Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is there an Open Source software application that will draw a graticule on a map?
Hi Brent, (remembering this thread...) some new cartography screenshots arrived: http://grass.itc.it/screenshots/cartography.php Cheers Markus On 9/7/07, Markus Neteler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Brent, with GRASS' ps.map you can do that rather easily: - define the raster and vector map names - define (optionally) legend stuff - activate geogrid to overlay a geographic grid onto the output map - define paper size It generated a Postscript file (use ps2pdf to make PDF) which can be printed then. See http://grass.itc.it/gdp/html_grass63/ps.map.html Example screenshot (a bit low-res, sorry): http://www.gdf-hannover.de/lit_html/grass60_v1.2/img35.png Code for that map: http://www.gdf-hannover.de/lit_html/grass60_v1.2_en/node78.html Markus On 9/6/07, Brent Fraser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, I've been looking for an Open Source desktop application that will: 1. Combine raster and vector spatial data, and (re)project them 2. Render a graticule (lines and labels showing latitude and longitude) (and no, I don't want to create a shapefile to do that) 3. Print to a large format plotter (paper 24 inches wide or greater) So far I've looked at uDig, Quantum GIS, and gvSig. As far as I can tell, none of them can do Step 2, and only gvSig does Step 3 successfully. Any pointers would be appreciated! Brent Fraser GeoAnalytic Inc. Calgary, Alberta ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support
Not quite yet Landon; Jo was kind enough to contact someone with a few questions already (I cannot remember which organization but their seems to be several). Adrian Custer was also in contact with some FSF types. Until the board decides on the scope of its activities I do not want to trouble people further; suffice to say it looks like there are organizations around willing to help a non profit such as OSGeo out. The real question is what scope do you want the Foundation to have? Jody Landon Blake wrote: I have a contact at the Freedom Law Center. If no one here objects I could send an e-mail inquiring about legal services or advice for the OSGeo. Landon *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] *Sent:* Tuesday, October 30, 2007 10:27 PM *To:* OSGeo Discussions *Subject:* Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support IMO Good call Cameron. In this day and age it would pay to be proactive on these types of issues. It's been a while since I last looked at this. From memory, a number of large companies have pledged resources to help defend FOSS. I'm not sure where this is at currently. I think that its with the Linux Foundation - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Linux_Foundation (formed in 2007 from The Open Source Development Labs and the Free Standards Group). You may also want to look at the Software Freedom Law Centre founded by Eben Moglen. I understand that they provide pro-bono legal services to protect and advance Free and Open Source Software: http://www.softwarefreedom.org/technology/ Bruce *Cameron Shorter [EMAIL PROTECTED]* Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 31/10/07 09:30 AM Please respond to OSGeo Discussions discuss@lists.osgeo.org To OSGeo Discussions discuss@lists.osgeo.org cc Subject Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support Good processes + no money is an acceptable strategy so long as we have consciously made this decision and everyone is aware of the strategy. Allan Doyle wrote: On Oct 30, 2007, at 15:09 , Michael P. Gerlek wrote: Way back on that cold day in Chicago, I'm not sure anyone ever really thought about what it would mean when we said we'd offer legal protection. Does it imply/lead-to/entail some sort of indemnification? Ouch, that would be pricey... How does the Apache gang, et al, handle this? My recollection is that the Apache gang carefully keeps their coffers empty and makes sure the code all legally belongs to the Apache Foundation. Thus there's not enough of a pot of gold to win in a suit. However, I'm guessing that this strategy depends on a pretty well-defined process to ensure there are no loopholes. Allan -mpg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Landon Blake Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 7:56 AM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support Cameron, I think this is an excellent idea, and a lawyer should definitely be consulted. I wonder if the legal staff at the Software Freedom Conservancy could assist. Landon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cameron Shorter Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 3:56 AM To: OSGeo-Board Cc: OSGeo Discussions; Adrian Custer Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support OSGeo Board, (CC to OSGeo Discuss), During the founding of OSGeo, it was often noted that OSGeo projects would benefit from OSGeo legal protection. Now, as Geotools wrestles with graduation criteria and how to handle license assignment, the nature and level of legal protection offered by OSGeo is unclear. Also unclear is the level of legal review available (as tested by Geotools crafting of a Copywrite Assignment document). Consequently, geotools is having difficulty deciding whether it is wise to assign copywrite to OSGeo. I suspect a large part of the problem is that board members (like myself) are not lawyers and don't have a clear understanding of the options, the value of each of the options to OSGeo and the projects (how much protection is given), and the cost both in time and financially. Key questions to answer for each option are: * What level of support is given to contributors and license reviewers (individuals and companies) * What level of support is given to OSGeo users? * What level of support is given to projects? Will OSGeo fight a license infringer on behalf of a project? * What level of support is given to the OSGeo Foundation? *Proposal* That the board makes a clear statement on their website about nature and level of support offered by OSGeo to OSGeo projects and Individuals. This
