Subject: AW: Location Types Registry

From: "Tschofenig, Hannes" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 16:45:07 +0100

hi frank, 

> Tschofenig, Hannes wrote:
> 
> > The values listed in the "Location Types Registry" document
> > are not displayed to the user. As such, we don't cover
> > internationalization support.
> 
> That wasn't clear from the draft under discussion.  It should
> get some "I18N considerations" explaining why that's no issue.

we will reflect this aspect.

> 
> > If there are better definitions please let us know.
> 
> Maybe the WiKi dictionary has a category "location" (?)

i search for a while and found interesting pages but unfortuately not
related to this topic. 

i got the impression that some folks had very specific suggestions
already in mind in order to provide constructive feedback. 

>  
> > We thought that FCFS would be an acceptable policy. Some
> > people had a different view about it.
> 
> Not limited to registration request DoS attacks on IANA, yes.
> 
> > Fine. I have no problems changing it to expert review.
> 
> Where do you expect to find volunteers for an expert review
> of a location dictionary ?  From two "expert review" lists I
> know (langtags and charsets) one works at the moment, I'm
> not sure about the other.  
> 
> "Expert review" is essentially a filter protecting IANA from
> some really bad ideas, but it's also an exercise in TINSTAAFL
> - set up mailing list, appoint reviewer, handle appeals, etc.
do you think expert review is ok? (just to understand you right)

i thought about the Geopriv working group or its designated successor.

ciao
hannes

> 
>                                Bye, Frank
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 

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

---

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 17:47:58 +0100

Tschofenig, Hannes wrote:

> i got the impression that some folks had very specific
> suggestions already in mind in order to provide constructive
> feedback.

One potentially constructive idea I had was to enumerate the
locations.  If the location registry has say 256 slots it's
obvious that it's a resource not designed to get thousands of
entries in various languages.

> do you think expert review is ok? (just to understand you right

Not sure.  You'd need rules to update entries e.g. for a better
explantion, maybe ways to remove or at least deprecate entries,
and a justification why the registration request "wyoming" for
a fictional location - if I recall that example correctly - is
bogus.

> i thought about the Geopriv working group or its designated

Okay, so you have the volunteers for expert review, one problem
solved.  Makes me still wonder why "an entity" - I assume that
could be something I carry with me - should be so indiscreet as
telling that it's now in the "cafe" of a "jail" in an "airport"
or other obscure locations.  That's nobody's business but mine.

                             Bye, Frank

---

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 12:02:53 -0500

> or other obscure locations.  That's nobody's business but mine.

In many of the applications, the idea is that the location tells  
*you* where you are (or rather, your mobile device). That way, your  
smart mobile device can decide that a jail cafe is not a good place  
for a private audio conversation, for example, and redirect calls to  
some other locations.

---

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 11:24:24 -0600

Frank Ellermann wrote:

>Makes me still wonder why "an entity" - I assume that

Nobody's business but yours and the people with whom you choose to share 
it. You'll note that this work is coming out of GEOPRIV -- where the 
"PRIV" part of that name stands for "privacy." GEOPRIV has done lots of 
work in making sure that this kind of information ends up only in the 
hands of people you want to have it, and nowhere else (see, e.g., 
draft-ietf-geopriv-common-policy-06).

There are many good use cases in real-time communications that detail 
*why* conveying this kind of information is potentially useful. Going 
into a tutorial on these basic topics seems a bit inappropriate on the 
general list. If you're interested, though, I can point you to a number 
of working group mailing lists where these subjects have been discussed 
thoroughly.

/a

---

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:42:36 +0100

Adam Roach wrote:

> You'll note that this work is coming out of GEOPRIV -- where
> the "PRIV" part of that name stands for "privacy."

That's not more obvious in the "registry" draft.  Joe Abley
posted a pointer to draft-ietf-simple-rpid-08 for the missing
context, and there I found lists of locations and moods.  The
latter appears to be a list of smileys (without the smileys),
and it's clear that the user picks what his or her mood is -
a device can't know this, and it better doesn't try to guess
the mood of its user.

For the locations it's not so clear.  Why should a device tell
me that I'm in the "cafe" of a "jail" in an "airport", I would
know this.  And why would I tell my device where it is, all it
needs to know is "be quiet" or "make as much noise as you can",
different ways to attract my attention depending on where I am.

> There are many good use cases in real-time communications
> that detail *why* conveying this kind of information is
> potentially useful. Going into a tutorial on these basic
> topics seems a bit inappropriate on the general list.

Maybe the "registry" draft could be integrated into a draft
where that's immediately clear, or bound to a list of special
purposes where devices need to know why "cycle" and "water"
are different - at first glance both could fall into a category
"now isn't an optimal time to talk, but it's not impossible".

Without context a "location dictionary" as Internet standard
appears to be an odd idea.  And a list of smileys without the
smileys removes the fun - if the moods get their own registry.

                          Bye, Frank