Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] open source desktop shootout
I say we call it free and non-free so we can have a 10 page thread debating software licenses. On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:16 PM, Seven (aka Arnulf) se...@arnulf.us wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Markus Neteler wrote: On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 6:50 AM, Cameron Shorter cameron.shor...@gmail.com wrote: Percy, To start the ball rolling, I've created a wiki page for a desktop comparison here: http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GIS_Desktop_Comparison Here a reasonable contribution, lead by Tom McConnell: Matrix on OSGeo and COTS software functionality http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Albk_XRkhVkzdGxyYk8tNEZvLUp1UTUzTFN5bjlLX2chl=en Best regards, Markus Here comes the prayer wheel again... What does COTS mean? Ready-made products [1]. Is that the opposite to Open Source software? No. Citing some more Wikipedia: The term often refers to computer software or hardware systems and may also include free software with commercial support. Best regards, [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COTS [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_off-the-shelf - -- Arnulf Christl Exploring Space, Time and Mind http://arnulf.us -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAku+4nQACgkQXmFKW+BJ1b3H6ACfSO3wgtj87lSGMekRUAxcew2N erkAn15VBtZqx6+Hws585FSr5VriH1xJ =lX6s -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Brian Russo / (808) 271 4166 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open Source Viewer for 3D Maps
World Wind - http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/java/ On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 4:36 AM, Brent Fraser bfra...@geoanalytic.com wrote: Landon, We've used VTP (vterrain.org) and modified the GUI of it's Enviro viewer to be a little more end-user friendly. VTP does a good job of providing an interactive 3d environment of DEM and texture (e.g satellite image), and optionally 3d structure models. On the downside, you have to author your datasets carefully (using VTBuilder) to get good performance, and you have to limit your map/model to an extent (it doesn't model a globe, only a projection). There's a ton of 3d modeling info on the VTP web site. Ossim (www.ossim.org) has OssimPlanet which DOES model a globe but it can be an effort to set up (I've never tried it). While we've seen some interest in 3D mapping environments, one difficulty is ease of use from the end user's perspective. They're OK with rendered 3d perspective images, and they LIKE fly-thru movies of terrain. But they LOVE interactive 3d environments, as long as they navigate with ease (and this can be a big problem). They mainly care about the terrain (dem+image) and overlaying map data like points, lines, and polygons (with styling and annotation). While we've shown demos of including 3d structures models (buildings), it hasn't generated much interest. But then we talk to mapping depts, not engineering/construction. Best Regards, Brent Fraser GeoAnalytic Inc. Landon Blake wrote: I’m curious if anyone knows of a decent open source viewer for 3D maps. Does such a viewer exist? How widespread is its adoption? I know that Adobe PDF has become a fairly common way to share 2D maps digitally, but I didn’t see a lot on the web about a PDF solution for 3D maps. If you build 3D maps and models as part of your work, how do you share them with your clients and the wider public? Thank you for your thoughts. Landon P.S. – Here are a couple of links I ran across for what appear to be open file formats for 3D models. I’m not sure how applicable they would be to 3D maps: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COLLADA http://www.web3d.org/about/overview *Warning: *Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Brian Russo / (808) 271 4166 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick)
The latent arrogance displayed in this thread is more destructive than any software license. On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 7:31 AM, Christopher Schmidt crschm...@crschmidt.net wrote: On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 01:14:35PM -0400, Arnie Shore wrote: Awww, the relative merits of the platforms/languages involved, IMO, are a far second behind the factor of whether or not the choice makes it available to the largest community of possible users. Free is good; de-facto limitations ain't. The author is certainly to be applauded both for developing the package and offering it here. But I for one can't jump at it. Ya gotta have an OS and a language, so any choice here will prbly hack off some of the truly devout. But you don't gotta have a framework - proprietary or not. Huh? Are there any graphical GIS programs that don't use *some* framework? qgis uses, I believe, qt. uDig, I believe, uses Swing. Heck, even RESTClient uses wx (via Python). In web applications, the situation is even more pronounced -- Django, TurboGears, etc. For UI work, jquery/ext/mootools, etc. Using a framework as part of your development encourages you to write the hard parts... rather than doing the easy parts that people have done before all over again. Now, you may not like the particular one that was chosen here, but that's hardly the same as saying You should enver develop with a framework. -- Chris The choice of .NET rules out for me any interest other than curiosity. And to point out that MONO resolves the .NET issue, simply translates to 'you gotta have that in addition to the basic product', adding to the relative complexity and fragility of an implementation. So, thanks, but no thanks. AS ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Christopher Schmidt Web Developer ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Brian Russo / (808) 271 4166 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick)
It wasn't directed at you Chris, nor specifically at anyone. I just think the general tone of this conversation is pretty unproductive. Sure people have reasons about being strategic everything but maybe it's just how I'm reading it but I just see the old, familiar tones of the Free Software Movement which is do it my way (100% free) or the highway. I don't think that helps anyone.. It's all well and good if you're in a small organisation with 300 pcs or whatever like Chris P and you have that sort of latitude.. but people forget that most organisations aren't driven by cost or ideology - they're driven by business value. Openness is no different than being Green/Sustainable. It has to make good business sense in order to be the right decision. I can't go to my bosses and say we have to do this because it's open source. They won't care and I don't blame them. - bri On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 8:19 AM, Christopher Schmidt crschm...@crschmidt.net wrote: On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 08:06:59AM -1000, Brian Russo wrote: The latent arrogance displayed in this thread is more destructive than any software license. I'm not trying to be arrogant, I'm sorry if it came off that way. I really just think it's important to realize that Not every programmer programs like I do. There are many different, effective ways, and tools that can be used to write code; writing them off for yourself is fine, but trying to control the decisions someone else makes is ill-advised and potentially harmful. Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt Web Developer ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Brian Russo / (808) 271 4166 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is the integration of FOSS4G and proprietary software good for FOSS4G?
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Miguel Montesinos mmontesi...@prodevelop.es wrote: 1) Do you think that it may avoid proprietary users to migrate to open solutions, as they can benefit of open-source libraries under their proprietary software? It's overwhelmingly a good thing. If people are using proprietary software that incorporates open source libraries.. then they are using both open source AND proprietary software components. 100% open source purists (in my opinion) alienate themselves from a large portion of the community. There are many practical reasons to use proprietary software, I don't see it as something that ever gets 100% eliminated (in an realistic timeline relevant to me). Besides, this give arguments to proprietary manufacturers because of the weakness of open-source software needing to run on top of proprietary ones, or to sell out their compatibility with FOSS4G. No more than an argument that proprietary software is weak for 'needing' to leverage open source. And how is selling compatibility with FOSS4G bad? Isn't that the goal? -- Brian Russo / (808) 271 4166 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Software Copyright ownership
EAR is the Export Administration Regulations, maintained by the Bureau of Industry Security within the US Department of Commerce. Well I'm no lawyer so I cannot give legal advice nor confirm on this matter. I do know that 740.13(e)(6) says that posting encryption source code and object code online doesn't invoke the know your customer obligations nor constitute knowledge of export, etc. A simple solution may be to just mirror what Kerberos did and put up a bunch of disclaimers - http://web.mit.edu/Kerberos/dist/index.html Anecdotally, the fact that Mozilla got a 'no-violation' letter when it's known that Firefox has been exported to Iran via Mozilla's servers is interesting (though not a legal precedent). I suggest contacting EFF or a similar group and asking their lawyers. - bri On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 2:52 AM, Jorge Gaspar Sanz Salinas js...@osgeo.org wrote: On 14 February 2010 22:44, Brian Russo br...@beruna.org wrote: I'm having trouble thinking of any, since encryption isn't really a big factor in most GIS software. Even if it is a component of the software, as long as those encryption components reside outside of it in openssl or similar - while it is an inconvenience - it can be handled the same way this matter has been for years. Distribute/produce the software inside the US without the encryption - and then foreigners can obtain openssl from outside the US.. compile the software, etc. There are probably some GIS software packages that would fall under the EAR, but since they meet the GSN requirements for being 'generally available to the public', they are exempted 15 CFR §734.7(b). Likewise even if there was a non-encryption product that somewhere fell under ITAR, it is also exempt 22 CFR §125.1(a) since open source software is in what ITAR considers accessibility in the public domain. There's still of course the matter of places like North Korea/other embargoed nations, but unless you're actively initiating such specific transfers then there's no concern since the EAR language that I'm aware of refers to 'downloading or causing the downloading...'. I don't know what EAR means on this context (not talking about EJBs, right?) but as it seems that your knowledge on this field is far better than mine, can you confirm if is or not a law infringement of the OSGeo Foundation to let Cuban or North Korean people to download any product from OSGeo stack*? The wiki text I've copied says the contrary, isn't it? * from its own servers like GDAL or hosted outside like Geonetwor, Geoserver, etc. I can't confirm anything since I'm not a lawyer in this field, I just have some familiarity with it having filled out the paperwork to export high-tech items previously. If OSGeo does not have an attorney, probably EFF could be consulted on the matter freely as I'm sure they have experts on this topic. There are also some very knowledgeable people on this matter in the Debian Project and probably other OS projects. However the law itself is surprisingly clear and is worth reading. EAR refers to the Export Administration Regulations, noted in that wiki you linked. They are regulated by the BIS which is part of the Department of Commerce. They regulate the majority of export item. The Department of State also regulates 'defense articles' via ITAR, but since GIS software would most certainly be considered a 'dual purpose' item, as long as it does not include encryption I'd be genuinely shocked if it fell under ITAR. Even if it does, it being open source really helps it. As I mentioned previously, open source software meets the General Software Note exemption under 15 CFR §734.7(b). I urge you to read the language, but basically it says that if the software is generally available, via free or reproduction cost licensing, or like in a library, or is used in a university, etc; then exporting it is rather moot since any foreign national could simply walk in and grab a copy if they wanted anyway. Open source software easily meets this definition. Likewise under ITAR, there is an exemption for non-encryption open source software considered to be in the public domain (in the sense of access, not licensing) under 22 CFR §125.1(a) For encryption open source products, no license is required from BIS, however you have to make a TSU notification - http://www.bis.doc.gov/encryption/pubavailencsourcecodenofify.html Embargoed destinations and denied persons/entities are a no-go regardless of any exemptions. However simply placing the source code/object code on a website does not constitute export, knowledge of export, nor does it Best -- Jorge Gaspar Sanz Salinas Ingeniero en Geodesia y Cartografía http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jorge_Sanz ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Software Copyright ownership
Can you give an example of some osgeo software that is a concern for US export controls? I'm having trouble thinking of any, since encryption isn't really a big factor in most GIS software. Even if it is a component of the software, as long as those encryption components reside outside of it in openssl or similar - while it is an inconvenience - it can be handled the same way this matter has been for years. Distribute/produce the software inside the US without the encryption - and then foreigners can obtain openssl from outside the US.. compile the software, etc. There are probably some GIS software packages that would fall under the EAR, but since they meet the GSN requirements for being 'generally available to the public', they are exempted 15 CFR §734.7(b). Likewise even if there was a non-encryption product that somewhere fell under ITAR, it is also exempt 22 CFR §125.1(a) since open source software is in what ITAR considers accessibility in the public domain. There's still of course the matter of places like North Korea/other embargoed nations, but unless you're actively initiating such specific transfers then there's no concern since the EAR language that I'm aware of refers to 'downloading or causing the downloading...'. regards, - bri On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 7:33 AM, Frank Warmerdam warmer...