Matters of Location

There are lots of ways to measure the extent or impact of human or natural disasters but sometimes it is challenging to gain a true perspective on their scope.  The current oil spill impacting the Gulf of Mexico and the nearby coastal areas is a case in point.  Morgan Brown whose blog I follow largely for his insight into internet marketing and related topics posted an example of how web-based mapping an imaging tools can help frame events like the Gulf of Mexico oil spill in terms that are familiar to us.

He points to a great Google Earth application built by Paul Rademacher that allows you to compare the spatial extent of the oil spill to a geography you are more familiar with.  For example, here is a clip from the application overlaying the spill over the area where I live – including many of my favourite fishing spots!   Give it a try.  A great example of how spatial technology can help us understand what is happening in the real world.   And hopefully in this case will galvanize us into action!

The location of information sources is useful information itself. Where information is published can be valuable in many ways. Hyperlocal news services are one example. They benefit from the ability to aggregate news information based on the source of that news.

Another interesting application is in mapping source information about a particular subject. I came across an interesting blog post from InSTEDD (Innovative Support to Emergencies Diseases and Disasters). Their recent blog post illustrates the value of mapping source information on a map.  In the post they show recent information tagged with ‘influenza’ by location.  They have then overlain a representation of  the data using what is called a heat map.

It should be clear that in this particular example the InSTEDD results are not necessarily pointing to events of influenza itself but they do show patterns of information dissemination that tell their own story for those knowledgeable in this field.  Depending on the nature of the source posts, the mapped results could provide useful information about the underlying issue or simply provide insight into the patterns around the actual post sources themselves.   In either case, map representation can aid in the interpretation of the results.

One of the underlying requirements for mapping data is the need to somehow attach a location to data – in this case the location of sources who published information about influenza.  This location information has to be in a form that will allow an association with a point or region in order for it to be represented on a map.   The technical term for this is geocoding and it is fundamental to all location based services or applications.

There are a number of ways in which geocoding can be accomplished.  They vary in method, degree of difficulty, accuracy and cost.  In a future post, I intend to discuss geocoding in more detail and provide and overview of various approaches that are being used.

Location base services have emerged as one of the trending wireless application areas and as new applications emerge, the conversation about user privacy grows.

With respect to LBS, the privacy issue revolves around the need to make a user’s location known.  Location awareness allows the user to benefit from the application or service but on the downside, making ones location known can bring on a potential range of unintended, unpleasant or even dangerous results for the user.  So for LBS providers, a key question is how to balance the collection, use and dissemination of user location and related information so as to provide benefits without serving up or facilitating unintended results.

While the discussions around this topic are many, I found it encouraging that the CTIA – a leading representative for the wireless industry association recently published “Best Practices and Guidelines for Location Based Services” which focuses on user privacy and information security.  The document is intended for LBS providers with an objective to ensuring the LBS applications being developed and offered to users promote and protect user privacy.

The guidelines are developed around two fundamental principals – user notice and user consent and state:

• LBS Providers must ensure that users receive meaningful notice about how location information will be used, disclosed and protected so that users can make informed decisions whether or not to use the LBS and thus will have control over their location information.
• LBS Providers must ensure that users consent to the use or disclosure of location information, and LBS Providers bear the burden of demonstrating such consent. Users must have the right to revoke consent or terminate the LBS at any time.

Specific elements of the guidelines include:

• Provision of notice to users
• Obtaining user consent and allowing users to revoke their consent
• Establishment of information safeguards

As the guidelines points out, there are many groups who could be the LBS provider so the challenge will be to bring about concensus on appropriate guidelines and then broad adoption.  It is encouraging that the industry is take steps to meet these challenges.   From an industry and individual provider perspective, I believe proper attention is key to healthy growth.

If you are an LBS provider I encourage you to read and consider how to implement the guidelines. While there is nothing binding about the CTIA guidelines, they are encouraging LBS providers to self-certify for the benefit of users.

I came across a very nice Google mashup today.  There are so many of them out there but this one caught my attention for a number of reasons – both from a personal and technical interest standpoint.

Lindsay Wright has created a website called Tidespy that provides tide  and solar information for tidal stations in many countries.

From a technical standpoint some of the interesting things he has built into the site include:

• the incorporation of dynamic data (both tide and solar information) into a mashup environment
• information rich pop up windows with user control of which data to view
• simple user tools to modify how the data is presented
• tools that allow users to customize the how information is presented and search tools for finding specific locations
• nifty little location markers which at the local level show whether the tide is rising or falling and change color in accordance with the tide level

Tidespy shows that it is possible to create an attractive, interesting and informative mapping application with readily available mapping tools.

So how do you go about creating a dialogue between technical experts and those who may be able to benefit from the technology in question whether they realize it or not?

Location Intelligence Conference bridges this gap and creates dialogue.   LI 2009 has come and gone, in the process offering a wide ranging presentation of location technology trends and their application.

