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

Re: POI data model

From: Thomas Wrobel <darkflame@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 19:32:55 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTinEjySFk+hMLiGe08+UgGxUCujNxKMeS12FR=n8@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jens de Smit <jens.desmit@surfnet.nl>
Cc: "public-poiwg@w3.org" <public-poiwg@w3.org>
Just putting it "out there"; but if you could specify one anchor
relative to another surely this would kill
a few birds with one stone?
(so you have a base pivot/location for the building, and then other
things relative to that).

You could then even (at some point) specify co-ordinates relative to a
marker/image or other reference.

On 28 October 2010 17:56, Jens de Smit <jens.desmit@surfnet.nl> wrote:
> On 28/10/2010 17:46, Raj Singh wrote:
>> I changed centroid to anchor and made a new section for listing types of anchors. We can worry about the extensibility mechanism later.
>> Jens, I worry about anchors that only have 2D or 3D grid references within a building. It seems to me much harder to ensure interoperability and "linked data" without a common geographic reference. Maybe every space can at least have a geographic anchor for the enclosing building, then use a local grid reference system (x,y,z) to go from the building's anchor to the individual space.
> Yes, I was thinking along the same lines but didn't want to introduce
> more food for thought in my previous e-mail. A combined lat/lon/alt
> starting point with an x/y/z offset seems a very useful anchor type.
>> Can you post your suggestions to the wiki?
> I will, I just wanted to get some initial response from the mailing list
> before tearing apart the wiki with my thought process. I'll probably get
> around to updating it later today or else tomorrow.
> Regards,
> Jens
Received on Thursday, 28 October 2010 17:33:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:48:26 UTC