Re: [cti] Location Object

["Jason Keirstead" <Jason.Keirstead@ca.ibm.com>]

I agree with this proposal. Is this really
needed, and realistically how often will anyone provide it, and if so how
often would consumers process it. 

(FWIW, you can't even populate this
value from Maxmind originated location data since it's definition disagrees
with how they communicate accuracy, which is based on a radius)

-
Jason Keirstead
Lead Architect - IBM Security Cloud
www.ibm.com/security

"Things may come to those who wait, but only the things left by those
who hustle." - Unknown 




From:      
 Bret Jordan <Bret_Jordan@symantec.com>
To:      
 "cti@lists.oasis-open.org"
<cti@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date:      
 08/12/2018 09:06 PM
Subject:    
   [cti] Location
Object
Sent by:    
   <cti@lists.oasis-open.org>

---

All,

When we first worked on the Location object,
there was some discussion about adding a precision property for lat/long.
 Back then, I went along with the request and claims being made.  However,
after letting this sit for a while (6 months), I now think that precision
for lat/long is just not worth it. The amount of extra complexity it will
require on implementations and systems not knowing what to do with it,
makes this a solid candidate for a custom property.

We have a history in the TC about debating
precision on timestamps, and I feel like this falls in to that same bucket.
We decided to elide timestamp precision and I think we should do the same
here with lat/long precision in the Location object. 

If we find in the future that we honestly
really do need it, then sure, we can see about adding it.  I just
do not feel like it is worth it right now and would strongly propose that
we remove precision from Location before it is included in 2.1. 

Thanks
Bret