Subject: RE: [Geopriv] draft-thomson-geopriv-geo-shape-00

From: "James M. Polk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 23:54:09 -0600

IMO only

We cannot bound this, but we can recommend limits that achieve diminishing 
returns.  I have no knowledge of what this curve would look like, but I 
just don't believe that limit is at 16 points by any stretch of the 
imagination.  I would think it would be in the thousands.  If Manhattan had 
670 points, what does Canada have, given the shape of the Northern 
Territories?  Or Russia?

One recommendation could be specifically to meeting the 3GPP limitation 
they chose, but it should be just that: 'to do as 3GPP did (i.e. be 
interoperable with), a max of 16 points are allowed, and no more'.  I 
assume they were thinking of bw necessary to transmit when limiting the 
number to that few.

I do not believe there should be any unilateral limitation for all 
implementations.

At 11:26 PM 3/4/2006 -0600, Winterbottom, James wrote:
>Is the suggestion to make this unbounded in Geo-Shape, but make a
>recommendation in PIDF-LO profile?
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James M. Polk [mailto:[email-masked]]
> > Sent: Sunday, 5 March 2006 3:11 PM
> > To: Henning Schulzrinne; [email-masked]
> > Subject: Re: [Geopriv] draft-thomson-geopriv-geo-shape-00
> >
> > At 09:48 PM 3/4/2006 -0500, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
> >
> > >In the draft, it states
> > >
> > >>"For interoperability with [3GPP.TS23032], the number of points has
> > >>been limited to 16".
> > >
> > >It seems unnecessary to make this a general restriction. PIDF will be
> > >used in many contexts where this is not necessary or appropriate. Why
> > >shouldn't I be able to describe "I'm in Foo County", and provide the
> > >boundary of that county?
> >
> > I'd also be curious how one would chose which 16 coordinate pairs
> > represent
> > the US or Canada or England/UK or Japan without getting seriously out
>into
> > international waters or into another country's territory (think about
>how
> > to get around the Great Lakes between the US and Canada).
> >
> > I believe someone (our chair Andy?) already showed Manhattan in pairs
>and
> > had to use something like 670.  PIDF-LO can include more, and we
>shouldn't
> > be restricted in operation at this design level.  If an implementation
> > wants to maintain interoperability with 3GPP, they can choose to only
>use
> > 16 points, and have limited precision in their results, but that's an
> > implementation's choice.
> >
> > You could say something like this:
> >
> >          "In order to maintain seamless interoperability with 3GPP
> > implementations, per [3GPP.TS23032], there needs to be a maximum of 16
> > points used."
> >
> > But this cannot be normative; but just stated as guidance.
> >
> >
> > >Henning
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >Geopriv mailing list
> > >[email-masked]
> > >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Geopriv mailing list
> > [email-masked]
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>This message is for the designated recipient only and may
>contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.
>If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
>immediately and delete the original.  Any unauthorized use of
>this email is prohibited.
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>[mf2]

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv