W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > June 2010

[whatwg] input type="location" proposals

From: James Salsman <jsalsman@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 15:14:07 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTindJdHrikb0mFFhGUW4ccX4rooA0D9iOpmXWZE5@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Jeremy Keith <jeremy at adactio.com> wrote:
> Michelango wrote:
>>...
>> 3. Maps data are often non-free and non-open, reliable maps data are
>> always non-free and non-open.
>
> The second clause of point 3 is demonstrably false. Said demonstration is http://www.openstreetmap.org/ which in many cases (e.g. the town I live in) has better, more up-to-date reliable data than its non-free, non-open counterparts.
>
> See also: Wikipedia, blogs, and much of the World Wide Web....

The Wikimedia California Chapter initial funding proposal has some
interactive map work in it, if people are interested.  I've been
trying to raise money for it but it's been going pretty slow.  Anyone
who cares can find it on line.  It needs $150,000 plus management
salary to get going as a viable concern.  The point here is that even
free things take time and/or money to get right and and get open
right.

Locations should have security considerations similar to contacts.  It
seems reasonable to assume that people are going to want to download
them more than upload them, unless they have a very tightly controlled
assumption about of the list of recipients, and some assurance that
their assumptions are correct.  Also locations share a lot in common
with the user's contacts, of course, including the fact that at least
one is associated with the user.  (Telepresence is an interesting
example of a situation where a person may be associated with multiple
locations, but those are so rare that example seems contrived.)

Regards,
James Salsman
Received on Friday, 25 June 2010 15:14:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:24 UTC