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 stronger reason to make use of > that Open Standard. In particular, many national government agencies > have policies which promote standards over proprietary interfaces. With my mostly uninformed eyes in that topic, I don't know if OGC is the most relevant organization in that matter. It seems that the ASPRS would be a more natural host as it has already published the spec of the (uncompressed) LAS format: http://www.asprs.org/Committee-General/LASer-LAS-File-Format-Exchange- Activities.html I'm not sure about the LASzip format however, the compressed one, which is the one that ESRI has "cloned" into zLAS. I skimmed through http://www.laszip.org/ and couldn't find a reference to something more formal than LGPL code that implements it ;-) > > * Provide a position statement (as has been suggested) which explains > technically the pros and cons of both the proprietary and open LiDAR > interface. There are at least a few persons in the OSGeo community that have direct interest in LiDAR and are likely reading this thread. Perhaps some discussions are already happening behind the scene ? > > Regarding OGC GeoPackage standard: > * I would hope that OGC's list of standards supported has a tick for > read only, and tick for read/write support, so consumers can tell the > difference. 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 guess the conformance test suite would be similar to the KML one, in that you submit a file, and it is validated. So it "proves" that you can write a conformant file. Funnily, read-only implementations could not get the stamp! > * It is probably not appropriate for OSGeo as an organisation to > directly point out ESRI's lack of support for GeoPackage write capability. I agree. The best marketing, if needed, would be to point at our implementations that do support write capability. > * However, it is totally appropriate for individuals and news agencies > to write about it. > > On 2/03/2015 9:37 pm, Even Rouault wrote: > > Stefan, > > > > That a proprietary vendor decides not to implement a standard in its > > products is mainly its problem (as well as the one of its customers). > > Especially as they are plenty of FOSS alternatives that implement the > > standard! So I'd say it is a selling point for FOSS. > > > > The annoying thing here is that a proprietary vendor aggressively pushes > > his *closed* format and tries to undermine an open format implemented by > > FOSS. So it really harms the FOSS community. In that matter, the > > Geoservices REST API episode would have been less critical as the > > protocol had been at least opened... > > > > Even > > > >> Dear all, dear OSGeo Board > >> > >> While supporting this LAS related initiative I'd like to draw your > >> attention to a potentially similar use case which is at least of same > >> relevance: > >> > >> In April 2014 Esri officially announced support for >> GeoPackage << > >> vector in version 10.2.2 and raster in 10.3: > >> http://blogs.esri.com/esri/arcgis/2014/04/14/support-for-ogc-geopackages > >> -in -arcgis/ ("Support for OGC GeoPackage in ArcGIS") > >> > >> Now Esri support confirmed that in ArcgIS Desktop 10.3 only read-only > >> access is possible. So, there's still no write nor edit capability > >> (and no ArcGIS Server no Runtime) despite this FAQ: > >> http://support.esri.com/en/knowledgebase/techarticles/detail/42567 > >> ("What versions of the OGC GeoPackage standard are supported?") > >> > >> I'm still looking for an answer for an "Enhancement Request" but I'm > >> really concerned about Esri's commitment to (promised OGC) standards. > >> > >> Yours, S. > >> > >> 2015-03-01 22:38 GMT+01:00 Suchith Anand <[email protected]>: > >>> Colleagues, > >>> > >>> I see these kind of developments also directly affecting Open > >>> Principles in Geo Education that "Geo for All" , OSGeo, ICA all stand > >>> for and are working together in our common mission of making > >>> geospatial education and opportunities accessible to all. > >>> > >>> "Geo for All" will take a stand on this as it not only affects our > >>> Academic colleagues and students working in LIDAR research and teaching > >>> but will have long term impacts on Open Principles in Geo Education. We > >>> will work to put our ideas in the Open Letter from OSGeo explaining > >>> this. > >>> > >>> "Geo for All" started from very humble beginnings and this was only > >>> possible because academic colleagues globally came together to change > >>> the status of Geo education. For decades even though there was great > >>> progress in GIS technologies, educational opportunities esp. in > >>> developing and poor countries were very small. This is now changing > >>> dramatically thanks to the efforts of our colleagues from Nepal to > >>> Uruguay. > >>> > >>> We got excellent support from all sectors (universities, industry , > >>> governments etc) but to my surprise ESRI was the only proprietary > >>> vendor who was trying to undermine this initiative indirectly from > >>> the very start. I still cannot understand why this particular vendor > >>> wants to do that. I really hope the proprietors of this company will > >>> also support Open Principles in Geo Education (not just telling > >>> externally on Openness but actually