[rfc-i] summary of Removing postal information from RFCs

John R Levine johnl at taugh.com
Tue Jul 13 18:57:18 PDT 2021


On Wed, 14 Jul 2021, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> It's not clear what John's proposed resolution is (if any).

Here's what we came up with on Monday.  The current schema for <postal> is:

( ( city | cityarea | code | country | extaddr | pobox | region | sortingcode | street )*
   | postalLine+ )

We propose a small tweak:

( ( city | cityarea | code | country | extaddr | pobox | region | sortingcode | street )*
   | postalLine+  country? )

That is, we still allow the current syntax, in which we render just the 
country, getting rid of the problem of what order to render the rest.

Or you can give a sequence of postallines with an optional country, in 
which we render the whole list in order.

The point of adding the country after the postallines is so that scripts 
that are doing country statistics don't have to guess whether the last 
postalline is the country.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl at taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list