Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) K. Wolf
Request for Comments: 5774 A. Mayrhofer
BCP: 154 nic.at
Updates: 4776 March 2010
Category: Best Current Practice
ISSN: 2070-1721
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) K. Wolf
Request for Comments: 5774 A. Mayrhofer
BCP: 154 nic.at
Updates: 4776 March 2010
Category: Best Current Practice
ISSN: 2070-1721
Considerations for Civic Addresses in the Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO): Guidelines and IANA Registry Definition
存在信息数据格式位置对象（PIDF-LO）中公民地址的注意事项：指南和IANA注册表定义
Abstract
摘要
This document provides a guideline for creating civic address considerations documents for individual countries, as required by RFC 4776. Furthermore, this document also creates an IANA Registry referring to such address considerations documents and registers such address considerations for Austria.
根据RFC 4776的要求，本文件提供了为各个国家创建公民地址注意事项文件的指南。此外，本文件还创建了一个IANA注册中心，参考此类地址注意事项文件，并为奥地利注册此类地址注意事项。
Status of This Memo
关于下段备忘
This memo documents an Internet Best Current Practice.
本备忘录记录了互联网最佳实践。
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on BCPs is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
本文件是互联网工程任务组（IETF）的产品。它代表了IETF社区的共识。它已经接受了公众审查，并已被互联网工程指导小组（IESG）批准出版。有关BCP的更多信息，请参见RFC 5741第2节。
Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5774.
有关本文件当前状态、任何勘误表以及如何提供反馈的信息，请访问http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5774.
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
版权所有（c）2010 IETF信托基金和确定为文件作者的人员。版权所有。
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
本文件受BCP 78和IETF信托有关IETF文件的法律规定的约束(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info)自本文件出版之日起生效。请仔细阅读这些文件，因为它们描述了您对本文件的权利和限制。从本文件中提取的代码组件必须包括信托法律条款第4.e节中所述的简化BSD许可证文本，并提供简化BSD许可证中所述的无担保。
Table of Contents
目录
1. Introduction ....................................................3
2. Terminology .....................................................4
3. Requirements ....................................................4
4. Specifying PIDF-LO Element Usage ................................5
4.1. General Considerations and Workflow ........................5
4.2. Guidelines for Individual Elements .........................7
4.2.1. Country .............................................7
4.2.2. Country Subdivisions A1-A6 ..........................7
4.2.3. Road and Street Names ...............................8
4.2.4. House Numbers .......................................8
4.2.5. Local Names .........................................9
4.2.6. Floors .............................................10
4.2.7. Address Codes ......................................10
4.2.8. Other Elements .....................................11
5. Security Considerations ........................................12
6. IANA Considerations ............................................12
6.1. PIDF-LO Civic Address Considerations Registry .............12
6.1.1. Structure ..........................................12
6.1.2. Registration Template ..............................13
6.1.3. Registry Location ..................................14
6.1.4. Registration Procedure .............................14
6.2. Registration Request for Austria ..........................14
6.3. Registration of the Considerations in RFC 4776 as
Obsolete ..................................................14
7. Acknowledgements ...............................................17
Appendix A. Civic Address Considerations Registration for
the Austrian Building and Habitation Registry .............18
A.1. Civic Address Format in Austria ...........................18
A.2. Sample Addresses ..........................................22
A.3. Address Codes in Austria ..................................23
A.4. Austrian Addresses in PIDF-LO .............................23
A.4.1. Country ............................................23
A.4.2. Country Subdivisions A1-A6 .........................24
A.4.3. Road and Street Names ..............................27
A.4.4. House Numbers ......................................27
A.4.5. Local Names ........................................28
A.4.6. Floors .............................................28
A.4.7. Additional Code Element ............................28
A.4.8. Other Elements .....................................29
A.4.9. Elements Not to Be Used ............................29
A.5. Example ...................................................29
A.6. IANA Registration Record ..................................30
Normative References ..............................................31
Informative References ............................................32
1. Introduction ....................................................3
2. Terminology .....................................................4
3. Requirements ....................................................4
4. Specifying PIDF-LO Element Usage ................................5
4.1. General Considerations and Workflow ........................5
4.2. Guidelines for Individual Elements .........................7
4.2.1. Country .............................................7
4.2.2. Country Subdivisions A1-A6 ..........................7
4.2.3. Road and Street Names ...............................8
4.2.4. House Numbers .......................................8
4.2.5. Local Names .........................................9
4.2.6. Floors .............................................10
4.2.7. Address Codes ......................................10
4.2.8. Other Elements .....................................11
5. Security Considerations ........................................12
6. IANA Considerations ............................................12
6.1. PIDF-LO Civic Address Considerations Registry .............12
6.1.1. Structure ..........................................12
6.1.2. Registration Template ..............................13
6.1.3. Registry Location ..................................14
6.1.4. Registration Procedure .............................14
6.2. Registration Request for Austria ..........................14
6.3. Registration of the Considerations in RFC 4776 as
Obsolete ..................................................14
7. Acknowledgements ...............................................17
Appendix A. Civic Address Considerations Registration for
the Austrian Building and Habitation Registry .............18
A.1. Civic Address Format in Austria ...........................18
A.2. Sample Addresses ..........................................22
A.3. Address Codes in Austria ..................................23
A.4. Austrian Addresses in PIDF-LO .............................23
A.4.1. Country ............................................23
A.4.2. Country Subdivisions A1-A6 .........................24
A.4.3. Road and Street Names ..............................27
A.4.4. House Numbers ......................................27
A.4.5. Local Names ........................................28
A.4.6. Floors .............................................28
A.4.7. Additional Code Element ............................28
A.4.8. Other Elements .....................................29
A.4.9. Elements Not to Be Used ............................29
A.5. Example ...................................................29
A.6. IANA Registration Record ..................................30
Normative References ..............................................31
Informative References ............................................32
The Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO) [RFC4119] is an object format for carrying geographical information on the Internet. PIDF-LO can contain civic address information and supports a range of "civic address types" (CAtypes) to hold the individual attributes of such addresses (see Section 2.2.1 of [RFC4119] and Section 3.1 of [RFC5139]).
存在信息数据格式位置对象（PIDF-LO）[RFC4119]是用于在因特网上承载地理信息的对象格式。PIDF-LO可以包含公民地址信息，并支持一系列“公民地址类型”（类别），以保存此类地址的单独属性（参见[RFC4119]第2.2.1节和[RFC5139]第3.1节）。
In many use cases, PIDF-LOs are populated with data from long-established sources, like postal and governmental building registers, line information databases and yellow/white pages of infrastructure providers, or official residents registers. The structure and format of data from such sources is almost always different from PIDF-LO's CAtypes definition -- additionally, the structure and format of those sources differ from country to country.
在许多使用案例中，PIDF LOs使用来自长期存在的来源的数据进行填充，如邮政和政府建筑登记册、线路信息数据库和基础设施提供商的黄页/白页或官方居民登记册。这些来源的数据的结构和格式几乎总是与PIDF-LO的CAtypes定义不同——此外，这些来源的结构和格式因国家而异。
To make use of such existing data sources, transposing that data into PIDF-LO format is required. With no guidelines available on how to map source Fields into CAtype Elements, different creators of PIDF-LO documents might end up with different results, even when using the same data source, which reduces interoperability and increases the risk of misinterpretation by recipients.
为了利用这些现有数据源，需要将该数据转换为PIDF-LO格式。由于没有关于如何将源字段映射到CAtype元素的指导原则，不同的PIDF-LO文档创建者可能最终会得到不同的结果，即使使用相同的数据源，这会降低互操作性并增加收件人误解的风险。
Therefore, civic address considerations are necessary to ensure uniform usage of PIDF-LO Elements for such data sources. [RFC4776] explicitly requests such documents to be provided, but defines neither their structure nor a way to publish them. This memo provides documentation on how to create such civic address considerations, and IANA has created a registry to store references to such documents. Furthermore, civic address considerations for Austria are provided in Appendix A and have been registered in the IANA registry.
因此，有必要考虑公民地址，以确保对此类数据源统一使用PIDF-LO元素。[RFC4776]明确要求提供此类文档，但未定义其结构或发布方式。本备忘录提供了有关如何创建此类公民地址注意事项的文档，IANA已创建了一个注册表来存储对此类文档的引用。此外，附录A中提供了奥地利公民住址的考虑因素，并已在IANA注册处注册。
Section 3.4 of [RFC4776] contains some example considerations regarding the use of administrative subdivision Elements for Canada, Germany, Japan, Korea, and the United States. This document registers these examples with IANA as "obsolete" (see Section 6.3).
[RFC4776]第3.4节包含一些关于加拿大、德国、日本、韩国和美国使用行政区划要素的示例考虑。本文件在IANA中将这些示例登记为“过时”（见第6.3节）。
Section 3.4 of [RFC4776] also contains instructions on the creation of civic address considerations documents on page 8. This document updates that section and replaces said instructions with Sections 4 and 5 of this memo.
[RFC4776]第3.4节还包含第8页关于创建公民地址注意事项文件的说明。本文件更新了该部分，并用本备忘录第4节和第5节取代上述说明。
The guidelines in this document have been created with a focus on formal application of PIDF-LO (such as conveying location during an emergency call). It is not intended to forbid other, more informal uses of PIDF-LO that may not follow any formal mapping
本文件中的指导方针侧重于PIDF-LO的正式应用（如紧急呼叫期间的传送位置）。它并不是为了禁止PIDF-LO的其他更非正式的使用，这些使用可能不遵循任何正式映射
specifications. An example use case of such informal usage may be the transmission of PIDF-LO documents during an instant-messaging session between humans. Such use may, however, imply some drawbacks, like prohibiting automatic processing of civic addresses from such a PIDF-LO.
规格。这种非正式用法的示例用例可以是在人与人之间的即时消息传递会话期间传输PIDF-LO文档。然而，这种使用可能意味着一些缺点，比如禁止从这样的PIDF-LO自动处理公民地址。
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
本文件中的关键词“必须”、“不得”、“要求”、“应”、“不应”、“应”、“不应”、“建议”、“可”和“可选”应按照RFC 2119[RFC2119]中所述进行解释。
In addition, this document uses "Field" to refer to a field of a civic address data source, and "Element" to refer to a CAtype Element of a PIDF-LO.
