Landon Blake wrote:
I doubt I will be successful where you have failed.
Ah but together we yet prevail! Almost and open-source moto, or at least
open development.
Perhaps the GeoAPI is the solution I am looking for...We'll have to see
what type of response I get.
I tell you what, they are used to being a nice stable project working
from a) specification or b) consensus.
If I wanted to get my work with the OGD into the OGC and GeoAPI, what
would be the way to get the process started, and at what point in the
development would it be best to start?
As I recall the OGD is your idea of a local geospatial database? Similar
in concept to something ESRI has going ... geodatabase?
I usually approach things one of two ways:
Working against an existing existing specification:
- bang out the interfaces, include some magic @URL annotations citing
the original docs and place them into GeoAPI pending
If you want to do something new and exciting:
- start with an implementation, ie grab a "ext" module in geotools (show
up at an IRC meeting and ask) and try out your ideas, and get people
excited, your gt work will go out in the next release
- place the proven interfaces into GeoAPI pending, and be prepaired for
very careful detailed feedback and possibly a paper (I never survive the
feedback process unless I have something I can run to explore the trade
offs).
After all of the interfaces had been defined, but before the
implementation? Or after the implementation?
See above: I tend to not put anything forth as a standard until there
are two implementations (open-source or commercial implementations) of
the interfaces. GeoAPI does not stick by this however, as far as I know
there is only one implementation against the GO-1 interfaces they have
defined (but Martin has plans).
Thanks for your help.
np, I hate seeing eager mind with good ideas not find a home.
Landon
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jody Garnett
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 5:11 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Geowanking] Geospatial Standards For Free Software
Landon Blake wrote:
Jody,
After talking to the guys at OpenSDI, I have decided to try for a more
"reasonable" solution.
http://feature.opengeospatial.org/forumbb/viewtopic.php?p=845#845
I hope I can work something out for with the OGC. If this is possible,
then I will work to improve on its faults instead of trying to set up
an
alternative.
Um concerning your request - working on the GeoAPI project is how I
accomplish this task. I still find it more efficient as we are forced
to work things out with source code (that compiles), and then some
hapless OGC volunteers get to go and sit in technical meetings and
report back to the group.
Oh wait I am a hapless OGC volunteer in this respect now. Aside: even
for their closed door projects java interfaces can be defined (and have
been) to solicit feedback ...
Normally the list generates 1-2 messages a week, that will go up as
Byrce is punting out some ISO based coverage madness, and my bluff is
being called concerning the Feature Model work done in September. Now
that a GeoServer branch has used it successfully I have no excuses left
but to put it out for public review.
Later,
Jody
_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
