It seems to me that having (maintaining) several terms helps us to reach multiple diverse audiences. When dealing with government funding agencies (i.e. ministries) the SDI term conveys formality and officialdom...which does give some senior people (call them paleo-whatever) a warm+fuzzy feeling. On the other side I agree that geo-web or other web-2.0 terms are necessary to maintain audience interest.
We saw these two worldviews collide, and then try to understand each other, at a recent workshop on "volunteered geographic information, VGI" (another acronym, sorry). http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/projects/vgi/ (Mike L. was invited but could not make it.) Cheers, ------- Michael Gould Centro de Visualización Interactiva www.cevi.uji.es Dept. Information Systems (LSI), Universitat Jaume I, 12071 Castellón, Spain email: gould (at) lsi.uji.es // email2: mgould (at) opengeospatial.org research group www.geoinfo.uji.es // personal www.mgould.com AGILE www.agile-online.org Vespucci Summer Institute www.vespucci.org Erasmus Mundus: Master in Geospatial Technologies www.mastergeotech.info -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: sábado, 29 de diciembre de 2007 13:00 To: [email protected] Subject: Geowanking Digest, Vol 49, Issue 23 Send Geowanking mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Geowanking digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: SDI - time for a new name? (Chris Holmes) 2. RE: SDI - time for a new name? (Jeremy Irish) 3. Re: SDI - time for a new name? (Mike Liebhold) 4. Re: SDI - time for a new name? (stephen white) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 14:42:28 -0500 (EST) From: "Chris Holmes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Geowanking] SDI - time for a new name? To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Eh, you talk to the general public about what the 'web' is and I don't think they'll say 'computationally actionable links', or even 'links'. They'll say it's a place to get information. But I do think 'the web' has benefited by having a somewhat specialized term, instead of just 'information', so I don't think we should just say 'maps'. But maps that are an order of magnitude better than what has come before, ones you can search and combine and create yourself, those are the goal of the Geo Web. Sean, while I agree with you completely technically - that geospatial architectures have been sparsely linked, and that a more www like architecture needs to be encouraged for the Geo Web to succeed - I'm just using Geo Web as a term to invoke the vision we're working towards. Many terms in the popular consciousness are technically bogus, but are still very useful for explaining to those who aren't experts. Chris On Fri, December 28, 2007 1:28 pm, Sean Gillies wrote: > Chris, > > > The GeoWeb term has been bogus in its own way. It's supposed to be an > analogy to WWW or Semantic Web, right? But what's the defining > characteristic of these webs? Links, computationally actionable links. > Geospatial architectures have always been sparsely linked, at least > until Google Earth and KML hit the mainstream. > > Cheers, > Sean > > > Chris Holmes wrote: > >> Yeah, I've dropped use of the term except when talking to those who >> already know the word. I use Geospatial web or Geo Web, it's a bit more >> intuitive and easy to explain, and I can use it to emphasize the parts >> of SDI that I like. When I was writing a paper I ran across some other >> academic paper that had 7 different definitions for SDI. It does have >> some decent recognition, but those who do know what it means have >> different understandings of what it is, so I don't find it all that >> useful. The Geo Web to me gets at the same end goal as SDI's, but in a >> bottom up instead of a top down way - which is definitely my preferred >> mode. >> >> Chris >> >> >> On Fri, December 28, 2007 7:34 am, Mick Wilson wrote: >> >>> I am in the process of writing a "Why SDI?" guidebook >>> for non-technical middle management types and cannot help but wonder >>> why we put a millstone of an expression like "spatial data >>> infrastructure" around our necks? >>> >>> As a barrier to communication with an >>> instant-glaze-over factor of 100% "SDI" is hard to beat. It is >>> simultaneously pompous and intimidating while conveying very little >>> information to anyone outside inner circle. The term gives little >>> impression of what gets done or what improves if SDI's in place. And >>> just how much SDI planning and development these days is about 'just' >>> data, compared to discussion about value-adding services, chaining, >>> mash-ups and the likes. >>> >>> I appreciate that term is (or at least was) >>> technically accurate and has built up recognition over the past 10+ >>> years, that it's associated with well-respected individuals and >>> organizations. >>> >>> I can but wonder whether it's not worth some effort to >>> come up with something snappier and zingier that even my mother might >>> have a chance of understanding, or at least being curious about. I >>> have no suggestions I'm willing to make at this stage but would like >>> to gauge the level of in taking some of the terminology in new >>> directions. