David,
I
would just re-iterate that addresses are used for more than delivering mail. If
you have Royal Mail there, you have one aspect of addressing in the UK. However,
this address format is totally different from that used by, for example, local
authorities in the UK. If you look at the Election Markup Language, you will see
that we use "structured" and "unstructured" addresses to cater for just this
problem. In the International version, both map to the CIQ formats. In the UK
version, one maps to addresses based on some ISO standard, and the other to the
British Standard (BS7666).
Regards
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: David RR Webber
[mailto:]
Sent: 17 January 2004 23:02
To:
Paul Spencer; Peter Kacandes; regrep
Subject: Re: [regrep] UK
Government Registry Requirements
Paul,
I'm certain the way forward here is a blend of
the UPU work, CIQ and
then using CAM as the processing
engine.
The Royal Mail rep' to the UPU has ensured that
the UPU has the
right semantics and rules for UK postal
addresses. I agree some
of it is surprisingly gnarly. When they
changed to the post code
system back twenty+ years ago it was a great step
forward in
automation - but I was amazed to find out how
many times the
seamingly obvious system is actually broken by
local rules.
What we are looking at is taking those formal UPU
rules and
encoding them in CAM, and then using the content
reference
system to equate to the CIQ dictionary and UPU
dictionary.
Once we have that - we can also look at storing
the
individual element noun semantics in the registry.
I believe we have the technology means to do this
now -
all we need is resource and time to actually put
it in
place.
Thanks, DW
----- Original Message -----
From:
Paul Spencer
To: David RR Webber ; Peter Kacandes
; regrep
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2004 9:32
AM
Subject: RE: [regrep] UK Government
Registry Requirements
I
know that John Borras is already heavily involved in this, so I don't intend
to start unless invited by him. I think the difficulty is mapping the
British Standard onto the CIQ format. Even if you can, and I am sure there
are ways, there are local semantics to incorporate (such as for the Unique
Property Reference Number) that require a means of localizing the semantics.
Hence my earlier comment about getting you excited (since I am sure CAM can
help here).
Regards
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: David RR Webber
[mailto:]
Sent: 15 January 2004
21:04
To: Paul Spencer; Peter Kacandes;
regrep
Subject: Re: [regrep] UK Government Registry
Requirements
Paul,
Returning to the addressing stuff - the OASIS
CIQ work and
related to that the UPU work is extremely fine-grained.
The level of detail of not just the XML
elements - but the semantics,
rules and formats are covered. There
are roughly five address formats
for each postal service - as you point out -
its not just about
delivering bits of mail. The cultural
rules on address formatting are
also very important - as is being able to
handle addresses of
say - waterpumping stations and power
substations for utilities.
So - you will find that the UPU particularly
has a great deal of
semantics on all this.
The CAM has been upgraded to cover off what
the UPU needs,
and so the ultimate goal from the enduser
experience is to
have an address object - that they input
context into -
such as locale and use - and have the XML
autoconfigure
to that.
We have been busy looking at this in
significant detail.
Thanks,
DW.
