Hello all
On the work organisation topic, I would like to know SIS opinion on the
relationship with GeoAPI (http://www.geoapi.org). GeoAPI is an attempt
to standardize interfaces derived from OGC specifications. If SIS wishes
to be a GeoAPI implementation, this would have a strong influence on its
API. GeoAPI development actually happen in two places:
* GeoAPI is hosted on SourceForge and have a public mailing list (quite
inactive for a while)
* GeoAPI is also an OGC Standard Working Group and has a second mailing
list accessible only to OGC members.
The politic up to date has been to use the public mailing list for all
developments, and the OGC mailing list only for the standardisation
process inside OGC (vote for submission as a standard, etc.). The public
group can deploy as many milestones as they wish, but official releases
(I mean with "OGC standard" label) can be performed only by OGC. To date
there is only one official release (GeoAPI 3.0.0) and many milestones.
GeoAPI development tends to be very slow, because GeoAPI mission is to
create interfaces from OGC standards. The main debates are about how to
interpret a specific element of a standard. Some additions do happen,
but are expected to be rare. API not covered by standard stay
project-specific, so SIS would have its own API as a complement of the
GeoAPI one.
What are the opinions about SIS-GeoAPI relationship?
Martin