@pobox.com wrote: Arnulf Christl (aka Seven) wrote: Cleaning up an older thread... From what I gather from the lists there seems to be no broad opinion in favor of making projects move their copyright under the hood of OSGeo. With the recent discussion of potential export restriction enforcement by incorporated organizations incorporated in USA the the need for a more global organization seems to be higher. I am frankly at a loss at where such an organization would be incorporated and what it could look like but if it existed I would very much like to support it. If anyone has a great idea what a truly global OSGeo should look like please speak up. We should spend some thought on copyright every time we admit and evaluate projects in incubation. My personal experience shows that having the copyright of Open Source projects completely under the hood of a community owned organization is a good thing. Everything else is messy. The messy bit only shows when things go wrong so lets keep fingers crossed and as long as nothing happens we'll all be fine. Arnulf, I'm not sure I see the connection between the who holds copyright issue, and the US export controls issue. To me, centralized copyright is primarily helpful when relicensing, or ensuring we have the right to pursue legal action against someone using one of our projects in a fashion that is contrary to the license. I haven't yet come to any conclusions what to do about the US export control problem. One thing that was expressed in the past in a discussion of this problem (perhaps on foundations list) is that many US export controls are a reflection of international convenants on the export of weapons and possibly weapons related technologies that have also been signed by most other major nations. As such, the US just seems to have more organized enforcement, and we might at some point expect some similar enforcement in other nations. I'm not sure exactly how true this is - I suspect there is a lot of leeway in how things are classified, and enforced. Best regards, -- ---+-- I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmer...@pobox.com light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Programmer for Rent ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[OSGeo-Discuss] spatial ETL / bulk loading tools (?)
I'm looking for some feedback on open source spatial ETL tools (or just regular ETL tools that you've used in some spatial workflow). I'm aware of GeoKettle (Pentaho) and Spatial Data Integrator (Talend). My focus is on relatively simple processing of moderate to large amounts of bulk data, but any other useful suggestions/comments are welcome. I will summarize useful responses back to the list. thanks, - bri ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Will there be an OSGeo Desktop shootout atFOSS4G 2010?
I do not think a simple feature comparison is very useful. Seeing workflows that happen to use XYZ software or.. how we transitioned from ABC proprietary software to XYZ open source and improved performance 10% while reducing costs 20% etc.. that's useful and convincing. Knowing that ABC proprietary supports 3 methods of kriging while XYZ open source supports 2 may be earthshattering or completely irrelevant. The real answer is an unexciting It depends. You can tweak feature comparisons to make yourself look good, the competition look bad.. etc.. It's just like statistics. I see this in camera reviews all the time, The Pentax K200D has a 96% viewfinder. Comparable models from Nikon and Canon offer 95% viewfinders. Call me cynical, but I find it hard to believe that someone at Pentax didn't say Let's make our number bigger. Of course, in many reviews of those models, the Pentax scores higher on that feature because 96 95 [1]. Does that make it a better camera? Well gee I guess if you only cared about that 1 thing; I don't know anyone that does (or should). What you don't see in feature comparisons are solid, no-B$ analyses of how they let you do your job better. Usability for example is something that you cannot easily quantify. You can have the best product/software in the world but if I can't get the results due to UI/UX failure, or an unnecessarily steep learning curve, etc; then for me the user - your software is 100% useless (actually it's worse because now I have to find a tool that does work). Handtools are a classic example of this; anyone that works with wood or mechanical parts will understand how some tools just don't feel right. Do they feel 20% less right? Doesn't work that way. Not to say that feature comparisons are completely useless, especially for new people they can be good; but overall they're coarse, imprecise, and not very knowledge-rich IMO. Case studies of transition are much more powerful; speaking both as a user and a decisionmaker. I think moving towards active real-world presentations is far more powerful than lifeless comparisons. Another example is people that love SSDs (solid state drives) and rave about their Windows boot times. Yeah SSDs are great but.. do you just sit around and reboot your computer all day? A 2000% improvement on something I do once a month is probably not that big of a deal. - bri p.s. I shoot nikon but I really don't care what you shoot and have 0 vested interest; just an example. 1. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxK200D/page20.asp On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 11:01 PM, Miguel Montesinos mmontesi...@prodevelop.es wrote: Hello, I think that a simple comparison to what ArcGIS does is limitating. Several issues arises: - Why compare to ArcGIS 9.3 and not Geomedia, MapInfo,…? - What about features that OS GIS desktops provides not present in ArcGIS 9.3? I’d rather have a comparison among all of them under equal conditions, for instance a feature comparison based on the maximum features all products offer, as well as a perfomance analysis. For this, a common dataset of both file and service based data should be available. In Spain there are “a lot” of public official geodata which could be used as test datasets. I also like very much Paul Ramsey’s approach about what I like and what I don’t made by people belonging to different projects. Regards, - Miguel Montesinos CTO PRODEVELOP, S.L. mmontesinos [at] prodevelop [dot] es www.prodevelop.es Miguel Montesinos *De:* discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] *En nombre de *Daniel Ames *Enviado el:* lunes, 21 de diciembre de 2009 19:25 *Para:* Maxim Dubinin; OSGeo Discussions *Asunto:* Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Will there be an OSGeo Desktop shootout atFOSS4G 2010? Folks, I like the structured comparison approach that Cameron outlined. Also equally (or perhaps more useful) would be to put together a wiki page with goals and benchmarks based on ArcGIS 9.3. And then indicate where the os packages compare. This would provide us with the ability to answer the most important question which is can this do what the proprietary software does. For example, we could post a couple of maps made in AG and then challenge each desktop team to create and upload the same maps. Etc. I have a line shapefile with 200 shapes. We could upload it and have everyone do some timing to show how fast to load,pan, etc on the data. This could also serve as a way for some of the teams to see their own deficiencies and find critical tasks to work on (they could then update their reporting on the wiki and indicate the version number)... - Dan ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Will there be an OSGeo Desktop shootout atFOSS4G 2010?
