- From: Thomas Wrobel <darkflame@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 21:03:33 +0100
- To: "Seiler, Karl" <karl.seiler@navteq.com>
- Cc: "roBman@mob-labs.com" <roBman@mob-labs.com>, "public-poiwg@w3.org" <public-poiwg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <AANLkTinqNiYzDQyHuTeSOWDs6DYM-iK9YUNo9oEu6PKh@mail.gmail.com>
I think this goes a bit back to the early <trigger> <content> idea as that has a nice clear separation. In this case the trigger is the location (by some GPS standard - not a description), and the content is a POI. (which could be a description/name of that location, or a 3d mesh, or any other bit of data). The trigger can be, of course, updated completely independently of the data. (as in the moving across the street example) On 13 December 2010 19:38, Seiler, Karl <karl.seiler@navteq.com> wrote: > I agree that a prime goal should be the separation of the definition of a > POI and a location. > > A POI may need one or more locations to describe itself (navigation point > x/y/z, display point center, main entrance door front, parking spots, a > parcel area, a bounded polygon of linked X/y's, a set of navigable map > references - link/side/spot, etc.). > > POI's can and do move from one location to another (closed and moved across > the street). > > Locations may not always have POIs. > > A location can be shared by several POIs (stores in a mall). > > _______________________________ > Karl Seiler > Director Location Technology & Services > NAVTEQ - Chicago > (T) +312-894-7231 > (M) +312-375-5932 > www.navteq.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-poiwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-poiwg-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of Rob Manson > Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 9:27 PM > To: public-poiwg@w3.org > Subject: Separation of Presentation from the Places/Things > > Hi, > > a while back I posted a note about the Data Model coming in 2 main > flavours[1]. > > 1. the data describing the physical placement of the POI > (e.g.lat/lon/alt/x-rot/y-rot/z-rot). > 2. the content the POI is linked to > (e.g. title, description, type, keywords, favicon/thumbnail, > 3D model, etc.). > > Looking back at it I think I didn't quite express it correctly...but the > idea is important and needs more discussion. I think with point 1. I > was really thinking about Presentation. With point 2. I was thinking > about the underlying Place or Thing that the POI was re-presenting. > > On the Data Model page there seems to be a real blurring of these 2 > types of data (e.g. "Apply some CSS-like "outer-glow: 3pt yellow;" > effect to your POI"). > > I think clarifying this abstraction would allow the two aspects of the > Data Model to develop more freely and independently. > > NOTE: In the Mobile AR space there is a constant push for more freedom > in the Presentation layer (just like CSS enabled with the web). But in > the Data Model discussion this is quite different from separation of > Markup and Presentation. > > NOTE: Dynamic behaviour (e.g. scripting) may also need to be explicitly > separated out too. > > > roBman > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/wiki/Data_Model#Notes > > > > > > The information contained in this communication may be CONFIDENTIAL and is > intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not > the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, > distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is > strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, > please notify the sender and delete/destroy the original message and any > copy of it from your computer or paper files. >
Received on Monday, 13 December 2010 20:04:07 UTC