-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add optional GEOJson object to organization
#73
Comments
Nothing too worrying about this. Interesting and if you think there's general applicability I can support the idea. Especially if it is optional. I did find the official JSONSchema for this but don't think there's a way to use it is there? It would be a minor bump. What I'm not sure is how we publish these changes. Service-info is now a very central concept. Does this have sufficient visibility here? I would point out when testing your coordinate payload I think they're the wrong way around i.e. this worked in geojson.io {
"type": "FeatureCollection",
"features": [
{
"type": "Feature",
"properties": {
"label": "Winterthurerstrasse 190, Zurich, Switzerland",
"city": "Zurich",
"country": "Switzerland",
"ISO3166alpha3": "CHE"
},
"geometry": {
"coordinates": [
8.547288974410833,
47.39759348037788
],
"type": "Point"
},
"id": 0
}
]
} |
@andrewyatz Yes, since the days of the Metadata Task Team I've thought that we need a geotagging standard one can reference, for provenance, services, admin ... And GEOjson is the obvious choice; however, one needs to create a version which defines a subset of it & adds some specifics (e.g. I also think that a) So one could rewrite above as:
... where repo, address ... etc. could be re-engineered (TASC?!). Would be a good driver case.
Double ouch - this exemplifies nicely the one of the 2 problems w/ long, lat - they get swapped easily (by copying etc.), esp. since Google Maps for whatever reason uses the other order (
I'm actually not sure that this is kept up-to-date; I'd rather use a tailored instance (in the Further thoughts? |
Proposal: Add GEOJson object to
organization
For many purposes the inclusion of a standardized geographic location object would be extremely helpful. A prime example here would be Beacon, obviously, but the use cases are widespread from documenting the usage of a federated service across the world to providing a map of collaborators in a distributed project or for filtering services according to their location.
As optional addition such an object would not break the current specification (version bump issues aside).
Format note: With increasing complexity inline object definitions should rather be moved to a
definitions
section or external files.Example:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: