Re: Geolocation and POI

Hello Lars Erik,

Thank you for your invitation to inputs on this topic.

As you may realize, AR POI involves location and device orientation as 
*two* of the many possible types of metadata attributed to a point of 
interest.

The "point" can and will very frequently, be an object (thing or a 
person)  moving in space/without geoposition or orientation associated. 
Even if the GEO WG charter were to include feature extraction 
attributes, I fear that the AR community could have difficulty "seeing" 
the definition of POI as their domain for contribution if it is "housed" 
in the GEO WG.

My major concerns are that

(1) the AR work will be lost (not receive the attention it warrants) if 
it is part of the Geo location group.

If the GEO WG scope/charter encompasses all the possible AR activity, 
these will gradually become "charter" creep.

(2) people who originally chartered the GEO WG are not the best to be 
implementing/writing the recommendations which need to be implemented by 
the AR platform publishers.

My proposal is that there be two separate WGs within W3C and that these 
have close working relationships and perhaps co-locate a meeting per 
year, as needed/ convenient.

A separate WG will permit the charter to treat AR is a "mash up" of many 
technologies. An AR WG will have the ability to establish liaisons with 
many groups which includes Geo WG but others which are outside the scope 
of interest of a GEO WG.

in a separate e-mail I will write up what I propose to be a starting 
point for a charter.

I look forward to reading what others think/would like to have.

-- 
Christine

Spime Wrangler

cperey@perey.com
mobile +41 79 436 68 69
VoIP (from US) +1 (617) 848-8159
Skype (from anywhere) Christine_Perey

On 7/9/2010 2:58 PM, Lars Erik Bolstad wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There is an interest in producing specifications for POI (Points of
> Interest) data and work is underway on a charter for a new POI working
> group:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-members/2010AprJun/0067.html
>
> We are currently working on the charter for the next set of deliverables
> from the Geolocation working group.
> At this time our scope includes some specific additions to the
> Geolocation API ("Level 2"), as well as a separate DeviceOrientation
> Event specification and most likely also a Location Provider REST API
> specification, but there is an interest in extending the scope.
>
> The discussions around Augmented Reality on the Web and standardization
> of POI data are clearly relevant to the scope of work in the Geolocation
> working group, and I am wondering if it would make sense to consider
> including the planned POI work in the Geolocation charter. The feedback
> I have received so far suggests that this is an interesting idea to
> some, but there might be good arguments against.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Lars Erik
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Friday, 9 July 2010 16:12:04 UTC