The use of Multiple Locations in the Location Object
draft-morris-geopriv-location-object-issues-00
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | John Morris | ||
| Last updated | 2002-06-27 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
This document discusses three major questions that were posed and discussed at some length at the interim meeting in San Diego, June 2002: (1) Should geopriv facilitate the misrepresentation of location information? (2) Should the geopriv Location Object (LO) accommodate multiple locations as part of a single positioning transaction? (3) If so, should the Location Object hold multiple locations in a single object, or should the multiple locations be contained in multiple objects? In this paper we propose an answer to those questions.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)