Geolocation ideas

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Geolocation ideas

Ian Hickson


Hey Chaals,

Could you please confirm that it is acceptable for us to begin
unofficially discussing geolocation API requirements on the
[hidden email] mailing list and for us to start noodling on ideas in
CVS in the http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/ directory? We would like
to start today.

If yes, then could you maybe please also confirm that the working group
will adopt geolocation APIs as a working group work item, at least until
the W3C has decided whether to create a new working group for this? As far
as I can tell no working group members has expressed their dissent and
several have expressed their agreement since I first mentioned this last
week, which puts us ahead of most of our working group decisions! :-)

I understand that you are travelling; my apologies for making this
request when you are indisposed.

Cheers,
--
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Geolocation ideas

Charles McCathieNevile-2

Cc+ appformats, since it seems that we will be merged with them soon and  
they should get a chance to comment too (although there is a large overlap  
I don't think it is 100%).

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 17:33:53 -0300, Ian Hickson <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hey Chaals,
>
> Could you please confirm that it is acceptable for us to begin
> unofficially discussing geolocation API requirements on the
> [hidden email] mailing list and for us to start noodling on ideas  
> in CVS in the http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/ directory? We would
> like to start today.

I cannot stop you doing it. On the other hand, given that there is an  
existing mailing list and that you have been explicitly asked to use it  
for the topic it was set up for, it seems a bit small-minded not to do so.  
Is there any obvious reason for continuing the discussion here that has  
escaped my attention? I am concerned about the effect one can observe in  
HTML, where effective transparency is destroyed by the fact that there are  
an large set of different discussion fora one needs to track in order to  
discover where relevant information is, making it very difficult to  
determine what is being proposed, let aone decided, unless one works  
full-time on HTML. I don't see that as conducive to good, informed open  
development.

I would therefore request that you keep discussion on this topic to the  
mailing list designed to gather it in one place.

> If yes, then could you maybe please also confirm that the working group
> will adopt geolocation APIs as a working group work item, at least until
> the W3C has decided whether to create a new working group for this? As  
> far as I can tell no working group members has expressed their dissent
> and several have expressed their agreement since I first mentioned this
> last week, which puts us ahead of most of our working group decisions!
> :-)

It would appear that someone is sitting on some kind of IPR/patent block  
that has been commnicated to hte team in confidence. So there is nnot much  
we can do to figure out who or what except look at the ongoing  
communication and see if something stands out enough to start making  
speculative guesses.

Unfortunately, this is not easy to work with. Formally taking on the work  
item in this group within this context seems like a bad idea - the patent  
policy is there for a reason and we don't do ourselves a lot of favours by  
pretending that the world is nicer than it is.

Like you, I am upset that W3C has decided to split this off somewhere  
else, and that in the best case we will have to wait weeks to do anything  
formal (and for possible worst cases we can consider the 6 months it took  
to propose a charter we had pretty much agreed on as a strawman, or the  
years that some W3C activities have gone without charters :( ). However,  
unless there is no sign of progress in W3C (and at the moment they are  
showing signs of progress, if not actual measurable reaching of the  
various milestones for a new group) I propose to defer the question,  
rather than try to take on a new formal deliverable. If there is no  
apparent movement in the time between now and our face to face meeting,  
that may be time to take it up again. In the meantime why not give the W3C  
Team a little credit for acting in good faith, and the time to do their  
work at a reasonable rate?

Since the webspace at dev.w3.org/2006/webapi is just a set of addresses  
for convenience, and since we are discussing something that is clearly  
some kind of WebAPI, unless there is some process reason I don't know of  
or you do something blatantly stupid like trying to make a document look  
like it has more W3C support than it does through inappropriate use of  
stylesheets, missing or misleading status statements and so on, I don't  
see that it is impossible to put a proposal for a spec into that space.  
Indeed, there is no reason I can see that a geolocation group could not  
continue using a chunk of that space, given that there is trust between  
the members of the two groups not to step on each other's work.

> I understand that you are travelling; my apologies for making this
> request when you are indisposed.

Well, the reply gets out according to the vagaries of net access and my  
time, which is the same rule that always applies. You just picked the  
moment I finished work and went to celebrate my birthday as the time to  
send mail, which was perhaps an unluckily sub-optimal choice.

cheers

Chaals

--
Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals   Try Opera 9.5: http://snapshot.opera.com

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Geolocation ideas

Doug Schepers-3

Hi, Chaals-

Charles McCathieNevile wrote (on 6/5/08 11:21 AM):
>
> If there is no apparent movement in the time between now
> and our face to face meeting, that may be time to take it up again. In
> the meantime why not give the W3C Team a little credit for acting in
> good faith, and the time to do their work at a reasonable rate?

Thanks for the support.  I am conscious of the potential delay, and I'm
trying to mitigate it as much as possible.


> Since the webspace at dev.w3.org/2006/webapi is just a set of addresses
> for convenience, and since we are discussing something that is clearly
> some kind of WebAPI, unless there is some process reason I don't know of
> or you do something blatantly stupid like trying to make a document look
> like it has more W3C support than it does through inappropriate use of
> stylesheets, missing or misleading status statements and so on, I don't
> see that it is impossible to put a proposal for a spec into that space.
> Indeed, there is no reason I can see that a geolocation group could not
> continue using a chunk of that space, given that there is trust between
> the members of the two groups not to step on each other's work.


