Re: [Geopriv] Moving Forward on 3825 update

From: Andrew Newton ^lt;andy@hxr.us>
Date: Sun Feb 04 2007 - 20:12:26 EST

On Feb 4, 2007, at 5:35 PM, Winterbottom, James wrote:

> The harm is crystal clear, the fact that this discussion is
> occurring at
> all is demonstration enough.

Honestly, do you really think this sentence helps your argument?

> I pose to you the question that if the location can only be determined
> to within some level of uncertainty, why not simply adjust the meaning
> of the resolution parameter so that it can express what it is
> intending
> to express without ambiguity.

And now you are attempting a bate-and-switch. It isn't appreciated.

-andy

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
Received on Sun, 4 Feb 2007 20:12:26 -0500

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Feb 04 2007 - 20:12:09 EST