ISSUE-37: Should we use geo URIs?

geouris

State:

CLOSED

Product:

Core FPWD

Raised by:

Matt Womer

Opened on:

2011-05-11

Description:

From: leigh.klotz@xerox.com
Date: Fri May 06 18:51:47 2011
Archived: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-poiwg/2011May/0025.html

[[
Have you considered RFC 5870, which proposes a URI scheme for locations
("Geo URI")? It could give you a URI representation for the latitude
and longitude attributes which are currently separate.
]]

See http://tools.ietf.org/search/rfc5870

Related Actions Items:

No related actions

Related emails:

Re: 'geo:' URIs (from jens@layar.com on 2011-06-28)
'geo:' URIs (from alexander.mayrhofer@nic.at on 2011-06-27)
RE: Agenda May 19, 2011 (from karl.seiler@navteq.com on 2011-05-19)
Re: Agenda May 19, 2011 (from cperey@perey.com on 2011-05-18)
Agenda May 19, 2011 (from Andrew.Braun@sonyericsson.com on 2011-05-18)
Minutes POI Teleconference 12 May 2011 (from mdw@w3.org on 2011-05-12)
ISSUE-37 (geouris): Should we use geo URIs? (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2011-05-11)

Due to us needing more complex representations than just points, we're not using geo: URIs.

Matt Womer, 14 Jul 2011, 18:15:53