RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo friendly countries to live in
Like the subject of patents from a couple weeks ago, we need to be careful of painting these things with too broad a brush. I've got to have MicroStation to work with CALTRANS, AutoCAD to work with my local city, ESRI to work with the County's GIS department, and software from LizardTech to use the imagery distributed by USDA for my County in MRSID format. To make it even more pleasant, AutoDESK breaks its file compatibility every other version or so, which means my company gets to purchase a license upgrade if we want to keep dealing with our government clients. Money talks in United States politics, and I'm sure the big boys in the software development throw plenty of greenbacks around when it suits there purpose. I'm not sure what you mean by this -- lobbying? Campaign contributions? Yes, MrSID is widely used in parts of the federal government but it is certainly not the case that LizardTech has ever thrown plenty of greenbacks around to get anyone to use our file format. (I doubt the various owners of ECW ever have either.) I'm not saying there is a malicious intent on government agencies to make life difficult. But I certainly don't see a widespread effort to embrace open source for its benefits, or to look for any alternatives to the widely established monopolies. In the case of one very prominent use of MrSID in the US federal government, an open standard solution was explicitly considered as an alternative, but it was notably rejected in large part because of the lack of penetration and technical expertise in the target marketplace and ecosystem. I actually see a lot of explicit government consideration of open standards and open source software -- and it gets better every year. However, adoption of new technologies (when done right!) requires evaluation of a myriad of criteria, only one of which is open access. -mpg (not speaking officially for LizardTech) -Original Message- From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Landon Blake Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 9:10 AM To: punk...@eidesis.org; OSGeo Discussions Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo friendly countries to live in I'm a long ways from Washington DC and a lot closer to the Silicon Valley, which may be a reason why I perceive different attitudes. I do think the new US Administration seems friendlier towards open source software. Still, when I think about the fight over using ODF in Maryland and other similar situations I realize open source software still has an uphill battle in many parts of the United States. This may even be truer in the geospatial arena than in others. Autodesk and ESRI may be great corporate citizens, but there is no doubt in my mind that the control software monopolies, especially in the government market. This isn't just true at the federal level, but at the state and local level as well. I've got to have MicroStation to work with CALTRANS, AutoCAD to work with my local city, ESRI to work with the County's GIS department, and software from LizardTech to use the imagery distributed by USDA for my County in MRSID format. To make it even more pleasant, AutoDESK breaks its file compatibility every other version or so, which means my company gets to purchase a license upgrade if we want to keep dealing with our government clients. Money talks in United States politics, and I'm sure the big boys in the software development throw plenty of greenbacks around when it suits there purpose. I'm not saying there is a malicious intent on government agencies to make life difficult. But I certainly don't see a widespread effort to embrace open source for its benefits, or to look for any alternatives to the widely established monopolies. (I do know of a couple cases where some state agencies in California are making an effort to use open source GIS desktop software.) Things may be very different in the web-mapping world. I'm talking about desktop software, since that is what I deal with 98% of the time. But, like you, I speak from personal experience, and don't have any hard facts or statistics to back up my wild claims. :] Landon Office Phone Number: (209) 946-0268 Cell Phone Number: (209) 992-0658 -Original Message- From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of P Kishor Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 7:53 AM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo friendly countries to live in On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Landon Blakelbl...@ksninc.com wrote: Cameron wrote: Canada looks preferable to the US. I wonder how much the Canadian GeoConnections program is responsible for Canada's strong OSGeo industry. I believe governments in Canada are much more supportive of open source software than governments in the United States. In my experience, the attitude towards open source software held by many organizations
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo friendly countries to live in
MPG, I didn't mean to shine a spotlight on the USDA's use of MRSID. It is one of several examples of an attitude I was trying to describe. I think you and I respectfully disagree with one another on one aspect of this debate. In my humble opinion sharing data acquired with tax payer funding in a format that is easily accessed without the use of proprietary software should be the most important factor in a file format decision by a government agency. (Well, maybe the second most important. The most important is the license that data is released under.) A company is well within its rights to use and promote a proprietary file format. I admit that file format may even have awesome benefits when compared to the best equivalent open file format. Just don't ask me to be happy when my government decides to use this proprietary file format. I think it short changes the citizens of the government and give that company an unfair advantage over its competitors. I'd much rather see the government support a company that was trying to build its business around open technology standards. In my opinion, you can't have it all. If you want to build your business model around a proprietary file format like DWG or MRSID you should be prepared to deal with a little push back from open source and open technology advocates, especially when their money (in the form of tax dollars) is involved. One of the greatest things ESRI ever did was publish the Shapefile specification. I don't doubt they have a software monopoly of sorts, but I will always respect them for that move. In many respects it has changed my view of their company. I don't know that the free software movement on the geospatial side of things would have been widely adopted without that standard way to share data. But alas, I am just one man and my opinion doesn't count for much in the greater scheme of things! I appreciate having an open source advocate like you at LizardTech, and please don't take my e-mail as a personal attack. The use of open file formats by our governments is just something I feel strongly about. Landon -Original Message- From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Michael P. Gerlek Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 7:23 AM To: OSGeo Discussions; punk...