practicing this). We want to have > >>> good relations with everyone in the Geospatial domain , so our hand of > >>> friendship is always open. So please let us all work together. > >>> > >>> Hardware costs are (and will) keep coming down, internet access is > >>> increasing (and will keep increasing) even in developing countries > >>> and with free and open source software, even poor schools in > >>> developing countries are getting small computer labs established ( i > >>> know this from my experience in India) .The convergence of all these > >>> factors with a great team of dedicated people is changing geoeducation > >>> forever. > >>> > >>> I strongly believe access of good quality education is everyones > >>> birthright and now we are for first time in history getting opportunity > >>> to make this possible. We will not accept putting artificial barriers > >>> like high cost proprietary software (which quite frankly they won't be > >>> able to even think of affording) which will continue denying quality > >>> education opportunities for millions of students globally (both in > >>> developed and developing countries). > >>> > >>> So why should i care? Because i learned one of the most important > >>> lessons in my life in my childhood from my grandmother (who though did > >>> not get the opportunity of "proper education" herself taught me the > >>> importance of the values of sharing and about "Vasudeva Kudumbam" > >>> which means "We all belong to one large Universal family" and " Geo > >>> for All" is for my Universal family and i will do everything in my > >>> abilities to make sure education opportunities are open to all. > >>> > >>> Best wishes, > >>> > >>> Suchith > >>> > >>> ________________________________________ > >>> From: [email protected] > >>> [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Cameron Shorter > >>> [[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2015 7:37 PM > >>> To: Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX); Paul Ramsey; Carl Reed > >>> Cc: P Kishor; Scott Simmons; [email protected] > >>> Subject: Re: [Ica-osgeo-labs] [Board] [OSGeo-Discuss] The LAS format, > >>> the ASPRS, and the “LAZ clone” by ESRI > >>> > >>> What would strengthen a position for use of Open LIDAR interfaces would > >>> be if such an Open LIDAR interface were introduced into the OGC > >>> standards program. > >>> > >>> Carl, > >>> I'd be interested to hear you (or someone else from the OGC) explain > >>> how people should approach initiating an Open LIDAR standard, and how > >>> much effort / cost would be required to do so. > >>> > >>> The OSGeo community can then assess whether there is sufficient > >>> motivation to initiate such development of a standard. > >>> > >>> Patrick, > >>> For an Open Letter from OSGeo, it would be a very powerful statement if > >>> we can list a number of influential organisations who will commit to > >>> developing an open, interoperable standard. (This can be a section of > >>> the open letter with signatures). > >>> > >>> On 2/03/2015 4:57 am, Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX) wrote: > >>>> Paul, > >>>> I would care to refine the 'yawn' context of 'doing the right thing,' > >>>> that of standing up to actions that directly contravene an > >>>> organization's 'open exchange' mission. This would seem the kind of > >>>> *engaged integrity* quite apart from one deserving a yawn. If your > >>>> kids do something directly contrary to what the family needs for a > >>>> healthy exchange of information, if a yawn is the response, there are > >>>> even more serious issues at stake. -Patrick > >>>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Paul Ramsey [mailto:[email protected]] > >>>> Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2015 9:32 AM > >>>> To: Carl Reed > >>>> Cc: Cameron Shorter; P Kishor; Suchith Anand; Scott Simmons; OSGeo > >>>> Discussions; Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX); OSGeo-Board; > >>>> [email protected] Subject: Re: [Board] [OSGeo-Discuss] > >>>> [Ica-osgeo-labs] The LAS format, the ASPRS, and the “LAZ clone” by > >>>> ESRI > >>>> > >>>> 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 organization" whose membership includes the offender, > >>>> the OGC will not be standing up and publicly saying "this company is > >>>> contravening the spirit of our organization and mission, that it is > >>>> supposedly supportive of". > >>>> > >>>> Am I incorrect? > >>>> > >>>> WRT to OSGeo, I think that black letter cases like this come along > >>>> infrequently enough that it would not be at all inappropriate for > >>>> OSGeo to publicly state what is wrong with the direction being taken > >>>> in the world of LAS formats. The only trouble is, it's exactly what > >>>> everyone expects we would do, and therefore will be greeted with a > >>>> collective yawn. But it is the right thing, so we should still do it. > >>>> > >>>> ATB, > >>>> > >>>> P. > >>>> > >>>> On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Carl Reed <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > >>>>> All - > >>>>> > >>>>> The OGC is not currently involved in activities related to defining > >>>>> or maintaining LIDAR specific modeling and related encoding > >>>>> standards. Any work the OGC has been