此外，本文档使用“字段”表示公民地址数据源的字段，“元素”表示PIDF-LO的CAtype元素。
The following requirements apply to defining civic-address mapping considerations:
以下要求适用于定义城市地址映射注意事项：
o The considerations document MUST identify the data source to which the definitions apply. A brief description of its structure SHOULD be provided as well.
o 注意事项文档必须标识定义适用的数据源。还应提供其结构的简要说明。
o For any data source, just one active mapping definition should exist in order to reduce the risk of ambiguous interpretation.
o 对于任何数据源，只应存在一个活动映射定义，以降低解释不明确的风险。
o The document MUST include instructions for any Field that occurs in the data. For any of the Fields, the document MUST describe whether the Field is required, optional, or must not be used in the mapping procedure.
o 文档必须包括数据中出现的任何字段的说明。对于任何字段，文档必须说明该字段是必需的、可选的，还是不能在映射过程中使用。
o Instructions MUST be included for any CAtype Element that is registered by the time the document is created. Those instructions MUST include information regarding whether an Element is required, optional, or must not be used in that mapping. In case the set of CAtypes is revised by the IETF, the address considerations document SHOULD be updated. Until an update is approved, the existing mapping procedure MUST be used.
o 必须包括在创建文档时注册的任何CAtype元素的说明。这些说明必须包括有关元素是必需的、可选的还是不能在该映射中使用的信息。如果IETF修改了CATYPE集，则应更新地址注意事项文档。在批准更新之前，必须使用现有映射程序。
o Address mapping procedures SHOULD be reversible so that location recipients can identify the corresponding record in the original data source (given they have access to that source).
o 地址映射过程应该是可逆的，以便位置接收者可以识别原始数据源中的相应记录（假定他们有权访问该源）。
o For any source data Field that is required or optional, at least one example mapping MUST be provided.
o 对于任何必需或可选的源数据字段，必须至少提供一个示例映射。
o In many cases, data sources used in the mapping process might be subject to access restrictions. Such restrictions (as imposed on the original data) MUST also be imposed on the resulting PIDF-LO documents. The considerations document SHOULD note such restrictions in its Security Considerations section.
o 在许多情况下，映射过程中使用的数据源可能会受到访问限制。这些限制（如对原始数据施加的）也必须施加在产生的PIDF-LO文件上。注意事项文件应在其安全注意事项一节中注明此类限制。
Although the mapping is defined in a national way and the actual meaning of several PIDF-LO Elements may not be clear to an outsider, at least the country Element tells in what context this PIDF-LO was created. In case of emergency calls, a PIDF-LO would just be passed to a Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) in the same country as the location generator anyway. However, in a border region there might be exceptions and the PIDF-LO could be sent to a neighboring country. The PIDF-LO can still be passed on to a PSAP in the right country (based on the country Element), or the PSAP might be aware of the mapping scheme used in the neighboring country.
虽然映射是以国家方式定义的，并且一些PIDF-LO元素的实际含义对外人来说可能并不清楚，但至少国家元素说明了该PIDF-LO是在什么样的背景下创建的。在紧急呼叫的情况下，PIDF-LO将被传递到与位置生成器位于同一国家/地区的公共安全应答点（PSAP）。然而，在边境地区可能会有例外情况，PIDF-LO可以发送到邻国。PIDF-LO仍然可以传递给正确国家的PSAP（基于国家元素），或者PSAP可能知道邻国使用的映射方案。
A consistent mapping is also very important for checking if two PIDF-LO documents describe the same location. When civic address Fields are put into different PIDF-LO Elements, it may be difficult to identify whether or not two PIDF-LOs describe identical addresses.
一致的映射对于检查两个PIDF-LO文档是否描述相同的位置也非常重要。当公民地址字段放入不同的PIDF-LO元素中时，可能很难确定两个PIDF LO是否描述相同的地址。
The purpose of the civic address considerations for an individual data source is to create interoperability by specifying a common list of PIDF-LO Elements to be used and by defining the mapping between these Elements and the Fields of the respective data source.
单个数据源的civic address注意事项的目的是通过指定要使用的PIDF-LO元素的通用列表，并通过定义这些元素与相应数据源的字段之间的映射来创建互操作性。
The workflow for creating an address considerations document is as follows:
创建地址注意事项文档的工作流如下所示：
1. Describe the data source to which the address considerations document applies.
1. 描述地址注意事项文档适用的数据源。
2. Identify all Fields from the data source and decide, for each of the Fields, whether or not it is to be used for the purpose of creating PIDF-LO documents. The considerations document must list all Fields (or at least state which Fields are considered in the mapping and clearly state that the other Fields MUST NOT be used).
2. 识别数据源中的所有字段，并决定每个字段是否用于创建PIDF-LO文档。注意事项文档必须列出所有字段（或至少说明映射中考虑哪些字段，并明确说明不得使用其他字段）。
3. For each of the Fields that are required or optional, specify a clear mapping instruction according to the guidelines below.
3. 对于每个必填或可选字段，请根据以下指南指定清晰的映射说明。
4. Provide a list of all CAtypes registered and describe their level of usage in this mapping (or combine it with the list of Fields above and clearly list which Elements are not used for the mapping procedure). For Elements that are not described in detail, state whether they MUST NOT be used at all or whether they may be used without further restriction.
4. 提供已注册的所有CAType的列表，并描述其在此映射中的使用级别（或将其与上面的字段列表相结合，并明确列出映射过程中未使用的元素）。对于未详细描述的元素，请说明是否完全不能使用它们，或者是否可以在没有进一步限制的情况下使用它们。
5. Provide examples of source data and mapping results.
5. 提供源数据和映射结果的示例。
Civic address Elements are designed to be generic containers. In some cases, Fields clearly correspond to such a container; however, in some other cases, identifying the correct container might require some approximation. For example, in some countries the RD (road) Element might also be appropriate for other thoroughfares, like waterways or tunnels.
Civic address元素设计为通用容器。在某些情况下，字段显然对应于这样一个容器；然而，在其他一些情况下，识别正确的容器可能需要一些近似值。例如，在某些国家，RD（道路）要素可能也适用于其他通道，如水道或隧道。
Fields that are identified to have the same meaning as one of the CAtypes SHOULD be directly mapped to that CAtype Element.
标识为与某个CAtype具有相同含义的字段应直接映射到该CAtype元素。
Where CAtype usage diverges from the original specification, the mapping definition of Fields that are mapped to that Element SHOULD include a discussion of the differences.
当CAtype用法与原始规范不同时，映射到该元素的字段的映射定义应包括对差异的讨论。
Fields that do not fit into an existing CAtype:
不适合现有CAtype的字段：
Even though the list of CAtypes could be extended, it is not feasible to add new Elements for every new Field in every data source in every country. Therefore, unless new generic CAtypes are specified by the IETF, only existing Elements can be used, which leaves the following options:
尽管CATYPE列表可以扩展，但在每个国家的每个数据源中为每个新字段添加新元素是不可行的。因此，除非IETF指定了新的通用类别，否则只能使用现有元素，这就留下了以下选项：
1. Concatenate several civic address Fields into a single PIDF-LO Element (define delimiters if applicable and make sure the separate civic address parts can be retrieved again).
1. 将多个civic address字段连接到单个PIDF-LO元素中（如果适用，请定义分隔符，并确保可以再次检索单独的civic address部分）。
2. Use a PIDF-LO Element that is unused so far.
2. 使用迄今未使用的PIDF-LO元素。
Note: Obviously, the first option is required if the number of Fields that are used in the mapping procedure is greater than the number of existing CAtype Elements.
注意：显然，如果映射过程中使用的字段数大于现有CAtype元素数，则需要第一个选项。
Note that the xml:lang attribute should be present in PIDF-LO XML [W3C.REC-xml-20060816] documents, according to RFC 5139.
注意，根据RFC 5139，xml:lang属性应该出现在PIDF-LO xml[W3C.REC-xml-20060816]文档中。
The following sections discuss individual PIDF-LO Elements and describe what to consider for each Element when defining civic address considerations. It is RECOMMENDED to follow a similar structure for considerations documents.
以下各节讨论单个PIDF-LO元素，并在定义公民地址考虑时描述每个元素应考虑的内容。建议遵循类似的结构来考虑文档。
The country Element must hold the alpha-2 codes from ISO 3166-1 [ISO3166-1] in uppercase characters, as clarified in Section 3.3 of RFC 5139 [RFC5139].
如RFC 5139[RFC5139]第3.3节所述，国家/地区元素必须以大写字符保存ISO 3166-1[ISO3166-1]中的alpha-2代码。
This Element cannot be redefined on a national basis since it identifies the country itself. This Element is used to identify which national mapping for civic addresses has been used in a specific PIDF-LO.
这一要素不能在国家基础上重新定义，因为它确定了国家本身。此元素用于确定在特定PIDF-LO中使用了哪个公民地址的国家映射。
Example for Austria: <country>AT</country>
Example for Austria: <country>AT</country>
The Elements A1 to A6 are used to hold national subdivision identifiers, with A1 holding the top-level subdivision identifier. A1 may either contain the second part of ISO 3166-2 [ISO3166-2] (see Section 3.4 of RFC 5139 [RFC5139]) or other values as described in the particular address considerations document. Elements "A2" to "A6" may contain additional levels of subdivisions (see Section 2.2.1 of RFC 4119).
元素A1至A6用于保存国家细分标识符，A1保存顶级细分标识符。A1可能包含ISO 3166-2[ISO3166-2]的第二部分（见RFC 5139[RFC5139]第3.4节）或特定地址注意事项文件中描述的其他值。元素“A2”至“A6”可能包含额外的细分级别（见RFC 4119第2.2.1节）。
For A1, an address considerations document MUST state whether ISO 3166-2 codes are to be used exclusively; alternatively, it should define a list of values to be used (for example, subdivision names). In either case, A1 MUST NOT be redefined for any other use than describing top-level subdivisions.
对于A1，地址注意事项文件必须说明是否仅使用ISO 3166-2代码；或者，它应该定义要使用的值列表（例如，细分名称）。在任何一种情况下，A1都不能被重新定义为用于描述顶级细分以外的任何其他用途。
For each of the A2 - A6 Elements that are required or optional, the document SHOULD define the set of allowed values, either by listing them or by referring to such a list.
对于每个A2-A6元素，无论是必需的还是可选的，文档都应该通过列出它们或参考这样的列表来定义允许的值集。
Example for Austria:
奥地利的例子：
A1 province (Bundesland) A2 political district (politischer Bezirk) name or identifier A3 commune (Gemeinde) name or identifier A4 village (Ortschaft) name or identifier A5 cadastral municipality (Katastralgemeinde) name or identifier
A1省（邦德斯兰）A2政治区（politischer Bezirk）名称或标识符A3公社（Gemeinde）名称或标识符A4村庄（Ortschaft）名称或标识符A5地籍市（Katastralgemeinde）名称或标识符
A6 must not be used. For more details, see the example in Appendix A.4.2.
A6不得使用。有关更多详细信息，请参见附录A.4.2中的示例。
PIDF-LO contains the following Elements related to road names: RD, RDSEC, RDBR, RDSUBADDR, PRM, POM (Sections 3.1 and 3.2 of RFC 5139 [RFC5139]) and PRD, POD, STS (Sections 3.4 of [RFC4776]). Note: the use of the A6 Element for street names is not valid any more (Section 3.2 of RFC 5139 [RFC5139]).
PIDF-LO包含以下与道路名称相关的元素：RD、RDSEC、RDBR、RDSUBADDR、PRM、POM（RFC 5139[RFC5139]第3.1和3.2节）和PRD、POD、STS（RFC4776]第3.4节）。注：街道名称使用A6元素不再有效（RFC 5139[RFC5139]第3.2节）。
Besides the basic specification of which of those Elements are required, optional, or not to be used, an address considerations document may also describe more complicated dependencies (for example, "RD is optional, but required if any other road name Element is used").