@eidesis.org Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo friendly countries to live in Like the subject of patents from a couple weeks ago, we need to be careful of painting these things with too broad a brush. I've got to have MicroStation to work with CALTRANS, AutoCAD to work with my local city, ESRI to work with the County's GIS department, and software from LizardTech to use the imagery distributed by USDA for my County in MRSID format. To make it even more pleasant, AutoDESK breaks its file compatibility every other version or so, which means my company gets to purchase a license upgrade if we want to keep dealing with our government clients. Money talks in United States politics, and I'm sure the big boys in the software development throw plenty of greenbacks around when it suits there purpose. I'm not sure what you mean by this -- lobbying? Campaign contributions? Yes, MrSID is widely used in parts of the federal government but it is certainly not the case that LizardTech has ever thrown plenty of greenbacks around to get anyone to use our file format. (I doubt the various owners of ECW ever have either.) I'm not saying there is a malicious intent on government agencies to make life difficult. But I certainly don't see a widespread effort to embrace open source for its benefits, or to look for any alternatives to the widely established monopolies. In the case of one very prominent use of MrSID in the US federal government, an open standard solution was explicitly considered as an alternative, but it was notably rejected in large part because of the lack of penetration and technical expertise in the target marketplace and ecosystem. I actually see a lot of explicit government consideration of open standards and open source software -- and it gets better every year. However, adoption of new technologies (when done right!) requires evaluation of a myriad of criteria, only one of which is open access. -mpg (not speaking officially for LizardTech) -Original Message- From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Landon Blake Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 9:10 AM To: punk...@eidesis.org; OSGeo Discussions Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo friendly countries to live in I'm a long ways from Washington DC and a lot closer to the Silicon Valley, which may be a reason why I perceive different attitudes. I do think the new US Administration seems friendlier towards open source software. Still, when I think about the fight over using ODF in Maryland and other similar situations I realize open source software still has an uphill battle in many parts of the
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo friendly countries to live in
All, Chiming in here on this thread, good reading BTW . . . I would like to expand somewhat on the idea that Open Formats should be the number one consideration. I would personally like to see the data be primarily released in an open format, and then these other market related aspects taken into account. If there seems to be more users of a certain type, then by all means accommodate them, but setting out initially with an open form will further reuse of the data much faster (IMO) and allow for others to reuse much easier. Too bad we could get companies to just serve things up in their repsective data forms as services and be done with it. If it's to their advantage they can maintain the data in their desired form. bobb Landon Blake lbl...@ksninc.com wrote: MPG, I didn't mean to shine a spotlight on the USDA's use of MRSID. It is one of several examples of an attitude I was trying to describe. I think you and I respectfully disagree with one another on one aspect of this debate. In my humble opinion sharing data acquired with tax payer funding in a format that is easily accessed without the use of proprietary software should be the most important factor in a file format decision by a government agency. (Well, maybe the second most important. The most important is the license that data is released under.) A company is well within its rights to use and promote a proprietary file format. I admit that file format may even have awesome benefits when compared to the best equivalent open file format. Just don't ask me to be happy when my government decides to use this proprietary file format. I think it short changes the citizens of the government and give that company an unfair advantage over its competitors. I'd much rather see the government support a company that was trying to build its business around open technology standards. In my opinion, you can't have it all. If you want to build your business model around a proprietary file format like DWG or MRSID you should be prepared to deal with a little push back from open source and open technology advocates, especially when their money (in the form of tax dollars) is involved. One of the greatest things ESRI ever did was publish the Shapefile specification. I don't doubt they have a software monopoly of sorts, but I will always respect them for that move. In many respects it has changed my view of their company. I don't know that the free software movement on the geospatial side of things would have been widely adopted without that standard way to share data. But alas, I am just one man and my opinion doesn't count for much in the greater scheme of things! I appreciate having an open source advocate like you at LizardTech, and please don't take my e-mail as a personal attack. The use of open file formats by our governments is just something I feel strongly about. Landon -Original Message- From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Michael P. Gerlek Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 7:23 AM To: OSGeo Discussions; punk...@eidesis.org Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo friendly countries to live in Like the subject of patents from a couple weeks ago, we need to be careful of painting these things with too broad a brush. I've got to have MicroStation to work with CALTRANS, AutoCAD to work with my local city, ESRI to work with the County's GIS department, and software from LizardTech to use the imagery distributed by USDA for my County in MRSID format. To make it even more pleasant, AutoDESK breaks its file compatibility every other version or so, which means my company gets to purchase a license upgrade if we want to keep dealing with our government clients. Money talks in United States politics, and I'm sure the big boys in the software development throw plenty of greenbacks around when it suits there purpose. I'm not sure what you mean by this -- lobbying? Campaign contributions? Yes, MrSID is widely used in parts of the federal government but it is certainly not the case that LizardTech has ever thrown plenty of greenbacks around to get anyone to use our file format. (I doubt the various owners of ECW ever have either.) I'm not saying there is a malicious intent on government agencies to make life difficult. But I certainly don't see a widespread effort to embrace open source for its benefits, or to look for any alternatives to the widely established monopolies. In the case of one very prominent use of MrSID in the US federal government, an open standard solution was explicitly considered as an alternative, but it was notably rejected in large part because of the lack of penetration and technical expertise in the target marketplace and ecosystem. I actually see a lot of explicit government consideration of open standards and open source software -- and it gets better every year. However, adoption of new technologies (when done right!) requires
[OSGeo-Discuss] DTQS or something else.
Hi, I'm looking for a software (or something else) which can help me to validate a geodetic calculus engine and a coordinate transformation engine. I have found, on the web, that Eurocontrol has DQTS (Data Quality Tool Set), but it is too expensive. Can Someone tell me if there is a software like DTQS cheaper than this? Where can I find some table precompiled as reference for validate my engine? Many Thanks. SN Torna a grande richiesta l'offerta estiva di Tiscali Photo !! Non rinuniciare ai tuoi ricordi. Stampa le tue foto a soli 0,09 euro http://photo.tiscali.it ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo friendly countries to live in
All, This is a great thought-provoking discussion. Thinking about the U.S. geodata released in the MrSID format. I think this may be the best way to show the return on the taxpayers' investment in the data. The vast majority of citizens don't want to manipulate these datasets; they only want to view them. The MrSID format with USGS topo maps and USDA county compressed mosaics makes them available to many more people than a more open format would. For those of us who want to manipulate these datasets with our geospatial OSS, alternatives are available. Perhaps someday there will be a widely adopted open format that can compete with MrSID but for today the MrSID option provides for the best access for the largest number of people. Regards, Richard On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 7:36 AM, Landon Blake lbl...@ksninc.com wrote: MPG, I didn't mean to shine a spotlight on the USDA's use of MRSID. It is one of several examples of an attitude I was trying to describe. I think you and I respectfully disagree with one another on one aspect of this debate. In my humble opinion sharing data acquired with tax payer funding in a format that is easily accessed without the use of proprietary software should be the most important factor in a file format decision by a government agency. (Well, maybe the second most important. The most important is the license that data is released under.) A company is well within its rights to use and promote a proprietary file format. I admit that file format may even have awesome benefits when compared to the best equivalent open file format. Just don't ask me to be happy when my government decides to use this proprietary file format. I think it short changes the citizens of the government and give that company an unfair advantage over its competitors. I'd much rather see the government support a company that was trying to build its business around open technology standards. In my opinion, you can't have it all. If you want to build your business model around a proprietary file format like DWG or MRSID you should be prepared to deal with a little push back from open source and open technology advocates, especially when their money (in the form of tax dollars) is involved. One of the greatest things ESRI ever did was publish the Shapefile specification. I don't doubt they have a software monopoly of sorts, but I will always respect them for that move. In many respects it has changed my view of their company. I don't know that the free software movement on the geospatial side of things would have been widely adopted without that standard way to share data. But alas, I am just one man and my opinion doesn't count for much in the greater scheme of things! I appreciate having an open source advocate like you at LizardTech, and please don't take my e-mail as a personal attack. The use of open file formats by our governments is just something I feel strongly about. Landon ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo friendly countries to live in
Richard, You make an interesting point. I would respond to your argument in this way: Richard wrote: I think this may be the best way to show the return on the taxpayers' investment in the data. The vast majority of citizens don't want to manipulate these datasets; they only want to view them. The MrSID format with USGS topo maps and USDA county compressed mosaics makes them available to many more people than a more open format would. If you can only view the data, you really miss out on a lot of its value. To really benefit from the data you need to be able to manipulate it, and to convert it to/from other formats. How useful would shapefiles be if we could only look at them? I think the main argument for using MRSID is the file compression. But this is the government we are talking about. Tile the image data and put up an easy to use index online that allows people to download just what they need. Users that want to access images for entire counties are likely going to have the computing power to use that much data anyways. In my mind, the issue can be boiled down to this: MRSID doesn't have to be a closed file format. Look at a company like Adobe. Governments around the world release tons of data in PDF format. But Adobe publishes a spec for this format. This has important implications for the adoption of the format, for the ability to archive, for dealing with vendor lock-in, and for supporting development of open source software. Adobe makes a killing on PDF software, but if you wanted to write an open source library to write and manipulate PDF files you could. (iText is an example.) The bottom line is that closed file formats give a company like LizardTech a way to lock out competition from other commercial companies or from open source developers. They don't have to keep the file format closed, they choose to do so. They could publish a spec if they wanted and the USDA would loose none of the benefits of the MRSID file format. If there was a published spec I would have no problem with the USDA using MRSID or with them paying LizardTech for software and support because of their choice of this format. I'd wager LizardTech keeps the MRSID closed for the same reason Autodesk keeps the DWG format closed. It means money and market control. I don't think US taxpayers should be supporting that type of business model. I know what I'm saying here likely rubs some people the wrong way. But this is the OSGeo mailing list. :] I don't care if a private company chooses to use MRSID. I don't care how Autodesk and LizardTech run their businesses. Until you get my tax payers involved. Then I have a right to be critical. My government's choices in these matters say more about a single business or IT decision. They say a lot about what principles we value and financially support as a society. Landon Office Phone Number: (209) 946-0268 Cell Phone Number: (209) 992-0658 From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Richard Rupp Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 10:03 AM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo friendly countries to live in All, This is a great thought-provoking discussion. Thinking about the U.S. geodata released in the MrSID format. I think this may be the best way to show the return on the taxpayers' investment in the data. The vast majority of citizens don't want to manipulate these datasets; they only want to view them. The MrSID format with USGS topo maps and USDA county compressed mosaics makes them available to many more people than a more open format would. For those of us who want to manipulate these datasets with our geospatial OSS, alternatives are available. Perhaps someday there will be a widely adopted open format that can compete with MrSID but for today the MrSID option provides for the best access for the largest number of people. Regards, Richard On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 7:36 AM, Landon Blake lbl...@ksninc.com wrote: MPG, I didn't mean to shine a spotlight on the USDA's use of MRSID. It is one of several examples of an attitude I was trying to describe. I think you and I respectfully disagree with one another on one aspect of this debate. In my humble opinion sharing data acquired with tax payer funding in a format that is easily accessed without the use of proprietary software should be the most important factor in a file format decision by a government agency. (Well, maybe the second most important. The most important is the license that data is released under.) A company is well within its rights to use and promote a proprietary file format. I admit that file format may even have awesome benefits when compared to the best equivalent open file format. Just don't ask me to be happy when my government decides to use this proprietary file format. I think it short changes the citizens of the government and give that company an unfair
[OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms
I realized that publishing a spec for a file format like MRSID isn't as clear cut as I had at first thought. If the MRSID software uses a fancy top-secret compression/decompression algorithm to move data to and from the file format knowing only the structure of the format would do no good. You'd have to release the details of the algorithm as well. I still don't think proprietary file formats are a good idea for government data released to the public, but I admit that having a company like LizardTech publish a spec for something like MRSID is not necessarily a simple task. No doubt a lot of time and money goes into developing those algorithms. This makes me wonder about algorithms used to purposefully encrypt binary file formats. That is another can of worms. It looks like the easiest thing to do is to start with a file format that was designed to be open from the very beginning. Landon 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.___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms
The MRSID format is a very special case - and perhaps an opportunity for a new FOSS file format. MRSID is a lossless, fractal-based, multi-scale raster compression format. LizardTech has the algorithms to encode and decode MRSID locked up in copyrights, and I believe, patents. Even companies like ESRI shell out big bucks to LizardTech to be able to read and write the MRSID format. I guess I missed the context of the discussion. Is the government releasing certain data exclusively in this format? If so, I think the argument can be made against this practice. The different in compression between MRSID and gziped TIFFs isn't really that great in this day of cheap disks and fat pipes. -Eric -=--=---===---=--=-=--=---==---=--=-=- Eric B. WolfNew! 720-334-7734 USGS Geographer Center of Excellence in GIScience PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Landon Blake lbl...@ksninc.com wrote: I realized that publishing a spec for a file format like MRSID isn’t as clear cut as I had at first thought. If the MRSID software uses a fancy top-secret compression/decompression algorithm to move data to and from the file format knowing only the structure of the format would do no good. You’d have to release the details of the algorithm as well. I still don’t think proprietary file formats are a good idea for government data released to the public, but I admit that having a company like LizardTech publish a spec for something like MRSID is not necessarily a simple task. No doubt a lot of time and money goes into developing those algorithms. This makes me wonder about algorithms used to purposefully encrypt binary file formats. That is another can of worms. It looks like the easiest thing to do is to start with a file format that was designed to be open from the very beginning. Landon *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. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms
Eric, The imagery I am talking about is from the USDA APFO: This FAQ contains a snippet about the format: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=homesubject=progtopic=nai In an interesting turn of events I note that as of 2008, the USDA is releasing the county mosaics in JP2 format, not in MRSID. I am not sure what brought about this change, and I wasn't aware that it had been made. The same web page indicates that there is a shapefile index for the individual image tiles. It appears that you can also download the county mosaics online. A lot of this has changed (improved) in the last couple of years. I'm glad I checked again. That being said, the principles from our discussion still apply. :] Landon Office Phone Number: (209) 946-0268 Cell Phone Number: (209) 992-0658 From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Eric Wolf Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 1:15 PM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms The MRSID format is a very special case - and perhaps an opportunity for a new FOSS file format. MRSID is a lossless, fractal-based, multi-scale raster compression format. LizardTech has the algorithms to encode and decode MRSID locked up in copyrights, and I believe, patents. Even companies like ESRI shell out big bucks to LizardTech to be able to read and write the MRSID format. I guess I missed the context of the discussion. Is the government releasing certain data exclusively in this format? If so, I think the argument can be made against this practice. The different in compression between MRSID and gziped TIFFs isn't really that great in this day of cheap disks and fat pipes. -Eric -=--=---===---=--=-=--=---==---=--=-=- Eric B. WolfNew! 720-334-7734 USGS Geographer Center of Excellence in GIScience PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Landon Blake lbl...@ksninc.com wrote: I realized that publishing a spec for a file format like MRSID isn't as clear cut as I had at first thought. If the MRSID software uses a fancy top-secret compression/decompression algorithm to move data to and from the file format knowing only the structure of the format would do no good. You'd have to release the details of the algorithm as well. I still don't think proprietary file formats are a good idea for government data released to the public, but I admit that having a company like LizardTech publish a spec for something like MRSID is not necessarily a simple task. No doubt a lot of time and money goes into developing those algorithms. This makes me wonder about algorithms used to purposefully encrypt binary file formats. That is another can of worms. It looks like the easiest thing to do is to start with a file format that was designed to be open from the very beginning. Landon 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. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms
Interesting... I can understand why NAIP was in MRSID. It's a pretty large dataset - and I think .SID was more widely supported than JP2 until recently. The USDA site does provide links to PCI Geomatics FreeView, which can read .SID format but not save it. IrfanView, with a plugin, can read SID format and convert. So it's not a dead-end format. And it sure beats SDTS! I think data interchange and real interoperability has only recently been possible for large raster datasets. It's still a chore if you have to re-project large raster datasets. This may add some content to a research paper I'm working on. -Eric -=--=---===---=--=-=--=---==---=--=-=- Eric B. WolfNew! 720-334-7734 USGS Geographer Center of Excellence in GIScience PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Landon Blake lbl...