Skip to content

Conversation

@johnx25bd
Copy link
Member

Summary

This PR addresses feedback from Philipp (via Adam Spiers) regarding confusion about the locationType attribute structure in the Location Format Extensions documentation.

Key Changes

  • Clarified that locationType IS the Location Format Identifier - Changed vague "included in" language to explicitly state the attribute contains the identifier itself, not just includes it
  • Added "How It Works" section - New subsection that explicitly explains the relationship between locationType (the identifier) and location (the payload)
  • Added three concrete examples - Shows locationType and location values together for different formats:
    • Coordinate format example
    • GeoJSON format example
    • WKT polygon format example
  • Reorganized content flow - Presents the two-attribute structure upfront before diving into identifier naming conventions
  • Minor cleanup - Removed trailing whitespace

Problem Addressed

The original text stated:

"Each location format is defined by a unique identifier (the Location Format Identifier — a string value included in the locationType attribute)"

This caused confusion because:

  1. "included in" suggested the attribute might contain other things besides the identifier
  2. The relationship between locationType and location wasn't explicitly stated
  3. No concrete examples showed both attributes together

Navigation Improvement

The updated structure makes it immediately clear:

  • What goes in locationType (the format identifier string)
  • What goes in location (the actual geospatial data)
  • How the two work together

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Addresses feedback from Philipp via Adam Spiers regarding confusion about the
locationType attribute structure:

- Changed "included in" to clearly state that locationType IS the Location
  Format Identifier, not a container that includes it
- Added new "How It Works" section explicitly explaining the relationship
  between locationType and location attributes
- Added three concrete examples showing both locationType and location values
  together for different formats (coordinate, GeoJSON, WKT)
- Reorganized content to present the two-attribute structure upfront before
  diving into identifier naming conventions
- Minor whitespace cleanup (trailing space removal)

This improves navigation and clarity by making it immediately clear which
content applies to locationType (the identifier) vs location (the payload).

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
@vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented Dec 16, 2025

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Review Updated (UTC)
docs Error Error Dec 16, 2025 1:27pm

Location attestations are consistently-formatted verifiable location records
that can optionally carry location proofs (cryptographic/cryptoeconomic
evidence). Updated terminology to accurately reflect this distinction.

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Changed GitHub links in navbar and footer from
AstralProtocol/astralprotocol to AstralProtocol/docs to correctly
reference the documentation repository.

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
…ions

Added comprehensive explanation of why locationType is included and clarified
that the location payload can be either direct data or a pointer:

- Clarified that location can contain actual data OR pointers (CID, DID, URL)
- Added "Why Include locationType?" section explaining:
  - Efficiency: Avoids blind downloads of large files
  - Clarity: Resolves ambiguities like coordinate ordering
  - Interoperability: Enables system coordination without inspecting payloads
- Added Example 4 showing pointer usage with IPFS CID for raster data
- Updated existing examples to distinguish "Direct data" vs "Pointer" patterns
- Noted that verifiable storage (like IPFS) is recommended but not required

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
@johnx25bd johnx25bd merged commit cedd398 into main Dec 16, 2025
2 of 3 checks passed
@johnx25bd johnx25bd deleted the docs/clarify-location-type-attribute branch December 16, 2025 13:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants