IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Geopriv] Proposal for uncertainty

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Wed, 28 May 2014 18:00 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 389B21A01AC for <geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 May 2014 11:00:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AqnrARV5vqLt for <geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 May 2014 11:00:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22e.google.com (mail-wi0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 373B51A6F02 for <geopriv@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 May 2014 11:00:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f174.google.com with SMTP id r20so4235730wiv.13 for <geopriv@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 May 2014 11:00:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=8IDWD99TgXZChfd+aqKWWToMAYWl3diSOAtOIFXKh/s=; b=Ov0byXWYSou75MEb7nEVrayW07tq3uHkCz1CtPkxNbmYt9KrNPgxDxJ7AQeZVnF+n3 lhDLtXL3mJRShKWwALMyqxR9wKNuIWJRxWEUl2FxJMU6VkFzRrVYC8km4cdv/PyAGgE4 7M+etB9sycbKy70+6YipAsIT8WUVAkKT7Z5meFoM2lDV10SfoHqWvSoNV7Ty22BDw6sY 0sIHxy69Mi1IfKXZug+nSxWW/6gR/wYGYNACSmP9qrxH7eeWs8tbtiBgJKsShGAQB0pg qwo8wAAz93wtgibDIr6tuwxJC5oHCZB5C75JZoPEjMimFnPyC3+UAln5QAMf3fzkrALv JfPQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.195.18.8 with SMTP id gi8mr1491617wjd.75.1401300009326; Wed, 28 May 2014 11:00:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.235.163 with HTTP; Wed, 28 May 2014 11:00:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CFAB4F96.59AF4%mlinsner@cisco.com>
References: <CABkgnnWHaxgEKBbb8g0b3wAC1gujZ8XQqJngM+K=gG0Xtr3wuw@mail.gmail.com> <CFAB4F96.59AF4%mlinsner@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 11:00:09 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnUL6UUMWeoQ5RanDryyCRHa8=9-rKcScK7NXi5dfUxjxQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: "Marc Linsner (mlinsner)" <mlinsner@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/geopriv/sLXxKi3qrtDrzJjBr0TgUk84tc0
Cc: GEOPRIV WG <geopriv@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Geopriv] Proposal for uncertainty
X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy <geopriv.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/geopriv>, <mailto:geopriv-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/geopriv/>
List-Post: <mailto:geopriv@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:geopriv-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv>, <mailto:geopriv-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 18:00:18 -0000

On 28 May 2014 06:04, Marc Linsner (mlinsner) <mlinsner@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> S3.3: You (re)define uncertainty as accuracy/precision wrt civic.

The definition is consistent.  More elements means a smaller area of
intersection of those areas:

"The resulting spatial partition can be considered as a region of uncertainty. "

> WRT measured location, uncertainty goes down and confidence goes up as the
> size of the polygon gets bigger (less accurate).  According to S3.3 wrt to
> civic the opposite is true.  Is that what you are trying to say?

If that's your interpretation of the text, then I'm at a loss as to
how to fix it.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email