@ksninc.com wrote: Eric, The imagery I am talking about is from the USDA APFO: This FAQ contains a snippet about the format: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=homesubject=progtopic=nai In an interesting turn of events I note that as of 2008, the USDA is releasing the county mosaics in JP2 format, not in MRSID. I am not sure what brought about this change, and I wasn’t aware that it had been made. The same web page indicates that there is a shapefile index for the individual image tiles. It appears that you can also download the county mosaics online. A lot of this has changed (improved) in the last couple of years. I’m glad I checked again. That being said, the principles from our discussion still apply. :] *Landon* Office Phone Number: (209) 946-0268 Cell Phone Number: (209) 992-0658 -- *From:* discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] *On Behalf Of *Eric Wolf *Sent:* Thursday, August 20, 2009 1:15 PM *To:* OSGeo Discussions *Subject:* Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms The MRSID format is a very special case - and perhaps an opportunity for a new FOSS file format. MRSID is a lossless, fractal-based, multi-scale raster compression format. LizardTech has the algorithms to encode and decode MRSID locked up in copyrights, and I believe, patents. Even companies like ESRI shell out big bucks to LizardTech to be able to read and write the MRSID format. I guess I missed the context of the discussion. Is the government releasing certain data exclusively in this format? If so, I think the argument can be made against this practice. The different in compression between MRSID and gziped TIFFs isn't really that great in this day of cheap disks and fat pipes. -Eric -=--=---===---=--=-=--=---==---=--=-=- Eric B. WolfNew! 720-334-7734 USGS Geographer Center of Excellence in GIScience PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Landon Blake lbl...@ksninc.com wrote: I realized that publishing a spec for a file format like MRSID isn’t as clear cut as I had at first thought. If the MRSID software uses a fancy top-secret compression/decompression algorithm to move data to and from the file format knowing only the structure of the format would do no good. You’d have to release the details of the algorithm as well. I still don’t think proprietary file formats are a good idea for government data released to the public, but I admit that having a company like LizardTech publish a spec for something like MRSID is not necessarily a simple task. No doubt a lot of time and money goes into developing those algorithms. This makes me wonder about algorithms used to purposefully encrypt binary file formats. That is another can of worms. It looks like the easiest thing to do is to start with a file format that was designed to be open from the very beginning. Landon *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. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms
Some clarifications: - MrSID has both lossy and lossless modes - MrSID is not fractal based; it uses wavelets (and arithmetic encoding) - you can't copyright algorithms; the MrSID source code certainly is, however - MrSID relies on a number of patents, not all of which are owned by LizardTech - reading MrSID does not require any fees; we have libraries you can download, although they are not open source That said, some editorial comments (although I'm now wishing I hadn't been so quick to rise to Landon's bait :-) - Some of you know the history of trying to open source MrSID; I won't go into that here, except to say that LizardTech doesn't own all of the required IP needed to make that happen. - If we are speaking of the NAIP data, then no, it is not exclusively available in MrSID format; it is also shipped as GeoTIFFs. - JPEG 2000 is a very robust open standard alternative to MrSID, and a number of players already support it (including LizardTech), but not enough to make it viable for certain domains like NAIP. - some of you also know the history on open JP2 support: there is today no open source implementation of JP2 that is suitable for geo work. Alas. -mpg From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Eric Wolf Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 2:15 PM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms The MRSID format is a very special case - and perhaps an opportunity for a new FOSS file format. MRSID is a lossless, fractal-based, multi-scale raster compression format. LizardTech has the algorithms to encode and decode MRSID locked up in copyrights, and I believe, patents. Even companies like ESRI shell out big bucks to LizardTech to be able to read and write the MRSID format. I guess I missed the context of the discussion. Is the government releasing certain data exclusively in this format? If so, I think the argument can be made against this practice. The different in compression between MRSID and gziped TIFFs isn't really that great in this day of cheap disks and fat pipes. -Eric -=--=---===---=--=-=--=---==---=--=-=- Eric B. WolfNew! 720-334-7734 USGS Geographer Center of Excellence in GIScience PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms
Thanks for the clarification, Michael! And your comments about IP may also add to the paper I am developing (or another). I have a theme I plan to develop at some point - mostly dealing with the inherent limitations of copyrighted software in an era of cloud computing... -Eric -=--=---===---=--=-=--=---==---=--=-=- Eric B. WolfNew! 720-334-7734 USGS Geographer Center of Excellence in GIScience PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Michael P. Gerlek m...@lizardtech.comwrote: Some clarifications: - MrSID has both lossy and lossless modes - MrSID is not fractal based; it uses wavelets (and arithmetic encoding) - you can’t copyright algorithms; the MrSID source code certainly is, however - MrSID relies on a number of patents, not all of which are owned by LizardTech - reading MrSID does not require any fees; we have libraries you can download, although they are not open source That said, some editorial comments (although I’m now wishing I hadn’t been so quick to rise to Landon’s bait :-) - Some of you know the history of trying to open source MrSID; I won’t go into that here, except to say that LizardTech doesn’t own all of the required IP needed to make that happen. - If we are speaking of the NAIP data, then no, it is not exclusively available in MrSID format; it is also shipped as GeoTIFFs. - JPEG 2000 is a very robust open standard alternative to MrSID, and a number of players already support it (including LizardTech), but not enough to make it viable for certain domains like NAIP. - some of you also know the history on open JP2 support: there is today no open source implementation of JP2 that is suitable for geo work. Alas. -mpg *From:* discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] *On Behalf Of *Eric Wolf *Sent:* Thursday, August 20, 2009 2:15 PM *To:* OSGeo Discussions *Subject:* Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms The MRSID format is a very special case - and perhaps an opportunity for a new FOSS file format. MRSID is a lossless, fractal-based, multi-scale raster compression format. LizardTech has the algorithms to encode and decode MRSID locked up in copyrights, and I believe, patents. Even companies like ESRI shell out big bucks to LizardTech to be able to read and write the MRSID format. I guess I missed the context of the discussion. Is the government releasing certain data exclusively in this format? If so, I think the argument can be made against this practice. The different in compression between MRSID and gziped TIFFs isn't really that great in this day of cheap disks and fat pipes. -Eric -=--=---===---=--=-=--=---==---=--=-=- Eric B. WolfNew! 720-334-7734 USGS Geographer Center of Excellence in GIScience PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms
