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

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Tue Jul 13 20:01:40 PDT 2021


Am 14.07.2021 um 03:57 schrieb John R Levine:
> 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.
> ...

Looks good to me.

Best regards, Julian


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list