On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Andy Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > It is possible to come up with a set of tasks and tests used to confirm and > classify what software are capable of. Working out what is included and how > this is included is non-trivial and I think this is in the domain of the Open > Geospatial Consortium and the standards defining organisations generally. > Sorry, I've not been engaging there of late, but when I did interoperability > was the primary goal and standardisation of data and services and how to use > the services was key. Anyway, there can be other descriptors of > software/services too, like the nature of the user interfaces (whether there > are optional GUI/command line/whether things operate via web protocols and > indeed whether it is more a single desktop application or something that has > more of a client/server architecture, whether it is modular, whether there is > an API (and what the nature of this is), what language(s) it is written in > and possibly loads of other things). > > Sorry, I digress, let me try to get to the point... > > If there was a breakdown of what functions there are and how the software > works then this may help in identifying not only similarities between one > FOSS offering and other proprietary ones, but between FOSS ones. This could > be useful in a number of ways, one of which might be identifying whether > there is a single FOSS offering that does everything that a user currently > wants to do (and may do already using other software). > > Migrating from using one set of software to using another to perform the same > tasks can be quite a job for any organisation. It might require a significant > amount of research, the development of educational resources and training. > > It would be great if there was a set of educational resources that show how > to perform tasks in different software (and indeed using different > programming languages). Whatever the platform, there are metrics on the > complexity the level of automation and the computational efficiency that can > be developed. With a set of metrics it would be easier to measure the > similarity and difference between software. > > Sorry, having rambled on I realise that I have gone a bit off topic, I expect > this has already been suggested and is being worked on, I've dared not to > read the entire thread before posting, and I have very little time to help > get this in place! Also I have not replied to the very last post on this > thread but one a bit back as these others have spun off in other important > directions. > > Anyway, you have my moral support, thanks for all your efforts developing the > OSGeo website, educational resources, services and software. > > Best wishes, > > Andy > http://www.geog.leeds.ac.uk/people/a.turner/index.html >
Hi Andy, Somehow we are already including this. Although, it's true, we didin't distinguish between client and server, which could be quite confusing (to improve!). For example, for GeoNetwork, find attached image.
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
