On Mar 17, 2010, at 12:25 PM, Martin Isenburg wrote: > what do you think? feel free to set me straight now ... it was not my idea in > the first place so you can't hurt my feelings. (-:
I kind of like it, but it makes the shapefile mistake (multiple files). Being used to shapefiles, I don't mind so much, but there are times when having a single thing to copy/zip/carry around has strong benefits. My schema proposal was trying to see if there is any wiggle room within LAS 1.x yet, not start designing LAS 2.0 :) Speaking of which, I think the lack of public debate and public feedback on LAS 1.3 is what in the end is going to submarine it. It doesn't cover enough breadth, and doesn't solve anyone else's problems other than a single hardware vendors. I have experience developing geospatial standards in the open <http://geojson.org/geojson-spec.html>. It works. The LAS committee has no public mailing list, and we haven't heard a peep from them in quite a while. I wish some of the committee members followed what we're doing... Howard_______________________________________________ Liblas-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/liblas-devel
