Re: person location vs position

There is an ISO standards that defines these terms. Perhaps rather then 
invent some new definitions, we should consider what has already been 
defined and accepted.

Regards

Carl

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
To: "C H" <craighubleyca@yahoo.com>
Cc: "Carl Reed" <creed@opengeospatial.org>; "public-xg-eiif" 
<public-xg-eiif@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 9:11 PM
Subject: Re: person location vs position


>
> Maybe you are trying to point to distinction
>
> location = static
> position = dynamic
>
> so maybe both fields are useful in determining where an affectedPerson
> is when they need ES?
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 7:46 PM,  <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Craig
>>
>> its an interesting discussion, and the scenario is surely more complex 
>> even
>> for missing persons location will be blank
>>
>> but for person that we know where it is, location is where they need the 
>> service
>> wheter that is their usual location or not, is not important for who
>> must deliver
>>
>> what about
>>
>> any_darn_location
>>
>>
>>
>>> These are recognizably a physical location on the Earth with coordinates 
>>> but are also clearly distinguished from the actual physical location of 
>>> the person, body or vehicle.  Which we must assume the system will know.
>>
>> no Craig, we must avoid making assumption. the system might be down at
>> any given moment, and person may be able
>> to give position using natural language or approximate location etc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Paola Di Maio
>> School of IT
>> www.mfu.ac.th
>> *********************************************
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Paola Di Maio
> School of IT
> www.mfu.ac.th
> *********************************************
>