MPG: Thanks for the clarification. When you said there is today no open source implementation of JP2 that is suitable for geo work do you mean that there is no open source library that can read and write JP2? If so, who is using the format? Do you know why there hasn't been a broader adoption of JP2? (I should also add the MPG helped me publish a short article in support for open file formats, so I know he is on our side.) :] Landon Office Phone Number: (209) 946-0268 Cell Phone Number: (209) 992-0658 From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Michael P. Gerlek Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 1:55 PM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms Some clarifications: - MrSID has both lossy and lossless modes - MrSID is not fractal based; it uses wavelets (and arithmetic encoding) - you can't copyright algorithms; the MrSID source code certainly is, however - MrSID relies on a number of patents, not all of which are owned by LizardTech - reading MrSID does not require any fees; we have libraries you can download, although they are not open source That said, some editorial comments (although I'm now wishing I hadn't been so quick to rise to Landon's bait :-) - Some of you know the history of trying to open source MrSID; I won't go into that here, except to say that LizardTech doesn't own all of the required IP needed to make that happen. - If we are speaking of the NAIP data, then no, it is not exclusively available in MrSID format; it is also shipped as GeoTIFFs. - JPEG 2000 is a very robust open standard alternative to MrSID, and a number of players already support it (including LizardTech), but not enough to make it viable for certain domains like NAIP. - some of you also know the history on open JP2 support: there is today no open source implementation of JP2 that is suitable for geo work. Alas. -mpg From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Eric Wolf Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 2:15 PM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms The MRSID format is a very special case - and perhaps an opportunity for a new FOSS file format. MRSID is a lossless, fractal-based, multi-scale raster compression format. LizardTech has the algorithms to encode and decode MRSID locked up in copyrights, and I believe, patents. Even companies like ESRI shell out big bucks to LizardTech to be able to read and write the MRSID format. I guess I missed the context of the discussion. Is the government releasing certain data exclusively in this format? If so, I think the argument can be made against this practice. The different in compression between MRSID and gziped TIFFs isn't really that great in this day of cheap disks and fat pipes. -Eric -=--=---===---=--=-=--=---==---=--=-=- Eric B. WolfNew! 720-334-7734 USGS Geographer Center of Excellence in GIScience PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography 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.___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms
Landon asked: When you said there is today no open source implementation of JP2 that is suitable for geo work do you mean that there is no open source library that can read and write JP2? If so, who is using the format? There are a few implementations of JP2 around. The Kakadu library, which is extremely compliant and featureful and robust (and correspondingly extremely big and complicated and scary) is the best-known package: it is available only via licensing fees. LizardTech uses Kakadu, in fact, and a number of geo vendors use either Kakadu directly or LizardTech's packaging of it. The ER Mapper folks had a JP2 solution at one time, but I never understood their licensing terms to be OSI compliant -- and since they got bought out by Leica I've sort of stopped tracking that issue. If anyone has any current info, I'd like to hear it. There are a couple truly open source libraries, but none have been written in such a way as to be able to support geo-sized imagery (500MB, say). Doing the wavelet algorithms efficiently for large data sets requires rocket science. Do you know why there hasn't been a broader adoption of JP2? Not through lack of trying on my part :-) I think the two biggest reasons are: (1) The algorithms for handling large images in memory really are rocket science, and no one in the FOSS community has gotten the itch sufficiently bad enough to go and do the work needed inside the existing open source packages. Hopefully someday someone will. (2) MrSID (and, perhaps, ECW) are widely used and supported. Philosophical motivations aside, MrSID and ECW have historically gotten the job done and so the need for JP2 just isn't as high as it otherwise might be. That said, NGA is a good counter-example. They support JP2 in a number of areas already and have mandates to broaden that support. -mpg ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms
I'll mention too the question of patents and JP2, since this thread is bound to get into THAT issue too before long :-) Some of the algorithms within the JP2 standard (from ISO) are patented. However, the companies in question have agreed to not exercise their rights on those patents for any implementation of the standard. That is, if you write a ISO-compliant JP2 encoder, Company X won't come after you. This is a good thing, and is not uncommon practice for some standards groups. It's better for us than the RAND (reasonable and non-discriminatory) clauses that get used by some groups. However, there is an interesting philosophical consideration for the open source community here. Let's say I write a nice, compliant MpgJp2 library on Monday and open source it. Landon looks at my code and, smart cookie that he is, realizes that he could improve the overall compression ratio by tweaking one of the core algorithms. He forks my code, makes the change, and posts the SunburnedJp2 library to the web on Tuesday night. Cool. We like that. Open source in action. But wait -- Wednesday morning, he finds an email from Company X's lawyers in his inbox: he is now in violation of X's patent, because he is not using the patent within the bounds of a compliant JP2 encoder. He broke the file format. [You break it, you buy it?] It's not a JPEG 2000 library anymore. Some open source partisans may therefore consider the JP2 standard to not be truly open enough. I'm sure there are other standards with this same problem, although I don't know of any offhand. -mpg From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Landon Blake Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 2:57 PM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms MPG: Thanks for the clarification. When you said there is today no open source implementation of JP2 that is suitable for geo work do you mean that there is no open source library that can read and write JP2? If so, who is using the format? Do you know why there hasn't been a broader adoption of JP2? (I should also add the MPG helped me publish a short article in support for open file formats, so I know he is on our side.) :] Landon Office Phone Number: (209) 946-0268 Cell Phone Number: (209) 992-0658 From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Michael P. Gerlek Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 1:55 PM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms Some clarifications: - MrSID has both lossy and lossless modes - MrSID is not fractal based; it uses wavelets (and arithmetic encoding) - you can't copyright algorithms; the MrSID source code certainly is, however - MrSID relies on a number of patents, not all of which are owned by LizardTech - reading MrSID does not require any fees; we have libraries you can download, although they are not open source That said, some editorial comments (although I'm now wishing I hadn't been so quick to rise to Landon's bait :-) - Some of you know the history of trying to open source MrSID; I won't go into that here, except to say that LizardTech doesn't own all of the required IP needed to make that happen. - If we are speaking of the NAIP data, then no, it is not exclusively available in MrSID format; it is also shipped as GeoTIFFs. - JPEG 2000 is a very robust open standard alternative to MrSID, and a number of players already support it (including LizardTech), but not enough to make it viable for certain domains like NAIP. - some of you also know the history on open JP2 support: there is today no open source implementation of JP2 that is suitable for geo work. Alas. -mpg From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Eric Wolf Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 2:15 PM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms The MRSID format is a very special case - and perhaps an opportunity for a new FOSS file format. MRSID is a lossless, fractal-based, multi-scale raster compression format. LizardTech has the algorithms to encode and decode MRSID locked up in copyrights, and I believe, patents. Even companies like ESRI shell out big bucks to LizardTech to be able to read and write the MRSID format. I guess I missed the context of the discussion. Is the government releasing certain data exclusively in this format? If so, I think the argument can be made against this practice. The different in compression between MRSID and gziped TIFFs isn't really that great in this day of cheap disks and fat pipes. -Eric -=--=---===---=--=-=--=---==---=--=-=- Eric B. WolfNew! 