Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Would you be concerned if the GeoServices REST API became an OGC standard?
Hello, I've made a brief summary of this thread and sent it to the Spanish Local Chapter mailing list linking specially the mail from Cameron[1] that started the conversation. I've tried to encourage them to participate in the debate, right now we are receiving some responses, in spanish in the spanish list, I'm going to wait a couple of days and translate them to english and copy them in Discuss. I think that all the Liaison Officers from the Chapters should do the same and try to make their communities aware of this situation. Bests, [1] http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2013-May/011599.html On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 11:34 PM, Adrian Custer acus...@gmail.com wrote: Hey Ann, all, On 5/6/13 5:48 PM, Anne Ghisla wrote: Stephan, Adrian: is there an effective way for OSGeo to address a statement to OGC, beside the official requests for comments and our Discuss list? Thanks for your thoughts, Anne Any official statement issued by the OSGeo Board or community on this particular vote should probably be addressed to the 'Voting Members of the OGC Technical Committee' since they are the ones who are taking a position during this vote and deciding whether to accept it or not as an official OGC standard. The statement could be sent via Carl Reed, who is the head of the OGC Technical Committee. He lurks on this list as part of the collaboration agreement between the two communities and can be reached directly at: creed U+0040 opengeospatial.org ciao, ~adrian ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Pedro-Juan Ferrer Matoses Valencia (España) ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Would you be concerned if the GeoServices REST API became an OGC standard?
On 7 May 2013 08:58, Pedro-Juan Ferrer Matoses pfer...@osgeo.org wrote: Hello, I've made a brief summary of this thread and sent it to the Spanish Local Chapter mailing list linking specially the mail from Cameron[1] that started the conversation. I've tried to encourage them to participate in the debate, right now we are receiving some responses, in spanish in the spanish list, I'm going to wait a couple of days and translate them to english and copy them in Discuss. I think that all the Liaison Officers from the Chapters should do the same and try to make their communities aware of this situation. Bests, HI I won't repeat the arguments, but I fully agree Adrian, Bruce, Andrea, Daniel etc on how bad for the geospatial community would be to have such a broad standard overlaping existing WxS services. We need to improve WxS services and help OGC to evolve them to current market needs, not throw to the bin years of knowledge and community driven efforts. Cheers -- Jorge Sanz http://es.osgeo.org ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo event june 13th Ghent Belgium
-- Yours sincerely, Sofie Niemegeers Geosparc n.v. Business Parc Zuiderpoort G.Crommenlaan 10, box 101 B-9050 Ghent +32 (0)9 27 53 110 +32 (0)496 932 962 http://www.geomajas.org http://www.geosparc.com ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo event june 13th Ghent Belgium
Dear mr/mrs, We would like to announce an upcoming OSGeo event: start date/end date: june 13th 2013 location: Ghent, Belgium description of the event: The first Flemish edition of the OSGeo conference explores the theme “Today’s OSGeo market: experiences from users and suppliers”. It will be an interesting opportunity to confront different points of view in order to establish the direction OSGeo is/should be heading for. The presentations of the day can be divided into three main blocks: 1) Those that focus on the fundamentals of open source geospatial software, the basic concepts/definitions and goals 2) Presentations that go into user experiences 3) Suppliers’ presentations During the panel discussion afterwards, all participants (the audience included) will get a chance to discuss pending questions, concerns and give further information. Finally, all the information gathered during the day, will be distilled into a number of concluding remarks. Url with more details: www.geomajas.org/osgeogent2013 -- Yours sincerely, Sofie Niemegeers Geosparc n.v. Business Parc Zuiderpoort G.Crommenlaan 10, box 101 B-9050 Ghent +32 (0)9 27 53 110 +32 (0)496 932 962 http://www.geomajas.org http://www.geosparc.com ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo event june 13th Ghent Belgium
Interesting. You should also consider having this listed on osgeo.org, by following the steps at http://www.osgeo.org/events/submit_events Please do submit it. -jeff On 2013-05-07 9:09 AM, Sofie Niemegeers wrote: Dear mr/mrs, We would like to announce an upcoming OSGeo event: start date/end date: june 13th 2013 location: Ghent, Belgium description of the event: The first Flemish edition of the OSGeo conference explores the theme “Today’s OSGeo market: experiences from users and suppliers”. It will be an interesting opportunity to confront different points of view in order to establish the direction OSGeo is/should be heading for. The presentations of the day can be divided into three main blocks: 1) Those that focus on the fundamentals of open source geospatial software, the basic concepts/definitions and goals 2) Presentations that go into user experiences 3) Suppliers’ presentations During the panel discussion afterwards, all participants (the audience included) will get a chance to discuss pending questions, concerns and give further information. Finally, all the information gathered during the day, will be distilled into a number of concluding remarks. Url with more details: www.geomajas.org/osgeogent2013 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is OGC losing its Way?
