- From: Henning Schulzrinne <hgs@cs.columbia.edu>
- Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2010 16:07:07 -0400
- To: "Hermodsson, Klas" <Klas.Hermodsson@sonyericsson.com>
- Cc: Jens de Smit <jens.desmit@surfnet.nl>, Thomas Wrobel <darkflame@gmail.com>, 전종홍 <hollobit@etri.re.kr>, Matt Womer <mdw@w3.org>, "public-poiwg@w3.org" <public-poiwg@w3.org>
We seem to be talking about several different use cases, and there's a danger of commingling them. I suspect this is because each of us has a particular application in mind, but we're (presumably) trying to cover a somewhat broader area. If I'm parsing this correctly, there are at least two broad scenarios: (1) "AR": device detects a nearby POI (building, sign, ...) and performs some related action, visualization or other media rendering; (2) "GIS" POI: An application wants to search for suitable POIs in a defined area, and then render them in some way. Active behavior or 3D wizardry is not necessary or called for, searchability, simplicity and uniform structure are. I think there's a common intersection, but probably easiest by having pointers to properties and behavior that can then be ignored by other applications. For example, a POI "object" can easily include a set of URIs that contain related media, with appropriate tagging. Henning On Aug 20, 2010, at 10:31 AM, Hermodsson, Klas wrote: > On Aug 20, 2010, at 9:14 , Jens de Smit wrote: > > On 19/08/2010 09:49, Hermodsson, Klas wrote: > I think two levels (i.e. [criteria]<>[data]) is too simplistic. I would like to see a three level approach: > [criteria]<>[representation]<>[actual data] > > I'm not really seeing this (yet). They way you put it, isn't the > representation implicit in the type of data that's being linked? As in, > if the [actual data] is X3D we're dealing with a "visual" representation > (of the subtype "3D model") and if it's an OGG container with a Vorbis > stream inside it's an "aural" representation, etc. > > I may be using some terms that are not really suitable above. Let's take a concrete example to illustrate: > > - Company A has a sign with their logo on outside their stores > - When this logo is detected the company wants a spinning sphere with the logo on to be displayed while a music piece is playing > - If you select/activate/click this spinning sphere the latest ad is played back as a video > > Criteria: if computer vision detection of the logo occurs (criteria expressed in suitable markup language) > Representation: a spinning sphere + music (layout and resources of this representation expressed in suitable markup language) > Actual data: the video ad (content in specific format stored reached through some URI and over suitable protocol) > > If we then consider that one device is a audio only device and one device is a touch display mobile then representation and actual data may change but criteria is the same. I was just thinking about the separation of these three parts. Maybe what I call representation is what other people call data? Note that both representation and data may need "layout" markup to explain how it should appear in our real world. > > Best regards, > Klas >
Received on Sunday, 22 August 2010 20:07:54 UTC