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support
I have a contact at the Freedom Law Center. If no one here objects I could send an e-mail inquiring about legal services or advice for the OSGeo. Landon From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 10:27 PM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support IMO Good call Cameron. In this day and age it would pay to be proactive on these types of issues. It's been a while since I last looked at this. From memory, a number of large companies have pledged resources to help defend FOSS. I'm not sure where this is at currently. I think that its with the Linux Foundation - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Linux_Foundation (formed in 2007 from The Open Source Development Labs and the Free Standards Group). You may also want to look at the Software Freedom Law Centre founded by Eben Moglen. I understand that they provide pro-bono legal services to protect and advance Free and Open Source Software: http://www.softwarefreedom.org/technology/ Bruce Cameron Shorter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 31/10/07 09:30 AM Please respond to OSGeo Discussions discuss@lists.osgeo.org To OSGeo Discussions discuss@lists.osgeo.org cc Subject Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support Good processes + no money is an acceptable strategy so long as we have consciously made this decision and everyone is aware of the strategy. Allan Doyle wrote: On Oct 30, 2007, at 15:09 , Michael P. Gerlek wrote: Way back on that cold day in Chicago, I'm not sure anyone ever really thought about what it would mean when we said we'd offer legal protection. Does it imply/lead-to/entail some sort of indemnification? Ouch, that would be pricey... How does the Apache gang, et al, handle this? My recollection is that the Apache gang carefully keeps their coffers empty and makes sure the code all legally belongs to the Apache Foundation. Thus there's not enough of a pot of gold to win in a suit. However, I'm guessing that this strategy depends on a pretty well-defined process to ensure there are no loopholes. Allan -mpg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Landon Blake Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 7:56 AM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support Cameron, I think this is an excellent idea, and a lawyer should definitely be consulted. I wonder if the legal staff at the Software Freedom Conservancy could assist. Landon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cameron Shorter Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 3:56 AM To: OSGeo-Board Cc: OSGeo Discussions; Adrian Custer Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support OSGeo Board, (CC to OSGeo Discuss), During the founding of OSGeo, it was often noted that OSGeo projects would benefit from OSGeo legal protection. Now, as Geotools wrestles with graduation criteria and how to handle license assignment, the nature and level of legal protection offered by OSGeo is unclear. Also unclear is the level of legal review available (as tested by Geotools crafting of a Copywrite Assignment document). Consequently, geotools is having difficulty deciding whether it is wise to assign copywrite to OSGeo. I suspect a large part of the problem is that board members (like myself) are not lawyers and don't have a clear understanding of the options, the value of each of the options to OSGeo and the projects (how much protection is given), and the cost both in time and financially. Key questions to answer for each option are: * What level of support is given to contributors and license reviewers (individuals and companies) * What level of support is given to OSGeo users? * What level of support is given to projects? Will OSGeo fight a license infringer on behalf of a project? * What level of support is given to the OSGeo Foundation? *Proposal* That the board makes a clear statement on their website about nature and level of support offered by OSGeo to OSGeo projects and Individuals. This statement needs to be backed up with a budget item addressing financial implications related to the statement. Implementation: I suggest the steps to achieve the above would be: 1. Board approves budget to have a lawyer, or volunteer with legal review, to draw up a list of options and their financial implications. Adrian Custer's review provides an excellent basis for a lawyer to start from. http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/Geotools+Legal+Review 2. Board votes to select best option. 3. OSGeo financial sponsors are given opportunity to contribute to decision. 4. OSGeo budgets for decision 5. OSGeo
[OSGeo-Discuss] Scope of OSGeo Legal Support
Hi Cameron; I am catching up on these threads ... it seems a lot of them are often in private email. Your proposal is indeed where we want to be; the problem with planning (especially when there is money involved) is that we all get stuck in risk management mode and do not want to say much for fear of it costing cold hard cash. It looks like (since OSGeo is a non profit) that there is a range of organizations willing to donate us some legal time and advice. I recommend we make use of these facilities as we set up; rather than scare the board with a budget request. Even in the case where the foundation does not wish to play a hands on roll; we will still need to set the standard for the incubation process. At the end of the day we want others feel comfortable using and contributing to the projects championed by the foundation. The standard we hold these projects and contributors to is where the reputation of OSGeo foundation comes from. Jody OSGeo Board, (CC to OSGeo Discuss), During the founding of OSGeo, it was often noted that OSGeo projects would benefit from OSGeo legal protection. Now, as Geotools wrestles with graduation criteria and how to handle license assignment, the nature and level of legal protection offered by OSGeo is unclear. Also unclear is the level of legal review available (as tested by Geotools crafting of a Copywrite Assignment document). Consequently, geotools is having difficulty deciding whether it is wise to assign copywrite to OSGeo. I suspect a large part of the problem is that board members (like myself) are not lawyers and don't have a clear understanding of the options, the value of each of the options to OSGeo and the projects (how much protection is given), and the cost both in time and financially. Key questions to answer for each option are: * What level of support is given to contributors and license reviewers (individuals and companies) * What level of support is given to OSGeo users? * What level of support is given to projects? Will OSGeo fight a license infringer on behalf of a project? * What level of support is given to the OSGeo Foundation? *Proposal* That the board makes a clear statement on their website about nature and level of support offered by OSGeo to OSGeo projects and Individuals. This statement needs to be backed up with a budget item addressing financial implications related to the statement. Implementation: I suggest the steps to achieve the above would be: 1. Board approves budget to have a lawyer, or volunteer with legal review, to draw up a list of options and their financial implications. Adrian Custer's review provides an excellent basis for a lawyer to start from. http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/Geotools+Legal+Review 2. Board votes to select best option. 3. OSGeo financial sponsors are given opportunity to contribute to decision. 4. OSGeo budgets for decision 5. OSGeo records the legal stance publicly (on a webpage). ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support
Arnulf wrote: As long as we have more or less empty pockets and do not aim at leveraging money as a major facilitator against anybody and we continue to build our brand as being a straight group of spatial FOSS addicts there is little reason to get at us from the legal side anyway. What would you get? A bad reputation, little or no money at all and a large bunch of really angry people. Hooray, lets go sue some Foundations. This is good point. However, I don't think we should forget the possibility of legal action that doesn't seek money, but to simply shut down an organization. Lawsuits can be very scary things, and I think we can all bring to mind or FOSS project or two that was shut down because of the mere threat of a lawsuit. Sometimes it only takes a nasty letter from a lawyer to shut things down. Arnulf wrote: We should get a lawyer only when we need one as we cannot anticipate in which context we will need her. In my humble opinion it is always better to talk to a layer sooner rather than latter, especially if we can do it for free. But Arnulf is correct, we should have specific topics to discuss. Perhaps we need to create a well defined scope for the OSGeo and then talk to a lawyer about issues we need to be aware of based on that scope? Landon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Arnulf Christl Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 11:08 AM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support Cameron Shorter wrote: Good processes + no money is an acceptable strategy so long as we have consciously made this decision and everyone is aware of the strategy. Hello, keeping budgets low already is a corporate strategy of OSGeo as far as I am concerned. I am eager to extend this strategy to Legal Support. We are not here to fight legal wars but to further Free and Open Source Software. Whenever someone does want to pick on us we should have a solid ground and we have this with the incubation guidelines as they are. All that has to happen then will then happen, not now. As long as we have more or less empty pockets and do not aim at leveraging money as a major facilitator against anybody and we continue to build our brand as being a straight group of spatial FOSS addicts there is little reason to get at us from the legal side anyway. What would you get? A bad reputation, little or no money at all and a large bunch of really angry people. Hooray, lets go sue some Foundations. I disagree with Frank and find that Adrian Custer's proposed document for the GeoTools Project is a good starting point. As everything in this world it is not perfect and it will develop in future. Additionally I think we do not even need this document if it gives anybody a headache. My personal opinion is that a lot of the discussion is beside the point and we are oftentimes confusing copyright, ownership, originator's rights, branding and what really makes up a project - the community around it. We should get a lawyer only when we need one as we cannot anticipate in which context we will need her. Please never ever be IANAL again, I am tired of reading that phrase. Call me simplistic but I am still of the strong opinion that all we need to do is get some GeoTools developers go through the project files, change the Copyright to point at OSGeo and commit. My only concern was that the developers might feel they lose control and OSGeo could go berserk and sell the code Copyright to some big bad corporation. I think it simply cannot. And even if it did it wouldn't make any difference as anybody can always fork the last GNUed one and go for it. Can we get over it, please and let GeoTools graduate? Best regards, Arnulf. Allan Doyle wrote: On Oct 30, 2007, at 15:09 , Michael P. Gerlek wrote: Way back on that cold day in Chicago, I'm not sure anyone ever really thought about what it would mean when we said we'd offer legal protection. Does it imply/lead-to/entail some sort of indemnification? Ouch, that would be pricey... How does the Apache gang, et al, handle this? My recollection is that the Apache gang carefully keeps their coffers empty and makes sure the code all legally belongs to the Apache Foundation. Thus there's not enough of a pot of gold to win in a suit. However, I'm guessing that this strategy depends on a pretty well-defined process to ensure there are no loopholes. Allan -mpg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Landon Blake Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 7:56 AM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support Cameron, I think this is an excellent idea, and a lawyer should definitely be consulted. I wonder if the legal staff at the Software Freedom Conservancy could assist. Landon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support
Cameron Shorter wrote: Good processes + no money is an acceptable strategy so long as we have consciously made this decision and everyone is aware of the strategy. Hello, keeping budgets low already is a corporate strategy of OSGeo as far as I am concerned. I am eager to extend this strategy to Legal Support. We are not here to fight legal wars but to further Free and Open Source Software. Whenever someone does want to pick on us we should have a solid ground and we have this with the incubation guidelines as they are. All that has to happen then will then happen, not now. As long as we have more or less empty pockets and do not aim at leveraging money as a major facilitator against anybody and we continue to build our brand as being a straight group of spatial FOSS addicts there is little reason to get at us from the legal side anyway. What would you get? A bad reputation, little or no money at all and a large bunch of really angry people. Hooray, lets go sue some Foundations. I disagree with Frank and find that Adrian Custer's proposed document for the GeoTools Project is a good starting point. As everything in this world it is not perfect and it will develop in future. Additionally I think we do not even need this document if it gives anybody a headache. My personal opinion is that a lot of the discussion is beside the point and we are oftentimes confusing copyright, ownership, originator's rights, branding and what really makes up a project - the community around it. We should get a lawyer only when we need one as we cannot anticipate in which context we will need her. Please never ever be IANAL again, I am tired of reading that phrase. Call me simplistic but I am still of the strong opinion that all we need to do is get some GeoTools developers go through the project files, change the Copyright to point at OSGeo and commit. My only concern was that the developers might feel they lose control and OSGeo could go berserk and sell the code Copyright to some big bad corporation. I think it simply cannot. And even if it did it wouldn't make any difference as anybody can always fork the last GNUed one and go for it. Can we get over it, please and let GeoTools graduate? Best regards, Arnulf. Allan Doyle wrote: On Oct 30, 2007, at 15:09 , Michael P. Gerlek wrote: Way back on that cold day in Chicago, I'm not sure anyone ever really thought about what it would mean when we said we'd offer legal protection. Does it imply/lead-to/entail some sort of indemnification? Ouch, that would be pricey... How does the Apache gang, et al, handle this? My recollection is that the Apache gang carefully keeps their coffers empty and makes sure the code all legally belongs to the Apache Foundation. Thus there's not enough of a pot of gold to win in a suit. However, I'm guessing that this strategy depends on a pretty well-defined process to ensure there are no loopholes. Allan -mpg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Landon Blake Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 7:56 AM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support Cameron, I think this is an excellent idea, and a lawyer should definitely be consulted. I wonder if the legal staff at the Software Freedom Conservancy could assist. Landon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cameron Shorter Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 3:56 AM To: OSGeo-Board Cc: OSGeo Discussions; Adrian Custer Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support OSGeo Board, (CC to OSGeo Discuss), During the founding of OSGeo, it was often noted that OSGeo projects would benefit from OSGeo legal protection. Now, as Geotools wrestles with graduation criteria and how to handle license assignment, the nature and level of legal protection offered by OSGeo is unclear. Also unclear is the level of legal review available (as tested by Geotools crafting of a Copywrite Assignment document). Consequently, geotools is having difficulty deciding whether it is wise to assign copywrite to OSGeo. I suspect a large part of the problem is that board members (like myself) are not lawyers and don't have a clear understanding of the options, the value of each of the options to OSGeo and the projects (how much protection is given), and the cost both in time and financially. Key questions to answer for each option are: * What level of support is given to contributors and license reviewers (individuals and companies) * What level of support is given to OSGeo users? * What level of support is given to projects? Will OSGeo fight a license infringer on behalf of a project? * What level of support is given to the OSGeo Foundation? *Proposal* That the board makes a clear statement on their website about nature and level of support offered by OSGeo to OSGeo projects and Individuals. This statement needs