doing WRT LIDAR is within the > >>>>> context of processing, visualization, and analytics. Obviously, > >>>>> existing OGC standards such as WCS and GMLJP2 can be used to encode > >>>>> and share small, processed LIDAR data sets. Feel free to check OGC > >>>>> email archives, project pages, and so forth for documentation on any > >>>>> ongoing discussions in the OGC related to LIDAR. > >>>>> > >>>>> http://www.opengeospatial.org/pub/www/ows9/innovations.html : The > >>>>> thread participants looked at NITF, LIDAR, and DAP/OPeNDAP, and > >>>>> investigated their re-implementation in an OWS environment with a > >>>>> focus on the Web. > >>>>> > >>>>> or > >>>>> > >>>>> http://koenigstuhl.geog.uni-heidelberg.de/publications/bonn/conferenc > >>>>> e /LanigGeoinformatik09.pdf > >>>>> > >>>>> for examples. > >>>>> > >>>>> Hope this clarifies the current OGC position. > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards > >>>>> > >>>>> Carl > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Suchith Anand > >>>>> Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2015 4:20 AM > >>>>> To: Cameron Shorter ; P Kishor ; Suchith Anand > >>>>> Cc: [email protected] ; Hogan, Patrick(ARC-PX) ; > >>>>> [email protected] ; [email protected] > >>>>> Subject: Re: [Board] [OSGeo-Discuss] [Ica-osgeo-labs] The LAS format, > >>>>> the ASPRS, and the “LAZ clone” by ESRI > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi Cameron, > >>>>> > >>>>> Thank you for this excellent suggestion. I remember this previous > >>>>> Geoservices REST API issues and discussions. > >>>>> > >>>>> Patrick - Could you please start a wiki page and input as much > >>>>> information as you know on this (ideally in the same structure as the > >>>>> Geoservices REST API wiki ). Once it is ready, please email the > >>>>> community and OSGeo Board and we all can look into this. > >>>>> > >>>>> Anyone from OGC willing to help with this? > >>>>> > >>>>> I think this should be open letter from the OSGeo Board to the whole > >>>>> Geo community. I really hope this proprietary vendor (ESRI) will be > >>>>> decent enough to not keep repeating these inappropriate actions in > >>>>> the future. > >>>>> > >>>>> Best wishes, > >>>>> > >>>>> Suchith > >>>>> > >>>>> ________________________________________ > >>>>> From: Cameron Shorter [[email protected]] > >>>>> Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2015 10:47 AM > >>>>> To: P Kishor; Suchith Anand > >>>>> Cc: [email protected]; Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX); > >>>>> [email protected]; [email protected] > >>>>> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Ica-osgeo-labs] The LAS format, the > >>>>> ASPRS, and the “LAZ clone” by ESRI > >>>>> > >>>>> Patrick, others, > >>>>> OSGeo and related OGC communities have been successful previously in > >>>>> stopping ESRI's inappropriate creation of OGC standards. See here: > >>>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Geoservices_REST_API > >>>>> > >>>>> I'd suggest that if we as OSGeo wish to be effective at blocking a > >>>>> vendor lock-in tactic, as seems to be the case, then we should > >>>>> consider developing a similar wiki page for the LAS format debate. > >>>>> > >>>>> 0. Write an open letter (who to? OGC?) 1. Describe the issue. (Is > >>>>> there someone who knows the issues well enough to describe them?) 2. > >>>>> Describe technically why one format is or is not better than the > >>>>> other, on both a technical and commercial point of view. > >>>>> 3. Is the Open LIDAR format an OGC standard? > >>>>> 4. If needed, collect signatures. > >>>>> 5. If needed, ask OSGeo Board to present the open letter > >>>>> > >>>>> On 28/02/2015 11:18 am, P Kishor wrote: > >>>>> Thanks Patrick for surfacing this. Yes, this should be opened up for > >>>>> scrutiny by the entire community and we should all weigh in. > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Suchith Anand > >>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected] > >>>>> > wrote: > >>>>> Hi Patrick, > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I believe the OSGeo Board > >>>>> need to look into this and prepare a position paper with inputs from > >>>>> the community as this has wider implications. This also need to be > >>>>> discussed with like minded organisations. We all can provide the > >>>>> needed support for this. > >>>>> > >>>>> Jeff and OSGeo Board - please add this to the next month Board > >>>>> meeting's agenda items. Thanks. > >>>>> > >>>>> Best wishes, > >>>>> > >>>>> Suchith > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> ________________________________________ > >>>>> From: > >>>>> [email protected]<mailto:ica-osgeo-labs-bounces@ > >>>>> l ists.osgeo.org> > >>>>> [[email protected]<mailto:ica-osgeo-labs-bounces > >>>>> @ lists.osgeo.org>] On Behalf Of Lene Fischer > >>>>> [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] > >>>>> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 6:29 PM > >>>>> To: Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX); > >>>>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > >>>>> Subject: Re: [Ica-osgeo-labs] The LAS format, the ASPRS, and the “LAZ > >>>>> clone” by ESRI > >>>>> > >>>>> +1 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Lene Fischer > >>>>> Associate Professor > >>>>> > >>>>> Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management University > >>>>> of Copenhagen > >>>>> > >>>>> MOB +45 40115084<tel:%2B45%2040115084> > >>>>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:lfi@i > >>>>> g n.ku.dk>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> [cid:[email protected]] > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Fra: > >>>>> [email protected]<mailto:ica-osgeo-labs-bounces@ > >>>>> l ists.osgeo.org> > >>>>> [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:ica-osgeo-labs- > >>>>> b [email protected]>] > >>>>> På vegne af Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX) > >>>>> Sendt: 27. februar 2015 18:48 > >>>>> Til: > >>>>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > >>>>> Emne: [Ica-osgeo-labs] The LAS format, the ASPRS, and the “LAZ clone” > >>>>> by ESRI > >>>>> > >>>>> Dear OSGEO, > >>>>> For what our good name is worth. . . > >>>>> Do we have an opinion on something so essential as an open standard > >>>>> for a data format? > >>>>> Speak now, or forever hand over your wallet. Individual and > >>>>> collective response encouraged. > >>>>> > >>>>> Can OSGEO provide a short position paper commenting on our values? > >>>>> I.e., “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all [data] are > >>>>> created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain > >>>>> unalienable Rights, that among these [is Life, Liberty and the > >>>>> pursuit of Openness].” > >>>>> > >>>>> The LAS format, the ASPRS, and the “LAZ clone” by ESRI > >>>>> http://rapidlasso.com/2015/02/22/lidar-las-asprs-esri-and-the-laz-clo > >>>>> n e/ > >>>>> > >>>>> [First paragraph] > >>>>> We are concerned about ESRI’s next moves in forcing yet another > >>>>> proprietary format into wide-spread deployment. Forwarded emails, > >>>>> retold conversations, and personal experiences suggest that sneaky > >>>>> tactics<http://rapidlasso.com/2014/11/06/keeping-esri-honest/> are > >>>>> being used to disrupt the harmony in open LiDAR formats that we have > >>>>> enjoyed for many years. > >>>>> [cid:[email protected]] > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks much, > >>>>> -Patrick > >>>>> Project Manager > >>>>> NASA World Wind > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Puneet Kishor > >>>>> Manager, Science and Data Policy > >>>>> Creative Commons > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> Discuss mailing list > >>>>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > >>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Cameron Shorter, > >>>>> Software and Data Solutions Manager > >>>>> LISAsoft > >>>>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf, > >>>>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009 > >>>>> > >>>>> P +61 2 9009 5000, W www.lisasoft.com<http://www.lisasoft.com>, F > >>>>> +61 2 > >>>>> 9009 5099 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee > >>>>> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this > >>>>> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete > >>>>> it. > >>>>> > >>>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this > >>>>> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the > >>>>> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the > >>>>> University of Nottingham. > >>>>> > >>>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an > >>>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your > >>>>> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email > >>>>> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as > >>>>> permitted by UK legislation. > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> Board mailing list > >>>>> [email protected] > >>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> Board mailing list > >>>>> [email protected] > >>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Cameron Shorter, > >>> Software and Data Solutions Manager > >>> LISAsoft > >>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf, > >>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009 > >>> > >>> P +61 2 9009 5000, W www.lisasoft.com, F +61 2 9009 5099 > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> ica-osgeo-labs mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ica-osgeo-labs > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee > >>> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this > >>> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. > >>> > >>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this > >>> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the > >>> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the > >>> University of Nottingham. > >>> > >>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an > >>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your > >>> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email > >>> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as > >>> permitted by UK legislation. > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Discuss mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Discuss mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Spatialys - Geospatial professional services http://www.spatialys.com _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
