W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-poiwg@w3.org > February 2011

Re: The Object Primitive

From: Christine Perey <cperey@perey.com>
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 11:06:49 +0100
Message-ID: <4D4E72B9.9010207@perey.com>
To: Jens de Smit <jens@layar.com>
CC: "public-poiwg@w3.org" <public-poiwg@w3.org>
Hi Jens, thanks for your excellent points!

my replies in-line.

On 2/2/11 1:53 PM, Jens de Smit wrote:
> Hey,
> Some feedback/thoughts/discussion points
> On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Christine Perey<cperey@perey.com>  wrote:
>> I took the locations primitive which Karl provided
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-poiwg/2011Jan/0017.html
>> as well as the suggestions from Roy Davies
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-poiwg/2011Jan/0007.html
>> and created, based on those, a laundry list of what could be included in the
>> "objects primitive".
>> As Roy suggests and we discussed on the call January 26, an Object has a
>> location but it can change over time (in which case it is a NON-FIXED POI),
>> or not moving (in which case it is a FIXED POI).
>> I welcome feedback.
>> Regards,
>> Christine
>> Object Primitive
>> Goal:
>> Provide a rich and flexible description of an object (aka a thing)
>> De-couple or isolate the description of an object and from where it is (a
>> Place of Interest) and other primitives.
>> An object has one location at a (temporary-duration undefined) specific
>> point in TIME but does not have one fixed point over time.
>> An Object of Interest can be a parent to other Objects each with its own
>> description to allow for the representation of complex objects that are the
>> aggregate of a collection of Objects (a car, boat, or airplane).
>> It should not be inferred that each of the elements within the object
>> primitive are not spatially synonymous, but do refer to the same object.
>> High Level Attribution:
>> Object Name
>> Object's Absolute Location at last known time
> Why absolute? Could it not be relative to another location?
If an absolute location is known, it could be added.

If a relative location is known, it could also be added.

I would suggest that both are optional but that either, if in the 
primitive, must have a time stamp.
>> Identification
>> Object's category [living, non-living]
> What is the (use) case for distinguishing living and non-living objects?
I think many things can be inferred via the living vs. non-living ID. 
Having an idea, when available, of the object's living/non-living status 
may help with recognition and tracking algorithms, for example.  Once 
you know it is living, and then know if it is an animal, then something 
may recognize the genus. Then, your algorithms will probably detect 
deformations more often in a specific zone (the head).

non-living materials/objects can also deform (e.g., water, sand) but 
using different parameters. The more which can be quickly codified the 
lower the processing requirement, the faster the response times.

By the way, I'm not attached to this/saying it is required, but I 
suspect it will have utility.
>> Object's Attribution Details
>> Identification
>>                 ID (optional)
>> Identification System or Service
>> ID
>> Associated IDs
> What is exactly the meaning of an "ID", a "System or service ID" and
> an "Assoicated ID".
Don't know, really. Perhaps this is where one stores the living v.s 
non-living, etc These were part of the Location Primitive so I kept 
them. I think the Associated IDs would be helpful if an object is part 
of a larger entity (e.g., the component of a computer, or anything else 
which is composed of multiple objects)
>> Name
>> Last Updated On : Date/Time  (optional)
>> Updated By : owner / author (optional)
>> Use : public, private, restrictions (optional)
>> Ownership info : owner of all or part of a POI
>> Cost - each point can cost more for the people who lease it from the layer
>> owner.
> This seems to come directly from look-here.biz. What's the use case for that?
You are correct. This was integrated from Roy Davies' post.

Cost can be unknown, known, it can be flexible (more for me that for a 
member of a club). I think that having information about the value in 
monetary terms might be important if you are in a shopping application.
>> Status : Active, blocked, deleted (optional)
> This is usually (if not always) in relation in a certain context. I do
> not see how an object of itself can be "active" or "blocked". If it's
> deleted, doesn't it just disappear?
Yes, but once again, these were "inherited" from the location primitive 
and my goal was to keep the two as similar to one another as possible.
>> Trustworthiness : degree of certainty the author has in the accuracy of the
>> object
> What makes an object more or less accurate?
Good catch. It should be a relative assessment of the accuracy of the 
information, not of the object.
>> Category
>> Object (optional)
>>                                 Type
>> Living - composed of one or more cells
>> Non-living - inanimate, not composed of cells
>> [Then we can classify according to animal or plants, mammal, etc!]
> Again, what is the use case for this classification system?
Addressed (to the extent I can) above. If you are going to assign a 
business code to places (e.g., the place is commercial, this kind of a 
commerce, etc) then, why not have taxonomy in the sense of "nature"? 
Just thinking outside the box!!
>> Circumference/radius (the description applies to this Object plus the space
>> around it?)
> Isn't this covered in Location? An object is linked to a Location,
> which defines its spatial boundaries...
Not necessarily. If the object is not linked to a location, then this 
rule does not hold. And the POI might refer to simply the size, if it is 
known, in order to aid with the recognition of how far away it is from 
the user, how to display the digital data in relation to it, etc.
>> Is it planar or 3D?
>> If it is planar, what are its X&Y dimensions? This is the equivalent of area
>> for the location primitive.
>> If it is 3D, what is known about it?
>> Volume
>> Density
>> Identification (optional)
>> Supplier: who made this object?
>> Version: what is its version?
>> Associated Object ID
>> Trustworthiness of this information?
>> What are its relationships to other objects?
>> Is it near a fixed object? How near?
>> Does it belong to someone? A company or an individual?
>> Connected- Part of a larger entity (a motor?)
>> Independent- not part of a larger entity
Received on Sunday, 6 February 2011 10:07:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:48:27 UTC