Hi all - in particular anyone in the group able to clear up some
questions around the TOU,

I would like to get some clarification on whether or not the following
example violates the Google Maps TOU, specifically; Section: 1.4
Appropriate Conduct and Prohibited Uses. Paragraph 1. as it relates to
vehicle/sensor position tracking.

I work as at a University in the UK and we are considering putting
together a prototype web app that uses amongst other things the Google
Maps API to display environmental and traffic monitoring sensor data
(e.g. Environmental pollution - co2, nox, temperature, particulate
count. Traffic - vehicle counts, vehicle stationary wait times,
speeds. Vehicle pollutants - noise, exhaust gases, etc...).

Some of this data is collected by sensors mounted on/ carried by
*moving* assets, which could mean any/all of; people, private and
public transport, bicycles etc... The data is not streamed live, in
realtime directly to a client (e.g. pushed or pulled), rather it's
first sent to a number of processing and storage servers which are
then queried by a client - preferably Google Maps API - which then
displays it on a map using several techniques that depend on the
nature of the datasource. Displaying the data on the map can be in
form of WMS, custom Tile Servers, regularly updating KML, XML and JSON
responding web services. Here's where we require some guidance.

We propose to display output from a number of sensors, some of which
are mounted on vehicles such as buses and cars (research vehicles) the
sensors would be plotted and updating thier position on the map in
near, but *not* realtime. In fact we don't need *live* updating, it
would be sufficiently useful for the route travelled by a sensor to be
plotted and its recorded value(s) accessible through the map (e.g. as
a colour coded symbol or infowindow). We might also like to play
routes back, as i've seen done elsewhere on web by just about every
route recording website going. The data is 'archive' / old data and so
should pass the TOU test.

Requests by the client to request updated sensor information (which
includes sensor position) are proposed to occur at regular intervals/
frequency, yet undecided (e.g. between 5-60 seconds). We can delay/
add a time lag to update requests such that for example, we delay the
last position update time by a number of minutes. This would give a
time lag in the sensor positions and still keep the appearence of an
object moving in the real world.

This is how we read/interpret the TOUs various parts based on system
proposed above;

"You may not use the Service with any products, systems, or
applications installed or otherwise connected to or in communication
with vehicles"

We are requesting data observed by sensors mounted/*connected* to
vehicles. The sensors do not control any aspect of the vehicles
operation but may concievably *communicate* with its onboard sensors
to record such things as wheel speed, internal noise, fuel
consumption.

"... for or in connection with:"

As far as i can tell we don't propose to do any of the following;

(a) real time route guidance (including without limitation, turn-by-
turn route guidance and other routing that is enabled through the use
of a sensor);

We are not tracking, intentionally or otherwise, simply reflecting
where in the world a sensor was when it made an observation. The
position update time will be subject to a time lag. Suggestions/
guidance gladly recieved.

We are not providing or offering route guidance/assistance to objects
carrying sensors or anything the sensor communicates with. The sensors
are essentially one way recording and reporting devices.

(b) any systems or functions for automatic or autonomous control of
vehicle behavior;

Not doing this, very dangerous! Not our area of research try these
guys (v.cool stuff, if a little scary); http://www.darpa.mil/GRANDCHALLENGE/

(c) dispatch, fleet management or similar applications.

Not doing this, no management or control/tasking of sensors. Sensor
data will be used for visualisation and exploration only.

Hopefully this is a clear enough case to make a judgement on and i'm
happy to answer any further questions, perhaps not at such length!

Thankyou.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Maps API" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Maps-API?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to