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

Re: POI data model

From: Jens de Smit <jens.desmit@surfnet.nl>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 20:25:52 +0200
Message-ID: <4CC9C030.6050608@surfnet.nl>
To: "public-poiwg@w3.org" <public-poiwg@w3.org>
On 28/10/2010 19:32, Thomas Wrobel wrote:
> 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.

Having relative positioning will be as good as _crucial_ for efficiently
defining more complex structures, like descibing superstructures and
substructures (such as rooms in a building) and so on.

Now, do we want to do this relative positioning

a. standalone (e.g. every POI carries a lat/lon/alt and an offset)
b. by reference (this POI's position is relative to that POIs position)
c. through nesting
d. some or all of the above


I think a. would yield us too little flexibility and leads to heavy data
duplication, but can be the easiest method for simple cases. Option b.
could be useful but requires a way to uniquely identify POI's in a set.
Option c. will lead to complicated documents (arbitrary depth nesting)
but allows a very intuitive way of building up a structure (golly,
almost like an HTML document).

So I'd say option d.


Received on Thursday, 28 October 2010 18:26:33 UTC

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