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Board Proposal: Statement of OSGeo Legal Support
Arnulf Christl wrote: Cameron Shorter wrote: Good processes + no money is an acceptable strategy so long as we have consciously made this decision and everyone is aware of the strategy. Hello, keeping budgets low already is a corporate strategy of OSGeo as far as I am concerned. I am eager to extend this strategy to Legal Support. We are not here to fight legal wars but to further Free and Open Source Software. Odd; not what I signed up for. For me an open source foundation is there to protect and promote. Without both I am stuck shopping around to other foundations for help; a bit of a waste of my time. Whenever someone does want to pick on us we should have a solid ground and we have this with the incubation guidelines as they are. All that has to happen then will then happen, not now. I do not believe that; the job of the first projects through the incubation process is to set the guidelines - as such they are still very much a work in progress. As long as we have more or less empty pockets and do not aim at leveraging money as a major facilitator against anybody and we continue to build our brand as being a straight group of spatial FOSS addicts there is little reason to get at us from the legal side anyway. What would you get? A bad reputation, little or no money at all and a large bunch of really angry people. Hooray, lets go sue some Foundations. Depends what you are after; as Paul's recent blog shows patents and so forth are a very strange chess game and these older open source projects are a large body of prior art. We have already had to remove code violating patents from GeoTools; and I trust we will need to do so again. My personal opinion is that a lot of the discussion is beside the point and we are oftentimes confusing copyright, ownership, originator's rights, branding and what really makes up a project - the community around it. We should get a lawyer only when we need one as we cannot anticipate in which context we will need her. Please never ever be IANAL again, I am tired of reading that phrase. Fair enough; on a pragmatic front the only reason I care about this stuff at all is because I hate getting email to the effect of We did a review 6 months ago and felt your project was too risky. I am trying to be proactive about contributors fears; so that all this legal stuff stops separating the community. Call me simplistic but I am still of the strong opinion that all we need to do is get some GeoTools developers go through the project files, change the Copyright to point at OSGeo and commit. My only concern was that the developers might feel they lose control and OSGeo could go berserk and sell the code Copyright to some big bad corporation. Actually we are ready to do just that; we have a change proposal page to that effect sitting there ready to go. The GeoTools PMC approved this direction over a year ago. What we don't want to do is inflict a codebase on the OSGeo board without them feeling comfortable about what they are signing up for. I think it simply cannot. And even if it did it wouldn't make any difference as anybody can always fork the last GNUed one and go for it. Can we get over it, please and let GeoTools graduate? This discussion; and definition of scope; is exactly what the GeoTools incubation process is supposed to be contributing to the foundation. Yes we could graduate at any time (simply by changing our policy so that contributors retain copyright - like half the OSGeo projects); that would be a disservice to the next project through the gates. Cheers, Jody ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is there an Open Source software application that will draw a graticule on a map?
Markus Neteler ha scritto: Hi Brent, (remembering this thread...) some new cartography screenshots arrived: http://grass.itc.it/screenshots/cartography.php a couple of pages are missing: http://grass.itc.it/screenshots/images/lake_mimac.jpg http://grass.itc.it/screenshots/images/lake_charles.jpg nice shots! all the best. pc -- Paolo Cavallini, see: http://www.faunalia.it/pc signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is there an Open Source software application that will draw a graticule on a map?
On 10/31/07, Paolo Cavallini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Markus Neteler ha scritto: Hi Brent, (remembering this thread...) some new cartography screenshots arrived: http://grass.itc.it/screenshots/cartography.php a couple of pages are missing: http://grass.itc.it/screenshots/images/lake_mimac.jpg http://grass.itc.it/screenshots/images/lake_charles.jpg We are working on this slowly... please stay tuned... Markus nice shots! all the best. pc -- Paolo Cavallini, see: http://www.faunalia.it/pc ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
