Re: [cti-stix] F2F Topic - Location Object.

[Eric Burger <Eric.Burger@georgetown.edu>]

So long as we do not confuse accuracy with precision. See, e.g.,
http://fusion.net/story/287592/internet-mapping-glitch-kansas-farm/

> On Sep 16, 2016, at 10:57 AM, Allan Thomson <athomson@lookingglasscyber.com> wrote:
> 
> I agree accuracy/precision should be an optional field.
> 
> On 9/16/16, 5:33 AM, "Trey Darley" <trey@kingfisherops.com> wrote:
> 
>    On 15.09.2016 15:20:45, Allan Thomson wrote:
>> 
>> But I was going to focus on definition what the object will contain
>> as a start and whether its an object that can be an attribute or a
>> related object is a separate discussion.
>> 
> 
>    I'd like to see a Location SDO that supports an optional precision
>    field, along with the ability for third-parties to express their
>    confidence on Location precision. That way we can easily support
>    crowd-sourcing when there's a high probability someone is way out in
>    left field. ;-)
> 
>    --
>    Cheers,
>    Trey
>    ++--------------------------------------------------------------------------++
>    Kingfisher Operations, sprl
>    gpg fingerprint: 85F3 5F54 4A2A B4CD 33C4  5B9B B30D DD6E 62C8 6C1D
>    ++--------------------------------------------------------------------------++
>    --
>    "There are two types of people: those who fit into my taxonomy and
>    those who do not." --anonymous
> 
>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail