[GeoJSON] Point as list of one point, or list of coords

[Martin Daly]

One transatlantic flight later... 

> I think it's needlessly complex to try to set up a protocol for  
> accept/offer when all we want is a fairly simple format. People who  
> want a protocol can use a different spec.

I completely agree.

> Don't use the words metamodel, profile, or extension in a spec that  
> should be only one page long. Just tell people, if you want to only  
> use Points in your app, go for it. If you think your app might be  
> faced with Polygons some day and you want to be a good citizen, maybe

> warn people when you throw them out. But if we say "you must  
> implement x, y, and z" and people only want x, in a spec this simple,

> what would be easier? Inventing your own or using x,y, and z?

I had no intention of putting the 'm' word in the spec., I was just
using it to sound clever.

I am OK with just putting the spec out there and letting implementers
find their level, and was only offering an alternative to the "profiles"
option.  Having said that, is there *anything* in there that we should
say is mandatory, e.g. the object/array/name/value structure?

M