About the use of "positive" in my reply to the thread it was just a semantic usage of what is written in the doc, not representing my opinion.
I have never understood what was the difference between an identification, processed with the official approved procedures and another one which is supposed to be "positive". And as the official doc is worked and published in english it could not come from another language ( Positively is used, translated with the same meaning,in the french ICAO version of DOC4444, but not transcripted in the official french OPS document)
And also I have never used this concept in ops phraseology as ICAO has not introduce "positive" in the DOC4444 phraseology.
I suppose that in english, when there is a risk to have a positive and/or a negative situation, the one which is used shall be stated.(Positively is used many time by ICAO and not only for the identification).
From what I hear, EASA ( Whoare the experts ?) like to found problem when there is none..so when there is some concerns it becomes quickly a huge mountain....