explicit guidance on GeoJSON Foreign Members #191
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jacobagilbert
added
the
clarification
jacobagilbert
force-pushed
the
geojson_foreign_members
branch
from
0141dcb
to
e0beeb6
Compare
bhilburn
requested changes
Nov 3, 2021
Signed-off-by: Jacob Gilbert <[email protected]>
jacobagilbert
force-pushed
the
geojson_foreign_members
branch
from
e0beeb6
to
9eaa19d
Compare
|
Thanks @bhilburn - merged. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
@bhilburn
Based on a discussion with a colleague I feel this is necessary clarification. The proposal in the PR places no additional burden on SigMF parsers; alternatively we can explicitly forbid GeoJSON Foreign Members but I believe we should provide explicit guidance either way.
Relevant section of RFC: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7946#section-6.1