Hi,

Being a MapBasic programmer since version 2.0 (oh yes!), I've spend many happy hours 
Mb'ing :-) And seing that era coming to an end
is not easy, and I agree with Ben Crane that MI/MB will probably not die out for a few 
years. Just look at ArcView, it's still
kicking even though ArcMap was released years ago. But I don't think we should kid 
ourselves either - MapInfo Corp. will dump
MapBasic eventually, they'll simply have to to stay on the MS bandwagon.

One idea that comes to mind is perpetuating MapBasic outside MapInfo, perhaps as an 
Open Source project. MapBasic programs could
(almost) just as easily be run via a COM/.NET application from outside Pro than from 
inside (_if_ the data compatability is kept
intact and _if_ the Pro object model is well designed !) However, that would require 
for MapInfo Corp. to release all relevant specs
for mbo/mbx (who should we ask to for this ?), and even then I'm not sure whether 
enough dedicated developers are willing to
shoulder the task.

The idea proposed by Darrin Clement about a symbolic subscription fee to continue 
MAPINFO-L is intriguing, but unfortunately I can't
see the economics of it as sound. Even for a fee of $10 per year it would require 
several hundreds of paying subscribers to even pay
for a single man-year per year. And the strength of the current list is that it 
features not one but many experts. And paid-for
solutions are usually also subject to support issues, which would increase the need 
for funding. This forum can only continue on
it's current voluntary basis, imho, so I think we should get the most of it as it is.

But there may be an alternative route to MB, so let me make a proposition.

I've been working on-off and off-shift for more than a year now on a VB/6 project I 
call MIProxy. The project involves building an
external COM object model for MIPro 4.1-7.0,  publishing a full featured object model 
for external programming languages while
working internally with the very limited object model the current MIPro itself 
publishes. I haven't been able to give it the time it
deserves, so I'm willing to turn this project into an Open Source project if anyone's 
seriously interested in helping out with the
development. The project's currently about 95% finished including docs, but needs some 
serious alpha/beta testing. Sofar it doesn't
support feature objects, but that may become possible if more hands are at work - I 
have some ideas.

So please contact me if you're a "medium hard core" ;-) VB/6 programmer with an 
interest in COM'ing the current MIPro.

Best regards/Med venlig hilsen
Lars V. Nielsen
GisPro, Denmark
http://www.gispro.dk/
http://hjem.get2net.dk/lars-online/
WGS84: 10.20'40"E 55.20'20"N
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jacques Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "MIL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 3:23 PM
Subject: MI-L MI/MB developements


> The recent wish list discussion reopened an old concern of mine that I will
> sum up to present to you and have your feed back.
>
> 1 - I am pretty convinced that MI will not put much efforts into supporting
> and developing its MI Pro beyond 7.0 in its present format. The move to .net
> structure will create a rupture in the working environment and in the
> framework for developing applications.
> 2 - There will be for several years many MI users who will continue to use
> versions <=7.0 because they fit their needs or because updating to the
> latest one (to come) would not be $$$ justified.
> 3 - There are several, not to say many, among us that have a certain
> knowledge ob MapBasic and find pleasure at building applications or tools in
> that language.
> 4 - The creation of new tools seems to be more in reaction to "personal
> inspirations" than in answer to some "organized coverage" and potential
> programming resources are misused with frequent duplications and
> re-inventions.
> 5 - Wish lists do not generally differentiate between "internal"
> improvements (achievable essentially through internal programming) and new
> "tools" that can be created as external resources. Beside, they do not offer
> follow-up to wishes
>
>
> I believe that we could set up some organization to improve on that
> situation. For sake of expediency I offer an acronym: MIP-TPF that someone
> could read as MapInfo Professional - Tool Programming Forum. I would give it
> immediately the following tasks:
>
> A - recording wishes for tools
> B - establishing if no solutions already exist (and their availability)
> C - sketching specifications for new tools required
> D - recording the resource who would take the responsibility for developing
> a specific tool
> E - recording the progress in new tools availability
>
> I would also consider adding later on the tasks of
>
> F - identifying existing tools and their accessibility
> G - reviewing existing tools and making recommendations to the users and to
> their authors
>
> In order to make programming easier and more daring, I would add some modus
> operandi considerations
>
> I - the MIP-TPF should be inspired by the terms of the Lesser GNU General
> Public (Lesser GNU General Public License page at:
> http://www.fsf.org/copyleft/lesser.html). Tools produced in that spirit will
> be available with their code and be open to further developments that should
> be recorded with the MIP-TPF
> II - the MIP-TPF should provide support to programming by at least
> identifying existing resources in that area; it could also offer its own MB
> resource library including all sorts of DLL's.
>
>
> I would like very much to know your reactions to this suggestion; its
> usefulness, ways to improve on it, your willingness to participate at its
> creation, at the conception of tools to support it (site design, functioning
> and management), your potential contributions as a tool programmer, etc.
> Once I am convinced there is enough support, I will start the ball rolling
> most probably by using some special list for the necessary exchanges.
>
> I know that you are all very busy, but there are several among you (some
> have told me so already) who have resources almost available to share, and
> occasionally some "free" time to "play". You can answer me directly (I will
> find a way to sum up at some future date) or through the MapInfo-L if you
> think your answer can fuel some debate on the subject.
>
> Thanks for taking the time of reading this message, and high hopes you will
> react.
>
> Jacques Paris
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
List hosting provided by Directions Magazine | www.directionsmag.com |
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message number: 6019

Reply via email to