[microformats-discuss] Re: [Geowanking] geo microformat BOF session at Where 2.0

[Bud Gibson]

On Jul 7, 2005, at 7:43, Carl Beeth wrote:

> On 7/7/05, Kevin Marks <kevinmarks at mac.com> wrote:
>
>
>> What would be useful, in my view, would be to translate the above  
>> into
>> a latitude, longitude, and radius of interest. These can be  
>> translated
>> back into different map display systems.
>>
>
> IMO radius is an not an important piece of information, or rather
> radius is assuming a particular use for the data that may or may not
> be the way people use it. Even if the user uses it to map an area in
> what way do we as authors know what would be an appropriate scale. It
> will be very different on a PDA or a big screen.
> Most applications will pick their own appropriate scale, for example
> if you are to get driving directions the appropriate map scale may be
> whatever fits both you start and end points.
>
> Carl

One thought I have had in all of this is the remarkable precision we  
are asking for from users.  I could not give you latitude and  
longitude.  Radius would be interesting.  Is that in miles?

It seems there are at least two concerns here, and I am not sure what  
the microformat is trying to address:

1.  Giving people a systematic way to express their location.

2.  Collecting precise coordinate data (address or longitudinal).

If microformats are going to be user friendly, I would wonder if you  
would not want to focus on 1.

The google maps search interface as one of the referents for the  
location microformat.  Should we study in closer detail how that  
interface works?  I expect that this is the level of detail most  
people are going to be able to give on their location.

Bud