Now that foss4g is over - I did have one comment about it.

As far as I was able to understand foss4g wanted to charge $600 dollars for
speakers to present.  Maybe I misunderstood this?  It just seems so bizarre
and so alien and such a speed-bump that it really didn't make any sense to
me.  It was like a socialist take on open source - where everybody has to
carry equal weight. This is why I dropped my participation with prejudice -
apologies to the folks who wanted to see my talk.

There is good work from the GIS open source enthusiasts - PostGIS
extensions, MapServer, OpenLayers - effectively from people who are now
financed by GIS companies and are now GIS insiders.  Part of what makes this
innovation great is that it is open source at all - in a world where ESRI
dominates.

But there's a problem in the open source GIS community. It is being
constantly innovated into by outsiders.  It doesn't seem to innovate
outwards.  And this means that often new work doesn't leverage old
expertise.  I constantly watch new ideas struggle to find ways to manage
geometry and solve problems that have already been solved.

Look at the list of recent innovations.  Why didn't OSM come from inside the
GIS community?  Why didn't tiling and tile caches come from within the GIS
community?  Why do mapping solutions deal with temporal data so badly?  Why
is transient and volatile ephemeral data so difficult to manage with
classical GIS solutions?  Why do they deal with client side persistence and
real time streaming so badly?  Why do strangled phrases like "volunteered
geographic information" get any airtime?  Why does the average video game
toss around 100k polygons phong shaded lit polygons at 60 fps while most GIS
clients struggle to show even 10k lines at 1 fps?

Projects like tonchidot, work in ambient computing and augmented reality
coming out of university research labs, or google, and random hacker teams -
and seem to in part be re-inventing the wheel.  They have their own formats,
they seem to emerge full cloth with no history, they act as if nothing else
exists.  Why aren't more crazy new ideas coming from (or supported in part
by) established players such as say MetaCarta or ESRI or um, even (although
perhaps not strictly fair because we've seen a fair degree of innovation
here) from Poly9 or Urban Mapping?

Maybe I'm wrong here - it's hard to really see the whole landscape - does
the EarthMine team come from a GIS background for example?  Maybe NASA
WorldWind is also a good example of something amazing that comes from the
'inside'.

Basically I'm trying to understand if people holding new ideas could afford
to fly to somewhere far away like South Africa, pay an entrance fee, and
help spark innovation and dialogue and get feedback with people who are
truly expert and could make their vision fly.... and if not then how to
suggest fixing it.

In any case my recommendations for foss4g are,

1) Sponsorship to reduce costs overall.

2) Speakers should be discounted to foster new participation.

 - me
_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking

Reply via email to