@[email protected] @danirabbit my first reaction to a "general map URI standard" is that like, this is extremely nontrivial unless your payload is just a single point in the world identified by GPS coordinates. and of course, this is already supported in
geo:. but like, maps applications support linking to a particular business, to a particular address, to a particular region, and a variety of other things. this is all quite nontrivial to communicate in a URI. maps apps also generally support things like a location sharing link; this would likely not work cross-application, and i think it overall would make for a confusing user experience to inconsistently copy a "standard" link or a "proprietary" link depending on what
you want to link to.
like, i'm not against having a richer maps URI, i would love that, but i disagree that "it's especially straightforward" because map apps support so much more nuance
than a point in the physical world, because the ways human specify places is extremely fuzzy and nearly impossible to unambiguously reference in all cases.
and almost the exact same thing goes for songs: there is no universal registry of all songs, and songs are not unambiguously or uniquely named. you can't reference a song uniquely, in a uniform way. and unlike real world places, there is no convenient approximation that's good enough in most cases and can be uniquely referenced; that approximation being GPS coordinates because "taking up space on earth" is close enough
to a universal registry for that approximation to be actually useful in the real world.
still, i'm all for it. please, standards folks, figure out the fuzziness of human creativity and make a useful music link and maps link.