While not the opening talk, Jeff Christensen’s (Rhiza Labs) presentation entitled “Designing Simple Tools for Powerful Analysis” framed the discussion when he reminded those in attendance that ultimately data is used to tell stories and make decisions.  Regardless of complexity of the solution or the technology applied, the end goal is the same.

From a technology perspective, LI 2009 opened with Steve Coast founder of OpenStreetMap describing the phenomenal growth of the crowd sourced alternative to Navteq and TeleAtlas street network data.  As much as anything OpenStreetMap is a reminder that new paradigms can lead to technology advances and amazing new applications.

Cloud computing was a recurring theme throughout the conference with various speakers offering their expert opinion and hands on experience with cloud computing.  Discussion touched on cloud computing concepts, benefits, technical challenges and trends.  A particularly interesting presentation by Mark Sundt described the development of Appistry’s CloudIQ that provides a cloud solution for clients who want the benefits of cloud services but want to deploy it in their own data centres.

On the application side presentations covered the spectrum of location technology application from the complex with John Bennett (Hunt Energy IQ) describing Hunt Energy IQ’s work to integrate a range of sensors to develop green intelligent buildings where it is possible to calculate and manage energy costs in real time through the role of IP location information at the foundation of Examiner.com (Dave Shafer, Co-Founder and COO) allowing them to provide users with hyperlocal news content.

Three days of presentations, panel discussions and individual conversations provided a basket load of information on location technologies and their application.

My takeaways from LI 2009:

1. Confirmation that location intelligence technologies continue to evolve and offer opportunity for new applications, and
2. Successful applications of location intelligence technology consistently exhibit clear understanding and very specific use of technology regardless of the simplicity or complexity of the technology.

When you combine appropriate organizational structure, defined roles and responsibilities and appropriate processes that are properly linked to a mission or business model, an organization can be comfortable that it has a proper governance structure to guide its operations.

Put another way, the key elements of a governance model are:

• Build on corporate level mandate
• Define authority
• Establish and enforce rules of operation
• Manage change
• Measure results and optimize

So how is this relevant to an organization’s implementation of web-based mapping applications?

In the rapidly evolving world of technology the only thing that seems certain about the future is that it will be different from today and the degree of difference is proportional to the time scale.  I would suggest this picture applies to the current state of web-based mapping technology.

For an organization considering or already engaged in the development of a web mapping application, the challenge of making choices today that remain valid tomorrow can be daunting – and particularly so if the organization does not see its strengths in the world of technology.

Is it just me or do the terms governance and technical innovation seems at opposite ends of the cool spectrum?

All too often, inadequate attention is paid to constructing an application-appropriate governance structure to ensure the long term sustainability and evolution of web-based mapping applications.  My observation is that even though web mapping is a relatively young area of endeavour, many applications have a tendency to flag or grow stale over time.

The areas an appropriate governance model will touch on include:

• Application alignment with corporate goals
  • Definition and refinement of application objectives
  • Budgeting/resource procurement
• Definition of performance criteria
• Application lifecycle management
  • Management of the initial service/application functionality
  • Data management
  • Application enhancements
  • Internal staff resource management
  • User training
• Monitoring of application services performance and effectiveness
  • Application use
  • Service uptime/downtime or underperformance
  • Benefits to user organizations
  • Benefits to information users

The objective should be to strike a balance between a sufficient level of governance to provide direction without it becoming overbearing and bureaucratic.

As Kim Guenther has stated “… governance structures are most noticeable in their absence and seem invisible when working effectively.”

Spatial context is a part of our decision making but spatial information technology may not.

The recent announcement by YourStreet.com that they were discontinuing the use of maps in their hyperlocal news service is a reminder that there is nothing sacred about the application of spatial information tools in a business context.  That is sometimes hard for us to imagine – at least those of us living with spatial data and technology day in and day out.

The reason cited by Directions Magazine was a financial one – maintaining the service was too costly.  Assuming that is true, what does one make of it?

• Technology used to communicate spatial context has a value associated with it
• At some point the value of spatial information technology may not justify the cost
• If that point is reached, the technology in question will be dropped or will atrophy

Should that surprise us? Not really since it pretty much is the way life goes.

In the case of Yourstreet has the importance of spatial information disappeared? I would argue that it has not given that they premise for their business revolves around local (read spatially relevant) news.  Instead, YourStreet has simply determined they will not use online mapping tools as a spatial reference system to help their users.  They have deemed that a descriptive spatial reference system (ie, a user defines the spatial context for news of a particular location in his or her request) is adequate for their user’s needs.

We need to be clear that spatial context is not the same as spatial information technology.  The former can be achieved in a variety of ways.  Technology may aid in providing spatial context but it needs to be evaluated within a cost/benefit framework appropriate to the business or organization in question.