Hi Volker, If you run a real-world scenario where a registrant captures a complex street address, say for an office park, it’s going to be two or three lines long for example: Street1 Room 5, Floor 3 Street2 Orange Building, Teal Office Park, Street3 123 Silver Street now if the registrant moves buildings to a private residence for example: Street1 456 Yellow Avenue you wouldn’t want: Street2 Orange Building, Teal Office Park, Street3 123 Silver Street to remain. At the end of the day it’s up to the Registry policy; you can make it the Registrar’s problem to explicitly clear all fields or; provide some handling around resetting the fields if only one entry is provided. I know it’s not a direct answer but hopefully it sheds some light? -- Mike O'Connell Domain Name Services (Pty) Ltd +27 11 568 2812
On 25 Feb 2015, at 3:30 PM, Volker Janzen Notify <volker.janzen-notify@internetx.com> wrote:
Hi all,
I've a question regarding contact:addr inside of a contact:postalInfo block when using contact:chg.
E.g. this XML snippet from RFC 5733 (excerpt only):
C: <contact:chg> C: <contact:postalInfo type="int"> C: <contact:org/> C: <contact:addr> C: <contact:street>124 Example Dr.</contact:street> C: <contact:street>Suite 200</contact:street> C: <contact:city>Dulles</contact:city> C: <contact:sp>VA</contact:sp> C: <contact:pc>20166-6503</contact:pc> C: <contact:cc>US</contact:cc> C: </contact:addr> C: </contact:postalInfo> C: </contact:chg>
contact:street may occur zero to three times.
Is it intended that a single contact:street element should replace all existing contact:street elements or only the first contact:street element of the contact object?
Volker Janzen Team Entwicklung
-- InterNetX GmbH Maximilianstr. 6 93047 Regensburg Germany
Tel: +49 941 59559-0 Fax: +49 941 59579-050
www.internetx.com www.facebook.com/InterNetX www.twitter.com/InterNetX
Geschäftsführer/CEO: Thomas Mörz Amtsgericht Regensburg, HRB 7142
GPG-Key: 0x186C5F77 GPG-Fingerprint: 392E 8730 FE23 DCE8 8878 8524 5361 BCCC 186C 5F77