[dhcwg] Re: Unit of Measurement...?
"Carl Reed" <creediii@mindspring.com> Fri, 11 July 2003 11:25 UTC
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA25160; Fri, 11 Jul 2003 07:25:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19aw1N-00006g-5F; Fri, 11 Jul 2003 07:25:01 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19an7Q-0005ad-Pv for dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 10 Jul 2003 21:54:41 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA29857 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Jul 2003 21:54:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19an7N-0001DG-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Jul 2003 21:54:37 -0400
Received: from blount.mail.mindspring.net ([207.69.200.226]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19an7N-0001DD-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Jul 2003 21:54:37 -0400
Received: from user-uinj4ik.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.146.84] helo=compaq) by blount.mail.mindspring.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 19an7D-0007Tb-00; Thu, 10 Jul 2003 21:54:27 -0400
Message-ID: <004001c3474e$efc9b220$549279a5@compaq>
From: Carl Reed <creediii@mindspring.com>
To: "James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com>, Henning Schulzrinne <hgs@cs.columbia.edu>, Marc Linsner <mlinsner@cisco.com>
Cc: 'Andrew Daviel' <andrew@daviel.org>, dhcwg@ietf.org, geopriv@mail.apps.ietf.org
References: <000501c340ab$46784be0$220d0d0a@mlinsnerzk7abh><000501c340ab$46784be0$220d0d0a@mlinsnerzk7abh> <4.3.2.7.2.20030708235923.053d2718@localhost>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 19:45:31 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [dhcwg] Re: Unit of Measurement...?
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
See embedded comments - Carl > > OK.... so I'm having a bad day and (perhaps) as a result of this, I don't > understand what (which?) "unit of the measurement" you are referring to... units of measurement (UOM) typically are feet, meters, centimeters, yards, rods, etc. elevation in the geospatial world is usually measured in either feet or meters -not floors :) Any geospatial metadata that conforms to either the FGDC or ISO metadata standards will have UOM as one of the fields. > > It seems to be in relation to Altitude - which we have a unit of > measurement included already (meters and floors). Do you want additional > ones defined? > > We state that if the datum doesn't define a "0" altitude, we define it as > "mean low tide". Does this not cover that angle? This seems pointless when > the altitude is measured in floors, but I could be wrong. > > I'm not frustrated, I just don't know what you are referring to here (that > Carl agrees to) > > I need a vacation..... :-/ > > > >I think it is generally a bad idea to assume that all parties along a > >chain of transmission know what the data meant initially. This only adds a > >modest number of bits to the format, given that the number of choices > >appears to be on the order of two. Right. That is the whole reason for metadata. Add a couple of bits to deal with UOM and you most likely will save many potential head aches down stream (or in he future). > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >dhcwg mailing list > >dhcwg@ietf.org > >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg > > > cheers, > James > > ******************* > The answer is "42", what's the question? > _______________________________________________ dhcwg mailing list dhcwg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
- [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Location Co… Ralph Droms
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… Robert Elz
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… John Schnizlein
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… Robert Elz
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… Andrew Daviel
- RE: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… Marc Linsner
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… creediii
- [dhcwg] Unit of Measurement...? James M. Polk
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… John Schnizlein
- [dhcwg] Re: Unit of Measurement...? James M. Polk
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… James M. Polk
- RE: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… Marc Linsner
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… Greg Troxel
- [dhcwg] Re: Unit of Measurement...? Henning Schulzrinne
- [dhcwg] Re: Unit of Measurement...? Greg Troxel
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… Greg Troxel
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… Greg Troxel
- [dhcwg] Re: Unit of Measurement...? Carl Reed
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… Dominic Pinto
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Locatio… Carl Reed