Hi
It would be a benefit if I could recognize on the coverage map that the gateway serves real GPS data for testing LoRaCloud geolocation.
BR
LukasMany GW’s are deployed in remote or unsecured/less well secured locations or, given they are not neccessarily cheap and may be associated with other (expensive or easily ‘fenced’) communications, networking or computing equipment, valuable solar panel installations etc. it is not suprising to hear that many TTN’ers may not always wish to declare the exact location or GPS co-ordinates of a given GW to avoid risk of theft or possible break in (a risk with such a public and open network and set of data). I would hold my hand up and say that several of my own GW’s are ‘mapped’ as being anywhere from 50-500m from actual location when fully deployed or if being used for coverage testing and site surveys before final deployment. Security by obscurity to a certain extent but helps protect none the less. Any scheme that would help identify (and hence filter out) real vs potential fake locations would only serve to undermine that or in the case of genuine gps fixed location deployments may make that specific install more easily targeted and vulnerable. What might help one person say using LoRa location may then hinder another person looking to protect their valuable kit! 
Just saying! 
only the time is interesting for the geolocalisation. for sure there are some which don’t want to publish the location. but perhabs 80% don’t have to disguise that info.