除了这些元素中哪些是必需的、可选的或不使用的基本规范外，地址注意事项文档还可以描述更复杂的依赖关系（例如，“RD是可选的，但如果使用任何其他道路名称元素，则需要RD”）。
For any required or optional Element, the relation of those Elements to Fields of the data source used MUST be described, as should special considerations (like concatenation of Fields into an Element), if they apply. The usage of the Element STS (street suffix) SHOULD be consistent. In case no suffixes are known in a data source, or it is common to write the street name and the suffix together, the STS Element SHOULD be left out completely. If suffixes may be abbreviated, the common abbreviations SHOULD be defined.
对于任何必需或可选元素，必须描述这些元素与所用数据源字段的关系，以及特殊注意事项（如将字段串联到元素中）的关系（如果适用）。元素STS（街道后缀）的用法应该一致。如果数据源中没有已知的后缀，或者通常将街道名称和后缀一起写入，则应完全忽略STS元素。如果后缀可以缩写，则应定义常用缩写。
Example for Austria:
奥地利的例子：
RD: street name
道路：街道名称
All other road Elements must not be used. Street suffixes are already included in the "street name" Field and must not be abbreviated.
不得使用所有其他道路要素。街道后缀已包含在“街道名称”字段中，不得缩写。
PIDF-LO specifies two Elements related to house numbers: HNO ("house number", numeric part only) and HNS ("house number suffix") (see Section 3.4 of RFC 4776). However, in many countries house numbers have a more complex format. In any case, a clear definition is REQUIRED to minimize the potential for confusion.
PIDF-LO规定了与门牌号相关的两个元素：HNO（“门牌号”，仅限数字部分）和HNS（“门牌号后缀”）（见RFC 4776第3.4节）。然而，在许多国家，门牌号码的格式更为复杂。在任何情况下，都需要一个明确的定义，以尽量减少混淆的可能性。
An address considerations document should provide the following information with regards to house numbers: if the structure of house numbers fits the HNO/HNS structure, the document MUST mandate to use those Elements as described in RFC 4776. If the structure of house numbers does not directly fit into those two Elements, the document
地址注意事项文件应提供有关门牌号的以下信息：如果门牌号结构符合HNO/HNS结构，则该文件必须授权使用RFC 4776中所述的要素。如果门牌号的结构不直接符合这两个要素，则该文件
MUST define strategies on how to map source Fields into Elements. Besides HNO and HNS, LOC and BLD could be considered for carrying house number information.
必须定义如何将源字段映射到元素的策略。除HNO和HNS外，LOC和BLD还可考虑携带门牌号信息。
The document SHOULD describe whether or not abbreviations of house number information is valid. If abbreviations are used, they MUST be clearly defined. If house numbers consist of more than one number, or if multiple prefixes and suffixes may coexist, a delimiter symbol and a clear rule on how to concatenate all this data into the HNO and HNS Element might be necessary. Whenever concatenating data into one Element, keep in mind that the location recipient might want to separate the data again.
文件应说明门牌号信息的缩写是否有效。如果使用缩写，则必须明确定义。如果门牌号由多个数字组成，或者如果多个前缀和后缀可能共存，则可能需要一个分隔符符号和一条关于如何将所有这些数据连接到HNO和HNS元素的明确规则。每当将数据连接到一个元素中时，请记住位置接收者可能希望再次分离数据。
Example from Austria:
奥地利的例子：
HNO: concatenate all the data Fields of Austrian house numbers into this single PIDF-LO Element in a defined order with delimiter symbols (see Appendix A.4.4 for the complete definition).
HNO：将奥地利门牌号的所有数据字段以定义的顺序与分隔符符号连接到该PIDF-LO元素中（完整定义见附录a.4.4）。
HNS: usage not allowed since there may be multiple suffixes for the different parts of the house number.
HNS：不允许使用，因为门牌号的不同部分可能有多个后缀。
LOC and BLD are not to be used to reflect house number information.
LOC和BLD不用于反映门牌号信息。
PIDF-LO contains three Elements to reflect local names: LMK, LOC, and NAM (Section 3.4 of RFC 4776). Such local names may be of importance for the identification of a location and may either coexist with a valid civic address or (in some cases) have no address assigned, in which case the local name, itself, identifies the location. In rural regions, for example, a farm name may be more common than a street address to identify a location. Landmarks typically don't have any civic address information assigned. Therefore, local names may assist in finding a "street name" type address, but they might also be the authoritative (and only) civic location information.
PIDF-LO包含三个元素以反映本地名称：LMK、LOC和NAM（RFC 4776第3.4节）。此类本地名称可能对位置的识别非常重要，可能与有效的公民地址共存，或者（在某些情况下）没有指定地址，在这种情况下，本地名称本身可识别位置。例如，在农村地区，在识别位置时，农场名称可能比街道地址更常见。地标通常没有指定任何公民地址信息。因此，本地名称可能有助于找到“街道名称”类型的地址，但它们也可能是权威（且唯一）城市位置信息。
For any required or optional Element out of LMK, LOC, or NAM, the considerations document should state potential values (source data) for the Element. In the case that multiple values for an Element may occur, a concatenation/selection strategy should be described. Concatenation using ";" as a separator is recommended, unless this character also appears in the source Fields.
对于LMK、LOC或NAM之外的任何必需或可选元素，注意事项文档应说明元素的潜在值（源数据）。在一个元素可能出现多个值的情况下，应描述串联/选择策略。建议使用“；”作为分隔符进行连接，除非此字符也出现在源字段中。
If local name information and "common" address information is both available and used, the document SHOULD discuss the relationship between those two address information types and the expected behavior of location recipients.
如果本地名称信息和“公共”地址信息都可用并使用，则文档应讨论这两种地址信息类型与位置收件人预期行为之间的关系。
Example from Austria:
奥地利的例子：
NAM: contains the "Vulgoname" (local name); multiple local names are separated by a semicolon (if applicable).
NAM：包含“Vulgoname”（本地名称）；多个本地名称用分号分隔（如果适用）。
LMK: contains the farm name (just one name possible) (if applicable).
LMK：包含农场名称（可能只有一个名称）（如果适用）。
LOC: can be used without restriction for additional location information (as per RFC 4119).
LOC：可不受限制地用于附加位置信息（根据RFC 4119）。
The "Vulgoname" is useful to identify the location within its locality, since official addresses (especially in rural regions) might not be well known.
“Vulgoname”有助于确定其所在地的位置，因为官方地址（特别是在农村地区）可能并不广为人知。
PIDF-LO defines the Element FLR to hold floor information but does not further specify its content. Section 2.1 of RFC 3825 provides guidance about floor numbering but is not directly related to PIDF-LO.
PIDF-LO定义元素FLR以保存楼层信息，但不进一步指定其内容。RFC 3825第2.1节提供了有关楼层编号的指南，但与PIDF-LO没有直接关系。
An address considerations document SHOULD clearly specify how to express floors using the FLR Element. Following the above-mentioned guidance is RECOMMENDED; however, local nomenclature might require a completely different system. The document SHOULD specify whether only numbers, text, or both are allowed in the FLR Element. If there are standard values for certain floors, they SHOULD be listed. Abbreviations SHOULD be avoided, unless they are the primary (well-known) way of identifying floors.
地址注意事项文档应明确说明如何使用FLR元素表示楼层。建议遵循上述指南；然而，本地命名法可能需要一个完全不同的系统。文档应指定FLR元素中是否只允许数字和/或文本。如果某些楼层有标准值，则应列出这些值。除非缩写是识别楼层的主要（众所周知的）方式，否则应避免使用缩写。
Example from Austria:
奥地利的例子：
If floor numbers are to be mapped, the FLR Element MUST be used. Numbers and text are both allowed. The first floor (<FLR>1</FLR>) is the first "full" floor above the floor at street level. The floor at street level is <FLR>EG</FLR> or <FLR>0</FLR>. There might be intermediate floors, especially between the floor at street level and the "first floor". Such intermediate floors have names like "Mezzanine", "Erster Halbstock" ("first half floor"), or "Zweiter Halbstock" ("second half floor"), and have local meanings.
如果要映射楼层编号，则必须使用FLR元素。数字和文本都是允许的。第一层（<FLR>1</FLR>）是街道层上的第一个“满”层。街道层面的楼层为<FLR>EG</FLR>或<FLR>0</FLR>。可能有中间楼层，尤其是街道层和“一楼”之间的楼层。这类中间楼层的名称有“夹层”、“厄斯特Halbstock”（“上半层”）或“Zweiter Halbstock”（“下半层”）等，并具有当地含义。
Address codes are available in several countries in different forms (for estates, buildings, or usable units for example). These codes identify an address record and MAY be placed in the ADDCODE Element in PIDF-LO. Address codes can help the location recipient to determine the location and to identify the original record in the
地址代码在几个国家以不同的形式提供（例如，对于不动产、建筑物或可用单元）。这些代码标识地址记录，并可放置在PIDF-LO中的ADDCODE元素中。地址代码可以帮助位置接收者确定位置，并识别文件中的原始记录
data source. Depending on the type of code, the code alone (without any other Elements) may even be sufficient to fully identify an address within a country.
数据源。根据代码的类型，仅代码（不含任何其他元素）就足以完全识别一个国家内的地址。
In such cases, a PIDF-LO containing just the country and ADDCODE Elements might provide enough information to retrieve a civic address, given the location recipient has access to the respective source database.
在这种情况下，仅包含country和ADDCODE元素的PIDF-LO可能会提供足够的信息来检索civic地址，因为位置接收者可以访问相应的源数据库。
A civic address considerations document SHOULD specify whether and in which applications the use of the ADDCODE Element is allowed. If ADDCODE is used, its relation to the remaining Elements MUST be clearly stated. If several namespaces for address codes exist in a country, a mechanism to distinguish the different code spaces MUST be described.
civic address注意事项文档应指定是否以及在哪些应用程序中允许使用ADDCODE元素。如果使用ADDCODE，则必须明确说明其与其余元素的关系。如果一个国家/地区存在多个地址代码名称空间，则必须说明区分不同代码空间的机制。
Examples from Austria:
奥地利的例子：
Statistik Austria provides 4 codes: Adresscode (AdrCD), Adresssubcode (AdrsubCD), Objektnummer (ObjNr), and Nutzungseinheitenlaufnummer (NtzLnr).
奥地利统计局提供4种代码：Adresscode（AdrCD）、ADRESSUBCD、Objektnummer（ObjNr）和Nutzungseinheitenlaufnummer（NtzLnr）。
The following format SHOULD be used:
应使用以下格式：
<ADDCODE>AdrCD=1234567;AdrsubCD=123;
ObjNr=2333211;NtzLnr=0001</ADDCODE>
<ADDCODE>AdrCD=1234567;AdrsubCD=123;
ObjNr=2333211;NtzLnr=0001</ADDCODE>
This section lists all PIDF-LO Elements that have not been discussed so far.
