On Feb 6, 2007, at 19:26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I've been following the discussions on JSON etc for GEO.
IMO:
I'm finding that Open Source spatial projects are getting
increasing attention from large organisations.
This is largely due to a strong support for OGC standards in key OS
projects and an organisation's desire for vendor neutrality.
While I can sympathise with performance concerns, I'd recommend
that projects do not move away from support for OGC Standards.
There has been a great deal of thought and effort into getting the
standards where they are today. If specific OGC standards are not
working or have problems, we as an industry need to work with OGC
to make sure that the issues are resolved.
Open Source geo projects were among the first to implement and OGC
specs and then those implementations have become widely used, thus
helping to bring about further acceptance of OGC specs.
I think it's in fact the case that those specs that have found their
way into widely used open source implementations are those specs that
are considered to be working or at least workable by the broader
community. If you want to know which OGC specs are not working, then
to first order look for those that are not implemented in open source.
Many individual OGC members have a pretty good idea of which of their
specs are usable and which are not. Furthermore, they also have a
pretty good idea of what kinds of specs the broader community needs.
The trouble is that OGC is a large organization with many different
constituents and a process that is, dare I say it? - rather
ponderous. There's no way someone on this list, working for a small,
fast-moving, mindshare and buzz-seeking startup can afford to wait
for 18 months for OGC to come up with a JSON Geo encoding.
Particularly when there's no guarantee that the spec would ever see
the light of day.
There have been some rumblings coming from inside OGC recognizing
this and recognizing the need to adapt. I think it's a case of the
barbarians having to be at the gate before you can persuade anyone to
start boiling the oil.
Perhaps rather than try to fit geowanking with what is probably as
opposite to OGC as you can get, it might be the fact that guerilla
spec development is just the shot in the arm OGC needs to get enough
internal momentum going for a change.
Allan
Bruce
---------------------------------------
Bruce Bannerman
IT Solutions Architect - GIS
Department of Primary Industries - Victoria
Australia
Bruce dot Bannerman at dpi dot vic dot gov dot au
_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
--
Allan Doyle
+1.781.433.2695
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