It seems this email from Edric Keighan to osgeo discuss must have bounced as he was not subscribed (or maybe due to having an attachment). On 8/05/2013 3:27 AM, Edric Keighan ekeighan AT cubewerx com wrote: Dear All; We have been following with a lot of interest numerous emails exchanged between OSGeo members and others regarding the positioning of OSGeo vis-a-vis the proposed OGC GeoServices REST API. This email is just to inform you that an opposition is also building up within the OGC membership community and the attached letter has been sent to all OGC TC voters who have not yet exercised their vote. People in OGC and outside of OGC deserve to know the impact of such standard on the future of OGC. It is our hope that a larger opposition will be forming and solutions developed to meet the obvious needs for interoperability in our industry. Regards, Edric Keighan - CubeWerx Inc. On behalf of: Cameron Shorter - LISASoft. Ron Lake - Galdos Systems Inc. Martin Daly - Cadcorp Ltd. Barry O'Rourke - Compusult Limited. Original letter was in PDF, I've copied into text to make it easier for archiving. ... The OGC Interoperability Movement Team Leaders To: All OGC members May 6, 2013 Re: Is OGC losing its Way? Dear OGC Member, This is to inform you that an important OGC event deserves your immediate attention. This note is in reference to a vote that is taking place at OGC on a proposed specification named OGC GeoServices REST API. If approved, it will have costly, far reaching, negative impacts on interoperability, and significantly tarnish the OGC’s reputation as a champion of interoperability. During the last 15 years or so, we all have benefited from the collaborative effort of a large number of public and private organizations around the world to resolve numerous interoperability problems that have plagued our industry for many years. This has been an impressive achievement! But this movement will come to an end with the adoption of the proposed OGC GeoServices REST API. The voting process has already started and we recommend that you add your NO vote to the list of OGC voters that already expressed their clear opposition to this standard. While there is indeed support for RESTbased API ‘s in the geospatial community, REST is no more than a particular architectural style and should not be instantiated as a separate set of specifications as proposed by the OGC GeoServices REST API. If the OGC community perceives a need for a REST style, then that should be developed in a general way (i.e. applicable to all OGC services) from the existing services. Note that a REST version of OGC WMTS exists and an OGC WFS version is currently being developed as part of OGC WFS 2.5 activities. It is important that any REST API be general in nature and not bound to specific software tools such as Flex and Silverlight. The proposed GeoServices REST API specification will create an immense amount of confusion in the marketplace that is not good for OGC, or for its mission of interoperability. For example, if this passes, OGC will have two RESTbased feature services and two RESTbased map services which are incompatible with one another. And soon after there will be duplicate REST implementations for all current OGC web service specifications. One solution to the confusion would be to just drop existing OGC services, or let the marketplace decide. In either case, there is then little need for the OGC as an active and innovative body to solve interoperability and information infrastructure problems. If your organization is one that supports the activities and mission of the OGC, and believes that interoperable interfaces and encodings can be developed through a communitybased consensus process, then you need to look at the issues, make up your mind, and vote. This is not a time for complacency. It is our hope that the arguments below will convince you to support an already well entrenched interoperability movement at OGC: * We see no viable outcomes and benefits to OGC members in rubberstamping software products if this will result in creating more interoperability problems. * We believe that ‘rubber stamping’ existing software from a single vendor is unfair and anti-competitive, and not appropriate for OGC. This will only create an environment where the vendor with the deepest pockets wins to the detriments of all other players in the industry. * The proposed GeoServices REST API specification overlaps with most OGC standards already deployed by many organizations across the world: WMS, WMTS, WCS, WFS, SE/SLD, CS/W. * There are no needs for OGC to support duplicate standards that perform the same functionality; this does not make sense. * In the eventuality that the GeoServices REST API is adopted, all organizations in the industry will have to bear extra costs for purchasing two sets of OGC standard products since they will not
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is OGC losing its Way?