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> > _______________________________________________ > Geowanking mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking > > > !DSPAM:4005,47754080218188992556831! > > > -- Chris Holmes The Open Planning Project http://topp.openplans.org ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 12:03:33 -0800 From: "Jeremy Irish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [Geowanking] SDI - time for a new name? To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I would go as far as to say that most people would just respond "IE" or "Firefox" when you say "Web." Internet is more of a catch-all for networked stuff and the Web is now represents the presentation layer and not the interconnecting links in "the cloud." If you want to call them connected paths wouldn't it be more sensical to use the idea of interconnected trails or paths to describe map data? Just thinking (typing?) out loud. Not that there really needs to be a new official term. Digital Maps is also a general catch-all phrase that's approachable. Maps are going more digital but I still think paper when I hear that. Regarding neo-geo there is certainly a trust issue, especially when you are using the data as a way to physically go somewhere, but Wikipedia has shown us that "good enough" can be acceptable to the many as long as there are enough people minding the store (of data). Jeremy -----Original Message----- Eh, you talk to the general public about what the 'web' is and I don't think they'll say 'computationally actionable links', or even 'links'. ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 17:49:51 -0800 From: Mike Liebhold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Geowanking] SDI - time for a new name? To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sean Gillies wrote: > But what's the defining characteristic of these webs? Links, computationally actionable links. Geospatial architectures have always been sparsely linked, at least until Google Earth and KML hit the mainstream. > For convenience sake, I have no problem whatsoever using the terms geospatial web, or geoweb. When asked, I usually offer up these defining characteristics web-served 'standard' ((gml/wfs etc) geodata (points vectors and polygons), easily combined with geocoded web hypermedia - html text,, ( including rdf, and georss) and images, (jpegs etc.) ... sometimes I suggest that realtime sensor data ought to be considered part of a spatial web too. Open CAD data too. Like ESRIs Arc formats, KML is problematic since it's not really open standard geodata or hypermedia, and despite it's submission to OGC, and Google Earth's " Geographic Web Layers', KML is really controlled completely by one company. Maps are not really a derining characteristic, since geoweb data will soon be common used in a heads up cinematic view ( handheld AR, etc.) In the end though it's all really just a bag of jargon; web, semantic web, web2.0, geoweb, sensorweb, thingweb, cognitive web, intarweb, blah, blah. blah, - Mike > Cheers, > Sean > > Chris Holmes wrote: > >> Yeah, I've dropped use of the term except when talking to those who >> already know the word. I use Geospatial web or Geo Web, it's a bit more >> intuitive and easy to explain, and I can use it to emphasize the parts of >> SDI that I like. When I was writing a paper I ran across some other >> academic paper that had 7 different definitions for SDI. It does have >> some decent recognition, but those who do know what it means have >> different understandings of what it is, so I don't find it all that >> useful. The Geo Web to me gets at the same end goal as SDI's, but in a >> bottom up instead of a top down way - which is definitely my preferred >> mode. >> >> Chris >> >> On Fri, December 28, 2007 7:34 am, Mick Wilson wrote: >> >>> I am in the process of writing a "Why SDI?" guidebook >>> for non-technical middle management types and cannot help but wonder why we >>> put a millstone of an expression like "spatial data infrastructure" around >>> our necks? >>> >>> As a barrier to communication with an >>> instant-glaze-over factor of 100% "SDI" is hard to beat. It is >>> simultaneously pompous and intimidating while conveying very little >>> information to anyone outside inner circle. The term gives little >>> impression of what gets done or what improves if SDI's in place. And just >>> how much SDI planning and development these days is about 'just' data, >>> compared to discussion about value-adding services, chaining, mash-ups and >>> the likes. >>> >>> I appreciate that term is (or at least was) >>> technically accurate and has built up recognition over the past 10+ years, >>> that it's associated with well-respected individuals and organizations. >>> >>> I can but wonder whether it's not worth some effort to >>> come up with something snappier and zingier that even my mother might have >>> a chance of understanding, or at least being curious about. I have no >>> suggestions I'm willing to make at this stage but would like to gauge the >>> level of in taking some of the terminology in new directions. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> > _______________________________________________ > Geowanking mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking > > > ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2007 18:10:47 +1030 From: stephen white <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Geowanking] SDI - time for a new name? To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed On 29/12/2007, at 5:33 AM, Allan Doyle wrote: > Perhaps the most obvious watering and fertilizing of the neo-SDI > bits would be in the area of freeing up more data for the neo-geo > "kids" to play with. The "neo" part makes me gag... it makes me think of Indiana Jones exploring some tomb of VRML, collecting the baubles and trinkets of thousands of projects that tried to define standards before coding, then bursting out in a flourish of black leather trenchcoats and pencil necks snapping in the breeze. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking End of Geowanking Digest, Vol 49, Issue 23 ****************************************** _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
