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

Re: POI based Open AR proposal

From: Henning Schulzrinne <hgs@cs.columbia.edu>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 05:20:12 -0400
Cc: Thomas Wrobel <darkflame@gmail.com>, "roBman@mob-labs.com" <roBman@mob-labs.com>, "public-poiwg@w3.org" <public-poiwg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <9D8E5FAB-4F54-481B-83AC-1BA74BD8A4F9@cs.columbia.edu>
To: "Hermodsson, Klas" <Klas.Hermodsson@sonyericsson.com>

On Sep 3, 2010, at 3:14 AM, Hermodsson, Klas wrote:

> On Sep 2, 2010, at 10:30 , Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
>> Two quick remarks:
>> - See LoST (RFC 5222) for an example of a global distributed infrastructure for mapping. Such infrastructure is probably well beyond the scope of the W3C.
> Thank you, I will have a look at that. I just threw a very fast glance at it, is it correct in understanding that a likely scenario is to have a well known server to query and which may serve links and services relevant to a certain geographic area? As an example, would that mean that if you are in downtown Tokyo all stores, services, and all other info needs to register themselves to one server/service in order for the user to know where to query?

This deserves a longer answer, but the general notion is that there can be any number of server hierarchies, e.g., one tree per service class. There is no "well-known" server as such. There can be several (competing?) server "forests", if that makes sense. In other words, you can slice this both by geography and by service. To be honest,  I don't know of a way to avoid having some linkage - you don't want to send a message to a 1000 servers saying "Hi, you got anything about Tokyo?". (If you do, you are asking Bing or Google - this is a (logically) centralized server.)

Received on Friday, 3 September 2010 09:20:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:48:25 UTC