I think a more interesting presentation would be why there are so many desktop GIS packages, the consequent pros/cons, and if/how efforts could be consolidated. On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Stefan Steiniger sst...@geo.uzh.chwrote: Hei all, thanks for Cameron on keeping me in the loop, and to Markus for remembering :) I am now subscribed to this list. I think Pauls idea sounds interesting - because this whole comparison thing is a) quite cumbersome when we have 10 desktop GIS (+ X), and b) neither really worth because desktop GIS are used for a multitude of tasks, while web map Servers or databases aren't that much - right? So as Paul is quoted on the osgeo wiki: one needs to set up use cases first (just wrote that today in a new article too, which contains a section on selecting free GIS software). And I also discovered that just most of the projects have a different focus during my evaluation. Which of course does not mean that such thing should not be presented - but it must be focussed in some way or the other to have a benefit. And as a side note, I am not sure if measuring processing times makes sense either, as GIS analysis feature sets are so different. However, I am in for testing with OpenJUMP. Two more notes: - my comparison tables are now already 2 years old now (from 2007), i.e. need some update (but the last pub in Ecological Informatics took into account newer developments too, but is superficial and focused towards the average GIS users). - I gave a talk about this at OGRS: http://www.ogrs2009.org/doku.php?id=keynotes pdf can be downloaded from there. cheers from Germany right now (Xmas) stefan PS: I know also of this comparison by T. Hengl et al. on Grass vs. SAGA for Geomorphologic Analysis http://www.igc.usp.br/pessoais/guano/downloads/Hengl_etal_2009_gmorph.pdf Paul Ramsey schrieb: Interested in a different approach that is lower impact, but still interesting and entertaining? Have developers review a competing project and then present their findings, in the form of What I love about ___, what I hate about. Jody Garnett presents What I love about QGIS, what I hate about QGIS. Jorge Sanz presents What I love about uDig, what I hate about uDig. Tim Sutton presents What I love about gvSIG, what I hate about gvSIG. Not only do you get an unvarnished view, but you can have shorter presentations with a discussion segment at the end of each one. Works for almost any application category too. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Will there be an OSGeo Desktop shootout atFOSS4G 2010?
You're absolutely right, pretend I said collaborate instead of consolidate. On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Paul Ramsey pram...@cleverelephant.cawrote: I'll do that talk, if there's really interest in it, but it has nothing to do with technology or desktops, it's sociology and psychology. And no, efforts cannot be consolidated (active intervention) they may consolidate (natural progression). P. - Why? Because, we felt like it, and we knew better. - Pros and cons? Weighted in favor of the On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Brian Russo br...@beruna.org wrote: I think a more interesting presentation would be why there are so many desktop GIS packages, the consequent pros/cons, and if/how efforts could be consolidated. On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Stefan Steiniger sst...@geo.uzh.ch wrote: Hei all, thanks for Cameron on keeping me in the loop, and to Markus for remembering :) I am now subscribed to this list. I think Pauls idea sounds interesting - because this whole comparison thing is a) quite cumbersome when we have 10 desktop GIS (+ X), and b) neither really worth because desktop GIS are used for a multitude of tasks, while web map Servers or databases aren't that much - right? So as Paul is quoted on the osgeo wiki: one needs to set up use cases first (just wrote that today in a new article too, which contains a section on selecting free GIS software). And I also discovered that just most of the projects have a different focus during my evaluation. Which of course does not mean that such thing should not be presented - but it must be focussed in some way or the other to have a benefit. And as a side note, I am not sure if measuring processing times makes sense either, as GIS analysis feature sets are so different. However, I am in for testing with OpenJUMP. Two more notes: - my comparison tables are now already 2 years old now (from 2007), i.e. need some update (but the last pub in Ecological Informatics took into account newer developments too, but is superficial and focused towards the average GIS users). - I gave a talk about this at OGRS: http://www.ogrs2009.org/doku.php?id=keynotes pdf can be downloaded from there. cheers from Germany right now (Xmas) stefan PS: I know also of this comparison by T. Hengl et al. on Grass vs. SAGA for Geomorphologic Analysis http://www.igc.usp.br/pessoais/guano/downloads/Hengl_etal_2009_gmorph.pdf Paul Ramsey schrieb: Interested in a different approach that is lower impact, but still interesting and entertaining? Have developers review a competing project and then present their findings, in the form of What I love about ___, what I hate about. Jody Garnett presents What I love about QGIS, what I hate about QGIS. Jorge Sanz presents What I love about uDig, what I hate about uDig. Tim Sutton presents What I love about gvSIG, what I hate about gvSIG. Not only do you get an unvarnished view, but you can have shorter presentations with a discussion segment at the end of each one. Works for almost any application category too. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] new: OSGeo women mailing list