本节列出了迄今为止尚未讨论的所有PIDF-LO元素。
To specify the location inside a building, the following Elements can be useful:
要指定建筑内的位置，以下图元可能很有用：
o UNIT o ROOM o SEAT
o 房间座位
The following Elements are to be used for the representation of postal codes:
以下元素用于表示邮政编码：
o PC o PCN o POBOX
o PC o PCN o接线盒
To describe the place-type or the building, the following Elements are available:
要描述场所类型或建筑，可以使用以下元素：
o PLC - Place-type (for allowed values, refer to the IANA registry defined in [RFC4589])
o PLC-位置类型（有关允许的值，请参阅[RFC4589]中定义的IANA注册表）
o BLD - Building (structure)
o BLD-建筑（结构）
For any of those Elements that are required or optional in a mapping, the semantics of its contents must be described if it differs from the definition in the PIDF-LO base documents.
对于映射中必需或可选的任何元素，如果其内容的语义不同于PIDF-LO基础文档中的定义，则必须描述其内容的语义。
It is RECOMMENDED that the Elements SEAT, UNIT, and ROOM remain to be used for identifying a location inside a building. They MAY be used by the owner of the respective building if a considerations document does not restrict their use. For example, an airport could decide to place the gate number in the UNIT Element and a location recipient could identify that PIDF-LO by the value of the PLC Element. The name of the airport could be placed in NAM.
建议保留元素座椅、单元和房间，以确定建筑物内的位置。如果考虑事项文件未限制其使用，则各建筑物的业主可使用这些设施。例如，机场可以决定将登机门编号放置在单元元素中，位置接收者可以通过PLC元素的值识别该PIDF-LO。机场的名称可以放在NAM中。
RFC 4119 contains general security considerations for handling PIDF-LOs.
RFC 4119包含处理PIDF LOs的一般安全注意事项。
IANA has created the registry "PIDF-LO Civic Address Considerations Registry", according to the following definitions. Furthermore, this document registers a civic address considerations document for Austrian addresses, as provided in the Appendix of this document, and also registers the considerations of RFC 4776 as obsolete.
IANA根据以下定义创建了注册表“PIDF-LO公民地址注意事项注册表”。此外，如本文件附录所述，本文件登记了奥地利地址的公民地址注意事项文件，并将RFC 4776的注意事项登记为过时。
The IANA registry contains the following fields:
IANA注册表包含以下字段：
o Country-Code: either the ISO 3166 alpha-two code of the country to which the consideration applies or "other" in case the considerations document is not specific to a particular country. This field is to be defined by the requestor.
o 国家代码：考虑因素适用国家的ISO 3166 alpha 2代码，如果考虑因素文件不是特定国家的，则为“其他”。此字段由请求者定义。
o Serial Number: a number that uniquely identifies a considerations document within a certain "Country-Code" field value. Serial Numbers are sequentially assigned by IANA per Country-Code value, start at zero, and are never reused.
o 序列号：在某个“国家/地区代码”字段值内唯一标识考虑事项文档的编号。序列号由IANA按国家/地区代码值顺序分配，从零开始，从不重复使用。
o Reference to specification: this field contains a reference to the considerations document. The xref type "rfc" should be used for referencing to RFCs, while other documents should use the "uri" type.
o 对规范的引用：此字段包含对注意事项文档的引用。外部参照类型“rfc”应用于引用rfc，而其他文档应使用“uri”类型。
o Requestor: the author of the document.
o 请求者：文档的作者。
o Status: one of either "active" or "obsolete". When the document is registered by IANA, the status is first set to "active" by IANA. Experts may later request changing the status to "obsolete", especially if there is an updated version of the considerations document available. Authors of considerations documents must contact the experts if they wish to change the status of the document.
o 状态：“活动”或“过时”之一。当IANA注册文档时，IANA首先将状态设置为“活动”。专家稍后可能会要求将状态更改为“过时”，特别是如果有更新版本的考虑事项文件可用。如果需要更改文档的状态，文档的作者必须联系专家。
Note: the combination of Country-Code and Serial Number fields uniquely identifies a considerations document in the registry (for example, "AT-0", "US-0", "US-1", or "other-0").
注：国家代码和序列号字段的组合唯一地标识了注册表中的注意事项文档（例如，“AT-0”、“US-0”、“US-1”或“其他-0”）。
For registration of address considerations documents in the registry, requesters SHOULD use the following template. The template SHOULD be contained in the considerations document itself.
对于在注册表中注册地址注意事项文档，请求者应使用以下模板。模板应包含在注意事项文档本身中。
<record>
<country> <!-- Country-Code --> </country>
<serial> <!-- assigned by IANA --> </serial>
<record>
<country> <!-- Country-Code --> </country>
<serial> <!-- assigned by IANA --> </serial>
<!-- reference to document -->
<xref type="uri" data="http://www.example.org/civicaddr/"/>
<!-- reference to document -->
<xref type="uri" data="http://www.example.org/civicaddr/"/>
<!-- record requesters -->
<xref type="person" data="John_Doe"/>
<xref type="person" data="Jane_Dale"/>
<!-- record requesters -->
<xref type="person" data="John_Doe"/>
<xref type="person" data="Jane_Dale"/>
<status> <!-- assigned by IANA --> </status>
</record>
<status> <!-- assigned by IANA --> </status>
</record>
<people>
<person id="John_Doe">
<name> <!-- Firstname Lastname --> </name>
<org> <!-- Organization Name --> </org>
<uri> <!-- mailto: or http: URI --> </uri>
<updated> <!-- date format YYYY-MM-DD --> </updated>
</person>
<!-- repeat person section for each person -->
</people>
<people>
<person id="John_Doe">
<name> <!-- Firstname Lastname --> </name>
<org> <!-- Organization Name --> </org>
<uri> <!-- mailto: or http: URI --> </uri>
<updated> <!-- date format YYYY-MM-DD --> </updated>
</person>
<!-- repeat person section for each person -->
</people>
Approved registrations are published in the IANA registry named "PIDF-LO Civic Address Considerations Registry", which is available from http://www.iana.org.
批准的注册在IANA注册中心“PIDF-LO公民地址注意事项注册中心”发布，该注册中心可从http://www.iana.org.
Registrations are sorted by ascending order by the Country-Code and by Serial Number within Country-Code values. Registrations with Country-Code of "other" are put at the end of the list.
注册按国家代码和国家代码值内的序列号升序排序。国家代码为“其他”的注册被放在列表的末尾。
Following the policies outlined in [RFC5226], new address considerations are added to the registry after Expert Review (see Section 4.1 in RFC 5226). The Expert will generally check if the submitted address considerations conform to the civic address guidelines in this document (see Section 4). If in doubt, the Expert SHOULD consult the GEOPRIV mailing list or its dedicated successor. If possible, the Experts SHOULD check the available documentation on which the address consideration is based.
根据[RFC5226]中概述的政策，经专家审查后，新地址注意事项被添加到注册表中（参见RFC 5226中的第4.1节）。专家通常会检查提交的地址考虑是否符合本文件中的公民地址指南（见第4节）。如有疑问，专家应咨询GEOPRIV邮件列表或其专门继任者。如果可能，专家应检查地址考虑所依据的可用文件。
This document registers the civic address considerations for addresses from the official Austrian Building and Habitation registry, according to the registration procedure described above. The required information is contained in Appendix A.
根据上述登记程序，本文件登记了奥地利官方建筑和居住登记处地址的公民地址注意事项。所需信息包含在附录A中。
Since this document updates RFC 4776, the considerations on the subdivision Elements in Section 3.4 of RFC 4776 for Canada, Germany, Japan, Korea, and the United States are obsolete. The following IANA registration records register them in the IANA registry as obsolete.
由于本文件更新了RFC 4776，加拿大、德国、日本、韩国和美国的RFC 4776第3.4节中关于细分要素的考虑已过时。以下IANA注册记录在IANA注册中心将其注册为已过时。
Canada:
<record>
<country>CA</country>
<serial>0</serial>
<xref type="rfc" data="rfc4776"/>
<xref type="person" data="Henning_Schulzrinne"/>
<status>obsolete</status>
</record>
Canada:
<record>
<country>CA</country>
<serial>0</serial>
<xref type="rfc" data="rfc4776"/>
<xref type="person" data="Henning_Schulzrinne"/>
<status>obsolete</status>
</record>
<people>
<person id="Henning_Schulzrinne">
<name>Henning Schulzrinne</name>
<org>Columbia University</org>
<uri>mailto:hgs+geopriv@cs.columbia.edu</uri>
<updated>2009-01-09</updated>
</person>
</people>
<people>
<person id="Henning_Schulzrinne">
<name>Henning Schulzrinne</name>
<org>Columbia University</org>
<uri>mailto:hgs+geopriv@cs.columbia.edu</uri>
<updated>2009-01-09</updated>
</person>
</people>
Germany:
<record>
<country>DE</country>
<serial>0</serial>
<xref type="rfc" data="rfc4776"/>
<xref type="person" data="Henning_Schulzrinne"/>
<status>obsolete</status>
</record>
Germany:
<record>
<country>DE</country>
<serial>0</serial>
<xref type="rfc" data="rfc4776"/>
<xref type="person" data="Henning_Schulzrinne"/>
<status>obsolete</status>
</record>
<people>
<person id="Henning_Schulzrinne">
<name>Henning Schulzrinne</name>
<org>Columbia University</org>
<uri>mailto:hgs+geopriv@cs.columbia.edu</uri>
<updated>2009-01-09</updated>
</person>
</people>
<people>
<person id="Henning_Schulzrinne">
<name>Henning Schulzrinne</name>
<org>Columbia University</org>
<uri>mailto:hgs+geopriv@cs.columbia.edu</uri>
<updated>2009-01-09</updated>
</person>
</people>
Japan:
<record>
<country>JP</country>
<serial>0</serial>
<xref type="rfc" data="rfc4776"/>
<xref type="person" data="Henning_Schulzrinne"/>
<status>obsolete</status>
</record>
Japan:
<record>
<country>JP</country>
<serial>0</serial>
<xref type="rfc" data="rfc4776"/>
<xref type="person" data="Henning_Schulzrinne"/>
<status>obsolete</status>
</record>
<people>
<person id="Henning_Schulzrinne">
<name>Henning Schulzrinne</name>
<org>Columbia University</org>
<uri>mailto:hgs+geopriv@cs.columbia.edu</uri>
<updated>2009-01-09</updated>
</person>
</people>
<people>
<person id="Henning_Schulzrinne">
<name>Henning Schulzrinne</name>
<org>Columbia University</org>
<uri>mailto:hgs+geopriv@cs.columbia.edu</uri>
<updated>2009-01-09</updated>
</person>
</people>
Korea:
<record>
<country>KR</country>
<serial>0</serial>
<xref type="rfc" data="rfc4776"/>
<xref type="person" data="Henning_Schulzrinne"/>
<status>obsolete</status>
</record>
Korea:
<record>
<country>KR</country>
<serial>0</serial>
<xref type="rfc" data="rfc4776"/>
<xref type="person" data="Henning_Schulzrinne"/>
<status>obsolete</status>
</record>
<people>
<person id="Henning_Schulzrinne">
<name>Henning Schulzrinne</name>
<org>Columbia University</org>
<uri>mailto:hgs+geopriv@cs.columbia.edu</uri>
<updated>2009-01-09</updated>
</person>
</people>
<people>
<person id="Henning_Schulzrinne">
<name>Henning Schulzrinne</name>
<org>Columbia University</org>
<uri>mailto:hgs+geopriv@cs.columbia.edu</uri>
<updated>2009-01-09</updated>
</person>
</people>
United States:
<record>
<country>US</country>
<serial>0</serial>
<xref type="rfc" data="rfc4776"/>
<xref type="person" data="Henning_Schulzrinne"/>
<status>obsolete</status>
</record>
United States:
<record>
<country>US</country>
<serial>0</serial>
<xref type="rfc" data="rfc4776"/>
<xref type="person" data="Henning_Schulzrinne"/>
<status>obsolete</status>
</record>
<people>
<person id="Henning_Schulzrinne">
<name>Henning Schulzrinne</name>
<org>Columbia University</org>
<uri>mailto:hgs+geopriv@cs.columbia.edu</uri>
<updated>2009-01-09</updated>
</person>
</people>
<people>
<person id="Henning_Schulzrinne">
<name>Henning Schulzrinne</name>
<org>Columbia University</org>
<uri>mailto:hgs+geopriv@cs.columbia.edu</uri>
<updated>2009-01-09</updated>
</person>
</people>
The authors would like to thank Martin Thomson and Richard Barnes for reviewing the document, and Gregor Jaenin for contributing insights into the Austrian civic address data format.
