Showing content from https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7035.txt below:
Format for representing relative location
element MAY contain a single scale value or MAY contain 2 (or 3) values in XML list form. In TLV form, scale uses a type code of 131. The length of the TLV determines how many scale values are present: +------+------+------+------+------+------+ | 131 |Length| Scale(s) ... +------+------+------+------+------+------+ Figure 22: Map Scale TLV 4.11.3. Map Example An example of expressing a map is: http://example.com/map.jpg 200 210 68 2.90 -2.90 Figure 23: Map Example 5. Examples The examples in this section combine elements from [RFC3863], [RFC4119], [RFC4479], [RFC5139], and [OGC.GeoShape]. 5.1. Civic PIDF with Polygon Offset Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 24] RFC 7035 Relative Location October 2013 AU NSW Wollongong North Wollongong Flinders Street 123 Front Door A I 113 433.0 -734.0 431.0 -733.0 431.0 -732.0 433.0 -731.0 434.0 -732.0 434.0 -733.0 433.0 -734.0 GPS mac:1234567890ab 2007-06-22T20:57:29Z Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 25] RFC 7035 Relative Location October 2013 5.2. Geo PIDF with Circle Offset -34.407 150.883 50.0 -34.407 150.883 500.0 750.0 5.0 https://www.example.com/flrpln/123South/flr-2 2670.0 1124.0 1022.0 67.00 10 -10 Wiremap mac:1234567890ab Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 26] RFC 7035 Relative Location October 2013 2007-06-22T20:57:29Z 5.3. Civic TLV with Point Offset +--------+-------------------------------------------------+ | Type | Value | +--------+-------------------------------------------------+ | 0 | en | | | | | 1 | IL | | | | | 3 | Chicago | | | | | 34 | Wacker | | | | | 18 | Drive | | | | | 19 | 3400 | | | | | 112 | Reference | | | | | 25 | Building A | | | | | 27 | Floor 6 | | | | | 26 | Suite 213 | | | | | 28 | Reception Area | | | | | 115 | 100 70 | | | | | 126 | image/png | | | | | 127 | http://maps.example.com/3400Wacker/A6 | | | | | 129 | 0.0 4120.0 | | | | | 130 | 113.0 | | | | | 131 | 10.6 | +--------+-------------------------------------------------+ Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 27] RFC 7035 Relative Location October 2013 6. Schema Definition Note: The pattern value for "mimeType" has been folded onto multiple lines. Whitespace has been added to conform to comply with document formatting restrictions. Extra whitespace around the line endings MUST be removed before using this schema. Relative Location for PIDF-LO This schema defines a location representation that allows for the description of locations that are relative to another. An optional map reference is also defined. Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 28] RFC 7035 Relative Location October 2013 Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 29] RFC 7035 Relative Location October 2013 7. Security Considerations This document describes a data format. To a large extent, security properties of this depend on how this data is used. Privacy for location data is typically important. Adding relative location may increase the precision of the location but does not otherwise alter its privacy considerations, which are discussed in [RFC4119]. The map URL provided in a relative location could accidentally reveal information if a Location Recipient uses the URL to acquire the map. The coverage area of a map, or parameters of the URL itself, could provide information about the location of a Target. In combination with other information that could reveal the set of potential Targets that the Location Recipient has location information for, acquiring a map could leak significant information. In particular, it is important to note that the Target and Location Recipient are often the same entity. Access to map URLs MUST be secured with TLS [RFC5246] (that is, restricting the map URL to be an https URI), unless the map URL cannot leak information about the Target's location. This restricts information about the map URL to the entity serving the map request. If the map URL conveys more information about a Target than a map server is authorized to receive, that URL MUST NOT be included in the PIDF-LO. Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 30] RFC 7035 Relative Location October 2013 8. IANA Considerations 8.1. Relative Location Registry This document creates a new registry called "Relative Location Parameters". This shares a page, titled "Civic Address Types Registry" with the existing "Civic Address Types (CAtypes)" registry. As defined in [RFC5226], this new registry operates under "IETF Review" rules. The content of this registry includes: Relative Location Code (RLtype): Numeric identifier, assigned by IANA. Brief description: Short description identifying the meaning of the element. Reference to published specification: A stable reference to an RFC that describes the value in sufficient detail so that interoperability between independent implementations is possible. Values requested to be assigned into this registry MUST NOT conflict with values assigned in the "Civic Address Types (CAtypes)" registry or vice