geo-extension-nonWGS84

Geo Extension Straw-Man Proposal

Further to proposals for luna and mars equivalents to geo, the following is a "straw-man" proposal, to allow further debate to take place. Please feel free to critique it harshly but fairly!

Author

Andy Mabbett

Straw-Man

<span class="geo">

  <span class="body">
    Mars 1
  </span>

  <span class="schema">
    [name of mapping schema] 2
  </span>

  <span class="latitude">37.386013</span>, 
  <span class="longitude">-122.082932</span> 3
</span>

Notes

1. A list of acceptable, case-insensitive, values for 'body' would need to be drawn up (e/g/ "Earth", "Mars", "Luna", "Venus", etc.) wither "Earth" being assumed if none is specified.
2. A list of acceptable values for 'schema' would need to be drawn up, for each body, with one being declared the default, to be used if no value is present.
3. As with geo, if the "latitude" and "longitude" classes are omitted, the two values MUST be comma separated and latitude MUST be first:<span class=geo">37.386013,-122.082932</span>

Also:

• If latitude is present, so MUST be longitude, and vice versa.
• The same number of decimal places SHOULD be used in each value.

Issues

• Should other bodies be included in geo, or have stand-alone microformats?
• What effect will this have on existing 'geo' parsers, and it is safe to ignore that?
• Do appropriate schemas exist? What are they?
• Luna is the scientific name for Earth's moon. Should we use that, or reserve "Moon"?
• Is it appropriate to use the name "geo" (which means "Earth") for other bodies?
• is body an acceptable class name, given that it's also an HTML element?

Comments

???