Re: [gpsd-dev] RFC: GPSd on Android as a system service

[Adam Serbinski]

>> It's not about passing on the unknown elevation, it's about passing
>> on the cno and SV identifying numbers.
>
>Which have no value without elevation and azimuth.

That is incorrect. That data is EXTREMELY useful. At the most basic level, if I 
see NO SV's at all, then how do I know if the receiver is broken or it's just 
poor signal? If I see a couple of SV's with a cno of 5, then I know that the 
receiver is good and I can probably get a fix just by moving it somewhere else.


>> The -91 is incidental.
>
>No, it tells us the data is useless.

Incidental in terms of using it as a valid elevation. I don't care the 
difference between -91, -125, or a flag in another field that says there is no 
elevation.

>A good test for you would be to try to explain this to a casual user.

A casual user will see grey bars in GPS status, will see that they are short or 
tall, and know that after grey comes maybe purple, then yellow, then lock. Or 
the casual user will see nothing at all and wonder why.