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

Re: POI WG charter status

From: Andy Braun <ajbraun@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 08:21:33 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTinKWKAuJyaSNaBFSrGYqtcYTGcQP17HCs1tig1v@mail.gmail.com>
To: roBman@mob-labs.com
Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, "Public POI @ W3C" <public-poiwg@w3.org>
It is great living in the USA. By the time you wake up, someone else may
have already given you the right words and finished the debate.

So first off, I think the most important thing is: "it's better to finalise
things in W3C WGs than to invent them"

Secondly, the intention is that this group needs "to focus on stabilising
this existing space as a starting point".  I also completely agree that
sensors are an important aspect to our ongoing discussions.

Finally just a comment on ISMAR. It does look like the AR standards workshop
[1] will be great but the charter for this POI WG will either be pending
approval or just passed. So while I will participate in the event along with
many other members of this working group, it isn't a W3C meeting and we
can't really hold one either.

Andy



[1] http://www.perey.com/ARStandardsMeeting.html


On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 3:41 AM, Rob Manson <roBman@mob-labs.com> wrote:

> Hi Dan,
>
> I think there are already a lot of reference designs for a POI standard
> including Layar [1], Junaio [2], KARML/Geospot [3], SimpleGeo [4],
> GeoJSON [5], GeoRSS [6], Geo Microformat [7], OpenGeo [8], Geo Planet
> [9] just to name a very few.
>
> What we're missing is the work from an open standards body to generalise
> these different approaches into a simple, coherent and re-usable model
> to bind these disparate data silo's into one single shared web of POIs.
>
> So I completely agree with you...we ought to have one by now 8)
>
> If this group needs to focus on stabilising this existing space as a
> starting point then I do think that's a great idea.  And keeping the
> door open to evolve this mission as the field quickly changes - largely
> driven by the community of implementors - will also be essential.
>
> I'm really looking forward to reviewing all of these approaches at the
> Standards Workshop in Seoul and I think as a group we can definitely
> work to consolidate some useful perspectives to feed back into this
> groups work.
>
> I also think that the broader focus on sensors and Patterns of Interest
> will inform a lot of our ongoing discussions too.
>
>
> roBman
>
> [1] http://layar.pbworks.com/GetPOIs-Request+and+Response+Examples
> [2] http://www.junaio.com/publisher/poissearch
> [3] https://research.cc.gatech.edu/kharma/content/karml-reference
> [4] http://simplegeo.com/docs/getting-started/introduction#what-record
> [5] http://geojson.org/geojson-spec.html#point
> [6] http://www.georss.org/Main_Page
> [7] http://microformats.org/wiki/geo
> [8] http://opengeo.org/publications/opengeo-architecture/#4
> [9] http://developer.yahoo.com/geo/geoplanet/
>
>
> On Fri, 2010-09-10 at 09:16 +0200, Dan Brickley wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Rob Manson <roBman@mob-labs.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Andy,
> > >
> > > I'm fascinated to see how cut-down the charter now is, especially based
> > > on the public discussion and apparent consensus that had been forming
> on
> > > this list.
> > >
> > > Personally I find it hard to see how a solely Point of Interest
> standard
> > > based on the thinnest definition will be anything but very out dated
> and
> > > redundant by Dec 2011 (scheduled date for REC).
> >
> > If a workable POI standard is so easy, we ought to have one by now!
> >
> > > Also, since so many people will be in Seoul for ISMAR10, ISWC, Mobile
> AR
> > > Summit and the AR Standards Workshop then surely that would be a great
> > > time to kick off this discussion in more detail.
> >
> > Good idea. If you can also kick start a community of implementors who
> > will try to build, test and refine richer, more sophisticated
> > potential standards for Geo/AR, it should be possible imho for the W3C
> > group's mission to evolve over the next year or so to track that
> > changing reality. But in the absence of candidate designs that have
> > multiple implementations, I'm completely supportive of a modest,
> > "let's stabilise the basics" charter.
> >
> > Generally it's better to finalise things in W3C WGs than to invent
> > them, and we still seem to be in a very inventive phase here...
> >
> > cheers,
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > >
> > > roBman
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 13:12 -0400, Braun, Andrew wrote:
> > >> Hi Everyone,
> > >>
> > >> First off an introduction, I am Andy Braun from Sony Ericsson. I have
> > >> been tagged to chair this POI working group. In addition to this
> > >> group, my responsibilities in Sony Ericsson include researching
> > >> emerging web and application technologies for the office of the CTO.
> > >>
> > >> I hope those of you who are Advisory Committee representatives have
> > >> already seen that a Points of Interest WG charter [1] has been
> > >> submitted for review. The charter details three main deliverables: a
> > >> "Points of Interest" Recommendation, a WG Note detailing AR specific
> > >> POI properties, and another note that covers how AR and Web standards
> > >> can converge.  There are other potentially separate deliverables, such
> > >> as best practices, use cases/requirements, a 'landscape' document,
> > >> test suite, etc.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> The review period ends on the 24th of September, so please be sure
> > >> that you or your AC rep fill in the survey [2] as soon as possible.
> > >>  If you haven't joined W3C yet, now is the time.  Once the review
> > >> ends, there is a two week period where W3C management reviews the
> > >> results and creates the new WG.  So, the WG should be ready to go the
> > >> week of 11 October.  While we could have our first teleconference
> > >> during the week of 11 October, many of the groupís participants will
> > >> likely be at ISMAR that week. So I recommend we have our call during
> > >> the week of 18 October.  Before then, I'll send out a poll for
> > >> selecting the time and date. I'll follow up with an agenda about a
> > >> week or so before the meeting.
> > >>
> > >> With regards to the first face to face meeting, we did talk about
> > >> meeting at TPAC in Lyon during November. However, for a number of
> > >> reasons which I am happy to discuss, this will not be possible. I
> > >> would like to meet face to face this year. With holidays approaching I
> > >> believe the best chance would be during the first week or second week
> > >> of December.  I will provide more details about the site and logistics
> > >> in a future note.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I look forward to a continued interesting and fruitful discussion.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >>
> > >> Andy Braun
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> [1] http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/charter/
> > >> [2] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/POI-2010/
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 10 September 2010 12:22:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 10 September 2010 12:22:11 GMT