|Wireless Developer Network Mailing List|
|Mailing List Archives|
|Subject: ||Re: MobileLBSList: WAP/WML interoperable?|
||09/15/2000 09:32:36 AM|
Just a couple of comments:
1. The new version of GML (not yet publically released) will support
2. The referenced document and interfaces as written by Cliff Kottman
are to provoke thought and discussion only. They are not specified, agreed
upon interfaces in any way, shape, or form - although I think they are an
interesting and good start.
3. The OGC is now very focused on LBS/LS and is looking to do a testbed
in 2001 to begin to define and specify the interfaces for interoperable LB
----- Original Message -----
From: Gould Carlson Michael <email@example.com>
To: Alistair Edwardes <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Gould Carlson Michael <email@example.com>: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2000 10:15 AM
Subject: Re: MobileLBSList: WAP/WML interoperable?
> Mensaje citado por: Alistair Edwardes <email@example.com>:
> > >Yes, indeed OGC is *very* keen on LBS, and will need a strong
> > >effort to produce and maintain lightweight specs for that
> > >which will soon be much larger than GIS.
> > >
> > What are your feelings on the current suggested interfaces,
> > WhereIsIt, WhereIsItInTermsIUnderstand, BuildPathway, Who'sThere?
> First, let it be said that these (OpenGIS location based services)
> specs are green, and not intended to be treated as the word of God. It
> was a (good) first cut effort, by Cliff Kottman.
> > I'm not clear as to what interface they actually address. I can see
> > GetLocation, WhereIsIt, Who'sThere are useful for a location server
> but is
> > it the role of a location server to provide services such as
> > WhereIsItInTermsIUnderstand, BuildPathway these seem to be value added
> > services.The implication is that a mobile user will interface
> directly with
> > a location service - I can't see the usefulness of this.
> None of these specs is for end-user use.
> >I guess the
> > confusion lies in exactly what reference model is being used. Do see
> a need
> > for a formal model or do you think that it is generally aggreed and
> > understood?
> Agreed that we need one: completely understood, no.
> > >> I also personally think that a deciding factor for the sucsess of
> > >is
> > >> how
> > >> soon it will support topology.
> > >
> > >Yes, topology is on the to-do list.
> > >
> > What about time stamps?
> Donīt know. You should ask author Ron Lake <firstname.lastname@example.org> about
> his/their plans.
> > Regards Alistair.
> Mike Gould
> To unsubscribe, write to email@example.com
> The MobileLBSList is brought to you by The GeoCommunity and The
To unsubscribe, write to firstname.lastname@example.org
The MobileLBSList is brought to you by The GeoCommunity and The WirelessDeveloperNetwork