- From: Scott Simmons <ssimmons@ogc.org>
- Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 13:37:16 -0600
- To: ted@w3.org
- Cc: Joseph Abhayaratna <joseph.abhayaratna@geoscape.com.au>, "public-sdwig@w3.org" <public-sdwig@w3.org>, public-automotive <public-automotive@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <700BAFEB-256B-47D4-9E23-FF0F81A8BCCA@ogc.org>
Hi Ted, OGC staff contributed to the requirements assessment for the Unmanned Aerial Systems work in ANSI (see the roadmap here: https://www.ansi.org/standards-coordination/collaboratives-activities/unmanned-aircraft-systems-collaborative <https://www.ansi.org/standards-coordination/collaboratives-activities/unmanned-aircraft-systems-collaborative>). There are standards that can be used to represent a geofence, but no standard to exactly describe a geofence in general (there are specs for various industries for domain-specific fencing). In short, geofences may be defined in increasingly complex ways, starting with a point and radius to a box to an arbitrary polygon to a buffer around a corridor…. And those fences can be 2D or 3D in geometry and have temporal characteristics for a period of validity. Finally, geofences include or exclude, e.g., leaving a fenced area can result in a trigger or entering a fenced area can trigger an action. Best Regards, Scott Scott Simmons Chief Standards Officer | Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) Office: +1 970 682 1922 | Mobile: +1 970 214 9467 ssimmons@ogc.org <mailto:ssimmons@ogc.org> | ogc.org <http://ogc.org/> | @opengeospatial Sign up for OGC News <https://ogc.us4.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=704e02f81107a6caab1568067&id=4e4528fd9d> > On Mar 30, 2021, at 1:23 PM, Ted Guild <ted@w3.org> wrote: > > Hi Jo and Spatial Data experts, > > The Automotive group would like to be able to come up with a modest set > of parameters that could influence whether an application is permitted > to sample data on a vehicle. > > We already have granular access control for signals so an application > should be restricted to only information deemed pertinent and would > likely only send a subset off the vehicle for bandwidth/cost/privacy > considerations. We figure we can influence the access control > authorization system based on additional parameters. > > As to thoughts on parameters for restricting data collection we have a > few that initially come to mind: > > * Time of day, concept of eg off-work hours and personal use of company > vehicle > * geofence boundaries** > * explicit opt-in/out override on a whole as well as granular per data > point, specific purpose > > Geo-fencing in particular is what I'm hoping to get input from the OGC > +others crowd in SDW group. > > The shape of the "fenced" area can vary. We are hearing in practice, > the privacy settings may involve user drawing an amorphous shape on a > map, specify municipalities, counties, regions or give a radius. > Representing that concisely is our problem. A simple rectangular shape > would require four sets of coordinate, radius one coordinate and a > distance plus means to calculate, county or other geographic boundary > could be a look-up based on current location, and a free drawn shape > more complex. > > Is there a geo-fencing definition convention or standard that might > facilitate? > > If there are other thoughts this question provokes or suggested > references, please share. > > -- > Ted Guild <ted@w3.org> > W3C Automotive Lead > https://www.w3.org/auto > > > -- <https://www.ogc.org/webinars>
Received on Tuesday, 30 March 2021 19:38:31 UTC