--Richard
On Jan 19, 2011, at 11:50 AM, Bernard Aboba wrote:
> Ari Keränen's review (see below) included a comment on issues arising from clamping of
> latitude/longitude values outside the range.
>
> Comments?
> ===========================================
> 2.3. Latitude and Longitude Fields
>
> Latitude values encoded by the DHCP server MUST be constrained to the
> range from -90 to +90 degrees. Location consumers MUST be prepared
> to normalize values outside this range. Values outside the range are
> normalized by clamping [...]
>
> If the values MUST be within those boundaries, doesn't it mean that a
> value that is out of the range is somewhat likely completely wrong (due
> to a broken implementation) and thus it would make sense to ignore it
> rather than try to normalize the value and make it appear as if it was
> valid? I'm not sure if I'd like to be liberal in what I accept when it
> comes to information that could literally be a matter of life and death.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list
> Geopriv@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
