Frank wrote: "And I'm a very practical guy." Me too. I wasn't trying to discourage James, just point out that he was arguing about .doc on the OSGeo mailing list. I thought that was kinda funny. :]
Frank wrote: " On the other hand, in many cases, government agencies have ended up publishing data in formats like SAIF, SDTS and various highly custom GML schemas that are technically open, but for practical purposes they are very difficult to utilize." Amen. Can I get a shout out for the death of impractical standards? (I think we should implement a sacred law every standard author should be forced to create an implementation of his own standard beast. That might go a long way towards solving the impractical standard problem.) Landon -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frank Warmerdam Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 10:13 AM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration Landon Blake wrote: > I thought it might be wise to point out that this discussion seems to be > getting a little aggressive, and possibly a little personal. > > All sides have made valid points. It's obvious that Mr. Fee isn't going > to agree with many of us on this particular issue, and his opinion is > worth considering. > > I would remind Mr. Fee, very humbly (of course), that he is on the OSGeo > mailing list, so in some respects he's chosen a fight in which he is > very outnumbered. I don't know how productive it is to aggressively > defend something like the .doc format on a mailing list for proponents > of open source software. :] > > You'll probably have about as much success as you would touting the odt > format on a mailing list for the Microsoft Word fan club. :] Landon, James is making valid points about practical aspects of openness. I hesitate to sign the declaration because it seems to absolutist and not recognizing of practical aspects of openness (as opposed to de-jure definitions of open standards). I personally am dubious this discussion will accomplish anything useful because of the vague generalities of the original proposition, and the lack of a real purpose to the discussion. But I'm also not inclined to discourage James or others from expressing their position once the discussion has started. Another example often given a bit more in our realm than .doc files is shapefiles. They are technically a proprietary format belonging to one proprietary vendor. But the format is published, widely implemented in free and proprietary software and quite understandable. So I think it is reasonable for government data to be distributed in this format. On the other hand, in many cases, government agencies have ended up publishing data in formats like SAIF, SDTS and various highly custom GML schemas that are technically open, but for practical purposes they are very difficult to utilize. What I would like to discourage is governments distributing in file formats (like the mentioned new ESRI File Geodatabase) that are effectively closed - at least for the time being. Like MPG, I'm sympathetic to the goals of the declaration but am concerned it is not sufficiently practical. And I'm a very practical guy. Best regards, -- ---------------------------------------+-------------------------------- ------ I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, [EMAIL PROTECTED] light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam and watch the world go round - Rush | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] 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 [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
