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

Re: thoughts towards a draft AR WG charter

From: Christine Perey <cperey@perey.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:43:05 +0200
Message-ID: <4C518569.5070407@perey.com>
To: RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
CC: Thomas Wrobel <darkflame@gmail.com>, public-poiwg@w3.org
Hi Raphael,

I don't know enough about RDF (but Matt did mention it in our 
conversation) to be able to reply to your question. I'm confident that 
there are RDF experts on this list.

I wish I could express this mathematically, or using code.

In my view:

- an event or a trigger (as we described it earlier, the detection of a 
set of conditions in the user's environment via the use of sensors), when

   (a)  it matches a trigger (the set of conditions specified by a 
publisher) in a database, and
   (b)  the AR support (software and in some cases hardware) is 
available in the user's device,

should return (send via an IP network if it is in the cloud, retrieve if 
it is stored locally) to the user's device that digital data with which 
the trigger was previously associated (by a publisher, in the broadest 
sense of the word).

The data would be "displayed" (visualized but also possibly including an 
audio file plays) in accordance with

   (a)  the user preferences,
   (b) conditions of use (e.g, did the user pay a subscription to the 
"history" database or to the "tourism" database, or to the "commerce" 
database, or all three or more? this involves some rights management)
   (c) user's device capabilities (can render/view the 3D object live, 
can only support 2D view, etc)
   (d) user's environment (time of day, noisy, quiet, light, dark, etc).

The details of the "display," or representation step, are the "user 
experience" and should (in my opinion) be defined entirely by the 
developer of the browser or application.

I would not suggest that the representation need to be standardized 
further (at this time) since there are already many widely-adopted 
display options available.

I believe we need to develop the standard(s) such that when a trigger is 
associated with a set of data (using the open AR Data format in a 
database) by a publisher, any device with AR support and with which the 
user has the rights to receive said publisher's data (see "b" above), 
can "display" the data in the real world context.

This would increase the content publisher's appetite for publishing once 
to many audiences/viewers under conditions specified by the publisher 
(e.g., show my UGC AR post only to my friends). I believe this is in the 
spirit of the W3C and the Web.

Further open standard for AR data format reduces the need for (any 
benefits associated with) building proprietary (closed) silos 
(platforms) for AR data publishing and viewing.


Spime Wrangler

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

On 7/29/2010 1:29 PM, RaphaŽl Troncy wrote:
> +1 (as a lurker but also interested person and familiar with W3C groups
> and policy, still chairing other WG)
>> Matt and I also explored how the element of time (when was the trigger?
>> when did the event occur, is it during opening hours of a business?) can
>> be part of the data which is used to retrieve the resulting
>> output/linked data.
> I'm particularly interested in representing this type of event data to
> attach to a trigger. When you say "to retrieve the resulting
> output/linked data", should we understand "linked data" as the
> technology promoted by W3C (aka RDF)? If yes, then my +1 becomes a +1000
> :-)
> Cheers.
> RaphaŽl
Received on Thursday, 29 July 2010 13:43:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:05:20 UTC