作者要感谢Martin Thomson和Richard Barnes对该文件的审阅，以及Gregor Jaenin对奥地利公民地址数据格式的见解。
Appendix A. Civic Address Considerations Registration for the Austrian Building and Habitation Registry
附录A.奥地利建筑和居住登记处的公民住址注意事项登记
The Austrian "Gebaeude- und Wohnungsregistergesetz" (building and habitation registry law) is the legal basis for the obligation to provide a registry of civic addresses, buildings, and their usable units (subdivisions of buildings). The registry is operated by "Statistik Austria GmbH", a fully governmentally owned company. The local administrations of individual townships are responsible for keeping records in the registry up to date.
奥地利“Gebaeude-und Wohnungsregistergesetz”（建筑和居住登记法）是提供市政地址、建筑及其可用单元（建筑分区）登记的义务的法律基础。注册处由“Statistik Austria GmbH”运营，该公司是一家完全由政府所有的公司。各乡镇的地方行政部门负责在登记册中保存最新记录。
The data format definition for the individual records is publicly available (data access itself is, however, restricted). Hence, a uniform address database for the whole of Austria is available. A detailed description of the Statistik Austria civic address data format is contained in Appendix A.1.
单个记录的数据格式定义是公开的（但是，数据访问本身受到限制）。因此，整个奥地利都有一个统一的地址数据库。关于Statistik奥地利公民地址数据格式的详细说明，请参见附录A.1。
Statistik Austria data describes estates, buildings, and usable units [merkmalskatalog]. On a single estate there may be any number of buildings. Apartment houses that have more than one staircase are split up in separate buildings at every staircase. In every building, there may be several usable units. For example, an apartment house may have several apartments, counting as separate usable units. Moreover, one building may have more than one address but will have at least one address. Below, the address Fields for estates (Table 1), buildings (Table 2), and usable units (Table 3) are shown.
奥地利统计局的数据描述了房地产、建筑物和可用单元[merkmalskatalog]。在单个地产上，可以有任意数量的建筑物。有多个楼梯的公寓房屋在每一个楼梯处分为不同的建筑。在每栋建筑中，可能有几个可用单元。例如，一栋公寓楼可能有几个公寓，作为单独的可用单元计算。此外，一栋建筑可能有多个地址，但至少有一个地址。下面显示了屋（表1）、建筑物（表2）和可用单元（表3）的地址字段。
The ADDCODE, A5, and PCN Elements are optional, and the other Elements MUST be used if the data source contains their corresponding Fields. The Elements A1 and A2 (not listed in the tables) SHOULD also be used if data is available. Exception: when using the address codes only (access to the codes is necessary for the creator and recipient of the location information), just the ADDCODE and country Elements are mandatory; the other Elements can be used optionally, of course.
ADDCODE、A5和PCN元素是可选的，如果数据源包含其相应的字段，则必须使用其他元素。如果数据可用，也应使用元素A1和A2（表中未列出）。例外情况：当仅使用地址代码时（位置信息的创建者和接收者需要访问代码），只有ADDCODE和country元素是必需的；当然，可以选择使用其他元素。
+-------------------------+-------------------------------+---------+
| Statistik Austria name | Explanation | PIDF-LO |
| | | Element |
+-------------------------+-------------------------------+---------+
| Adresscode | address identifier | ADDCODE |
| | | |
| Gemeindename, | commune name and identifier | A3 |
| Gemeindekennziffer | | |
| | | |
| Ortschaftsname, | village name and identifier | A4 |
| Ortschaftskennziffer | | |
| | | |
| Strassenname, | street name and identifier | RD |
| Strassenkennziffer | | |
| | | |
| Katastralgemeindename, | cadastral municipality and | A5 |
| Katastralgemeindenummer | identifier | |
| | | |
| Hausnummerntext | text in front of the house | HNO |
| | number | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - 1. Teil - | first part of the house | HNO |
| Nummer | number, numeric | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - 1. Teil - | first part of the house | HNO |
| Buchstabe | number, character | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - | links first and Bis part of | HNO |
| Verbindungszeichen Teil | house number | |
| 1 -> Bis | | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - Bis-Nummer | number of Bis part of house | HNO |
| | number | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - | character of Bis part of | HNO |
| Bis-Buchstabe | house number | |
| | | |
| Hausnummernbereich | indicates if all house | HNO |
| | numbers specified or just odd | |
| | or even numbers are stated | |
| | | |
| Postleitzahl | postal code | PC |
| | | |
| Postleitzahlengebiet | postal community code | PCN |
| | | |
+-------------------------+-------------------------------+---------+
| Statistik Austria name | Explanation | PIDF-LO |
| | | Element |
+-------------------------+-------------------------------+---------+
| Adresscode | address identifier | ADDCODE |
| | | |
| Gemeindename, | commune name and identifier | A3 |
| Gemeindekennziffer | | |
| | | |
| Ortschaftsname, | village name and identifier | A4 |
| Ortschaftskennziffer | | |
| | | |
| Strassenname, | street name and identifier | RD |
| Strassenkennziffer | | |
| | | |
| Katastralgemeindename, | cadastral municipality and | A5 |
| Katastralgemeindenummer | identifier | |
| | | |
| Hausnummerntext | text in front of the house | HNO |
| | number | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - 1. Teil - | first part of the house | HNO |
| Nummer | number, numeric | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - 1. Teil - | first part of the house | HNO |
| Buchstabe | number, character | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - | links first and Bis part of | HNO |
| Verbindungszeichen Teil | house number | |
| 1 -> Bis | | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - Bis-Nummer | number of Bis part of house | HNO |
| | number | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - | character of Bis part of | HNO |
| Bis-Buchstabe | house number | |
| | | |
| Hausnummernbereich | indicates if all house | HNO |
| | numbers specified or just odd | |
| | or even numbers are stated | |
| | | |
| Postleitzahl | postal code | PC |
| | | |
| Postleitzahlengebiet | postal community code | PCN |
| | | |
| Vulgoname | local name | NAM |
| | | |
| Hofname | farm name | LMK |
+-------------------------+-------------------------------+---------+
| Vulgoname | local name | NAM |
| | | |
| Hofname | farm name | LMK |
+-------------------------+-------------------------------+---------+
Table 1: Civic Address Fields for Estates
表1：屋的公民地址字段
+------------------------+--------------------------------+---------+
| Statistik Austria name | Explanation | PIDF-LO |
| | | Element |
+------------------------+--------------------------------+---------+
| Adresssubcode | address subcode | ADDCODE |
| | | |
| Objektnummer | object code | ADDCODE |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - | links Bis and second part of | HNO |
| Verbindungszeichen | house number | |
| Teil Bis -> Teil 2 | | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - 2. Teil | second part of the house | HNO |
| - Nummer | number, numeric | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - 2. Teil | second part of the house | HNO |
| - Buchstabe | number, character | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - | links second and third part of | HNO |
| Verbindungszeichen | house number | |
| Teil 2-> Teil 3 | | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - 3. Teil | third part of the house | HNO |
| - Nummer | number, numeric | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - 3. Teil | third part of the house | HNO |
| - Buchstabe | number, character | |
| | | |
| Gebaeudeunterscheidung | for differentiation of | HNO |
| | buildings, e.g. Maierweg 27 | |
| | Hotel vs. Maierweg 27 | |
| | Appartmenthaus | |
| | | |
+------------------------+--------------------------------+---------+
+------------------------+--------------------------------+---------+
| Statistik Austria name | Explanation | PIDF-LO |
| | | Element |
+------------------------+--------------------------------+---------+
| Adresssubcode | address subcode | ADDCODE |
| | | |
| Objektnummer | object code | ADDCODE |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - | links Bis and second part of | HNO |
| Verbindungszeichen | house number | |
| Teil Bis -> Teil 2 | | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - 2. Teil | second part of the house | HNO |
| - Nummer | number, numeric | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - 2. Teil | second part of the house | HNO |
| - Buchstabe | number, character | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - | links second and third part of | HNO |
| Verbindungszeichen | house number | |
| Teil 2-> Teil 3 | | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - 3. Teil | third part of the house | HNO |
| - Nummer | number, numeric | |
| | | |
| Hausnummer - 3. Teil | third part of the house | HNO |
| - Buchstabe | number, character | |
| | | |
| Gebaeudeunterscheidung | for differentiation of | HNO |
| | buildings, e.g. Maierweg 27 | |
| | Hotel vs. Maierweg 27 | |
| | Appartmenthaus | |
| | | |
+------------------------+--------------------------------+---------+
Table 2: Additional Civic Address Fields for Buildings
表2：建筑物的其他公民地址字段
+-----------------------------+---------------------------+---------+
| Statistik Austria name | Explanation | PIDF-LO |
| | | Element |
+-----------------------------+---------------------------+---------+
| Nutzungseinheitenlaufnummer | usable unit code | ADDCODE |
| | | |
| Tuernummer | door number | HNO |
| | | |
| Topnummer | unit number | HNO |
| | | |
| Lagebeschreibung | for verbal description | HNO |
| | | |
| Lage | describes if the usable | FLR |
| | unit is in the basement, | |
| | mezzanine, attic floor, | |
| | ... (but not the floor | |
| | number) | |
| | | |
| Stockwerk | floor | FLR |
| | | |
+-----------------------------+---------------------------+---------+
+-----------------------------+---------------------------+---------+
| Statistik Austria name | Explanation | PIDF-LO |
| | | Element |
+-----------------------------+---------------------------+---------+
| Nutzungseinheitenlaufnummer | usable unit code | ADDCODE |
| | | |
| Tuernummer | door number | HNO |
| | | |
| Topnummer | unit number | HNO |
| | | |
| Lagebeschreibung | for verbal description | HNO |
| | | |
| Lage | describes if the usable | FLR |
| | unit is in the basement, | |
| | mezzanine, attic floor, | |
| | ... (but not the floor | |
| | number) | |
| | | |
| Stockwerk | floor | FLR |
| | | |
+-----------------------------+---------------------------+---------+
Table 3: Additional Civic Address Fields for Usable Units
表3：可用单元的附加公民地址字段
Note: "floors" in Austria (as in most parts of Europe) are counted differently compared to the US. The "1st floor" in Austria is actually the floor above the floor at street level (2nd floor in US) -- not considering the fact that, in old buildings, there might be even more floors between street level and 1st floor, like "mezzanine" and "2nd mezzanine". So, an Austrian "1st floor" could well be the "4th floor" according to US nomenclature.
