(note: resend to make sure this gets on the lists)
Hi Stefan,
I will make a few comments!
GeoPackage: the OGC Compliance Program develops conformance test suites for OGC
Standards after the Standards have been officially adopted. This process takes
time and requires thorough testing itself.
Hi,
2015-03-03 7:13 GMT+01:00 Even Rouault wrote:
> Hi Cameron,
...
> Currently there's no finalized conformance test suite available for GeoPackage
> to test implementations, so there's no official reference implementation or
> conformant implementations.
I'd wish Scott or somebody from OGC cou
The ASPRS LAS committee has been roundly criticized in the past for not
operating in an open, consensus-driven, transparent manner.
My personal feeling is that LAS - or any future lidar standard - is now too
important a topic to be left to the ASPRS committee. The OGC model and the
grass-roots,
Hi Cameron,
> It is difficult for OSGeo to stop a vendor from promoting their product,
> or promoting a specific lock in strategy.
Of course. That was exactly my point.
>
> But we can:
> * Support the OGC in developing an OGC standard for LiDAR. Once a
> standard is in place, there is a much st
Hi Even,
It is difficult for OSGeo to stop a vendor from promoting their product,
or promoting a specific lock in strategy.
But we can:
* Support the OGC in developing an OGC standard for LiDAR. Once a
standard is in place, there is a much stronger reason to make use of
that Open Standard. In
Carl,
No, it doesn't really clarify it. I think what people are wondering is
"does OGC have a default mission and position that closed formats are
bad for the industry and would it publicly admonish a member who took
actions that ran counter to that position". I assume that, as a
"member driven o
