W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-poiwg@w3.org > January 2011

Action 25 - POI Relationships

From: <gary.gale@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 10:24:54 +0000
To: <public-poiwg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <664B4FD5-19BB-4426-987C-9696C03B6707@nokia.com>
At a bare minimum it's now pretty much established that the definition of a POI contains attributes which detail both what the POI is and where the POI is. But we can significantly enrich the definition of a POI by including relationship information. This serves the dual purpose of increasing both discoverability and relevance of POI information ... two things which are highly attractive in today's internet economy.

So to kick start the discussion on POI relationships, I'm going to propose a minimum set of relationships that a POI can (and should) have, plus another possible extension to the minimum set.

Minimum Relationship Set ...

Parents - the superiors for a POI, either from a hierarchical administrative perspective or from a more colloquial or umbrella perspective ... establishing a "belongs to" relationship. A POI can have many different parents and those parents can be of many different types (administrative, postal code, colloquial, etc).

Children - the inferiors of a POI, again either from a hierarchical administrative perspective or by means of an "is contained by" relationship. As with parentage, a POI can have (and will have) many different children of many different types.

Adjacencies - those POIs which adjoin the current POI; an adjacency relationship should be considered to be
"near" but not necessarily sharing a border or being contiguous (as other geographical features such as rivers may prevent such a relationship but a bridge across the river allows the relationship).

Possible Extension Set

Another extension to the above relationship sets offers the ability to differentiate parents and "belongs to" and children and "is contained by". Whilst it could be argued that these extensions are simply specializations of the parent and child relations, applying such specialization increases discoverability by removing the need to traverse a POI hierarchy simply to determine whether a parent is an administrative one or a "belongs to" one.

Three immediate use cases spring to mind, regardless of whether the minimum set is utilized or the extensions.

1) Traverse the administrative hierarchy of a given POI, either "up" towards the top of the hierarchy (nominally the Earth) or "down" towards the lowest level of administrative granularity there is (nominally a street level address or a postal code).

2) Traverse adjacency relationships ... "find me POIs in a given neighborhood and if none are found, allow me to easily discover those POIs in an adjacent neighborhood"

3) Discover POIs in a colloquial geography, such as a non formalized neighborhood (such as London's Soho) or other construct (such as the UK's "Home Counties" or California's "Silicon Valley").

No doubt people will have comments on this ... 

Best

G

--
Gary Gale
Director, Ovi Places Registry, Nokia Gate5 GmbH
Schönhauser Allee 180, 10119 Berlin, Germany
UK: +44.7508.000336 | DE: +49.1515.5150909
gary.gale@nokia.com
Received on Wednesday, 19 January 2011 10:25:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 19 January 2011 10:26:00 GMT