Ty Cheers, Ryan Sent via BlackBerry
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 17:28:55 To:[email protected] Subject: Geowanking Digest, Vol 43, Issue 43 Send Geowanking mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Geowanking digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Follow Up To "Standards - An Ugly Truth" (Landon Blake) 2. Re: Software Standards - The Ugly Truth (Scott Davis) 3. Surface Computing - Is this the Future? (Bill Thoen) 4. RE: Surface Computing - Is this the Future? (Landon Blake) 5. Re: Surface Computing - Is this the Future? (Paul Ramsey) 6. RE: Surface Computing - Is this the Future? (Landon Blake) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 08:22:17 -0700 From: "Landon Blake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Geowanking] Follow Up To "Standards - An Ugly Truth" To: <[email protected]>, "OSGeo Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I can see that I hit a chord with my post about software standards, and that if nothing else,I generated some good discussion. I hope the end result of this discussion will be positive. At best we will find consensus on some issues and will be able to work on improving things. At worst I hope we will have a better understanding of the different perspectives on software standards. I'm afraid that I won't be able to individually respond to all of the e-mails that I got with comments on my post. There where at least 20 of them, and several were sent to me off the list as well. I will try to read through the messages and respond to the some of the points that were made on my blog. I agreed with many of these points and disagreed with a few. I also changed my opinion on a couple of the issues after reading several of the comments, which I think is a great. I'm almost afraid to blog anymore on these topics, after realizing how narrow my own perspective can be. Thank you to all for taking the time to read the post and for taking the time to make well-though responses. I appreciate being a member of these communities. Landon (A.K.A. - The Sunburned Surveyor) Warning: Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.burri.to/pipermail/geowanking/attachments/20070625/2df0f099/attachment-0001.html ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 09:56:28 -0600 From: Scott Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Geowanking] Software Standards - The Ugly Truth To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed On Jun 24, 2007, at 5:08 AM, SteveC wrote: > > WMS vs. googles tiles is, I think, a great example of what the > original poster was trying to get at. On the one hand you have a > Specification which does everything, for everyone all the time in > any way, and on the other you have something which is approximately > trivial, does one thing which happens to be what 5 9's of the > population want. Tiled WMS is this big band aid. The only real > innovation on top of gtiles was MSFTs quadtree and even that was a > no-brainer. > Let's examine this (alleged) Google Maps / WMS schism a bit more. I'm not sure that the two compete at any level lower than "well, we both serve up maps via a web browser." The WMS spec gives us complete customization of the map (bbox, projection, map layers, styling, image format). Google maps uses canned vector and raster layers that offer zero customization choices. There is no way to provide your own base layer. WMS allows us to seamlessly merge map data from disparate sources (provided they implement the spec correctly). Google maps provides great support for "red dot fever" (overlaying points), ok support for lines (you can draw arbitrary lines, but not have them 'snap to' roads segments), and historically weak support for polygons (although this seems to be improving with the recent addition of KML support). WMS offers zero caching solutions -- since each map is a unique work of art, customized to the Nth degree, caching is not a real consideration. Google Maps is a brilliant example of how caching, tessellation, ajax, et al can bring a desktop-like user experience to the browser. Let me be perfectly clear: I think both are brilliant at what they do, and I use both on a daily basis for customers and myself. They are, however, two different solutions for two different problems. At the end of the day, arguing that one is ultimately better than the other is naive. They represent the opposite ends of the web mapping spectrum. GM optimizes for mass consumption (caching, performance). To do so, they sacrifice customization. WMS optimizes for customization. To do so, they must sacrifice caching. When I am gathering requirements with customers, these are the discussions we have. If the data is relatively static, let's cache the hell out of it and gain the speed (either using GM or a GM-like tiling strategy). If the point of the app is to allow the end user to compose a map from disparate sources, there is less we can do in terms of caching. Let's leverage the native customization capabilities of WMS. I am working with one transit authority right now that wanted to use all of their own data (vectors, aerials), host it in-house on their hardware, but still provide a Google Maps-like user experience. Beyond what GM can provide, for a specific subset of the users they want to provide the ability to turn map layers on and off and do distance measuring on the screen. All of their data is in state plane, and they want to keep it in that projection. I've put together a PostGIS + GeoServer (WMS) + Tilecache + OpenLayers solution that is due to go live in the next month or so. Problem solved. I'm in talks with another transit authority that is a very small shop. They don't want the hassle of hosting their own data, managing their own hardware, etc. They want a turn-key solution. Google Transit seems to be the right fit there. Problem solved. No golden hammers here. Right tool, right job. SImple as that. Are WMS/WFS/GML/et al flawless? Far from it. (Although neither is Google...) Is Google innovating at light-speed compared to the OGC? Absolutely. But should a standards body be expected to release a new spec every 3 months? Could the industry keep up, or would the OGC catch equal amounts of different grief for that? All are interesting questions, but far different than the "WMS sux -- GM roolz!" hypothesis originally posted. (grin) Cheers, Scott Davis author of Google Maps API (Pragmatic Press) author of GIS for Web Developers (Pragmatic Press) > Standards, like ideas, are cheap. It's the implementation that's > expensive. > > have fun, > > SteveC | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.asklater.com/steve/ > > _______________________________________________ > Geowanking mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:41:02 -0600 From: Bill Thoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Geowanking] Surface Computing - Is this the Future? To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed This looks like it could be some pretty cool technology: http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid932579976?bclid=932553050&bctid=933742930 It's a preview and demo of Micorsoft's "Surface Computing" interface and it looks like it's step in the right direction. Of course, they don't talk about how accessible the interface will be, but the concept looks good to me! The only thing better would be a 3D holographic interface, but I imagine that's coming too someday soon. ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 09:56:51 -0700 From: "Landon Blake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [Geowanking] Surface Computing - Is this the Future? To: <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Here is the other side of the coin. Kinda funny, and makes some good points. http://www.break.com/index/microsoft-surface-technology-parody.html Landon -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Thoen Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 9:41 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [Geowanking] Surface Computing - Is this the Future? This looks like it could be some pretty cool technology: http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid932579976?bclid=93255305 0&bctid=933742930 It's a preview and demo of Micorsoft's "Surface Computing" interface and it looks like it's step in the right direction. Of course, they don't talk about how accessible the interface will be, but the concept looks good to me! The only thing better would be a 3D holographic interface, but I imagine that's coming too someday soon. _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking Warning: Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately. ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:11:54 -0700 From: Paul Ramsey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Geowanking] Surface Computing - Is this the Future? To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed http://www.perceptivepixel.com/ Here's another company on that train. Watching the demo a few times makes be pretty negative. It is the same thing over and over and over again, with different subjects. - Zoom in - Zoom out - Rotate - Move They've re-invented the mouse, only it is way more expensive, and just slightly more ergonomic (once you've learned the gestural syntax). One thing you see very little of is... words. The things we spend 95% of our time working with on our computers. There's perhaps a few niche uses that are going to find this hugely helpful, both in terms of the large format and the somewhat cleaner interface to the data, but I don't see a revolution necessarily in the offing. P. Bill Thoen wrote: > This looks like it could be some pretty cool technology: > http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid932579976?bclid=932553050&bctid=933742930 > > > > It's a preview and demo of Micorsoft's "Surface Computing" interface and > it looks like it's step in the right direction. Of course, they don't > talk about how accessible the interface will be, but the concept looks > good to me! > > The only thing better would be a 3D holographic interface, but I imagine > that's coming too someday soon. > _______________________________________________ > Geowanking mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking -- Paul Ramsey Refractions Research http://www.refractions.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: 250-383-3022 Cell: 250-885-0632 ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:26:06 -0700 From: "Landon Blake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [Geowanking] Surface Computing - Is this the Future? To: <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Ramsey Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 10:12 AM Paul wrote: " They've re-invented the mouse, only it is way more expensive, and just slightly more ergonomic (once you've learned the gestural syntax)." That's probably true. (I wonder what will happen when you flip off your table top? Will you get the blue screen of death?) :] Paul wrote: "There's perhaps a few niche uses that are going to find this hugely helpful, both in terms of the large format and the somewhat cleaner interface to the data, but I don't see a revolution necessarily in the offing." I think the potential for map navigation is pretty cool. I was especially intrigued by the navigation of the globe that I saw in the Popular Mechanics Video. I can't tell you how many times I have to print 30 24" X 36" color sheets for an emergency meeting. It be great if my boss could just pull up a digital map in the conference room table or wall and take it for a spin with the touch of his hand. But, like you said, this is a niche market, not a mass market. Perhaps the real potential in this idea is the integration of computers into everyday objects with a flat surface. Once you remove the need for a mouse and keyboard you can start putting computers in some pretty interesting places. Just a thought... I'm curious how Linux will keep up and/or adapt to this. It seems like it would require a pretty major overhaul and/or extension of the X Windowing system. I don't know if that will be possible if it is a system Microsoft is developing. Could we get into a situation where Linux is excluded because of proprietary hardware like it is with some graphics cards? I also wonder if we'll ever see support for that type of interface in Swing/SWT. It is interesting to consider modeling user interface events generated from multiple screen interactions. You might have events like "DoubleInputPush" or "DoubleInputClick". The Sunburned Surveyor To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Geowanking] Surface Computing - Is this the Future? http://www.perceptivepixel.com/ Here's another company on that train. Watching the demo a few times makes be pretty negative. It is the same thing over and over and over again, with different subjects. - Zoom in - Zoom out - Rotate - Move They've re-invented the mouse, only it is way more expensive, and just slightly more ergonomic (once you've learned the gestural syntax). One thing you see very little of is... words. The things we spend 95% of our time working with on our computers. There's perhaps a few niche uses that are going to find this hugely helpful, both in terms of the large format and the somewhat cleaner interface to the data, but I don't see a revolution necessarily in the offing. P. Bill Thoen wrote: > This looks like it could be some pretty cool technology: > http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid932579976?bclid=93255305 0&bctid=933742930 > > > It's a preview and demo of Micorsoft's "Surface Computing" interface and > it looks like it's step in the right direction. Of course, they don't > talk about how accessible the interface will be, but the concept looks > good to me! > > The only thing better would be a 3D holographic interface, but I imagine > that's coming too someday soon. > _______________________________________________ > Geowanking mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking -- Paul Ramsey Refractions Research http://www.refractions.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: 250-383-3022 Cell: 250-885-0632 _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking Warning: Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately. ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking End of Geowanking Digest, Vol 43, Issue 43 ******************************************
_______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