720-334-7734 USGS Geographer Center of Excellence in GIScience PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 01:57:16PM -0700, Landon Blake wrote: MPG: Thanks for the clarification. When you said there is today no open source implementation of JP2 that is suitable for geo work do you mean that there is no open source library that can read and write JP2? If so, who is using the format? There are: 1. Several non-open source implementations (most of which cost money) which work at geo-sized JP2 images. 2. Many use cases of JPEG2000 which involve imagery at sizes that are less than geo. (This is the much more common case, in my research.) Do you know why there hasn't been a broader adoption of JP2? I'm not sure what your definition is of broader adoption; many of the datasources I worked with for OAM were provided in either JP2 or MrSID formats. I would almost always go with MrSID, because I could: * Work with it easily, and for free * It was typically significantly smaller. Perhaps you're asking why there hasn't been more open source software written to handle large, highly compressed JP2 images better -- to which I would point out that there isn't *any* format that has good open source support for large, highly compressed images. (gzipped TIFFs work to some extent, but don't compare to the benefits gained by JP2 or MrSID in many cases.) It's a hard problem, and -- given that the major players see the costs to 'pay to play' as being trivial (and they typically are, in the big scheme of things), not in a situation where it's likely that the people with ots of money ar ein a position to spend it on open source, rather than simply paying a smaller amount for existing non-opensource solutions. Despite the claims that 'disks are cheap and bandwidth is free', many providers *are* limited by bandwidth: MassGIS, for example, had to put in cash for a costly upgrade to their badnwidth solely due to the demand put on their servers by people downloading aerial imagery. Those funds could have gone to funding more open geodata, but instead were used to maek the data that already existed more readily available. These things *do* matter, and MrSID offers, by far, the best 'bang for the buck' for amount of data per byte of download. This applies even more at the consumer end; when you talk about consuming data, MrSID is even *more* user-friendly, because the users (who have limited bandwidth) are able to open it more easily. Additionally, many viewers which include MrSID support are able to display larger images -- due to the MrSID library -- than they would be by opening the entire image in RAM or something similar. Many of my friends have used MrSID for looking at thigns like Shakespear's Folios, because tools like IfranView include it by default, and the tool Just Works better than anything else. I believe that the important things in terms of delivering public content to users are: * License -- Are they allowed to do what they want with it? * Ease of use -- Is it *possible* For them to do what they want with it, including downloading it in the first place? * Openness -- Can they do what htey want with it with free/open tools? If the formwer two are true, then the latter -- openness -- can be handled by third parties. Imagine that you have two options: * Data provided online, for users to download, in MrSID * Data provided on CDs, for users to have shipped to them, in GeoTIFF (The latter will almost always have a non-trivial fee, because it involves person time, but ignore that for the time being.) If these are your options -- and this *is* the case for a non-zero number of imagery providers -- which one would you prefer to use? Best Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt Web Developer ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms
Good post Christopher. I will think about what you have said. In the meantime, I won't be using any big images. :] Landon Office Phone Number: (209) 946-0268 Cell Phone Number: (209) 992-0658 -Original Message- From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Christopher Schmidt Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 2:50 PM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 01:57:16PM -0700, Landon Blake wrote: MPG: Thanks for the clarification. When you said there is today no open source implementation of JP2 that is suitable for geo work do you mean that there is no open source library that can read and write JP2? If so, who is using the format? There are: 1. Several non-open source implementations (most of which cost money) which work at geo-sized JP2 images. 2. Many use cases of JPEG2000 which involve imagery at sizes that are less than geo. (This is the much more common case, in my research.) Do you know why there hasn't been a broader adoption of JP2? I'm not sure what your definition is of broader adoption; many of the datasources I worked with for OAM were provided in either JP2 or MrSID formats. I would almost always go with MrSID, because I could: * Work with it easily, and for free * It was typically significantly smaller. Perhaps you're asking why there hasn't been more open source software written to handle large, highly compressed JP2 images better -- to which I would point out that there isn't *any* format that has good open source support for large, highly compressed images. (gzipped TIFFs work to some extent, but don't compare to the benefits gained by JP2 or MrSID in many cases.) It's a hard problem, and -- given that the major players see the costs to 'pay to play' as being trivial (and they typically are, in the big scheme of things), not in a situation where it's likely that the people with ots of money ar ein a position to spend it on open source, rather than simply paying a smaller amount for existing non-opensource solutions. Despite the claims that 'disks are cheap and bandwidth is free', many providers *are* limited by bandwidth: MassGIS, for example, had to put in cash for a costly upgrade to their badnwidth solely due to the demand put on their servers by people downloading aerial imagery. Those funds could have gone to funding more open geodata, but instead were used to maek the data that already existed more readily available. These things *do* matter, and MrSID offers, by far, the best 'bang for the buck' for amount of data per byte of download. This applies even more at the consumer end; when you talk about consuming data, MrSID is even *more* user-friendly, because the users (who have limited bandwidth) are able to open it more easily. Additionally, many viewers which include MrSID support are able to display larger images -- due to the MrSID library -- than they would be by opening the entire image in RAM or something similar. Many of my friends have used MrSID for looking at thigns like Shakespear's Folios, because tools like IfranView include it by default, and the tool Just Works better than anything else. I believe that the important things in terms of delivering public content to users are: * License -- Are they allowed to do what they want with it? * Ease of use -- Is it *possible* For them to do what they want with it, including downloading it in the first place? * Openness -- Can they do what htey want with it with free/open tools? If the formwer two are true, then the latter -- openness -- can be handled by third parties. Imagine that you have two options: * Data provided online, for users to download, in MrSID * Data provided on CDs, for users to have shipped to them, in GeoTIFF (The latter will almost always have a non-trivial fee, because it involves person time, but ignore that for the time being.) If these are your options -- and this *is* the case for a non-zero number of imagery providers -- which one would you prefer to use? Best Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt Web Developer ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss 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. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
