- From: Alec Berntson <alecb@windows.microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 08:26:12 -0700
- To: Doug Turner <doug.turner@gmail.com>, Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com>
- CC: public-geolocation <public-geolocation@w3.org>
I think each field needs to be freeform - e.g. Postal codes in the UK are alphanumerical as one example. Also, there might be more subtly to the order of the fields than first meets the eye - in Japan the order of address fields (in terms of accuracy) is different than in the US. -----Original Message----- From: public-geolocation-request@w3.org [mailto:public-geolocation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Doug Turner Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 2:12 PM To: Andrei Popescu Cc: public-geolocation Subject: Re: Geolication API level 2 - editor's draft I propose that we move postalCode from its position at the bottom of the interface, to between "city" and "street". In this way, the precision of the location increases with each field. it is not mentioned, but we should state that each attribute can be null. should the zip code be required to be in some sort of format? An extended ZIP + 4? Or should it be freeform? Doug On Mar 20, 2009, at 6:16 AM, Andrei Popescu wrote: > On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com> > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I have uploaded the first editor's draft for the Geolocation API v2 >> (or level 2): >> >> http://dev.w3.org/geo/api/spec-source-v2.html >> >> The main change is the addition of the Address interface. > > FYI, here's the diff to v1: > > http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/geo/api/spec-source-v2.html.diff?r1=1.4&r2=1.5&f=h > > Andrei >
Received on Wednesday, 25 March 2009 15:27:23 UTC