- From: Andy Braun <ajbraun@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 08:21:33 -0400
- To: roBman@mob-labs.com
- Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, "Public POI @ W3C" <public-poiwg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <AANLkTinKWKAuJyaSNaBFSrGYqtcYTGcQP17HCs1tig1v@mail.gmail.com>
It is great living in the USA. By the time you wake up, someone else may have already given you the right words and finished the debate. So first off, I think the most important thing is: "it's better to finalise things in W3C WGs than to invent them" Secondly, the intention is that this group needs "to focus on stabilising this existing space as a starting point". I also completely agree that sensors are an important aspect to our ongoing discussions. Finally just a comment on ISMAR. It does look like the AR standards workshop [1] will be great but the charter for this POI WG will either be pending approval or just passed. So while I will participate in the event along with many other members of this working group, it isn't a W3C meeting and we can't really hold one either. Andy [1] http://www.perey.com/ARStandardsMeeting.html On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 3:41 AM, Rob Manson <roBman@mob-labs.com> wrote: > Hi Dan, > > I think there are already a lot of reference designs for a POI standard > including Layar [1], Junaio [2], KARML/Geospot [3], SimpleGeo [4], > GeoJSON [5], GeoRSS [6], Geo Microformat [7], OpenGeo [8], Geo Planet > [9] just to name a very few. > > What we're missing is the work from an open standards body to generalise > these different approaches into a simple, coherent and re-usable model > to bind these disparate data silo's into one single shared web of POIs. > > So I completely agree with you...we ought to have one by now 8) > > If this group needs to focus on stabilising this existing space as a > starting point then I do think that's a great idea. And keeping the > door open to evolve this mission as the field quickly changes - largely > driven by the community of implementors - will also be essential. > > I'm really looking forward to reviewing all of these approaches at the > Standards Workshop in Seoul and I think as a group we can definitely > work to consolidate some useful perspectives to feed back into this > groups work. > > I also think that the broader focus on sensors and Patterns of Interest > will inform a lot of our ongoing discussions too. > > > roBman > > [1] http://layar.pbworks.com/GetPOIs-Request+and+Response+Examples > [2] http://www.junaio.com/publisher/poissearch > [3] https://research.cc.gatech.edu/kharma/content/karml-reference > [4] http://simplegeo.com/docs/getting-started/introduction#what-record > [5] http://geojson.org/geojson-spec.html#point > [6] http://www.georss.org/Main_Page > [7] http://microformats.org/wiki/geo > [8] http://opengeo.org/publications/opengeo-architecture/#4 > [9] http://developer.yahoo.com/geo/geoplanet/ > > > On Fri, 2010-09-10 at 09:16 +0200, Dan Brickley wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Rob Manson <roBman@mob-labs.com> wrote: > > > Hi Andy, > > > > > > I'm fascinated to see how cut-down the charter now is, especially based > > > on the public discussion and apparent consensus that had been forming > on > > > this list. > > > > > > Personally I find it hard to see how a solely Point of Interest > standard > > > based on the thinnest definition will be anything but very out dated > and > > > redundant by Dec 2011 (scheduled date for REC). > > > > If a workable POI standard is so easy, we ought to have one by now! > > > > > Also, since so many people will be in Seoul for ISMAR10, ISWC, Mobile > AR > > > Summit and the AR Standards Workshop then surely that would be a great > > > time to kick off this discussion in more detail. > > > > Good idea. If you can also kick start a community of implementors who > > will try to build, test and refine richer, more sophisticated > > potential standards for Geo/AR, it should be possible imho for the W3C > > group's mission to evolve over the next year or so to track that > > changing reality. But in the absence of candidate designs that have > > multiple implementations, I'm completely supportive of a modest, > > "let's stabilise the basics" charter. > > > > Generally it's better to finalise things in W3C WGs than to invent > > them, and we still seem to be in a very inventive phase here... > > > > cheers, > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > roBman > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 13:12 -0400, Braun, Andrew wrote: > > >> Hi Everyone, > > >> > > >> First off an introduction, I am Andy Braun from Sony Ericsson. I have > > >> been tagged to chair this POI working group. In addition to this > > >> group, my responsibilities in Sony Ericsson include researching > > >> emerging web and application technologies for the office of the CTO. > > >> > > >> I hope those of you who are Advisory Committee representatives have > > >> already seen that a Points of Interest WG charter [1] has been > > >> submitted for review. The charter details three main deliverables: a > > >> "Points of Interest" Recommendation, a WG Note detailing AR specific > > >> POI properties, and another note that covers how AR and Web standards > > >> can converge. There are other potentially separate deliverables, such > > >> as best practices, use cases/requirements, a 'landscape' document, > > >> test suite, etc. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> The review period ends on the 24th of September, so please be sure > > >> that you or your AC rep fill in the survey [2] as soon as possible. > > >> If you haven't joined W3C yet, now is the time. Once the review > > >> ends, there is a two week period where W3C management reviews the > > >> results and creates the new WG. So, the WG should be ready to go the > > >> week of 11 October. While we could have our first teleconference > > >> during the week of 11 October, many of the group’s participants will > > >> likely be at ISMAR that week. So I recommend we have our call during > > >> the week of 18 October. Before then, I'll send out a poll for > > >> selecting the time and date. I'll follow up with an agenda about a > > >> week or so before the meeting. > > >> > > >> With regards to the first face to face meeting, we did talk about > > >> meeting at TPAC in Lyon during November. However, for a number of > > >> reasons which I am happy to discuss, this will not be possible. I > > >> would like to meet face to face this year. With holidays approaching I > > >> believe the best chance would be during the first week or second week > > >> of December. I will provide more details about the site and logistics > > >> in a future note. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> I look forward to a continued interesting and fruitful discussion. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> > > >> Andy Braun > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> [1] http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/charter/ > > >> [2] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/POI-2010/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Received on Friday, 10 September 2010 12:22:10 UTC