I find the underlying bias of this discussion itself fascinating. Landon is right that surveying/engineering is male-dominated; yet nobody complains that nursing is female-dominated. I have to wonder what really is the problem? Money aside - what's inherently wrong with fewer women in math/science? Surveyors are more important to our society than kindergarten teachers? Tough argument to make IMO. Don't get me wrong, I know gender discrimination still exists, but I wonder if we're so eager to solve a problem (being tech people that's what we do) that we lose sight of what the goal is. I go to economic development presentations and people talk about developing tech jobs etc. What they're really talking about is developing jobs that make more money and are less resource-intensive - after all green is the new black. That said, there are lots of skilled, well-paying careers that aren't manufacturing nor easily outsourced yet aren't math/science. So I'm not so much being critical as I am confused at the real purpose. As tech people that's a bias that is really hard for many of us to recognize we even have. Some of us forget that there are other people out there with rich, fulfilling lives that can barely turn on a computer. Welding for example - if you're an amazing welder you can make a ton of money - and some people certainly enjoy it. Or sales. Yeah I dislike talking to tech marketing people on the phone too - but who am I to say their job is wrong for them. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we should raise a generation of waitresses and receptionists because it was the lazy choice - but at the same time we need to overcome our own bias of non-tech fields as being inherently inferior and encourage proper valuation of all roles in society. After all, it's arrogant to tell people what should be important for their lives. I've known people that basically decided all they wanted to do in their life is surf so they just live in a tiny apartment and make furniture on the side so they can do what they love. Who am I to tell them that my life is better? Because I make more money? I have a nicer cellphone? Big deal - if I hated my life that wouldn't matter. You only get one life so you gotta live it in a way that makes you happy. You can throw statistics into it like growth expectations, salary, etc.. At the end of the day most of us will spend more time working than any other task in our lives, so if you're not enjoying what you're doing then you're doing it wrong. I don't have kids but I do work with youth a lot, fortunate to have some amazing kids and you know I try to avoid telling them what to do - I just try to help them discover their options and their value system. If they all decided to go into retail and lead happy lives it'd make no difference to me than if they all became neurosurgeons or aeronautical engineers. I genuinely do not care and do not think it matters - as long as they get the best opportunities to choose for themselves and lead fulfilling lives. One 17yo girl for example wants to start a restaurant. Another is starting off in IT at Heald. So somehow the second person is better? I just don't understand a mindset like that. Does not compute. As for the original task of how to encourage more women into these fields (which I'm for, I just don't think it's a problem if they all choose not to) - well I think that Cornell study [1] is a good starting point for anyone that wants to understand one glance at it. A lot of the family-building aspect for example is related to how we prioritize work/life balance in the US. If you look at other countries like many in Europe they have far more family friendly cultures/laws with better maternal/paternal leave options [2], etc. Our FMLA in the US is a joke compared to what you can get in France, Sweden, etc - and I think it really speaks volumes about what we consider to be important in our lives. That said, I don't know how this really is specific to osgeo in particular. It may be better served under a broader focus of GIS for Women, Open Source for Women.. etc. I guess I'm curious what sort of goals are set. University recruitment? Encouraging female OS developers in general to engage in OSGeo? I'm a bit lost on the intent. - bri 1. Women’s Underrepresentation in Science: Sociocultural and Biological Considerations - http://www.apa.org/journals/releases/bul1352218.pdf 2. http://www.apesma.asn.au/women/maternity_leave_around_the_world.asp#Americas On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Agustin Diez Castillo ad...@uv.es wrote: There are tons of articles about women and science since more than 20 years ago I will recomend a look to Longino (1987) [1]. [1] http://www.jstor.org/pss/3810122 On Nov 16, 2009, at 9:58 PM, Landon Blake wrote: Tyler, I understand your wife's perspective completely. It seems reasonable to conclude that there are fewer women involved in OSGeo projects because there are fewer women involved in open source
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Redlands SDS ?
Well of course, Redlands is ESRI's corporate HQ after all. - bri On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:23 PM, James Reid james.r...@ed.ac.uk wrote: All, a colleague from our local chapter has recently been at Redlands Institute and emailed me the following link: http://www.institute.redlands.edu/sds/welcome.html#consortium His observation was that much of the extant content uses proprietary software for exemplars and that some contribution from the OSGeo might be worth investigating. Do others in the OSGeo community feel that there may be some traction here for broader visibility ? regards -- James S Reid EDINA National Datacentre University of Edinburgh t: +44 (0)131 651 1383 m: 0759 5116988 f: +44 (0)131 650 3308 e: james.r...@ed.ac.uk Beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow. The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Redlands SDS ?
