[Geojson] Drop all CRS? (Tracker issue #94)

[Sean Gillies <[e-mail]>]

We're so close to closing open tickets in the tracker! I'm bringing #94 to
the list to kick off 2016.

In https://github.com/geojson/draft-geojson/issues/94, it is suggested that

> Relative to https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-butler-geojson-06.txt
>
> Section 6.3 and 6.3
>
> As the original
> http://geojson.org/geojson-spec.html#coordinate-reference-system-objects
> is dropped from the internet draft - I am not sure why these sections
> cannot be simplified to simply stating that any and all coordinates are to
> be in EPSG:4326.
>
> Or alternatively - to introduce these - but do so wholesale and as a first
> class citizen (and allowing variant/attributed coordinates); with absence
> denoting EPSG:4326
>
I would love to drop all CRS other than the default (CRS84, to be precise,
not EPSG:4326) and have proposed that we do so in the past, but I believe
that we don't have consensus for anything other than what's in
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-geojson-00#section-3, a strong
recommendation against anything other than the default.

I propose to close issue 94 unless there's anything new to add to the
dicussion.

-- 
Sean Gillies