While I cannot comment specifically about RFC style, I can say (from my
study of the use of language globally) that there are several conventions in
use for numerical notation using the numerals 0-9, depending on usage.
- The point/period/full stop may be used to separate whole numbers from
values smaller than 1; alternatively, the comma may be.
- Then comes the possible issue of separation on either side of the decimal,
whether every second, every third, or every fourth place.
- If the decimal point is used, to use your terminology, then one may find a
space or a comma as a separator on either or both sides of the decimal.
- If the decimal comma is used, then one may find a space or point as a
separator on either or both sides of the decimal.
By the way, the word is jarring, not jaring, according to laws governing
regular English spelling conventions worldwide. Jaring implies a verb jare,
the way I understand the use of English, regardless of location.
/Kim.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill McQuillan" <McQuilWP@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "IETF Discussion" <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Christian Spanring" <spanring@xxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 11:32 AM
Subject: draft-mayrhofer-geopriv-geo-uri-00
> While reading through this ID: A Uniform Resource Identifier for
> Geographic
> Locations ('geo' URI), I found several minor issues.
>
>
> Section 2. Introduction
> [use of WGS84 reference system]
>
> I wonder if it might be more forward thinking to allow for the optional
> specification of the reference system being used. Perhaps this could be
> one
> of the "URI parameters" mentioned in section 4.7
>
>
> Section 4.4.1 Component Description
> The number of decimal places indicates the precision of the value.
> One degree equals 111.319,45m at the equator (40.075,004km / 360
> degree). Five decimal places (0.00001 degree) seem to imply a for
> civil use sufficient accuracy.
>
> To my American eye the decimal notation (partially) used here was jaring.
> Searching (briefly) for some sort of presentation standard in an RFC or
> other technical document was unsuccessful. Is the use of "." and ","
> standardized in the representation of real numbers in RFCs?
>
>
> Section 6. GML Mappings
>
> There seems to be no explanation of what GML is, not even a Reference
> document.
>
>
> Section 9.1. Invalid Locations
>
> Is there a recommended way to represent the poles? Dare I suggest <geo:90>
> and <geo:-90>? If that is too much of a special case, should the longitude
> always be zero or can it be anything between -180.00000 and 180.00000?
>
>
> Section 9.2. Location Privcay
>
> Typo: .................Privacy
>
> --
> Bill McQuillan <McQuilWP@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IETF mailing list
> IETF@xxxxxxxx
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf