Re: [AR Standards Discussion] OGC's proposed GeoSPARQL standard

Concur -

Carl

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Raj Singh" <rsingh@opengeospatial.org>
To: <roBman@mob-labs.com>
Cc: <discussion@arstandards.org>; <public-poiwg@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: [AR Standards Discussion] OGC's proposed GeoSPARQL standard


> Carl has coordinated with the W3C SPARQL folks on a review of this.
>
> It's hard to comment on any specific relationship to a domain of interest 
> such as AR. My general opinion on questions like this is that the 
> technology should be loosely coupled enough to support a wide range of 
> innovation by creative developers in all domains. As long as we support 
> RDF in the POI work, things should take care of themselves in the AR 
> arena.
>
> ---
> Raj
> The OGC: Making location count...
> http://www.opengeospatial.org/contact
>
>
> On Jul 11, at 10:38 AM, Rob Manson wrote:
>
>> Thought I'd post this link to both groups as it seems very relevant in a
>> lot of ways.  Especially back to some early points I made about the
>> separation between "representation" and "query".
>>
>>        OGC Seeks Comment on candidate GeoSPARQL standard
>>        http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/requests/80
>>        Please note: This Request is scheduled to close on 5 August
>>        2011.
>>
>> George, Raj, Carl - what are your thoughts on this in relation to AR?
>>
>>
>> roBman
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discussion mailing list
> Discussion@arstandards.org
> http://arstandards.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
>

Received on Tuesday, 12 July 2011 19:20:31 UTC