W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-poiwg@w3.org > August 2010

Re: thoughts towards a draft AR WG charter

From: Andy Braun <ajbraun@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 14:55:53 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTimbVEji+HrvyfwE47Keaz4X7MH5-CFQk1jUhX2J@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-poiwg@w3.org
Cc: cperey@perey.com, Matt Womer <mdw@w3.org>, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
Great discussion. Many of my sentiments have been expressed over these last
couple of days.

With respect to the trigger discussion I did have a concern about the
definition below.

We should not  tie the trigger creator to the publisher of the data.  I
believe these need to be independent entities. Converting Phil's example to
a US version.

There is a Bar (Phil this is the same as a pub) for which there is a
collection of well formatted AR data from either a third party, the bar
itself or another interested entity.  The Trigger to pull the beer list
should not be tied to the publishing of data, but rather the trigger should
be available from either the data publisher, another third-party (
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/id335624129?mt=8 for example) or my own
creation.

Andy




On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote:

>
>
> Christine Perey wrote:
> [..]
>
>
>
>> I think there is something (a trigger) which is defined by the publisher
>> and stored with the data (augmented information) which the publisher has
>> made available in the standard AR data format.
>>
>
> Ah, right, I think I'm starting to see what you mean and, if so, that we're
> actually in agreement.
>
> To continue my earlier example, the data about a bottle of 2000 St Emillion
> Grand Cru is clearly about that particular product. Now, I might, as a
> publisher of information about that wine, also say that my data is only
> applicable if you are in a branch of Carrefour or Wal-Mart. In that case,
> the publisher is setting two different criteria and both need to be true
> before the data is relevant.
>
> As I like to think in terms of angle brackets I end up with something like
> this:
>
>
> <item>
>  <criteria>
>    
>    <location>any branch of Carrefour or Wal-Mart</location>
>  <criteria>
>  <description>
>    <text>Delicious. Buy it</text>
>    <star_rating>5</star_rating>
>  </description>
> </item>
>
> If the two conditions in the <criteria /> element are met, then and only
> then does the description apply.
>
> For me, the trigger is that the two criteria have been met. The data
> remains static.
>
> Phil.
>
>
>
>
>> When the user's device sends a bundle of data [reflecting a whole set of
>> conditions in the real world  and user preferences, etc] and it matches the
>> trigger, the user receives data which augments the experience.
>>
>> To come back to what Rob Manson wrote on July 31 [1]:
>> "if we did use the "trigger" model then I'd express this as the
>> following RDFa style triplet:
>>
>>        this [location] is a [trigger] for [this information]
>>
>> POIs in this format would then become the archetypal AR relationship.
>>
>> The above is a common subset of the broader relationship:
>>
>>        this [sensor data bundle] is a [trigger] for [this information]
>>
>> In the standard POIs case the minimum [sensor data bundle] is "lat/lon"
>> and then optionally "relative magnetic orientation".
>>
>>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>
>>> I believe Point of Interest data should be thought of as static.
>>>
>>
>> Hmmm, I believe that there are situations in which the data is dynamic,
>> or, if it is static, points to a dynamic data source.
>>
>>  From Rob Manson's post on July 29 [2]:
>>
>> The data can be dynamic "such as access a data stream from a local sensor
>> (e.g. camera or even a VOIP connection)."
>>
>> See [3] for more discussion on this point.
>>
>> Christine
>>
>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-poiwg/2010Jul/0048.html
>> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-poiwg/2010Jul/0046.html
>> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-poiwg/2010Jul/0029.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> --
>
>
> Phil Archer
> W3C Mobile Web Initiative
> http://www.w3.org/Mobile
>
> http://philarcher.org
> @philarcher1
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 3 August 2010 18:56:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:48:25 UTC