Thanks, Henrique, I think that you will have to determine how to divide your concept into a part that is valuable to the entire community as a free and open standard and into a part that you can preserve to earn revenue. I do not understand what you mean by “openwashing,” so please better describe how to standardize the circle.
Best Regards, Scott > On Oct 20, 2015, at 3:10 AM, Munich Orientation Convention > <volks...@volksnav.de> wrote: > > > Hello Scott, > > my license model is very simple: CASE by CASE. The fees can be zero or > symbolical (Burundi) and the merit principle should be valid, therefore not > collide with the openmania. > > Now that OGC is reviewing the own corset, it would a good opportunity to > consider a forgotten target group which has no other lobbies than inventors: > the consumer. > > 4 billion people would obviously prefer the division of the horizon into 12 > instead of 360 directions and prefer station codes www.volksnav.de/TokyoMetro > <http://www.volksnav.de/TokyoMetro> instead of none. Our brains need > information like www.volksnav.de/orientator/index.htm > <http://www.volksnav.de/orientator/index.htm> but lobbies and openmania > generate standards like post codes, 360 directions or > www.volksnav.de/2directions <http://www.volksnav.de/2directions> . What cost > little is worth less, what costs nothing… > > Would it be possible for OGC to standardize the most of the Convention - e. > g. starting with a simple circle www.volksnav.de/r100 > <http://www.volksnav.de/r100> - or would this be considered as openwashing? > > Henrique > > > > > > > > - I’m not a missionary but an inventor. Inventors develop systems to > cover market gaps expecting the proven merit principle. > - > - Fortunately or not, the market gap “orientation” would be a matter > for authorities and require standardization. > - > - My experience with classical standardization boards is: they > aren’t interested on best but on free standards where only they can increase > incomes. So they would standardize a system like annex (division of the > horizon into 2 directions) just because it’s free and would ignore a proposal > which additionally answers the fundamental questions “where am I?” “where is > north?” “where is downtown?” even if I ask for a symbolical merit. > - > - So a question arises: why should someone invest creativity, time > and money on a non-merit basis? > - > - What costs little is worth less, what costs nothing… looks like > post codes, maps of type YouAreHere www.volksnav.de/YouAreHere > <http://www.volksnav.de/YouAreHere> etc. The resume is: actual standards can > only be suboptimal. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss@lists.osgeo.org> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