Microsoft's headquarters is in Redmond, WA. ESRI is in Redlands, CA. Easy to mix up. And I understand they're not just a face shop for ESRI. But knowing how ESRI works I'm guessing they're very hand in hand. I only point it out to soften possible expectations for success. By all means though, steer the ESRI ship towards more open waters! regards, - bri On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:24 AM, James Reid james.r...@ed.ac.uk wrote: and M$ too but actually the Redlands Institute is a little wider than that (how independent is another matter)... Brian Russo wrote: Well of course, Redlands is ESRI's corporate HQ after all. - bri On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:23 PM, James Reid james.r...@ed.ac.uk wrote: All, a colleague from our local chapter has recently been at Redlands Institute and emailed me the following link: http://www.institute.redlands.edu/sds/welcome.html#consortium His observation was that much of the extant content uses proprietary software for exemplars and that some contribution from the OSGeo might be worth investigating. Do others in the OSGeo community feel that there may be some traction here for broader visibility ? regards -- James S Reid EDINA National Datacentre University of Edinburgh t: +44 (0)131 651 1383 m: 0759 5116988 f: +44 (0)131 650 3308 e: james.r...@ed.ac.uk Beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow. The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- James S Reid EDINA National Datacentre University of Edinburgh t: +44 (0)131 651 1383 m: 0759 5116988 f: +44 (0)131 650 3308 e: james.r...@ed.ac.uk Beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow. The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Open Location Services
If you have big commercial customers I'd approach them. If they're heavily invested in your software then they could see the value potentially. I understand what you're saying tho. Most of the organically-grown projects are those that started as open source and don't compare well to closed2open conversions. On 11/3/09, Cameron Shorter cameron.shor...@gmail.com wrote: Puneet, I don't have a specific answer for How Much LISAsoft's OpenLS code costs to Open Source yet, I'd need to do the analysis, and so I'll talk in general terms, based on my experience with other projects. 1. For LISAsoft, Just dumping code into Sourceforge is usually not an option. Our reputation is based upon our understanding of Open Source and producing quality software, and it would be detrimental to our image, and hence our future job prospects to do a poor job. 2. For simple projects, Open Sourcing can easily at least a few weeks, to put processes and web sites in place. But the bigger cost is growing and supporting the community, maybe one person day per week, for the rest of the year. I heard that Autodesk decided to provide a major re-write of their MapGuide Open Source software before Open Sourcing, which would likely have cost them man months, probably man years. 3. Yes, LISAsoft will miss out on opportunity costs because we derive commercial advantage by owning an OpenLS codebase. At the end of the day, our decision will be financial. Can we make more money by Open Sourcing or not. At LISAsoft we support both Open and Closed source business models, depending on which makes better business sense. P Kishor wrote: On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Daniel Morissette dmorisse...@mapgears.com wrote: P Kishor wrote: On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:47 AM, Cameron Shorter cameron.shor...@gmail.com wrote: P Kishor wrote: On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Cameron Shorter cameron.shor...@gmail.com wrote: David, LISAsoft has a java implementation of OpenLS which we would like to Open Source if we can find a sponsor to cover our packaging costs. What kind of costs are packaging costs, and what do they amount to generally, and for OpenLS, more specifically? P Kishor, As you are probably aware, just dumping code into sourceforge is not an effective way to start a successful Open Source project. There needs to be suitable technical documentation, development processes documentation, web pages set up, issue trackers put in place, access writes granted to developers, and then have at least one champion sit on email lists supporting new users. That is what I consider packaging costs. The above makes sense, but honestly, I had never heard of this until now, and I have been tinkering with open source for almost a decade now. Most open source projects seemed organic to me. Someone had an itch, they scratched it, they put it out, and the project either gathered traction, or it died. Seems like my scholarship of open source has been lacking in this aspect hugely. Hi Puneet, I have to run now, so I don't have time for a long answer, but I just wanted to add that Cameron is right... unfortunately it's not as simple as setting up a project on sourceforge even if it may seem to be that way from the user's perspective. I have been through the process of open sourcing projects several times over the last 10 years, and did it again a few weeks ago with the GeoPrisma launch. I think we are getting better at it as we gain experience, and can confirm that those packaging costs and planning requirements are real and need to be taken into account for a successful project launch. Another aspect to consider that I don't think was mentioned is to balance the pros and cons of open sourcing and not doing it on your own business and on the project/product itself. Based on Daniel's response, a thought occurred to me -- my inquiry in this thread might be seen as an attack on the concept of packaging costs. I want to put this disclaimer forward, even though I thought I had made my intentions clear in my first email -- I am not at all antagonistic or in any way attacking the concept of packaging costs in general or LISASoft in particular. I am merely curious. I had never heard of packaging costs until this thread, so obviously, my scholarship of open source, particularly its economics and motivation, has been seriously lacking, and I need to correct it. And, what better way to do that than to ask the person who is asking for packaging costs in the first place. 1. How much are we talking about here? 2. Of course, any price is worth it if someone is willing to pay it, but how to determine if the amount being asked in #1 above is commensurate with the value of the product being considered, and is in line with the value of similar products? 3. If no one comes up with the packaging costs, would you not put it into open source, or would you still put it, but just dump the
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] The Best API for accessing map/geospatial server
