- From: Doug Turner <doug.turner@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 09:07:32 -0800
- To: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
- Cc: Richard Barnes <rbarnes@bbn.com>, public-geolocation <public-geolocation@w3.org>
We should look into this as we start taking about civic or simplified civic addressing. We do need a better name. location means something different in the browser. (e.g. the uri of the document). However, I thing that this is out of scope for the first version of geolocation. On Jan 21, 2009, at 8:58 AM, Erik Wilde wrote: > > hello. > > Richard Barnes wrote: >> Now that we've gotten over the FPWD debate, I wanted to float the >> idea >> of one more small field to add to the API - the ability to optionally >> represent location as a URI: >> interface <dfn id="geodetic-position">Position</dfn> { >> readonly attribute DOMString locationURI; >> }; >> This field would allow a UA to provide location to a location >> recipient in the form of a URI, which the site could then >> dereference (via XHR or by passing it to a back-end system) in >> order to get the UA's location. > > i am all up for that, and i think it would be good to consider > alternative ways of specifying a location. a location URI is > something that would nicely fit web architecture, and there already > are some proposals for location-oriented URI schemes, in which case > there would not even be a roundtrip. > > the beauty of location URIs is that they keep the API open for > extensions. on the other hand, implementations using the API have to > deal with the fact that they might receive URIs and/or resources > which they do not know. in terms of web architecture, for resources, > this could be dealt with using content negotiation, for URIs, it is > more difficult, and quite a while ago (before the geolocation API > work started), there was a long discussion on the uri@w3c.org > mailing list whether location URIs should be HTTP URIs or should > have a URI scheme of their own. that discussion never came to a > conclusion. > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2007Dec/0080.html > > on the other hand, i had proposed this wider scope of the API a > while back, but there seemed to be the general agreement that the > API should only be about coordinates, and not about any other > location concepts. this was why i proposed to rename the API to > "geoposition" and keep the more general "geolocation" name available > for a generalized version of the API which would have a wider scope. > > cheers, > > erik wilde tel:+1-510-6432253 - fax:+1-510-6425814 > dret@berkeley.edu - http://dret.net/netdret > UC Berkeley - School of Information (ISchool) >
Received on Wednesday, 21 January 2009 17:08:13 UTC