[Geowanking] OpenSearch Geo - Feedback

[Andrew Turner]

I like the idea about available search extents. Can you toss all this
in the comments on my blog post? That way I remember, and maybe spurs
more discussion :)

But doing that, then it would allow smart search clients to not even
try the engine (save bandwidth/time) since you're right that many
sites just won't have data outside of a small region (small could
still be a nation, but not global).

This could carry to time as well (I don't have any data before 1992,
or no future data), and general search (more difficult, but I could
imagine saying you only support searches dealing in "technology", so
don't search pizza unless you want something about how to make smarter
pizza's ;)




On 6/20/07, Barry Hunter <barry at barryhunter.co.uk> wrote:
> This looks very interesting, and a nice formalization of things that where
> discussed on this list a while ago.
>
> One thing wondering if would be nice to be able to specify something like:
>
>   <opensearchgeo:extents>49,- 9.5,62,2.3</opensearchgeo:extents>
>
> in the main definition block. Not sure of the practical use, or how it would
> be understood by the search initiator, but in theory it should allow an
> engine to state where it works. So if the initiator is capable of talking in
> boxes then it could know what is a rational search (assuming the engine
> isn't global)
>
> (btw haven't given this much thought, so the actual format of the tags, or
> if it could also be specified as a country code, or lat/long/radius extra.
> But the basic idea would to specify a geographic extent. )
>
>
> FWIW, geograph.org.uk, now supports this extension:
> http://www.geograph.org.uk/stuff/osd.xml
> (well technically it doesn't actually mark up the results correctly, but
> something to be worked on!)
>
>
> Now who is going to be the first initiator capable of creating a geo search
> via this, (for running against mapufacture.com or geograph.org.uk , unless
> someone knows of more...) ? ;)
>
>
>
> On 6/15/07, Andrew Turner <ajturner at highearthorbit.com> wrote:
> >
> > Greetings - as some of you may know - from WhereCamp - we rapidly put
> > together a draft specification of OpenSearch-Geo. We did it with
> > DeWitt Clinton - the original mastermind behind OpenSearch, and had
> > general consensus in the group.
> >
> > I've posted the draft here - with some modifications:
> >
> http://www.opensearch.org/Specifications/OpenSearch/Extensions/Geo/1.0/Draft_1
> >
> > I would definitely like any more feedback or thoughts people could
> > offer on the spec. The guiding principle behind the spec was to make
> > it work with existing services where possible (hence the bbox w,s,e,n
> > order) and also make it parallel to GeoRSS and GeoJSON.
> >
> > This makes it easier for all the specs to try and move forward
> > together in the future (we can argue concepts/terminology once and
> > have it apply to all) as well as educating other developers and users
> > by being able to instruct once and have common concepts carry over to
> > the different "formats".
> >
> > I figured Friday afternoon - you're all looking for some interesting
> > reading and the weekend to play with it. :)
> >
> > Thanks
> > Andrew
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Turner
> > ajturner at highearthorbit.com      42.2774N x 83.7611W
> > http://highearthorbit.com               Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
> > _______________________________________________
> > Geowanking mailing list
> > Geowanking at lists.burri.to
> > http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Barry
>
> - www.nearby.org.uk - www.geograph.org.uk -
> _______________________________________________
> Geowanking mailing list
> Geowanking at lists.burri.to
> http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
>
>


-- 
Andrew Turner
ajturner at highearthorbit.com      42.2774N x 83.7611W
http://highearthorbit.com              Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA