Hi, 2015-03-03 7:13 GMT+01:00 Even Rouault <[email protected]> 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 could comment on this (and this thread in general). >> * 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. Be aware that it's not only read/write support one should report and request in order to make a standard format an alternative to Shapefiles. For ArcGIS it's also edit capabilities (for whatever reason...). Yours, S. 2015-03-03 7:13 GMT+01:00 Even Rouault <[email protected]>: > 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
