> >In Geodetic:
> >-- Normal: outline of the building
>
> we should discuss this - as I think this (point "outline of the
> building") is problematic. What if you are at Yankees stadium or
> Soldier's Field. Where is the point "outline of the building"? that
> still means Yankees stadium or Soldier's Field?
That depends. It might be reasonable to use a shape that encloses either the stadium or the enclosing grounds.
> I think for Geo, we
> have to agree if the geo points to a property, and then there can be
> either:
>
> - a reference point within that property aside from the macro geo
> coodinates, or
> - us the exact geo as the reference point to then do an offset from.
>
> I know James and Martin will balk at this latter choice, saying why
> not just recalculate the external geo -- but I think that isn't so
> obvious, but it may be.
Not so much as you might think. While I always favour the inclusion of more information, and Richard's presentation is what I would consider ideal, this usage isn't that offensive.
A recipient that receives the information is not presented with more precision than there is accuracy, since there is no claim made with respect to accuracy.
--Martin
> James
>
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