注：与美国相比，奥地利（与欧洲大部分地区一样）的“楼层”计数不同。奥地利的“1楼”实际上是街道层（美国的2楼）上的楼层——不考虑在旧建筑中，街道层和1楼之间可能有更多楼层，如“夹层”和“第2夹层”。因此，根据美国的命名法，奥地利的“1楼”很可能是“4楼”。
According to Statistik Austria [adrwarten], 81.5% of Austrian addresses are of the simple type Musterstrasse 1 (Musterstrasse is an example street name). 5% of all addresses have an additional character, like Musterstrasse 1b. 1% of Austrian addresses look like Musterstrasse 21A - 23A. For 8% of addresses, an additional separator is necessary -- like Musterstrasse 10 Haus 1 Stiege 2, or Musterstrasse 20 Gruppe A Reihe 1 Parzelle 13, or Musterstrasse 30 Weg 1 Parzelle 10. Very seldom, there are so-called special addresses (0.03%) -- for example, Musterstrasse gegenueber 3A, meaning this address is actually opposite of house number 3A. Rather surprisingly, 4.47% of Austrian addresses contain the identifier of the estate since no house number is assigned at all -- for example, Musterstrasse GNR 1234, or Musterstrasse GNR .12/4 Kirche (this type of addresses is common for churches), or a real example in Stockerau:
根据奥地利统计局[adrwarten]的数据，81.5%的奥地利地址属于简单类型Musterstrasse 1（Musterstrasse是一个示例街道名称）。5%的地址具有附加字符，如Musterstrasse 1b。1%的奥地利地址看起来像Musterstrasse21a-23A。对于8%的地址，需要一个额外的分隔符，如Musterstrasse 10 Haus 1 Stiege 2，或Musterstrasse 20 Gruppe A Reihe 1 Parzelle 13，或Musterstrasse 30 Weg 1 Parzelle 10。很少有所谓的特殊地址（0.03%）——例如Musterstrasse gegenueber 3A，这意味着这个地址实际上是3A号房屋的对面。令人惊讶的是，4.47%的奥地利地址包含房产标识符，因为根本没有分配门牌号——例如Musterstrasse GNR 1234或Musterstrasse GNR.12/4 Kirche（这种类型的地址在教堂中很常见），或者Stockerau的一个真实例子：
Kolomaniwoerth GNR 1583. This identifier is stored by Statistik Austria as Hausnummerntext. Otherwise, one could misinterpret this number as a house number, which would be definitely wrong.
科洛曼尼沃思GNR 1583。此标识符由Statistik Austria存储为Hausnummerntext。否则，人们可能会将这个数字误解为门牌号，这肯定是错误的。
In order to clarify the Austrian civic address format, this section provides some exemplary addresses:
为了澄清奥地利公民地址格式，本节提供了一些示例地址：
1234 Musterstadt, Hauptstrasse 1a - 5a Block 1b Haus 2c Stiege 1
Postleitzahl: 1234
Stadt: Musterstadt
Strasse: Hauptstrasse
Hausnummer - 1. Teil - Nummer: 1
Hausnummer - 1. Teil - Buchstabe: a
Hausnummer - Verbindungszeichen Teil 1 -> Bis: -
Hausnummer - 2. Teil - Nummer: 5
Hausnummer - 2. Teil - Buchstabe: a
Hausnummer - Verbindungszeichen Teil Bis -> Teil 2: Block
Hausnummer - 2. Teil - Nummer: 1
Hausnummer - 2. Teil - Buchstabe: b
Hausnummer - Verbindungszeichen Teil 2-> Teil 3: Haus
Hausnummer - 3. Teil - Nummer: 2
Hausnummer - 3. Teil - Buchstabe: c
Gebaeudeunterscheidung: Stiege 1
1234 Musterstadt, Hauptstrasse 1a - 5a Block 1b Haus 2c Stiege 1
Postleitzahl: 1234
Stadt: Musterstadt
Strasse: Hauptstrasse
Hausnummer - 1. Teil - Nummer: 1
Hausnummer - 1. Teil - Buchstabe: a
Hausnummer - Verbindungszeichen Teil 1 -> Bis: -
Hausnummer - 2. Teil - Nummer: 5
Hausnummer - 2. Teil - Buchstabe: a
Hausnummer - Verbindungszeichen Teil Bis -> Teil 2: Block
Hausnummer - 2. Teil - Nummer: 1
Hausnummer - 2. Teil - Buchstabe: b
Hausnummer - Verbindungszeichen Teil 2-> Teil 3: Haus
Hausnummer - 3. Teil - Nummer: 2
Hausnummer - 3. Teil - Buchstabe: c
Gebaeudeunterscheidung: Stiege 1
1234 Musterstadt, Musterstrasse 13 Hotel Postleitzahl: 1234 Stadt: Musterstadt Strasse: Musterstrasse Hausnummer - 1. Teil - Nummer: 13 Gebaeudeunterscheidung: Hotel
1234马斯特施塔特，马斯特施塔斯13酒店Postleitzahl:1234斯塔特：马斯特施塔特大街：马斯特施塔斯豪斯努默-1。泰尔-努默：13格贝杜恩特谢东：酒店
6020 Innsbruck, Anichstrasse vor 35 Postleitzahl: 6020 Stadt: Innsbruck Strasse: Anichstrasse Hausnummerntext: vor ("in front of") Hausnummer: 35
6020因斯布鲁克，阿尼什特拉斯vor 35 Postleitzahl:6020斯塔特：因斯布鲁克大街：阿尼什特拉斯豪斯努默文本：vor（“前面”）豪斯努默：35
6173 Oberperfuss, Riedl 3097 (Pfarrkirche) Postleitzahl: 6173 Stadt: Oberperfuss Strasse: Riedl Hausnummerntext: 3097 (since the estate identifier is 81305 3097, where 81305 is the
6173 Oberpuss，Riedl 3097（Pfarkirche）Postleitzahl:6173 Statt:Oberpuss Strasse:Riedl Hausnumerntext:3097（因为遗产标识符是81305 3097，其中81305是
Katastralgemeindenummer (cadastral municipality), and no house number is assigned) Vulgoname: Pfarrkirche
Katastralgemeindenummer（地籍市），未指定房屋编号）Vulgoname:Pfarkirche
Statistik Austria registers 4 codes: Adresscode, Adresssubcode, Objektnummer, and the Nutzungseinheitenlaufnummer. The Adresscode (7 digits) is a unique code for an address in Austria. The Adressregister maps the Adresscode to the civic address. If there is a building located at an address, there is also an Adresssubcode (3 digits) assigned. Every building at an address has its own Adresssubcode (assigned sequentially starting with 001, 002, 003, and so on) in order to distinguish between buildings at the same address. Furthermore, every building located in Austria has its own unique code, the Objektnummer (7 digits). This code identifies the building independent of the Adresscode. That's because addresses are subject to change while the building may persist. To differentiate multiple usable units inside a building, the Nutzungseinheitenlaufnummer (4 digits) is used. This code is also assigned in sequential order for each building.
奥地利统计局注册了4个代码：Adresscode、ADRESSUBCODE、Objektnummer和Nutzungseinheitenlaufnummer。ADRESCODE（7位数字）是奥地利地址的唯一代码。地址注册器将地址代码映射到公民地址。如果某个地址上有一个建筑物，那么也会分配一个地址子代码（3位数字）。一个地址的每个建筑物都有自己的地址子代码（从001、002、003等开始依次分配），以便区分同一地址的建筑物。此外，位于奥地利的每栋建筑都有自己独特的代码，即Objektnummer（7位数字）。该代码识别独立于ADRESCODE的建筑物。这是因为地址可能会改变，而建筑物可能会保留。为了区分建筑物内的多个可用单元，使用Nutzungseinheitenlaufnummer（4位数字）。该代码也按顺序分配给每个建筑。
Besides, every address and building is geocoded by Statistik Austria. Hence, if every PIDF-LO would carry data in the format of Statistik Austria and if every PSAP would use the database of Statistik Austria for mapping, a time-saving, definite mapping without irregularities could be achieved.
此外，每个地址和建筑都由奥地利统计局进行地理编码。因此，如果每个PIDF-LO都将以奥地利统计局的格式携带数据，如果每个PSAP都将使用奥地利统计局的数据库进行绘图，则可以实现省时、无异常的明确绘图。
Besides these codes, Statistik Austria maintains reference numbers for communes, localities, or streets, to mention just a few.
除这些代码外，奥地利统计局还保留了社区、地方或街道的参考号，仅举几例。
The following subsections define the mapping procedure.
以下小节定义了映射过程。
The country Element for Austria must be set to AT, since this is the ISO 3166-1 [ISO3166-1] alpha-2 code for Austria.
奥地利的国家元素必须设置为AT，因为这是奥地利的ISO 3166-1[ISO3166-1]alpha-2代码。
<country>AT</country>
<country>AT</country>
The usage of the ISO 3166 code is demanded by RFC 4119 [RFC4119], and RFC 5139 [RFC5139] proposes to use uppercase characters only.
RFC 4119[RFC4119]要求使用ISO 3166代码，RFC 5139[RFC5139]建议仅使用大写字符。
A1 province (Bundesland), Section A.4.2.1 A2 political district name or identifier (politischer Bezirk), Section A.4.2.2 A3 commune name or identifier (Gemeinde), Section A.4.2.3 A4 village name or identifier (Ortschaft), Section A.4.2.4 A5 cadastral municipality name or identifier (Katastralgemeindename or Katastralgemeindenummer), Section A.4.2.5
A1省（邦德兰），A.4.2.1节A2政治区名称或标识符（politischer Bezirk），A.4.2.2节A3社区名称或标识符（Gemeinde），A.4.2.3节A4村庄名称或标识符（Ortschaft），A.4.2.4节A5地籍市名称或标识符（Katastralgemeindename或Katastralgemeindenumer），第A.4.2.5节
Element A6 must not be used.
不得使用元件A6。
Last, there is an exception to mention that concerns the Austrian capital, Vienna (Wien). The city of Vienna is equal to its political district and even the province is called Vienna. Nevertheless, Vienna is separated in 23 districts within the same political district. Consequently, an address in Vienna would look like:
最后，有一个例外是关于奥地利首都维也纳（维也纳）。维也纳市与其政治区相等，甚至该省也被称为维也纳。然而，维也纳在同一政治区内分为23个区。因此，在维也纳的地址如下：
<country>AT</country>
<A1>Wien</A1>
<A2>Wien</A2>
<A3>Wien</A3>
<A4>Favoriten</A4> or <A4>10<A4>
<A5>Inzersdorf Stadt<A5>
<country>AT</country>
<A1>Wien</A1>
<A2>Wien</A2>
<A3>Wien</A3>
<A4>Favoriten</A4> or <A4>10<A4>
<A5>Inzersdorf Stadt<A5>
The Element A4, holding the city division, can hold the name or the number of the district.