Playing a bit of devil's advocate but (broadly speaking) if you want your app to be interchangeable with different implementations of (nontrivial) standards you always need to test interoperability anyway because even in (unattainable) perfectly bug-free software there is always some variance due to interpretation of the standard. In other words, there is usually some ambiguity/grey area in the standards. Not to knock on certification, but its not a silver bullet. Bottom line is testing is needed if interoperability is a mission requirement. On 10/29/09, Jody Garnett jody.garn...@gmail.com wrote: i want to reverse, which one of those map servers in the world have fully certified by OGC for WMS implementation, so we know, all our apps that connect to those geospatial server no need modification Certification costs money :-) You also mentioned WMS again - and for your use case you need Web Feature Server. GeoServer is certified; MapServer works very well but had not been certified (perhaps OSGeo can arrange payment to be waived?). i can change mapguide to mapserver to geoserver and vice versa any idea all? I have worked well with MapGuide, MapServer and GeoServer (and deegree which you did not mention). You are encouraged to ask other users for their experience. I alway have trouble with MapServer WFS; due to configuration - not due to the application. Regards, Jody ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Sent from my mobile device ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] discussion or FUD
At first glance, my initial reaction is he's merely misinformed. However, after reviewing his blog and comments elsewhere; it's not just sad - it's outright funny how indoctrinated he is. We use a lot of proprietary software because we have a specific community we need to interoperate with, but in our case the scenario is not open VS closed, it's random assemblage of homebrew/proprietary software VS closed but standardized VS open. The latter would be ideal; but while interoperability within the open source geostack is good; integrating open source with proprietary is still a challenge. The market is begging for a vendor to pick up the ball here...luckily, ERDAS is HERE! Anyone have pictures of him in spandex and a cape? - bri On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Micha Silver mi...@arava.co.il wrote: Guillaume Sueur wrote: another one here : http://owston.blogspot.com/2009/05/price-free-of-open-source-software-has.html how can we have ignore that guy for so long , Hey, look on the bright side. In the above post he says he has many clients already using open source solutions. -- Micha Regards, Guillaume ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Documenting GIS Data Models (Again): Using DXF
I think it's an interesting problem to solve (Sharing gis models/processes), but... * Way too heavyweight for us, I don't have time/interest to build maintain sheets of DXFs manually * Of little practical use for us since our processes typically grow pretty organically with small meetings and whiteboards/stickies, eventually we are going to stop maintaining these 'heavy' model diagrams. * Probably more useful for very large teams defining massive workflows with well-defined requirements/outputs, but I don't really work on those types of problems often (nor personally know many that really do anymore - and they'd probably already have some dialect of UML or ERM) * Can't easily convert those DXFs into GDB/DB schemas or into the processes themselves, etc, so hence little use at the tech level It might be more useful to define a simple standardized set of symbols that handles 80% of what we do, and then for more complex processes just lets you name it, treat them like blackboxes and just annotate them or something. Personally I would just probably use simple data flow entity-relationship diagrams. If there was a simple system that modelled common spatial analysis processes via symbols then I might be interested in that. I'm skeptical on the real world utility of building/maintaining large sets of diagrams that A) Don't fit into the business process generation/capture processes and B) Don't easily convert into the actual code/schemas underlying. Perhaps figure out what the problem you're really trying to solve is. I.e. What am I trying to achieve via sharing models? - bri On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Landon Blake lbl...@ksninc.com wrote: I posted a few weeks back I posted about possible ways to document and share GIS data models. I decided to move forward with a graphical approach. I started building diagrams to document my GIS data model for the Public Land Survey System in the United States. I am drawing these diagrams in a CAD program. When I get things ironed out I hope to release the following items to the GIS community: - My completed GIS data model in DXF format that can be used as an example or template for other models. - A set of CAD “blocks” that can be used to build similar diagrams. If I like how things come together with the diagrams, I might try converting the diagrams to SVG. The diagrams would be much prettier in SVG, but I am quicker with CAD than I am with Inkscape, and I want to get a prototype completed quickly. This will make a lot more sense when you get to see the example diagrams. I welcome any collaboration on this effort. If there is interest, I could move this discussion to the Standards mailing list. It would be great to get input from interested parties now, while the diagrams are still taking shape. Landon *Warning: *Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Geodata as Public Record in U.S.
404 On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Richard Greenwood richard.greenw...@gmail.com wrote: A friend of my prepared this analysis of geodata distribution and fees at the county government level in the US: http://home.centurytel.net/wilsonlandsurvey/docs/GIS Data as Public Record.pdfhttp://home.centurytel.net/wilsonlandsurvey/docs/GIS%20Data%20as%20Public%20Record.pdf%20 I think it may be of interest to some members of this list. Although the US federal government sets a very high standard for freedom of information, local governments often do not rise to the same level. Regards, -- Richard Greenwood richard.greenw...@gmail.com www.greenwoodmap.com ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Geodata as Public Record in U.S.
Good to see that the case law seems to support disclosure. On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Richard Greenwood richard.greenw...@gmail.com wrote: Maybe this URL will work. http://home.centurytel.net/wilsonlandsurvey/docs/GIS Data as Public Record.pdfhttp://home.centurytel.net/wilsonlandsurvey/docs/GIS%20Data%20as%20Public%20Record.pdf The previous one had an extraneous space at the end. On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Richard Greenwood richard.greenw...@gmail.com wrote: A friend of my prepared this analysis of geodata distribution and fees at the county government level in the US: http://home.centurytel.net/wilsonlandsurvey/docs/GIS Data as Public Record.pdfhttp://home.centurytel.net/wilsonlandsurvey/docs/GIS%20Data%20as%20Public%20Record.pdf%20 I think it may be of interest to some members of this list. Although the US federal government sets a very high standard for freedom of information, local governments often do not rise to the same level. Regards, -- Richard Greenwood richard.greenw...@gmail.com www.greenwoodmap.com -- Richard Greenwood richard.greenw...@gmail.com www.greenwoodmap.com ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Patent for feature of paper map.