Matt Womer set up a (temporary?) playground to submit geolocation API
documents for discussion:
     http://dev.w3.org/geo/
and
     http://dev.w3.org/geo/api

All of Chaals' caveats above apply to the new repo, too, of course... as
do any IPR issues you can think of.  And any documents can be sent to
the public-geolocation email list as attachments, too, if that is more
convenient.


> Well, the reply gets out according to the vagaries of net access and my
> time, which is the same rule that always applies. You just picked the
> moment I finished work and went to celebrate my birthday as the time to
> send mail, which was perhaps an unluckily sub-optimal choice.

Happy birthday!

Regards-
-Doug Schepers
W3C Team Contact, SVG, CDF, and WebAPI

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Geolocation ideas

Ian Hickson

On Thu, 5 Jun 2008, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:

> >
> > Could you please confirm that it is acceptable for us to begin
> > unofficially discussing geolocation API requirements on the
> > [hidden email] mailing list and for us to start noodling on
> > ideas in CVS in the http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/ directory?
> > We would like to start today.
>
> I cannot stop you doing it. On the other hand, given that there is an
> existing mailing list and that you have been explicitly asked to use it
> for the topic it was set up for, it seems a bit small-minded not to do
> so.

Okie dokie. We'll use the public-geolocation list. Happy birthday, btw. :-)


On Thu, 5 Jun 2008, Doug Schepers wrote:
>
> Matt Womer set up a (temporary?) playground to submit geolocation API
> documents for discussion:
>     http://dev.w3.org/geo/
> and
>     http://dev.w3.org/geo/api

Cool, we'll use that.

Cheers,
--
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Geolocation ideas

Charles McCathieNevile-2

On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 23:01:28 +0200, Ian Hickson <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, 5 Jun 2008, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>> >
>> > Could you please confirm that it is acceptable for us to begin
>> > unofficially discussing geolocation API requirements on the
>> > [hidden email] mailing list and for us to start noodling on
>> > ideas in CVS in the http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/ directory?
>> > We would like to start today.
>>
>> I cannot stop you doing it. On the other hand, given that there is an
>> existing mailing list and that you have been explicitly asked to use it
>> for the topic it was set up for, it seems a bit small-minded not to do
>> so.
>
> Okie dokie. We'll use the public-geolocation list. Happy birthday, btw.  
> :-)

Thanks and thanks :)

cheers

Chaals-the-slightly-more-connected

> On Thu, 5 Jun 2008, Doug Schepers wrote:
>>
>> Matt Womer set up a (temporary?) playground to submit geolocation API
>> documents for discussion:
>>     http://dev.w3.org/geo/
>> and
>>     http://dev.w3.org/geo/api
>
> Cool, we'll use that.
>
> Cheers,



--
Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals   Try Opera 9.5: http://snapshot.opera.com

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Geolocation ideas

Charles McCathieNevile-2
In reply to this post by Doug Schepers-3

On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 22:09:30 +0200, Doug Schepers <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Matt Womer set up a (temporary?) playground to submit geolocation API  
> documents for discussion:
>      http://dev.w3.org/geo/
> and
>      http://dev.w3.org/geo/api
>
> All of Chaals' caveats above apply to the new repo, too, of course... as  
> do any IPR issues you can think of.  And any documents can be sent to  
> the public-geolocation email list as attachments, too, if that is more  
> convenient.

Although there is a W3C policy on what kind of attachments are acceptable.  
In short, please use HTML if you have to do this. (Having versioned  
documents is far better than attachments IMHO)

>> Well, the reply gets out according to the vagaries of net access and my  
>> time, which is the same rule that always applies. You just picked the  
>> moment I finished work and went to celebrate my birthday as the time to  
>> send mail, which was perhaps an unluckily sub-optimal choice.
>
> Happy birthday!

Thanks ;)

cheers

Chaals

--
Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals   Try Opera 9.5: http://snapshot.opera.com

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Geolocation ideas

Doug Schepers-3

Hi, Folks-

Charles McCathieNevile wrote (on 6/5/08 8:01 PM):

>
> On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 22:09:30 +0200, Doug Schepers <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Matt Womer set up a (temporary?) playground to submit geolocation API
>> documents for discussion:
>>      http://dev.w3.org/geo/
>> and
>>      http://dev.w3.org/geo/api
>>
>> All of Chaals' caveats above apply to the new repo, too, of course...
>> as do any IPR issues you can think of.  And any documents can be sent
>> to the public-geolocation email list as attachments, too, if that is
>> more convenient.
>
> Although there is a W3C policy on what kind of attachments are
> acceptable. In short, please use HTML if you have to do this. (Having
> versioned documents is far better than attachments IMHO)

True.

FYI, if anyone needs a CVS account for Geolocation, please contact Matt
or me.  If you need one for WebApps, contact me.


Regards-
-Doug Schepers
W3C Team Contact, SVG, CDF, and WebAPI