Ah. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
On Jul 9, 2014 10:09 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On Tuesday, July 8, 2014 11:00:34 PM UTC+2, Kevin Everets wrote:
> > > This would require a user to know their approximate location in order
> to
> >
> > look up their location based on nearby WiFi networks. An approximate
> >
> > location could be obtained using cell tower data.
> >
> >
> >
> > As discussed previously, it would not require an approximate location,
> >
> > though that could be used as additional (optional) data. The hash of a
> few
> >
> > WiFi BSSIDs would be enough to discern approximate location, with more
> >
> > BSSIDs increasing confidence.
> >
> >
> >
> > Bounding boxes would not be required.
>
> I was not referring to Sam's original proposal, but to the one I had made
> a paragraph earlier in my post. The proposal I made uses a hash of the
> BSSID and its approximate (i.e. rounded) location as a lookup key and
> returns complete latitude and longitude.
>
> Unlike other proposals, which require multiple access points to determine
> a location, using a hash dependent on approximate location would work even
> with just a single BSSID (and thus in areas with scarce coverage) but
> constrain searches to a bounding box.
> _______________________________________________
> dev-geolocation mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-geolocation
>
_______________________________________________
dev-geolocation mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-geolocation

Reply via email to