Oh I see ... I kind of think we should trust the projects for a bit (when listing the standards) and then work with the OGC on getting our OSGeo Projects certified (so they can have the official stickers). There is such a large gap of commitment between implementing a standard and being certified ...
We spoke with the OGC about this kind of thing as part of the sponsors, partners, friends breakfast meeting. -- Jody Garnett On 23 August 2017 at 14:32, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul) < [email protected]> wrote: > Jody, > > I meant that sometime an application uses the Standards, but doesn’t > really support them (per OGC specifications). GeoMoose for example can > read and write out WMS and WFS via MapServer. And in it’s latest > incarnation even read WFS directly. Some of these capabilities adhere to > the OGC spec’s for “supports”, but some don’t. > > > On Aug 23, 2017, at 3:52 PM, Jody Garnett <[email protected]> wrote: > > Do you mean the difference between clients and servers? I would hope WMS > support in OpenLayers is clearly distinct from WMS support in MapServer. > > > GeoMoose as an installation, serves up WMS/WFS via MapServer. It can also > act as (at least) a WFS client and read from WFS directly. > > > Can you clarify bobb, standards are confusing / intimidating enough as it > is (especially for projects that implement a wall of them). > > > I’m just trying to caution against using blanket statements of support is > all, and hopefully present some real world examples to back up my > statements. > > > Ideally I would like to see projects that are certified by OGC place the > correct logos on these pages. > > > I guess that’s where I’m going with this, GeoMoose has not gone through > the process of certifing it’s OGC standards. They have a very specific > process to do this too, and based on that I’m saying that GeoMoose for one, > would not be 100% compliant, as an example. Some pieces could be though. > > So we just say we can use those standards and have support for some of > them vs having (100%) OGC compliance. > > bobb > > > > > -- > Jody Garnett > > On 23 August 2017 at 08:47, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul) < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> All, >> >> “Support for” and “able to use” should be separate criteria in the OGC >> capabilities (I think) as well. >> >> bobb >> >> >> On Aug 22, 2017, at 1:41 PM, Jeff McKenna <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> In our case, nesting won't help (if project XXX selects "OGC" as its >> standards support in the wordpress backend, the reader of our site will >> assume that all OGC standards are met by project XXX - so yes I agree that >> the best thing is to delete the single "OGC" option. >> >> As for other "standards", we will need to specify that somehow. >> >> Possibly we can specify this directly in the description? For example: >> >> Web Processing Service (WPS) >> >> would become: >> >> OGC: Web Processing Service (WPS) >> >> >> and >> >> Georeferenced Tagged Image File Format (GeoTIFF) >> >> would become: >> >> Other: Web Processing Service (WPS) >> >> >> thoughts? >> >> -jeff >> >> >> >> >> >> On 2017-08-22 3:22 PM, Jeff McKenna wrote: >> >> Note that the issue here is not nested or not; the issue is that we must >> be careful with the use of the word "standard" on our new site. -jeff >> On 2017-08-22 3:11 PM, Jody Garnett wrote: >> >> Never mind, you can have nesting, so OGC can contain WFS, WMS, WCS, etc... >> >> -- >> Jody Garnett >> >> On 22 August 2017 at 11:09, Jody Garnett <[email protected] < >> mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>>> wrote: >> >> You can click on the number, in this case 11, and see a list of the >> projects implementing the OGC standard. I am deleting it now... >> >> -- >> Jody Garnett >> >> On 22 August 2017 at 10:17, Even Rouault <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>>> >> wrote: >> >> __ >> >> On mardi 22 août 2017 14:07:04 CEST Jeff McKenna wrote: >> >> > Many of these don't make any sense to me, if you ask me my >> opinion. We >> >> > should be using the list of OGC standards and entering them into >> >> > wordpress, and not allowing editors to edit/add new >> non-standards. But >> >> > that is all my own opinion :) Then we can link to these >> standards. As >> >> > of now anyone can create a 'standard' and post it on the beta >> site, >> >> > seems very odd to me. >> >> Just a remainder that OGC is not the only source of standards. >> For example, GeoJSON is IETF RFC 7946 for example (and before >> last year, was a community standard). GeoTIFF can also be >> considered as a defacto standard, etc.. You have also the ISO >> standards for metadata, etc... >> >> Probably a loose definition for standards could be a >> specification available somewhere (potentially behind a paywall >> like ISO...), and implemented by at least several >> software/vendors. >> >> Even >> >> > >> >> > Is my opinion here too strong? For now I chose just to edit the >> >> > descriptions for all of these 'standards', valid or not. >> >> > >> >> > What do you prefer? >> >> > >> >> > -jeff >> >> > >> >> > On 2017-08-22 1:59 PM, Jody Garnett wrote: >> >> > > Thanks jeff, I just noticed that work had been done in the >> GeoServer >> >> > > meeting :) We also spotted one standard "OGC" which does >> not make sense. >> >> > > >> >> > > Do you think it is worthwhile linking to these standards? >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > -- >> >> > > Jody Garnett >> >> > > >> >> > > On 22 August 2017 at 09:42, Jeff McKenna >> <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected] >> <[email protected]>> >> >> > > >> >> > > <mailto:[email protected] >> <[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] >> <[email protected]>>>> wrote: >> >> > > Since we have so many website 'editors' (currently 84), >> please if >> >> > > you do create a new "standard" (double-quote use is on >> purpose, as >> >> > > many of these are not actual standards) when you are >> editing your >> >> > > project page, please let me know and I will edit the new >> standard >> >> > > and add a description - I have just went through all of these >> >> > > "standards" and set descriptions for each of the 27 >> "standards". >> >> > > >> >> > > For example: >> >> > > (WPS) >> >> > > >> >> > > will now appear on the project pages as: >> >> > > >> >> > > Web Processing Service (WPS) >> >> > > >> >> > > This consistency makes it much easier to read for new users >> to our >> >> > > site. >> >> > > >> >> > > thanks all! >> >> > > >> >> > > -jeff >> >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > Discuss mailing list >> >> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected] >> <[email protected]>> >> >> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> >> >> -- >> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services >> >> http://www.spatialys.com >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected] >> <[email protected]>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> >> >> >> >> "The power of accurate observation is frequently called cynicism by those >> who don't have it." - George Bernard Shaw >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> > > > > > “There’s no place like home” > - Dorothy Gale, from the Wizard of Oz. > > > > >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
