
I believe.  We definitely want agreed upon structure.

You need something that indicates that translation between
lat/lon and civil has been done, and by whom

Brian