Discussion on location identifiers

[onthebreeze]

the readme says

Location Identifiers. should use plus codes as a URI (eg https://plus.codes/4RPFP4QJ+6G). A plus code identifies a latitude / longitude bounded area of variable resolution (eg could identify a farming region, a specific field, or a street location). The use of plus codes allows easy rendering of traceability graphs as geographic maps, supports location identification of non-address locations such as a field of cotton. It also appropriately separates geographic locations from entity identifiers so that location information can be provided without correlating to specific supplier identities that may be commercial in confidence.

There exist other schemes such as GS1 GLNs - but these are not, of themselves, resolvable to a geographic location or area. Also GLN includes an entity prefix that identifies the organisation that owns the location. This seems to confuse the idea of entity identity with geographic location and risks leaking sensitive supplier / business partner information if returned in user queries. Google pins are also an option - but can change (so fail the persistency requirement) and are strongly correlated to entities that own the address - which is not ideal.

This thread aims to provoke discussion about the preferred geographic location identifier scheme for sustainability platforms.

• Are plus codes the right approach?
• what other advantages / disadvantages exist?
• what might be the challenges to implementers in mapping their locations to plus codes?
• which we include plus codes as attributes of certain globally recognised location codes such as UNLOCODES ?