I think that when someone shoots something such as flowers which can be found just about anywhere, including in one's own garden or home, not really necessary to identify the location. Sure, I could be really specific in stating that many of my flower shots or other macro/closeup shots during the cold winter months are actually done in my master bedroom with the sun coming in the windows there and the subject(s) positioned on top of my dresser while I shoot from various angles.....but that's not really necessary to stipulate, is it? Nor is it necessary to describe one's particular home location -- certainly not the street address, although possibly a more generalized, vague "suburbs of Washington, DC" or "Countryside in the Lake District of England" would suffice in many situations.
On the other hand, if someone is shooting a beautiful landscape or an interesting monument, sure, it makes sense to identify that subject as being, say, "Grandfather Mountain, as seen from Foscoe, NC", or "Cherry Blossom trees in full bloom surrounding the Tidal Basin, Washington, DC," or "Jefferson Memorial, Tidal Basin, Washington, DC, in the early morning as the sun was rising."
Also, yes, what the subject is may be a mystery, especially if the artist has chosen to present it as an abstract. Sometimes my abstracts look nothing like what they actually do in real life by the time I've experimented with various camera angles, natural or artificial light, positioning of the subject(s), etc. Sometimes I look at an abstract later and think, "gee, how DID I get that?"