versa, unless the IANA Considerations section for the new value explicitly overrides this prohibition and the document defining the value describes how conflicting TLV codes will be interpreted by implementations. To ensure this, the CAtypes entries are explicitly reserved in the initial values table below. Those reserved entries can be changed, but only with caution, as explained here. To make this clear for future users of the registry, the following note is added to the "Civic Address Types (CAtypes)" registry: The registration of new values should be accompanied by a corresponding reservation in the Relative Location Parameters registry. Similarly, the "Relative Location Parameters" registry bears the note: The registration of new values should be accompanied by a corresponding reservation in the Civic Address Types (CAtypes) registry. Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 31] RFC 7035 Relative Location October 2013 The values defined are: +--------+----------------------------------------+-----------+ | RLtype | description | Reference | +--------+----------------------------------------+-----------+ | 0-40 | RESERVED by CAtypes registry | RFC 7035 &| | 128 | | RFC 4776 | +--------+----------------------------------------+-----------+ | 111 | relative location reference | RFC 7035 | | 113 | relative location shape 2D point | RFC 7035 | | 114 | relative location shape 3D point | RFC 7035 | | 115 | relative location shape circular | RFC 7035 | | 116 | relative location shape spherical | RFC 7035 | | 117 | relative location shape elliptical | RFC 7035 | | 118 | relative location shape ellipsoid | RFC 7035 | | 119 | relative location shape 2D polygon | RFC 7035 | | 120 | relative location shape 3D polygon | RFC 7035 | | 121 | relative location shape prism | RFC 7035 | | 122 | relative location shape arc-band | RFC 7035 | | 123 | relative location dynamic orientation | RFC 7035 | | 124 | relative location dynamic speed | RFC 7035 | | 125 | relative location dynamic heading | RFC 7035 | | 126 | relative location map type | RFC 7035 | | 127 | relative location map URI | RFC 7035 | | 129 | relative location map coordinates | RFC 7035 | | 130 | relative location map angle | RFC 7035 | | 131 | relative location map scale | RFC 7035 | +--------+----------------------------------------+-----------+ Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 32] RFC 7035 Relative Location October 2013 8.2. URN Sub-Namespace Registration This document registers a new XML namespace, as per the guidelines in [RFC3688]. URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:geopriv10:relative Registrant Contact: IETF, GEOPRIV working group (geopriv@ietf.org), Martin Thomson (martin.thomson@skype.net). XML: BEGIN GEOPRIV Relative Location Format for representing relative location urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:geopriv10:relative
See RFC 7035.
END 8.3. XML Schema Registration This section registers an XML schema as per the procedures in [RFC3688]. URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:pidf:geopriv10:relative Registrant Contact: IETF, GEOPRIV working group (geopriv@ietf.org), Martin Thomson (martin.thomson@skype.net) Schema: The XML for this schema is found in Section 6 of this document. Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 33] RFC 7035 Relative Location October 2013 8.4. Geopriv Identifiers Registry This section registers two URNs for use in identifying relative coordinate reference systems. These are added to a new "Geopriv Identifiers" registry according to the procedures in Section 4 of [RFC3553]. The "Geopriv Identifiers" registry is entered under the "Uniform Resource Name (URN) Namespace for IETF Use" category. Registrations in this registry follow the "IETF Review" [RFC5226] policy. Registry name: Geopriv Identifiers URN Prefix: urn:ietf:params:geopriv: Specification: RFC 7035 (this document) Repository: http://www.iana.org/assignments/geopriv-identifiers Index value: Values in this registry are URNs or URN prefixes that start with the prefix "urn:ietf:params:geopriv:". Each is registered independently. Each registration in the "Geopriv Identifiers" registry requires the following information: URN: The complete URN that is used or the prefix for that URN. Description: A summary description for the URN or URN prefix. Specification: A reference to a specification describing the URN or URN prefix. Contact: Email for the person or groups making the registration. Index value: As described in [RFC3553], URN prefixes that are registered include a description of how the URN is constructed. This is not applicable for specific URNs. The "Geopriv Identifiers" registry has two initial registrations, included in the following sections. Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 34] RFC 7035 Relative Location October 2013 8.4.1. Registration of Two-Dimensional Relative Coordinate Reference System URN This section registers the "urn:ietf:params:geopriv:relative:2d" URN in the "Geopriv Identifiers" registry. URN: urn:ietf:params:geopriv:relative:2d Description: A two-dimensional relative coordinate reference system Specification: RFC 7035 (this document) Contact: IETF, GEOPRIV working group (geopriv@ietf.org), Martin Thomson (martin.thomson@skype.net) Index value: N/A 8.4.2. Registration of Three-Dimensional Relative Coordinate Reference System URN This section registers the "urn:ietf:params:geopriv:relative:3d" URN in the "Geopriv Identifiers" registry. URN: urn:ietf:params:geopriv:relative:3d Description: A three-dimensional relative coordinate reference system Specification: RFC 7035 (this document) Contact: IETF, GEOPRIV working group (geopriv@ietf.org), Martin Thomson (martin.thomson@skype.net) Index value: N/A 9. Acknowledgements This document is the product of a design team on relative location. Besides the authors, this team included Marc Linsner, James Polk, and James Winterbottom. Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 35] RFC 7035 Relative Location October 2013 10. References 10.1. Normative References [Clinger1990] Clinger, W., "How to Read Floating Point Numbers Accurately", Proceedings of Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pp. 92-101, 1990. [IEEE.754] IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Floating-Point Arithmetic", IEEE Standard 754-2008, August 2008. [OGC.GML-3.1.1] Cox, S., Daisey, P., Lake, R., Portele, C., and A. Whiteside, "Geographic information - Geography Markup Language (GML)", OpenGIS 03-105r1, April 2004, . [OGC.GeoShape] Thomson, M. and C. Reed, "GML 3.1.1 PIDF-LO Shape Application Schema for use by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)", OGC Best Practice 06-142r1, Version: 1.0, April 2007. [RFC1014] Sun Microsystems, Inc., "XDR: External Data Representation standard", RFC 1014, June 1987. [RFC2046] Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types", RFC 2046, November 1996. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC2616] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., Masinter, L., Leach, P., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999. [RFC2818] Rescorla, E., "HTTP Over TLS", RFC 2818, May 2000. [RFC3553] Mealling, M., Masinter, L., Hardie, T., and G. Klyne, "An IETF URN Sub-namespace for Registered Protocol Parameters", BCP 73, RFC 3553, June 2003. [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, January 2004. Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 36] RFC 7035 Relative Location October 2013 [RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC 3986, January 2005. [RFC4119] Peterson, J., "A Presence-based GEOPRIV Location Object Format", RFC 4119, December 2005. [RFC4776] Schulzrinne, H., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4 and DHCPv6) Option for Civic Addresses Configuration Information", RFC 4776, November 2006. [RFC5139] Thomson, M. and J. Winterbottom, "Revised Civic Location Format for Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO)", RFC 5139, February 2008. [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, May 2008. [RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246, August 2008. [RFC5491] Winterbottom, J., Thomson, M., and H. Tschofenig, "GEOPRIV Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO) Usage Clarification, Considerations, and Recommendations", RFC 5491, March 2009. [RFC5962] Schulzrinne, H., Singh, V., Tschofenig, H., and M. Thomson, "Dynamic Extensions to the Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO)", RFC 5962, September 2010. [RFC6225] Polk, J., Linsner, M., Thomson, M., and B. Aboba, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Options for Coordinate-Based Location Configuration Information", RFC 6225, July 2011. [RFC6848] Winterbottom, J., Thomson, M., Barnes, R., Rosen, B., and R. George, "Specifying Civic Address Extensions in the Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF- LO)", RFC 6848, January 2013. [WGS84] US National Imagery and Mapping Agency, "Department of Defense (DoD) World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS 84), Third Edition", NIMA TR8350.2, January 2000. Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 37] RFC 7035 Relative Location October 2013 10.2. Informative References [RFC3863] Sugano, H., Fujimoto, S., Klyne, G., Bateman, A., Carr, W., and J. Peterson, "Presence Information Data Format (PIDF)", RFC 3863, August 2004. [RFC4479] Rosenberg, J., "A Data Model for Presence", RFC 4479, July 2006. Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 38] RFC 7035 Relative Location October 2013 Authors' Addresses Martin Thomson Microsoft 3210 Porter Drive Palo Alto, CA 94304 US Phone: +1 650-353-1925 EMail: martin.thomson@skype.net Brian Rosen Neustar 470 Conrad Dr Mars, PA 16046 US EMail: br@brianrosen.net Dorothy Stanley Aruba Networks 1322 Crossman Ave Sunnyvale, CA 94089 US EMail: dstanley@arubanetworks.com Gabor Bajko Nokia 323 Fairchild Drive Mountain View, CA 94043 US EMail: gabor.bajko@nokia.com Allan Thomson Lookingglass Cyber Solutions 1001 S Kenwood Avenue Baltimore, MD 21224 US EMail: athomson@lgscout.com Thomson, et al. Standards Track [Page 39]
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo
| Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4