Re: [Geopriv] Fwd: Call for consensus: WG item adoption - HELD Measurement

From: Carl Reed ^lt;>
Date: Mon Jun 28 2010 - 12:33:53 EDT

As the semantics of measurement and observation have been harmonized with OGC/ISO standards, I have no problem with HELD measurement moving forward. That siad, I should add that for future work in which observations and their related properties (such as measure) are to be modeled and encoded, I would encourage the group to consider the OGC Observations and Measurements standards. A revision of the current standard will soon be an ISO standard as an OGC standard. The standard consists of two parts: An abstract model and also the associated encoding schema (OMXML). An example is below.



The following could be made simpler but instead includes information about the temperature at the time the observation was produced, information about the processes related to the observation, and so forth.


 <gml:description>Observation test instance: fruit mass</gml:description>
 <gml:name>Observation test 1</gml:name>
 <om:type xlink:href=""/>
 <om:resultTime xlink:href="#ot1t"/>
 <!-- a notional URL identifying a procedure ... -->
 <!-- environmental conditions during measurement -->
   <om:name xlink:href=""/>
   <om:value xsi:type="gml:MeasureType" uom="Cel">22.3</om:value>
 <!-- a notional URN identifying the observed property -->
 <!-- a notional WFS call identifying the object regarding which the observation was made -->
  xlink:href=";featureid=fruit37f "/>

 <!-- The XML Schema type of the result is indicated using the value of the xsi:type attribute -->


----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard L. Barnes" <>
To: "Brian Rosen" <>
Cc: <>
Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2010 10:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Geopriv] Fwd: Call for consensus: WG item adoption

> <hat type="individual"/>
> FWIW, what you're asking w.r.t. -measurements is basically what it
> already does. Each measurement type is in its own namespace, as is
> the measurements container itself. So in principle, you could re-use
> these data structure elsewhere.
> Related: I think -measurements is a very high-priority item. It is
> needed to bring HELD to feature-parity with some of the most commonly-
> used location protocols on the Internet (e.g., the Google and Skyhook
> location protocols).
> On Jun 27, 2010, at 5:07 PM, Brian Rosen wrote:
>> I am in favor of adopting relative location and deref protocol.
>> I am sanguine about -measurements. I don't think measurements are
>> tied to a protocol. So, if I had my druthers, I'd define a protocol
>> independent mechanism and then define transports of that mechanism
>> for various protocols. However, since I don't have cycles available
>> to do that, and holding up the draft is not reasonable for that
>> reason, I can't stand in the way of adopting it.
>> Brian
>> On Jun 27, 2010, at 2:30 PM, Alissa Cooper wrote:
>>> We've had very little response to this call for consensus. If you
>>> have an opinion either way about adopting these three documents as
>>> working group items, please send it to the list by tomorrow
>>> (Monday, June 28).
>>> Thanks,
>>> Alissa
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>> From: Alissa Cooper <>
>>>> Date: June 22, 2010 12:46:44 PM BST
>>>> To:
>>>> Subject: [Geopriv] Call for consensus: WG item adoption
>>>> Since we've progressed a number of WG items recently, we have
>>>> space in our queue for some new ones. I'd like to make a call for
>>>> consensus about adopting the following three documents as GEOPRIV
>>>> work items:
>>>> 1) draft-thomson-geopriv-relative-location-01
>>>> 2) draft-thomson-geopriv-held-measurements-06
>>>> 3) draft-winterbottom-geopriv-deref-protocol-03
>>>> These were all among the documents that received expressions of
>>>> support from the working group at IETF 77 [1]. The top two have
>>>> been recently revised to address feedback from the meeting, the
>>>> list, and design team work.
>>>> Please send your responses about each document to the list no
>>>> later than Monday, June 28.
>>>> Alissa
>>>> [1]
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Geopriv mailing list
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Geopriv mailing list
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geopriv mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list

Geopriv mailing list
Received on Mon, 28 Jun 2010 10:33:53 -0600

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jun 28 2010 - 12:41:13 EDT