W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > July 2009

Re: Early comparison of Nokia/BONDI APIs

From: Matt Womer <mdw@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 07:51:18 -0400
Cc: public-device-apis <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-Id: <012BC9DE-CB98-47BE-93B4-AB969C7677E2@w3.org>
To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Hi Dom, et al,

Just an FYI on the Geolocation address format referenced here:

On Jul 30, 2009, at 3:57 AM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote:
> ...
> * Contacts
> Nokia's address interface more precise - note overlap with Geolocation
> v2 spec:
> http://dev.w3.org/geo/api/spec-source-v2.html#address_interface (which
> has more fields: county, streetNumber, premises, additionalInfo; diff
> 'postalCode' / 'code'

There have been lots of discussions on the civic address format, and I  
expect more to come as work on the 'v2' Geolocation API ramps up.

So far we've discussed:

	the format of the fields themselves [1]
	the field name of the 'civic address' [2]
	'civic address' use cases [3]
	comparing addresses [4]
	defining transformations between address formats [5]

I think it would be a laudable goal for the device APIs and the  
Geolocation API to have interoperability in our address formats.

-Matt

[1] http://www.w3.org/2008/geolocation/track/issues/77
[2] http://www.w3.org/2008/geolocation/track/issues/78
[3] http://www.w3.org/2008/geolocation/track/issues/79
[4] http://www.w3.org/2008/geolocation/track/issues/80
[4] http://www.w3.org/2008/geolocation/track/issues/81
Received on Thursday, 30 July 2009 11:52:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:38 UTC