Re: Introductions and WG objectives

Just to introduce myself, despite my role more as a background
participant on this group due to my work time constraints.

I'm part of a small, two-person company deeply interested in AR for
both practical and entertainment use's in the near future. I also
believe in the long term that AR can have a profound impact on our
society, offering a lot of benefits both for individuals, as well as
being helping reduce our resource consumption of society at large..

I'm also part of a small group working on a open solution for
social/realtime AR between individuals or groups (arwave.org). Our
goal is to ensure people can communicate privately with geolocated
data without needing to be on the same server. Essentially we are
trying to showcase a distributed, open, method for AR data beyond the
static "one to many" methods around today.

 oh, and I'm also a huge fan of Dennou Coil.

Overall I believe in much of what other people have already said in
what an AR standard should bring.
Specifically;

* Easy of creation. Associating a arbitrary bit of data with a fixed
location (or a marker), should be as simple, if not much easier, then
setting up a webpage is now. The lower the barrier for content
creation, the more rich and diverse its applications will be.

*AR is just one possible output method. Fundamentally we are just
establishing a way to tie virtual data to the real world, which could
be viewed in many different ways. That said, AR is a good use-case as
it pretty much establishes the "maximum" requirements of whats needed
to tie stuff to the real world. (AR needs lon/lat/alt, as well as
x/y/z rotation, all idealy to mm accuracy....placing a pin on
google-map hardly needs that).

* The trigger/content associations should be protocol natural as much
as possible. That is, the same form of association should be able to
be expressed over http, rss, json, xmpp/wfp etc to suit the use. It
should not, for example, be a requirement that everything is done as
"webpages" with html over http. Webpages might be the easiest
framework to adjust or emulate - but its probably not the best fitting
one for most use cases. (If for no other the concept of a "page" is
meaningless in AR space - most data will be streamed/aggravated in
some way)

* POI is just a sub-set of a larger super-set of potential
triggers<>content associations. I like thinking in terms of
triggers/content as it keeps options open in the future. Its ok (and
realistic) to focus on the POI subset of location based triggers now,
but we should at least keep in mind its part of a larger group of many
other possible triggers and where appropriate leaves things open to
expansion. (For example, I personally see image based triggers as
being just as useful, even if it does take a lot more work on the
client end)

* We should use existing work done where appropriate.

That pretty much some's up my thinking on the subject - most heard
before, but spread about elsewhere.
Overall I'm very happy with the comments and direction being taken for
the most part.

-Thomas Wrobel



On 23 October 2010 08:32, Christine Perey <cperey@perey.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On the first POI WG teleconference we were asked to post to the list to
> introduce ourselves and to share what we would like to accomplish in the WG.
>
> I'm an independent consultant and industry analyst who evangelizes in
> various communities for greater adoption of real time, rich-media mobile
> services for consumers.
>
> Augmented Reality is a "space" in which I've been working since mid-2006,
> doing technology scouting, technology transfer, business development and
> market development. You might get more information about what I do for
> clients and the community by visiting my web site www.perey.com
>
> I believe the objective is to have publishing for and "consuming" an AR user
> experience become as easy as publishing for user agents which are *NOT*
> built for placing/viewing information in context with the real world (e.g.,
> iPad applications, Web browsers today).
>
> That content which has one or more components which are viewable (or may be
> heard or felt) in association with/in the real world must be associated with
> triggers.
>
> Geo-location tagged content almost fits in this category today. If/when the
> user's position (lat/long) and orientation are known, then content can be
> placed in context.
>
> I would like to see the existing techniques for displaying information in
> context benefit from the deep examination which experts in a W3C WG can
> provide, and an open data format recommended.
>
> I hope that a group such as the POI WG can codify the association between
> content and triggers and, on that basis, publish an open, efficient and
> extensible data format for content and triggers.
>
>
> --
> Christine
>
> Spime Wrangler
>
> cperey@perey.com
> mobile +41 79 436 68 69
> VoIP (from US) +1 (617) 848-8159
> Skype (from anywhere) Christine_Perey
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 26 October 2010 14:37:18 UTC