[georss] Transport of Toponyms with GeoRSS

[Ron Lake]

Hi,

One approach to what Andrew wants is just to create a placename
hierarchy.  This can be done using the CLassificationSchema function in
OGC Web Registry Service.  Any number of such hierarchies can be created
and supported, and a resource can be classified under multiple such
hierarchies at the same time.  So just agree on such a hierarchy (by
inclusion) - xAL could also be supported concurrently.  We use such
hierarchies to organize geographic features - this might be the simple
bridge between web content and features that Josh is looking for.

R

-----Original Message-----
From: georss-bounces at lists.eogeo.org
[mailto:georss-bounces at lists.eogeo.org] On Behalf Of Marc
Sent: August 28, 2006 9:24 AM
To: Andrew Turner
Cc: georss at lists.eogeo.org
Subject: Re: [georss] Transport of Toponyms with GeoRSS

Hi Andrew,

I don't really care about addresses, I care about higher level
granularity.

The xAL specification is an unwieldy 90 pages paper and I doubt many 
feed publishers and feed processors would like to read it.

On page 13, section 6.3 the xAL specification says:
"Important: Use only elements and attributes that make sense to you. 
Ignore the rest that are needless for you."

Does it mean a feed publisher is supposed to read through all 90 pages 
to figure out which four or five elements he really needs? Wouldn't this

result in a gigantic tag-soup? If you look at your example you will see,

it is not well formated xml. Even for you as a highly competent senior 
professional with a lot of experience in this field, it is not so easy 
to come up with a correct xAL example.

What I am looking for is a simple one page document sufficient for 98% 
of all feeds. xAL is addressing the needs of nearly 100%, which makes it

incredibly complex.

I don't mind using xAL. So lets look at your example to figure out which

four our five Elements we want to use and put on a single page.

>Just as an example:
><georss:point>45.256 -71.92</georss:point>
>  
>
xAL also supports lat/lng. Why use the georss syntax? What if you have 
more than one 'object' (a number of US states for example).

><xnl:AddressDetails>
> <xnl:Country>
>  <xnl:CountryName>United States</CountryName>
>  
>
I would prefer the CountryNameCode Element with the ISO country code. It

is hard to parse country names as it may be in an exotic language. 
Parsing the iso country code is much easier.

>  <xnl:Locality Type="City">
>   <xnl:LocalityName>Seattle</LocalityName>
>    <xnl:Thoroughfare>
>     <xnl:ThoroughfareName>MainStreet</ThoroughfareName>
>     <xnl:ThoroughfareNumber>16</ThoroughfareNumber>
>    </xnl:Thoroughfare>
>   </xnl:DependentLocality>
>  </xnl:Locality>
> </xnl:Country>
></xnl:AddressDetails>
>

Cheers
Marc
_______________________________________________
georss mailing list
georss at lists.eogeo.org
http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss