On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 23:22:57 -0800, "Seth Fitzsimmons" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey. > Is this the right list for comments on this XEP?
I presume the standards mailing list would be the right place, but hey, this works too ;-) > For example, Section 10.1 refers to the wrong namespace and Example 7 > contains some extraneous ''s. I'm also confused by the presence of a > (mandatory) timestamp in Example 2. If it's indeed a geocoder (which that > section mostly seems to describe), there's no relevant timestamp to > return. The time-stamp, is as Simon pointed out, only useful when a client caches several queries and sends off in a batch. Is there scenario where this is useful? Perhaps not. The better way to use timestamps would probably be to add one to each beacon, and let the query timestamp represent the GPS coordinates (if any). Then it would be possible for the client to read different types of beacons (cells, wifi, bluetooth) and GPS coordinates at different rates, and not loose any timing information. I will make some changes here (maybe as a first just set the timestamp optional and add a comment that the server can assume current time on reception) > > This is quite interesting though. When Blaine and I built out Fire > Eagle's > PubSub service, we intentionally decided not to use XEP-0080, as we > considered it lossy and not the best fit for this application. I'll > revisit > that and try to remember specifically why that was the case; my initial > reaction is that multiple levels of precision didn't fit and there was no > room for additional elements like WOEIDs (although I suppose that could > fit > in the URI field). Possibly a stupid question where I should know better but what are WOEIDs? In any case i would be interested to hear your thoughts on XEP-0080. It is not the optimal stanza for the task perhaps, but we decided it would be better to pick a standard shoe and force our foot into it, than to make our own ;-) > > Does anyone have client or server implementations of this yet (or intend > to)? If so, we should talk. > I am working on a server implementation in parallel to writing this XEP (www.buddycloud.com). Currently it is almost, but not quite compliant (The XEP leads the way). We also have a client for the Symbian OS (3rd edition). Feel free to contact us directly: JIDS: [email protected] (me), [email protected] and [email protected] (Ross, our Symbian expert). I'm sure we have a lot of interesting things to talk about :-) Helge
