- From: Richard Barnes <rbarnes@bbn.com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:54:07 -0400
- To: Doug Turner <doug.turner@gmail.com>
- CC: Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com>, "Allan Thomson (althomso)" <althomso@cisco.com>, public-geolocation <public-geolocation@w3.org>
FWIW, there's currently a proposal in GEOPRIV to include these
attributes in an XML location object as a separate <dynamic> element:
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-singh-geopriv-pidf-lo-dynamic>
Ignoring all the XML and GML ugliness, it's got mostly the same
attributes as the current dynamic stuff in the current draft API
(actually, a superset).
So you could split off the dynamic part as an independent collection of
attributes:
interface Position {
readonly attribute Coordinates coords;
readonly attribute CivicAddress civic;
readonly attribute DynamicAttributes dynamic;
readonly attribute DOMTimeStamp timestamp;
};
interface DynamicAttributes {
readonly attribute double heading; // Degrees; horizontal only
readonly attribute double horizontalOrientation; // Degrees
readonly attribute double verticalOrientation; // Degrees
readonly attribute double speed; // m/s
readonly attribute double acceleration; // m/s/s
}
--Richard
Doug Turner wrote:
> Drop it all together?
>
>
> On Mar 31, 2009, at 5:31 AM, Andrei Popescu wrote:
>
>> Strictly speaking, you are right: it should be decoupled from the
>> Coordinates interface. How would you name this new interface?
>> Velocity? In practice, I suspect that velocity can only be provided by
>> implementations that can also provide geospatial coords.
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 31 March 2009 17:54:52 UTC