W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-geolocation@w3.org > June 2009

RE: updated editor's draft of the Geolocation API specification

From: Allan Thomson (althomso) <althomso@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 22:16:22 -0700
Message-ID: <18B307BFDE5098438B0BF42A4E508FB5089AC571@xmb-sjc-228.amer.cisco.com>
To: "Doug Turner" <doug.turner@gmail.com>, "Lars Erik Bolstad" <lbolstad@opera.com>
Cc: "Andrei Popescu" <andreip@google.com>, "public-geolocation" <public-geolocation@w3.org>
According the open issues list there are 3 issues.


Issue 3 - exposing civic addresses is not yet resolved to my knowledge. 


I'm interested in the resolution to this issue. If there is a resolution
please point me to it so that I can review and agree/disagree.




Allan Thomson

Cisco Systems


From: public-geolocation-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-geolocation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Doug Turner
Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 7:25 PM
To: Lars Erik Bolstad
Cc: Andrei Popescu; public-geolocation
Subject: Re: updated editor's draft of the Geolocation API specification



	But we also have two open issues that should be closed before we
go to last call:
	ISSUE-6: enableHighAccuracy, "Is enableHighAccuracy the right
naming for this attribute? Should we have it at all?"
	We seemed to have consensus on renaming it, with a few members
in favour of dropping it completely.
	Allan Thomson proposed to replace it with "reducedPowerHint",
along with a definition:
	Is anyone against resolving ISSUE-6 by replacing
enableHighAccuracy and its definition with Allan's proposal?



I still don't like having this attribute and would be quite content to
have it just be dropped.  If we don't great agreement on doing that, i
would be okay with "useLowPower".



	ISSUE-7: heading & speed, "Should heading & speed be moved out
of the Coordinates interface?"
	Given that Geolocation API v2 will have support for address,
should 'heading' and 'speed' attributes be moved out of the Coordinates
interface? They could go to a separate interface (e.g. Velocity) so that
implementation can return any combination of (coords, velocity,
	There hasn't really been any discussion on this issue. Are there
any objections to moving the "heading" and "speed" attributes out of the
Coordinates interface and into a new Velocity interface?



How about dropping them from V1, and consider them, as a new Velocity
interface w/ associated option flags, for V2?


Received on Tuesday, 9 June 2009 05:17:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:50:56 UTC