Re: [Geopriv] Moving Forward on 3825 update

From: Andrew Newton ^lt;andy@hxr.us>
Date: Sun Feb 04 2007 - 21:05:03 EST

On Feb 4, 2007, at 8:32 PM, Dawson, Martin wrote:
> 1. In this context "resolution" must mean the same as
> "precision" (until
> somebody can tell me what else it's supposed to say about the location
> value)
> 2. Precision/resolution indicates the best communicable accuracy. For
> example, a precision of mm typically means a measured accuracy of +/-
> 0.5mm (though it's actually necessary to document the convention for
> interpreting precision as used in any specific context)

You have subtly intertwined accuracy with resolution at this point.
Perhaps that is where you are getting confused.

> 3. Since the server decided to utilize a communicable precision less
> than the protocol could support, it must be trying to say something
> else
> about the nature of the location value or the location measurement.
> 4. Recipients of RFC3825 resolution values have to infer something
> from
> them. They are going to assume it means accuracy.

To be precise, you have assumed that they will make this mistake.
This is not an argument based in known fact.

> Finally - here's my challenge to you. There appears to be agreement
> that, whatever the RFC is trying to say these parameters are for, it
> doesn't do a good job of it. Could you please send what you think
> would
> have been useful text - not just something saying it means
> "resolution"
> but something which explains what the recipient of the parameters is
> supposed to interpret them as meaning and how they are useful to the
> recipient?

I can go you one better. There is a entire draft written on the
subject: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-geopriv-
binary-lci-00.txt

-andy

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
Received on Sun, 4 Feb 2007 21:05:03 -0500

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Feb 04 2007 - 21:04:50 EST