W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-geo@w3.org > June 2007

Re: Geospatial XG telecon - 21 June

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:26:43 +0100
Message-ID: <467706A3.5060806@danbri.org>
To: Andrew Turner <ajturner@highearthorbit.com>
CC: Mike Liebhold <mnl@well.com>, Joshua Lieberman <jlieberman@traversetechnologies.com>, public-xg-geo@w3.org, member-xg-geo@w3.org

Andrew Turner wrote:
> On 6/18/07, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:
>>
>> Mike Liebhold wrote:
>> > Hello Joshua,
>> >
>> > I'll be in a meeting all-day on Thursday, so will miss the
>> > teleconference/chat. I am still hoping that the geo xg will focus on
>> > influencing W3C members ( eg. Yahoo, et. al. )to rationalize geoRSS
>> > simple with OGC wgs84 geoRSS.
>> >
>> > It's a bit suprising to read that the geo xg is a wrap, given the
>> > unfinished business harmonizing geoRSS versions. I hope that the group
>> > will continue until this modest goal is achieved.
> 
> I don't believe this was a goal for the GeoXG.

You don't need to believe, just read ;)

The charter at http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/geo/charter says:
[
Objectives

The Geospatial XG has three objectives which address needs of the Local Web:

     * Immediate: update and harmonization with GeoRSS of the GEO 
vocabulary, aka simplest useful geospatial ontology.
     * Short Term: draft recommendations for a geospatial ontology 
focused on Web resources and tasks.
     * Longer Term: draft a charter for a proposed W3C Local Web WG to 
address issues beginning with geotags and continuing towards geospatial 
enablement of the Semantic Web.
]

My impression here re "harmonization" was more that the expectation of 
change was for the W3C-hosted RDF vocab (that I edited thru the SemWeb 
Interest Group), rather then GeoRSS itself.

> GeoRSS is it's own entity. 

Same goes for http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/ and
http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos# ... they're products of a 
different W3C Group. One who'd be happy to hear of proposals for change, 
improvement, harmonization etc, though.

 > Unfortunately, Yahoo has little interest in support any other
> GeoRSS - though Flickr is doing rather well with it.

Having tools and demos that show value of any new proposals would 
probably help in both directions...

Dan
Received on Monday, 18 June 2007 22:27:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:18 GMT