Thanks for sharing that Cameron and others! I suggest we as OSGeo (The board? Project officers/chairs of OSGeo projects?) write a letter in support of the one reflected below. It makes perfect sense to me and will hopefully strengthen their call for action. Jeroen Jeroen Ticheler GeoCat bv Veenderweg 13 6721 WD Bennekom Tel: +31 (0)6 81286572 http://geocat.net Op 7 mei 2013 om 22:53 heeft Cameron Shorter cameron.shor...@gmail.com het volgende geschreven: It seems this email from Edric Keighan to osgeo discuss must have bounced as he was not subscribed (or maybe due to having an attachment). On 8/05/2013 3:27 AM, Edric Keighan ekeighan AT cubewerx com wrote: Dear All; We have been following with a lot of interest numerous emails exchanged between OSGeo members and others regarding the positioning of OSGeo vis-a-vis the proposed OGC GeoServices REST API. This email is just to inform you that an opposition is also building up within the OGC membership community and the attached letter has been sent to all OGC TC voters who have not yet exercised their vote. People in OGC and outside of OGC deserve to know the impact of such standard on the future of OGC. It is our hope that a larger opposition will be forming and solutions developed to meet the obvious needs for interoperability in our industry. Regards, Edric Keighan - CubeWerx Inc. On behalf of: Cameron Shorter - LISASoft. Ron Lake - Galdos Systems Inc. Martin Daly - Cadcorp Ltd. Barry O'Rourke - Compusult Limited. Original letter was in PDF, I've copied into text to make it easier for archiving. ... The OGC Interoperability Movement Team Leaders To: All OGC members May 6, 2013 Re: Is OGC losing its Way? Dear OGC Member, This is to inform you that an important OGC event deserves your immediate attention. This note is in reference to a vote that is taking place at OGC on a proposed specification named OGC GeoServices REST API. If approved, it will have costly, far reaching, negative impacts on interoperability, and significantly tarnish the OGC’s reputation as a champion of interoperability. During the last 15 years or so, we all have benefited from the collaborative effort of a large number of public and private organizations around the world to resolve numerous interoperability problems that have plagued our industry for many years. This has been an impressive achievement! But this movement will come to an end with the adoption of the proposed OGC GeoServices REST API. The voting process has already started and we recommend that you add your NO vote to the list of OGC voters that already expressed their clear opposition to this standard. While there is indeed support for RESTbased API ‘s in the geospatial community, REST is no more than a particular architectural style and should not be instantiated as a separate set of specifications as proposed by the OGC GeoServices REST API. If the OGC community perceives a need for a REST style, then that should be developed in a general way (i.e. applicable to all OGC services) from the existing services. Note that a REST version of OGC WMTS exists and an OGC WFS version is currently being developed as part of OGC WFS 2.5 activities. It is important that any REST API be general in nature and not bound to specific software tools such as Flex and Silverlight. The proposed GeoServices REST API specification will create an immense amount of confusion in the marketplace that is not good for OGC, or for its mission of interoperability. For example, if this passes, OGC will have two RESTbased feature services and two RESTbased map services which are incompatible with one another. And soon after there will be duplicate REST implementations for all current OGC web service specifications. One solution to the confusion would be to just drop existing OGC services, or let the marketplace decide. In either case, there is then little need for the OGC as an active and innovative body to solve interoperability and information infrastructure problems. If your organization is one that supports the activities and mission of the OGC, and believes that interoperable interfaces and encodings can be developed through a communitybased consensus process, then you need to look at the issues, make up your mind, and vote. This is not a time for complacency. It is our hope that the arguments below will convince you to support an already well entrenched interoperability movement at OGC: * We see no viable outcomes and benefits to OGC members in rubberstamping software products if this will result in creating more interoperability problems. * We believe that ‘rubber stamping’ existing software from a single vendor is unfair and anti-competitive, and not appropriate for OGC. This will only create an environment where the vendor with the deepest pockets wins to the detriments of
[OSGeo-Discuss] Open Letter to state concerns about Geoservices REST API
I agree with Jeroen's suggestion that we should write an Open Letter to the OGC collating our concern. I've started a wiki page to collate this here: http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Geoservices_REST_API#Open_Letter_to_OGC_and_voting_members -- /We, the undersigned, have concerns that approving the Geoservices REST API as an OGC standard, would have detrimental impacts on interoperability within the spatial industry.// //We strongly urge that the proposed standard be rejected in its current form.// //People have listed different reasons for concern. They are described below. Signed: ... /-- I invite all to add their name to this page. There has also been a great depth of analysis and comment on this osgeo discuss list over the last few days, and I suggest that we capture these comments under the Concerns heading in this wiki. On 8/05/2013 7:10 AM, Jeroen Ticheler wrote: Thanks for sharing that Cameron and others! I suggest we as OSGeo (The board? Project officers/chairs of OSGeo projects?) write a letter in support of the one reflected below. It makes perfect sense to me and will hopefully strengthen their call for action. Jeroen Jeroen Ticheler GeoCat bv Veenderweg 13 6721 WD Bennekom Tel: +31 (0)6 81286572 http://geocat.net Op 7 mei 2013 om 22:53 heeft Cameron Shorter cameron.shor...