包含城市分区的元素A4可以包含地区的名称或编号。
As proposed in RFC 5139 [RFC5139], for the PIDF-LO Element A1, the second part of ISO 3166-2 [ISO3166-2] can be used. However, in Austria it is also common to write out the names of the states. Table 4 shows the possible values of the A1 Element for Austrian states.
如RFC 5139[RFC5139]中所述，对于PIDF-LO元件A1，可以使用ISO 3166-2[ISO3166-2]的第二部分。然而，在奥地利，写国家名称也很常见。表4显示了奥地利州A1元素的可能值。
+------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Bundesland | second part of ISO 3166-2 code |
+------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Burgenland | 1 |
| | |
| K=U+00E4rnten | 2 |
| | |
| Nieder=U+00F6sterreich | 3 |
| | |
| Ober=U+00F6sterreich | 4 |
| | |
| Salzburg | 5 |
| | |
| Steiermark | 6 |
| | |
| Tirol | 7 |
| | |
| Vorarlberg | 8 |
| | |
| Wien | 9 |
+------------------------+--------------------------------+
+------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Bundesland | second part of ISO 3166-2 code |
+------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Burgenland | 1 |
| | |
| K=U+00E4rnten | 2 |
| | |
| Nieder=U+00F6sterreich | 3 |
| | |
| Ober=U+00F6sterreich | 4 |
| | |
| Salzburg | 5 |
| | |
| Steiermark | 6 |
| | |
| Tirol | 7 |
| | |
| Vorarlberg | 8 |
| | |
| Wien | 9 |
+------------------------+--------------------------------+
Table 4: A1 Element Format for Austria (Note: values are shown in UTF-8, which is recommended to be used for PIDF-LO.)
表4:A1奥地利元素格式（注：值显示在UTF-8中，建议用于PIDF-LO。）
Names of the Austrian political districts are available at Statistik Austria [bezirke]. These names, the unique code for the political district, or both can be used for the A2 Element. If the content of the A2 Element is numeric, obviously the code is provided (there is no political district in Austria with a number in its name). In case both the name and the code are provided, they are separated by a semicolon and the name must be listed first.
奥地利政治区的名称可在奥地利统计局[bezirke]查阅。这些名称、政治区的唯一代码或两者均可用于A2元素。如果A2元素的内容是数字，则显然提供了代码（奥地利没有名称中带有数字的政治区）。如果同时提供了名称和代码，则它们用分号分隔，并且必须首先列出名称。
The district of "Bruck an der Leitha" could be represented by:
“Bruck an der Leitha”地区的代表可以是：
<A2>Bruck an der Leitha<A2>
<A2>Bruck an der Leitha<A2>
or
<A2>307</A2>
or
<A2>307</A2>
or
<A2>Bruck an der Leitha;307</A2>
or
<A2>Bruck an der Leitha;307</A2>
The Element A3 holds the Gemeindename (commune name), the identifier of the Gemeinde, or both separated by a semicolon (the name must be listed first). If the content of the A3 Element consists of a number only, it is obvious that just the identifier is provided. Statistik Austria maintains a table with the Gemeindenamen and identifiers [gemeinden], which must be used as the content for the A3 Element; no other spelling is allowed.
元素A3包含Gemeindename（commune名称）、Gemeinde的标识符，或者两者都用分号分隔（名称必须首先列出）。如果A3元素的内容仅由一个数字组成，则显然只提供了标识符。Statistik Austria维护一个带有Gemeindenamen和标识符[gemeinden]的表，必须将其用作A3元素的内容；不允许使用其他拼写。
Sample:
样本：
<A3>Neusiedl am See</A3>
<A3>Neusiedl am See</A3>
or
<A3>10713</A3>
or
<A3>10713</A3>
or
<A3>Neusiedl am See;10713</A3>
or
<A3>Neusiedl am See;10713</A3>
The Element A4 holds the Ortschaftsname (village name), the Ortschaftskennziffer (the identifier), or both separated by a semicolon (the name must be listed first). If the content of the A4 Element consists of a number only, it is obvious that just the identifier is provided, since there are no Ortschaftsnamen in Austria that contain a number. Statistik Austria maintains a table with the Ortschaftsnamen and identifiers [ortschaften], which must be used as the content for the A4 Element; no other spelling is allowed.
元素A4包含Ortschaftsname（村庄名称）、Ortschaftskennziffer（标识符），或者两者都用分号分隔（名称必须首先列出）。如果A4元素的内容只包含一个数字，那么很明显只提供了标识符，因为奥地利没有包含数字的Ortschaftsnamen。Statistik Austria维护一个包含Ortschaftnamen和标识符[ortschaften]的表，必须将其用作A4元素的内容；不允许使用其他拼写。
Sample:
样本：
<A4>Wilfleinsdorf</A4>
<A4>Wilfleinsdorf</A4>
or
<A4>03448</A4>
or
<A4>03448</A4>
or
<A4>Wilfleinsdorf;03448</A4>
or
<A4>Wilfleinsdorf;03448</A4>
The Element A5 holds the Katastralgemeindename (cadastral municipality), the Katastralgemeindenummer (the identifier), or both separated by a semicolon (the name must be listed first). If the
元素A5包含Katastralgemeindename（地籍自治区）、Katastralgemeindenummer（标识符）或两者都用分号分隔（名称必须首先列出）。如果
content of the A5 Element consists of a number only, it is obvious that just the identifier is provided, since there are no Katastralgemeindenamen in Austria that contain a number.
A5元素的内容只包含一个数字，显然只提供了标识符，因为奥地利没有包含数字的Katastralgemeindenamen。
Sample (Vienna, Fuenfhaus):
样本（维也纳，福恩福豪斯）：
<A5>Oberbaumgarten</A5>
<A5>Oberbaumgarten</A5>
or
<A5>1208</A5>
or
<A5>1208</A5>
or
<A5>Oberbaumgarten;1208</A5>
or
<A5>Oberbaumgarten;1208</A5>
The PIDF-LO Element RD holds the complete street name, including the street suffix. No abbreviations are allowed. No other Elements are needed for streets and must not be used.
PIDF-LO元素RD包含完整的街道名称，包括街道后缀。不允许使用缩写。街道不需要其他元素，不得使用。
Statistik Austria lists 14 data Fields related to the house number of a building plus another 5 Fields for distinction of different usable units inside a building (including the floor, which has a separate Element in PIDF-LO). Unfortunately, PIDF-LO only defines a single house number Element (HNO, numeric part only) and house number suffix Element (HNS). Therefore, this section defines a mapping in order to accommodate all data: all house number data is concatenated into a single HNO Element, even though it is expected to hold numeric part only.
Statistik Austria列出了14个与建筑物门牌号相关的数据字段，以及另外5个用于区分建筑物内不同可用单元的字段（包括楼层，该楼层在PIDF-LO中有一个单独的元素）。不幸的是，PIDF-LO只定义了单个门牌号元素（HNO，仅限数字部分）和门牌号后缀元素（HNS）。因此，本节定义了一个映射以容纳所有数据：所有门牌号数据都连接到一个HNO元素中，即使它只包含数字部分。
In order to allow automatic procession of the HNO Element, it is necessary to use a semicolon as a delimiter symbol (Austrian house numbers do not contain semicolons). The house number parts MUST be provided in the order in which they are listed by the Statistik Austria document [merkmalskatalog]. For user-interface representation, the semicolon-separated format can be transformed by replacing semicolons by spaces (multiple spaces should be combined) and no space should be present between a numeric part of a house number and its related character.
为了允许HNO元素的自动处理，有必要使用分号作为分隔符符号（奥地利门牌号不包含分号）。必须按照奥地利统计局文件[merkmalskatalog]列出的顺序提供门牌号零件。对于用户界面表示，分号分隔格式可以通过将分号替换为空格（应组合多个空格）进行转换，并且门牌号的数字部分与其相关字符之间不应存在空格。
It is not allowed to use the HNS Element for Austrian addresses, since there are addresses that do not have just a single suffix.
不允许对奥地利地址使用HNS元素，因为有些地址没有一个后缀。
The house number "vor 1 - 1A" (consisting of a house number text "vor", first part of the house number numeric "1", "-" as the link of the first and Bis part, "1" as house number Bis part numeric, "A" as character of the Bis part) would be mapped to:
门牌号“vor 1-1A”（由门牌号文本“vor”、门牌号第一部分数字“1”、作为第一部分和第二部分的链接的“-”、作为门牌号第二部分数字的“1”、作为第二部分的字符的“a”组成）将映射到：
<HNO>vor;1;;-;1;A;;;;;;;;;;;</HNO>
<HNO>vor;1;;-;1;A;;;;;;;;;;;</HNO>
NAM: contains the Vulgoname (local name); multiple local names are separated by a semicolon (if applicable).
NAM：包含Vulgoname（本地名称）；多个本地名称用分号分隔（如果适用）。
LMK: contains the farm name (just one name possible) (if applicable).
LMK：包含农场名称（可能只有一个名称）（如果适用）。
LOC: can be used without restriction for additional location information (as per RFC 4119).
LOC：可不受限制地用于附加位置信息（根据RFC 4119）。
The floor Element may contain numbers or text describing the floor. The first floor (<FLR>1</FLR>) is the floor above the floor at street level. The floor at street level is <FLR>EG</FLR> or <FLR>0</FLR>. Other floors may have names like mezzanine, for example. The Statistik Austria data Fields Lage and Stockwerk are concatenated if necessary.
楼板元素可能包含描述楼板的数字或文本。第一层（<FLR>1</FLR>）是街道标高上的楼层。街道层面的楼层为<FLR>EG</FLR>或<FLR>0</FLR>。例如，其他楼层可能有夹层这样的名称。必要时，将Statistik Austria数据字段Lage和Stockwerk连接起来。
The Element additional code may be used to hold the codes provided by Statistik Austria. There is an Adresscode, Adresssubcode, Objektnummer, and a Nutzungseinheitenlaufnummer. These unique codes identify the location. Actually, these codes alone would be enough but require that the location recipient has access to the database of Statistik Austria.
元素附加代码可用于保存Statistik Austria提供的代码。有一个Adresscode、ADRESSUBCODE、Objektnummer和一个Nutzungseinheitenlaufnummer。这些唯一的代码标识位置。事实上，仅凭这些代码就足够了，但要求地点接收者能够访问奥地利统计局的数据库。
If the additional code in a PIDF-LO document is going to hold the codes from Statistik Austria, the following format should be used:
如果PIDF-LO文件中的附加代码包含奥地利统计局的代码，则应使用以下格式：
<ADDCODE>AdrCD=1234567;AdrsubCD=123;
ObjNr=2333211;NtzLnr=0001</ADDCODE>
<ADDCODE>AdrCD=1234567;AdrsubCD=123;
ObjNr=2333211;NtzLnr=0001</ADDCODE>
It is not necessary to provide all codes, but there are some restrictions: the Adresssubcode cannot be used without an Adresscode. More restrictions are defined by Statistik Austria. By setting the country Element to AT (see Section 4.2.1), indicating an Austrian address, the Additional Code Element is expected to hold codes from
没有必要提供所有代码，但有一些限制：如果没有Adresscode，则无法使用Adresssubcode。奥地利统计局规定了更多的限制。通过将country元素设置为AT（参见第4.2.1节），表示奥地利地址，额外的Code元素将保存来自的代码
Statistik Austria only. When creating PIDF-LO documents using address codes by Statistik Austria, the country and ADDCODE Elements are mandatory.
