Re: AW: Re: "geo:" URIs

Well, we already have Google Moon and Mars, so POIs can't be far behind...
http://www.google.com/mars/
http://www.google.com/moon/

---
Raj
The OGC: Making location count...
http://www.opengeospatial.org/contact


On Jun 28, at 1:56 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote:

> ITYM "ahead of my time".
> 
> FYI, Wikipedia has already implemented metadata markup for coordinates on other bodies.
> 
> And I played no part (that
> I'm aware of) in GML doing so.
> 
> -- 
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> 
> On Jun 28, 2011 6:20 PM, "Alexander Mayrhofer" <alexander.mayrhofer@nic.at> wrote:
> > Andy,
> > 
> > Honestly - you were the only person ever mentioning the Moon/Mars cases - but everybody has a hobby ;-)
> > 
> > Alex
> > 
> > ----- Originalnachricht -----
> > Von: public-poiwg-request@w3.org <public-poiwg-request@w3.org>
> > An: public-poiwg@w3c.org <public-poiwg@w3c.org>
> > Gesendet: Tue Jun 28 18:41:14 2011
> > Betreff: Re: "geo:" URIs
> > 
> > On 28 June 2011 13:32, Jens de Smit <jens@layar.com> wrote:
> >>> What about non-WGS84 CRSs, so that the schema is a) future-proof and
> >>> b) capable of expressing PoIs on other bodies, such as  the Moon or
> >>> Mars?
> >>
> >> Both GML and RFC5870 allow for specifying a different CRS. I don't
> >> know if there is an interstellar CRS yet, but the great thing is that
> >> we do not have to come up with it because we can use any CRS we want.
> > 
> > Thanks, Jens.
> > 
> > Yes, it is a great thing, which is why I asked for it to be included
> > in RFC5870 ;-)
> > 
> > It's important that we can refer unambiguously to, say, the locations
> > of features on The Moon, or the exploratory journeys of Mars landers.
> > 
> > I'm not familiar with GML, hence the question; it's good to know that
> > it allows for other CRSs.
> > 
> > -- 
> > Andy Mabbett
> > @pigsonthewing
> > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> >

Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2011 18:00:38 UTC