@gmail.com het volgende geschreven: It seems this email from Edric Keighan to osgeo discuss must have bounced as he was not subscribed (or maybe due to having an attachment). On 8/05/2013 3:27 AM, Edric Keighan ekeighan AT cubewerx com wrote: Dear All; We have been following with a lot of interest numerous emails exchanged between OSGeo members and others regarding the positioning of OSGeo vis-a-vis the proposed OGC GeoServices REST API. This email is just to inform you that an opposition is also building up within the OGC membership community and the attached letter has been sent to all OGC TC voters who have not yet exercised their vote. People in OGC and outside of OGC deserve to know the impact of such standard on the future of OGC. It is our hope that a larger opposition will be forming and solutions developed to meet the obvious needs for interoperability in our industry. Regards, Edric Keighan - CubeWerx Inc. On behalf of: Cameron Shorter - LISASoft. Ron Lake - Galdos Systems Inc. Martin Daly - Cadcorp Ltd. Barry O'Rourke - Compusult Limited. Original letter was in PDF, I've copied into text to make it easier for archiving. ... The OGC Interoperability Movement Team Leaders To: All OGC members May 6, 2013 Re: Is OGC losing its Way? Dear OGC Member, This is to inform you that an important OGC event deserves your immediate attention. This note is in reference to a vote that is taking place at OGC on a proposed specification named OGC GeoServices REST API. If approved, it will have costly, far reaching, negative impacts on interoperability, and significantly tarnish the OGC’s reputation as a champion of interoperability. During the last 15 years or so, we all have benefited from the collaborative effort of a large number of public and private organizations around the world to resolve numerous interoperability problems that have plagued our industry for many years. This has been an impressive achievement! But this movement will come to an end with the adoption of the proposed OGC GeoServices REST API. The voting process has already started and we recommend that you add your NO vote to the list of OGC voters that already expressed their clear opposition to this standard. While there is indeed support for RESTbased API ‘s in the geospatial community, REST is no more than a particular architectural style and should not be instantiated as a separate set of specifications as proposed by the OGC GeoServices REST API. If the OGC community perceives a need for a REST style, then that should be developed in a general way (i.e. applicable to all OGC services) from the existing services. Note that a REST version of OGC WMTS exists and an OGC WFS version is currently being developed as part of OGC WFS 2.5 activities. It is important that any REST API be general in nature and not bound to specific software tools such as Flex and Silverlight. The proposed GeoServices REST API specification will create an immense amount of confusion in the marketplace that is not good for OGC, or for its mission of interoperability. For example, if this passes, OGC will have two RESTbased feature services and two RESTbased map services which are incompatible with one another. And soon after there will be duplicate REST implementations for all current OGC web service specifications. One solution to the confusion would be to just drop existing OGC services, or let the marketplace decide. In either case, there is then little need for the OGC as an active and innovative body to solve interoperability and information infrastructure problems. If your organization is one that supports the
[OSGeo-Discuss] West Coast USA Conference
I've been tossing around the idea of organizing an open source GIS conference on the USA West Coast. I'd thought it would be good to bounce that idea by this general discussion list. I think the organization of a conference could be spearheaded by the California Chapter under my lead. I know the PDX chapter is also on the West Coast and may be interested. If we couldn't swing a self-hosted event I think there is a good change I could get a day on the program of the California/Nevada land surveyors conference, which is usually in Reno every spring. This would greatly reduce the cost, and would have the added benefit of bringing in some extra revenue to the surveying conference. I have some connections with the California surveying organization that puts on the Reno conference and I serve on their GIS Committee. I would be able to explore this option with them. Please let me know if you would be interested in helping me organize a one or two day event on the West Coast. If there is enough support, I'll open a more detailed discussion on the California Chapter mailing list, and will try to see if there are enough volunteers to form a West Coast conference committee. My employer might be willing to help sponsor some of the costs for a smaller self-hosted event for 50 to 100 people. I don't want this to take the steam out of a national USA FOSS4G conference. But I think there is a good opportunity to capture the interest of local folks that won't attend a national conference, especially in the Silicon Valley. Perhaps we could coordinate with the USA FOSS4G folks to have an event in California every two or three years? Please share your thoughts. Landon ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo Treasurer update: 2013 budget, accounting and 501c3 status
OSGeo Members, This email is to give you a few quick updates on OSGeo's finance front: 1- 2013 budget The 2013 budget has been adopted at the 2013-04-11 board meeting. It is available in the wiki at http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Budget_2013 2- Outsourcing of book keeping and accounting Since the early days of OSGeo, all book keeping and accounting was done by our Executive Director, and then in 2011 I took over those tasks as treasurer. However accounting is better done by a real accountant and having a volunteer treasurer handling those tasks is not sustainable in the long run, especially when the treasurer is likely to change from year to year. For this reason we are looking into options to outsource the book keeping and accounting tasks to an accountant knowledgeable about nonprofits to help keep our books straight, produce regular financial statements, and mostly insure continuity between treasurers from year to year. We may have found a skilled and affordable resource to handle this for us. One of the first tasks for this resource would be to review and cleanup the books from past years as needed and then produce formal financial statements for fiscal years 2011 and 2012 that we can then share with our members. More info about this in the not too distant future I hope. 3- Non-profit status with the IRS (a.k.a. 501c3 status) Our nonprofit status in the US is not resolved yet. We had an exchange with the IRS agent responsible for our case a few weeks ago and provided some missing information. I expect that we will hear back from them soon with a decision on our status. More info about our recent exchanges with the IRS is available at http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/501c3_Application:_Questions_from_IRS,_September_2012 That's it for now Daniel (OSGeo Treasurer) ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] West Coast USA Conference
On 05/07/2013 06:54 PM, Landon Blake wrote: I've been tossing around the idea of organizing an open source GIS conference on the USA West Coast. I'd thought it would be good to bounce that idea by this general discussion list. I think the organization of a conference could be spearheaded by the California Chapter under my lead. I know the PDX chapter is also on the West Coast and may be interested. If we couldn't swing a self-hosted event I think there is a good change I could get a day on the program of the California/Nevada land surveyors conference, which is usually in Reno every spring. This would greatly reduce the cost, and would have the added benefit of bringing in some extra revenue to the surveying conference. I have some connections with the California surveying organization that puts on the Reno conference and I serve on their GIS Committee. I would be able to explore this option with them. Please let me know if you would be interested in helping me organize a one or two day event on the West Coast. If there is enough support, I'll open a more detailed discussion on the California Chapter mailing list, and will try to see if there are enough volunteers to form a West Coast conference committee. My employer might be willing to help sponsor some of the costs for a smaller self-hosted event for 50 to 100 people. I don't want this to take the steam out of a national USA FOSS4G conference. But I think there is a good opportunity to capture the interest of local folks that won't attend a national conference, especially in the Silicon Valley. Perhaps we could coordinate with the USA FOSS4G folks to have an event in California every two or three years? Please share your thoughts. Landon I think you should try to organize a committee to bring Foss4g NA to the west coast. Northern California, Oregon or Washington all have a decent number of folks to help with that. Not sure if next years location has already been selected yet or not. Thanks, Alex ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] West Coast USA Conference
Hi Alex, Next year's location has not been determined yet for FOSS4G-NA. Also the main FOSS4G will likely be in North America next year as well. Best, -Kate On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Alex Mandel tech_...@wildintellect.comwrote: On 05/07/2013 06:54 PM, Landon Blake wrote: I've been tossing around the idea of organizing an open source GIS conference on the USA West Coast. I'd thought it would be good to bounce that idea by this general discussion list. I think the organization of a conference could be spearheaded by the California Chapter under my lead. I know the PDX chapter is also on the West Coast and may be interested. If we couldn't swing a self-hosted event I think there is a good change I could get a day on the program of the California/Nevada land surveyors conference, which is usually in Reno every spring. This would greatly reduce the cost, and would have the added benefit of bringing in some extra revenue to the surveying conference. I have some connections with the California surveying organization that puts on the Reno conference and I serve on their GIS Committee. I would be able to explore this option with them. Please let me know if you would be interested in helping me organize a one or two day event on the West Coast. If there is enough support, I'll open a more detailed discussion on the California Chapter mailing list, and will try to see if there are enough volunteers to form a West Coast conference committee. My employer might be willing to help sponsor some of the costs for a smaller self-hosted event for 50 to 100 people. I don't want this to take the steam out of a national USA FOSS4G conference. But I think there is a good opportunity to capture the interest of local folks that won't attend a national conference, especially in the Silicon Valley. Perhaps we could coordinate with the USA FOSS4G folks to have an event in California every two or three years? Please share your thoughts. Landon I think you should try to organize a committee to bring Foss4g NA to the west coast. Northern California, Oregon or Washington all have a decent number of folks to help with that. Not sure if next years location has already been selected yet or not. Thanks, Alex __**_ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/**mailman/listinfo/discusshttp://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
