- From: Nick Brachet <nbrachet@skyhookwireless.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 22:53:20 -0400
- To: Shyam Habarakada <shyamh@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "public-geolocation@w3.org" <public-geolocation@w3.org>, Alec Berntson <alecb@windows.microsoft.com>
Hi Shyam,
I think this is a great suggestion. As you point out not all location
providers can easily provide reverse geocoding.
Nick.
On Jun 23, 2008, at 11:21 PM, Shyam Habarakada wrote:
>
> Re: http://dev.w3.org/geo/api/spec-source.html
>
> The draft presently defines Position as,
>
> interface Position {
> readonly attribute double latitude;
> readonly attribute double longitude;
> readonly attribute double altitude;
> readonly attribute double accuracy;
> readonly attribute double altitudeAccuracy;
> readonly attribute unsigned long long timestamp;
> readonly attribute Address address; /*
> REPLACE WITH A METHOD */
> };
>
> Looking more into this design, it looks like there is an assumption
> that reverse geocoding data is always easily available when ever
> position information is available. I assume this is because we
> started with triangulation as a popular method of obtaining lat/long
> and in this approach, it was cheap to get reverse geocoding
> information at the same time (i.e. in a single call to the cloud).
>
> However, many devices will soon have built in GPS and obtaining
> reverse geocoding data would incur a call to the cloud. To better
> reflect this, we should consider replacing the address property a
> method call like ReverseGeoCode( .. ).
>
> We can discuss details of this method* later, but how does the WG
> feel about the general idea?
>
>
> shyam habarakada
> Microsoft Corporation
>
>
> * Should it be async? would we specify a reverse geo-coding URL in
> the method call? what if the reverse geo-coding is not a free
> service? etc.
>
>
>
>
Nick Brachet (nick@skyhookwireless.com)
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2008 02:54:03 UTC