仅限奥地利统计局。当使用Statistik Austria的地址代码创建PIDF-LO文档时，必须使用country和ADDCODE元素。
The Elements PC and PCN can hold the data form Statistik Austria, the POBOX can be used if the post assigned a post office box. At least the PC Element should be present.
PC和PCN元素可以保存来自奥地利统计局的数据，如果邮局指定了邮政信箱，则可以使用POBOX。至少应存在PC元件。
PC: Postleitzahl (postal code)
PC:Postleitzahl（邮政编码）
PCN: Postleitzahlengebiet (postal community name)
PCN:Postleitzahlengebiet（邮政社区名称）
POBOX: Postfach
邮政信箱：Postfach
The Elements UNIT, ROOM, SEAT, PLC, and BLD may be used without further restriction.
可使用单元、房间、座椅、PLC和BLD等元件，无需进一步限制。
A6 STS HNS PRD POD RDBR RDSUBBR PRM POM
A6 STS HNS珠三角吊舱RDBR RDSUBBR PRM POM
This section shows an example mapping of an Austrian address to PIDF-LO.
本节显示了奥地利地址到PIDF-LO的映射示例。
Address:
地址:
Bundesland: Wien
Politischer Bezirk: Wien
Gemeindename: Wien
9. Bezirk
Strasse: Lazarettgasse
Hausnummer - 1. Teil - Nummer: 13
Hausnummer - 1. Teil - Buchstabe: A
Hausnummer - Verbindungszeichen Teil 1-Bis: -
Bundesland: Wien
Politischer Bezirk: Wien
Gemeindename: Wien
9. Bezirk
Strasse: Lazarettgasse
Hausnummer - 1. Teil - Nummer: 13
Hausnummer - 1. Teil - Buchstabe: A
Hausnummer - Verbindungszeichen Teil 1-Bis: -
Hausnummer - Bis-Nummer: 13
Hausnummer - Bis-Buchstabe: C
Postleitzahl: 1090
Hausnummer - Bis-Nummer: 13
Hausnummer - Bis-Buchstabe: C
Postleitzahl: 1090
PIDF-LO:
PIDF-LO：
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<presence xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf"
xmlns:gp="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:geopriv10"
xmlns:cl="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:geopriv10:civicAddr"
entity="pres:123@examplehost">
<tuple id="abcd123456">
<status>
<gp:geopriv>
<gp:location-info>
<cl:civicAddress xml:lang="de">
<cl:country>AT</cl:country>
<cl:A1>Wien</cl:A1>
<cl:A2>Wien</cl:A2>
<cl:A3>Wien</cl:A3>
<cl:A4>9</cl:A4>
<cl:RD>Lazarettgasse</cl:RD>
<cl:HNO>;13;A;-;13;C;;;;;;;;;;;;</cl:HNO>
<cl:PC>1090</cl:PC>
</cl:civicAddress>
</gp:location-info>
<gp:usage-rules>
<gp:retransmission-allowed>yes</gp:retransmission-allowed>
<gp:retention-expiry>2009-11-10T12:00:00Z</gp:retention-expiry>
</gp:usage-rules>
</gp:geopriv>
</status>
<timestamp>2009-02-09T12:00:00Z</timestamp>
</tuple>
</presence>
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<presence xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf"
xmlns:gp="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:geopriv10"
xmlns:cl="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:geopriv10:civicAddr"
entity="pres:123@examplehost">
<tuple id="abcd123456">
<status>
<gp:geopriv>
<gp:location-info>
<cl:civicAddress xml:lang="de">
<cl:country>AT</cl:country>
<cl:A1>Wien</cl:A1>
<cl:A2>Wien</cl:A2>
<cl:A3>Wien</cl:A3>
<cl:A4>9</cl:A4>
<cl:RD>Lazarettgasse</cl:RD>
<cl:HNO>;13;A;-;13;C;;;;;;;;;;;;</cl:HNO>
<cl:PC>1090</cl:PC>
</cl:civicAddress>
</gp:location-info>
<gp:usage-rules>
<gp:retransmission-allowed>yes</gp:retransmission-allowed>
<gp:retention-expiry>2009-11-10T12:00:00Z</gp:retention-expiry>
</gp:usage-rules>
</gp:geopriv>
</status>
<timestamp>2009-02-09T12:00:00Z</timestamp>
</tuple>
</presence>
<record>
<country>AT</country>
<serial>0</serial>
<record>
<country>AT</country>
<serial>0</serial>
<!-- reference to document -->
<xref type="rfc" data="rfc5774"/>
<!-- reference to document -->
<xref type="rfc" data="rfc5774"/>
<!-- record requesters -->
<xref type="person" data="Alexander_Mayrhofer"/>
<xref type="person" data="Karl_Heinz_Wolf"/>
<!-- record requesters -->
<xref type="person" data="Alexander_Mayrhofer"/>
<xref type="person" data="Karl_Heinz_Wolf"/>
<status>active</status>
</record>
<status>active</status>
</record>
<people>
<person id="Alexander_Mayrhofer">
<name>Alexander Mayrhofer</name>
<org>nic.at GmbH</org>
<uri>mailto:alexander.mayrhofer@nic.at</uri>
<updated>2009-01-09</updated>
</person>
<person id="Karl_Heinz_Wolf">
<name>Karl Heinz Wolf</name>
<org>nic.at GmbH</org>
<uri>mailto:karlheinz.wolf@nic.at</uri>
<updated>2009-01-09</updated>
</person>
</people>
<people>
<person id="Alexander_Mayrhofer">
<name>Alexander Mayrhofer</name>
<org>nic.at GmbH</org>
<uri>mailto:alexander.mayrhofer@nic.at</uri>
<updated>2009-01-09</updated>
</person>
<person id="Karl_Heinz_Wolf">
<name>Karl Heinz Wolf</name>
<org>nic.at GmbH</org>
<uri>mailto:karlheinz.wolf@nic.at</uri>
<updated>2009-01-09</updated>
</person>
</people>
Normative References
规范性引用文件
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2119]Bradner，S.，“RFC中用于表示需求水平的关键词”，BCP 14，RFC 2119，1997年3月。
[RFC4119] Peterson, J., "A Presence-based GEOPRIV Location Object Format", RFC 4119, December 2005.
[RFC4119]Peterson，J.，“一种基于状态的GEOPRIV定位对象格式”，RFC41192005年12月。
[RFC4589] Schulzrinne, H. and H. Tschofenig, "Location Types Registry", RFC 4589, July 2006.
[RFC4589]Schulzrinne，H.和H.Tschofenig，“位置类型注册表”，RFC4589，2006年7月。
[RFC4776] Schulzrinne, H., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4 and DHCPv6) Option for Civic Addresses Configuration Information", RFC 4776, November 2006.
[RFC4776]Schulzrinne，H.，“Civic地址配置信息的动态主机配置协议（DHCPv4和DHCPv6）选项”，RFC 4776，2006年11月。
[RFC5139] Thomson, M. and J. Winterbottom, "Revised Civic Location Format for Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO)", RFC 5139, February 2008.
[RFC5139]Thomson，M.和J.Winterbottom，“状态信息数据格式位置对象（PIDF-LO）的修订公民位置格式”，RFC 5139，2008年2月。
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, May 2008.
[RFC5226]Narten，T.和H.Alvestrand，“在RFCs中编写IANA注意事项部分的指南”，BCP 26，RFC 5226，2008年5月。
[W3C.REC-xml-20060816] W3C, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fourth Edition)", Recommendation REC-xml-20060816, August 2006, <http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816>.
[W3C.REC-xml-20060816]W3C，“可扩展标记语言（xml）1.0（第四版）”，建议REC-xml-20060816，2006年8月<http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816>.
Informative References
资料性引用
[adrwarten] Statistik Austria, "Handbuch Adress-GWR-Online Teil A Theoretisches Handbuch Kapitel 2 Warten von Adressen im Adress-GWR-Online", Jan 2005.
[adrwarten]奥地利统计局，“全球变暖在线报告”和“全球变暖在线报告”2005年1月。
[merkmalskatalog] Statistik Austria, "Handbuch Adress-GWR-Online Teil C Anhang 2 Merkmalskatalog", Sept 2004.
[merkmalskatalog]奥地利统计局，“Handbuch Address GWR Online Teil C Anhang 2 merkmalskatalog”，2004年9月。
[ISO3166-1] International Organization for Standardization, "Codes for the representation of names of countries and their subdivisions - Part 1: Country codes", ISO Standard 3166-1:1997, 1997.
[ISO3166-1]国际标准化组织，“国家及其分支机构名称表示代码-第1部分：国家代码”，ISO标准3166-1:1997，1997。
[ISO3166-2] International Organization for Standardization, "Codes for the representation of names of countries and their subdivisions - Part 2: Country subdivision code", ISO Standard 3166-2:1998, 1998.
[ISO3166-2]国际标准化组织，“国家及其分支机构名称表示代码-第2部分：国家分支机构代码”，ISO标准3166-2:1998，1998年。
[bezirke] Statistik Austria, "Politische Bezirke, Gebietsstand 2008", Feb 2008.
[bezirke]奥地利统计局，“bezirke政治局，Gebietstand 2008”，2008年2月。
[gemeinden] Statistik Austria, "Gemeindeliste sortiert nach Gemeindekennziffer, Gebietsstand 2008", Feb 2008.
[gemeinden]奥地利统计局，“Gemeindeliste sortiert nach Gemeindekennziffer，Gebietstand 2008”，2008年2月。
[ortschaften] Statistik Austria, "Gemeinden mit Ortschaften und Postleitzahlen, Gebietsstand 2008", Feb 2008.
[ortschaften]奥地利统计局，“2008年2月，奥特沙夫滕和波斯特莱萨伦的Gemeinden mit ortschaften和Postleitzahlen，Gebietstand”。
Authors' Addresses
作者地址
Karl Heinz Wolf nic.at GmbH Karlsplatz 1/2/9 Wien A-1010 Austria
卡尔·海因茨·沃尔夫nic.at股份有限公司卡尔斯普拉茨1/2/9维也纳A-1010奥地利
Phone: +43 1 5056416 37
EMail: karlheinz.wolf@nic.at
URI: http://www.nic.at/
Phone: +43 1 5056416 37
EMail: karlheinz.wolf@nic.at
URI: http://www.nic.at/
Alexander Mayrhofer nic.at GmbH Karlsplatz 1/2/9 Wien A-1010 Austria
Alexander Mayrhofer nic.at股份有限公司卡尔斯普拉茨1/2/9维也纳A-1010奥地利
Phone: +43 1 5056416 34
EMail: alexander.mayrhofer@nic.at
URI: http://www.nic.at/
Phone: +43 1 5056416 34
EMail: alexander.mayrhofer@nic.at
URI: http://www.nic.at/