- From: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 09:22:40 -0800
- To: "public-geolocation@w3.org" <public-geolocation@w3.org>
hello. i am still not quite sure where to look up open issues, could somebody please point me to the right place? a while ago i raised two questions about altitude, one was about the model of altitude (WGS vs. EGM), and the other was about GPS vs. barometric altitude. then we had the more general remark about the fact that there can be various location providers, and in fact both of the above issues could be summarized under that more general topic (even though WGS vs. EGM also could be regarded as a simple unit issue; but alas one that requires decidedly non-trivial conversions). the comments on that list mostly seemed to argue that having multiple location providers (such as multiple altitude values, or even multiple locations) would complicate the API. and i guess there is no denying that this would be the case. however, i am still curious to hear from the proponents of the "there can only be one" (location) approach how they assume implementers of the APIs would deal with the problem of having to decide on for example "the altitude", when the device has two conflicting readings from GPS and barometric sensors. it seems to me that having only one location is a simplification that either can take place in the API's implementation, or in the code using the API. there are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches. API simplicity is definitely an advantage of doing the simplification in the API's implementation, and i am still curious to hear how the API's implementation is supposed to do this. 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 17:23:28 UTC