W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-geolocation@w3.org > July 2010

Re: Geolocation and POI

From: Christine Perey <cperey@perey.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2010 01:39:42 +0200
Message-ID: <4C37B33E.3010901@perey.com>
To: Gene Becker <gene@lightninglaboratories.com>
CC: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Lars Erik Bolstad <lbolstad@opera.com>, public-poiwg@w3.org, public-geolocation <public-geolocation@w3.org>
Hi Gene,

Good expansion. This is material which should go into a meeting, I think.

This part:

from Gene Becker, July 9, 2010:

If the goal is to produce location standards that are more broadly 
useful and responsive to the particular needs of AR, then it should 
probably be a separate WG with an AR-specific charter beyond "POI". I 
guess that discussion should also look to existing W3C 3D efforts; Web3D 
folks are becoming active in AR, so there could be some converged 
interests here as well.

There is also the issue of data representation in AR; I'd like to think 
that a mechanism involving something analogous to user-agents and MIME 
types could help us get to client-aware adaptation and data extensibility.

======

I believe it was explained to me that a benefit of an AR WG is that it 
can (and, in my opinion should) go beyond POI,  but for "starters" for 
the first charter, the focus should be on what can be achieved.

Then, once the first objective is well underway, the WG can refocus its 
charter on problems the group is equipped to address or feels there is 
an urgent need for standardization.

Any other thoughts?

-- 
Christine

Spime Wrangler

cperey@perey.com
mobile +41 79 436 68 69
VoIP (from US) +1 (617) 848-8159
Skype (from anywhere) Christine_Perey

On 7/9/2010 8:18 PM, Gene Becker wrote:
> If the goal is to produce location standards that are more broadly
> useful and responsive to the particular needs of AR, then it should
> probably be a separate WG with an AR-specific charter beyond "POI". I
> guess that discussion should also look to existing W3C 3D efforts; Web3D
> folks are becoming active in AR, so there could be some converged
> interests here as well.
>
> Of course, as Christine points out, there are many more "triggers" for
> AR, beyond just location. I'm not sure if these are ripe for
> standardization, thoughts on this?
>
> There is also the issue of data representation in AR; I'd like to think
> that a mechanism involving something analogous to user-agents and MIME
> types could help us get to client-aware adaptation and data extensibility.
Received on Friday, 9 July 2010 23:40:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 22 March 2012 18:13:50 GMT