IMO: Just another thought on this issue (though we do seem to be recycling arguments over the years...): Assuming that I have a very large archive of spatial data, be it imagery or any other spatial format and that I store my data in a variety of proprietary formats: In ten years from now, can I be sure that: - the company that created, understands, and holds the IP in the data format will still be around? - there will still be software that runs on the then current operating environment, that can read and 'fully exploit' the data in the proprietary standard? - that this future software will work seamlessly with my then current spatial environment? - if all of the above risks prove to eventuate, can I be sure that I'll be able to salvage my data into another format, retaining its complete semantic context? IMO, it is a high risk proposition to lock public (or private) archives away in proprietary data formats. It makes more sense to use open standards and formats that are publically available. Bruce Bannerman -Original Message- From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Michael P. Gerlek Sent: Friday, 21 August 2009 6:55 AM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms Some clarifications: - MrSID has both lossy and lossless modes - MrSID is not fractal based; it uses wavelets (and arithmetic encoding) - you can't copyright algorithms; the MrSID source code certainly is, however - MrSID relies on a number of patents, not all of which are owned by LizardTech - reading MrSID does not require any fees; we have libraries you can download, although they are not open source That said, some editorial comments (although I'm now wishing I hadn't been so quick to rise to Landon's bait :-) - Some of you know the history of trying to open source MrSID; I won't go into that here, except to say that LizardTech doesn't own all of the required IP needed to make that happen. - If we are speaking of the NAIP data, then no, it is not exclusively available in MrSID format; it is also shipped as GeoTIFFs. - JPEG 2000 is a very robust open standard alternative to MrSID, and a number of players already support it (including LizardTech), but not enough to make it viable for certain domains like NAIP. - some of you also know the history on open JP2 support: there is today no open source implementation of JP2 that is suitable for geo work. Alas. -mpg From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Eric Wolf Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 2:15 PM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open File Formats and Proprietary Algorithms The MRSID format is a very special case - and perhaps an opportunity for a new FOSS file format. MRSID is a lossless, fractal-based, multi-scale raster compression format. LizardTech has the algorithms to encode and decode MRSID locked up in copyrights, and I believe, patents. Even companies like ESRI shell out big bucks to LizardTech to be able to read and write the MRSID format. I guess I missed the context of the discussion. Is the government releasing certain data exclusively in this format? If so, I think the argument can be made against this practice. The different in compression between MRSID and gziped TIFFs isn't really that great in this day of cheap disks and fat pipes. -Eric -=--=---===---=--=-=--=---==---=--=-=- Eric B. WolfNew! 720-334-7734 USGS Geographer Center of Excellence in GIScience PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[OSGeo-Discuss] Please Share: AWRA Announces Call for Abstracts for GIS in Water Resources Conference
(With apologies for cross posting... Please see the below announcement for the biannual GIS in Water Resources conference of the American Water Resources Association in March 2010 in Orlando Florida. This conference has had a growing representation of projects from the OPEN SOURCE GIS world and it would be awesome to see that continue! - Dan Ames) * ***AWRA Announces Call for Abstracts for Spring 2010 * *Conference on GIS in Water Resources* Contact: Terry Meyer, AWRA Marketing (540) 687-8390 or *te...@awra.org* te...@awra.org The American Water Resources Association’s (AWRA) upcoming specialty conference on *GIS in Water Resources*http://www.awra.org/meetings/Florida2010/is accepting abstracts through October 9, 2009. The conference will take place March 29-31, 2010 at the Rosen Shingle Creek Hotel in Orlando, FL. Recognizing that Geographic Information Systems (GIS) have become a fundamental tool for the analysis, planning, and management of environmental and water resources systems, AWRA launched a series of biennial conferences on this increasingly important topic for water resources professionals. The spring 2010 conference will be the sixth in this series. AWRA’s GIS conferences have seen both the breadth and depth of GIS application areas in water resources and the variety of GIS software tools to support such efforts expand dramatically in recent years. This sixth specialty conference will include presentations and topics on a number of exciting new developments and research findings at the intersection of GIS and water resources engineering and sciences. Researchers, practitioners, and students working in this field are encourage d to submit and abstract and plan to attend, keeping in mind that GIS includes commercial or open source software, custom geospatial modeling solutions, virtual worlds, web-based mapping, and more. Visit the conference website for information about the conference or to submit your abstract: *http://www.awra.org/meetings/Florida2010/*http://www.awra.org/meetings/Florida2010/. The Conference Program Committee encourages abstracts on a wide-ranging menu of GIS topics. The complete list of topics can be accessed here: * http://www.awra.org/meetings/Florida2010/topics.html*http://www.awra.org/meetings/Florida2010/topics.html. The deadline for submission of abstracts is October 9, 2009. 2010 AWRA Spring Specialty Conference GIS in Water Resources VI *http://www.awra.org/meetings/Florida2010*http://www.awra.org/meetings/Florida2010 Rosen Shingle Creek Hotel | Orlando, FL March 29-31, 2010 AWRA is the premier non-governmental organization dedicated to the advancement of multidisciplinary water resources management and research. For over 40 years, AWRA has provided a forum for water resources conservation and networking. AWRA has members in every state and in over 50 nations. More information at: *http://www.awra.org* http://www.awra.org. ### Terry Meyer AWRA PO Box 1626 Middleburg, VA 20118-1626 O: 540.687.8390 F: 540.687.8395 E: ***te...@awra.org* te...@awra.org W: ***www.awra.org* http://www.awra.org !DSPAM:218,4a8db90b38619366110416! ___ GIS2010 mailing list gis2...@lists.awra.org http://lists.awra.org/listinfo/gis2010 -- Daniel P. Ames, Ph.D. PE Associate Professor, Geosciences Idaho State University - Idaho Falls amesd...@isu.edu www.hydromap.com www.mapwindow.org ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
