[Standards-JIG] Re: Relation of JEP-0080: User Geolocation andietf-geopriv?

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Fri Jul 30 17:38:15 UTC 2004

In article <20040706114455.GA82679 at localhost>,
 Ralph Meijer <jabber.org at ralphm.ik.nu> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 12:33:01PM +0200, Heiner Wolf wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > yes, I don't like it either. 
> > 
> > Section 2.2.1 says something about "coordinate reference systems" and
> > that from GML 3.0 the "'feature.xsd' GML schema is REQUIRED". This
> > sounds more like longitude/latitude. But I admit I don't understand the
> > feature.xsd (attached). It seems to be so general that I can not find
> > the longitude/latitude aspect. 
> I have glanced the GML specification. It is awfully large, and I think
> way to complex for what JEP-0080 and JEP-0112 are aimed at. If you really
> wanted, you could transform one in the other using XSLT or something.

Yes, GML is huge. Even the geopriv specs are using a very small subset 
of GML.
> > I don't get the "coordinate reference systems" part. I don't like it. On
> > the other hand, it's not a good idea for an IETF approved IM protocol to
> > NOT follow the IETF in pidf-related things. Since Jabber is a strong
> > community, maybe it's the time to tell the author (or the IESG) that the
> > draft is not good and even not compatible with JEP-0080. After all its a
> > request for comments, not yet an RFC. 
> First of all, RFC stands for Request for Comments. Second, I don't agree with
> you that we have to follow IETF per se. JEPs are not affiliated with the IETF
> (we do Jabber, they do XMPP). 

Well, XMPP is done and the JSF defines XMPP extensions. Of course, 
anyone can define XMPP extensions, but we do it in a formalized way.

> We have our own goals, and many times the stuff
> already there is either too complex or doesn't meet the goals. Of course
> we /can/ learn from these other specifications, and possibly provide mappings
> between our stuff and the stuff out there (e.g. JEP-0107, User Mood, provides
> a mapping between the JEP and how moods are handled in Wireless Village).
> Note that this approach doesn't mean that you can't use GML in Jabber
> applications. If you need the more complex stuff, go for it. It is still XML
> and you can fit it right in some stanza.
> Cost vs. Benefit

Translating between JEP-0080/JEP-0112 formats could be something that a 
gateway could do. I don't particularly see the need for taking on those 
formants in the Jabber world, except for e2e encryption. But that's 
another ball of wax....


More information about the Standards mailing list