I've seen legends similar to that before; afraid I can't offer anything solid in terms of prior art examples but it's hardly as revolutionary as they seem to think. Pretty absurd if you ask me; On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:34 AM, René A. Enguehard ahugen...@gmail.comwrote: I suspect they might be applying for the patent but in for quite a surprise when it gets rejected. Features for maps would be very tricky to patent and, more importantly, not in the interest of the general public. As such the patent applications would probably get rejected. Would we really want people patenting things like projections, north arrows, scale bars or legends? I don't think it would be productive and suspect any patent office in its right mind would see it the same way. Patents were created to help people protect their ideas for a length of time so they could reap the rewards of their work and refine it without fear of being copied or undercut. This works very well for many things but fails miserably for conceptual things like maps or layouts for books or posters. This is why many patent offices now require people to patent systems rather than things. I don't see how a wrap-around map could be explained as a system. René IANAL Landon Blake wrote: The latest issue of the ACSM Bulletin had an interesting article about a map matrix that wraps around the edge of a paper map. It seems the company that is using this feature of hard copy map design is applying for a patent. I didn’t even think you could get a patent a feature of a paper map. It got me wondering who holds the patent on the use of a north arrow and scale. At any rate, here is the article if you are interested in reading it: http://www.webmazine.org/issues/current/documents/wrap.pdf I couldn’t find the patent application, or I would have posted a link to it. Let me know if you have any comments. Landon *Warning: *Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Patent for feature of paper map.
Well there are all kinds of nonsensical patents on the books but a lot of them are never enforced. I don't see how the web mapping patent would fulfill the non-obvious requirement- but there are a lot of stupid courts out there. - bri On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 4:14 AM, Bill Thoen bth...@gisnet.com wrote: You might be surprised what people might be able to get away with, though. There's been repeated attempts to patent web mapping for example, and if it wasn't for the efforts of a few dedicated people, there would now be patents in both Britain and the USA on displaying maps over the web. But the threat is not dead yet, believe it or not, and it may culminate in a battle between Microsoft and Google sometime in the near future. Check out Daniel Morissette's blog entry for Feb 21, 2009, Microsoft Patents the Map at http://www.systemed.net/blog/?p=68. If Microsoft really uses the Multimap patent to put the bite on Google, then you can bet your bippy that it'll affect your web mapping business too. If reading that article brings your blood to a righteous boil, and you want to know more about who really invented web mapping, see Carl Reed's 2004 article, Intellectual Property, Patents, and Web Mapping: Historical Perspective at http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=28360. - Bill Thoen GISnet - www.gisnet.com Brian Russo wrote: I've seen legends similar to that before; afraid I can't offer anything solid in terms of prior art examples but it's hardly as revolutionary as they seem to think. Pretty absurd if you ask me; On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:34 AM, René A. Enguehard ahugen...@gmail.commailto: ahugen...@gmail.com wrote: I suspect they might be applying for the patent but in for quite a surprise when it gets rejected. Features for maps would be very tricky to patent and, more importantly, not in the interest of the general public. As such the patent applications would probably get rejected. Would we really want people patenting things like projections, north arrows, scale bars or legends? I don't think it would be productive and suspect any patent office in its right mind would see it the same way. Patents were created to help people protect their ideas for a length of time so they could reap the rewards of their work and refine it without fear of being copied or undercut. This works very well for many things but fails miserably for conceptual things like maps or layouts for books or posters. This is why many patent offices now require people to patent systems rather than things. I don't see how a wrap-around map could be explained as a system. René IANAL Landon Blake wrote: The latest issue of the ACSM Bulletin had an interesting article about a map matrix that wraps around the edge of a paper map. It seems the company that is using this feature of hard copy map design is applying for a patent. I didn’t even think you could get a patent a feature of a paper map. It got me wondering who holds the patent on the use of a north arrow and scale. At any rate, here is the article if you are interested in reading it: http://www.webmazine.org/issues/current/documents/wrap.pdf I couldn’t find the patent application, or I would have posted a link to it. Let me know if you have any comments. Landon ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Patent for feature of paper map.
Experienced web mapping experts that are also patent lawyers? Good luck finding one. (a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode35/usc_sec_35_0102000-.htmlof this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made. [1] It just says to a person having ordinary skill in the art. I don't believe the law is so foolish as to expect everyone to double-dip in their professions. 1. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_35_0103000-.html - bri On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 7:59 AM, Michael P. Gerlek m...@lizardtech.comwrote: note While I have no absolutely no familiarity with the patent in question, something I've said here before perhaps bears occasional repeating: Patent and IP law is a very deep and complex subject. The vast majority of us laypersons are not qualified to read and evaluate patent claims; what is reported in the popular press is often a very watered-down or simplistic interpretation of what is actually being claimed. Some patent claims do indeed turn out to be riddled through with obvious prior art, but in order to really know that typically requires one to be experienced in the field of use *and* have thorough understanding of the legal language used in the claim constructions. By all means we should all continue to bring down bogus patent attempts, but we in doing so we all need to be careful of making any hasty or unfounded allegations. /note -mpg (ianal) -Original Message- From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org [mailto: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Bill Thoen Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 7:14 AM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Patent for feature of paper map. You might be surprised what people might be able to get away with, though. There's been repeated attempts to patent web mapping for example, and if it wasn't for the efforts of a few dedicated people, there would now be patents in both Britain and the USA on displaying maps over the web. But the threat is not dead yet, believe it or not, and it may culminate in a battle between Microsoft and Google sometime in the near future. Check out Daniel Morissette's blog entry for Feb 21, 2009, Microsoft Patents the Map at http://www.systemed.net/blog/?p=68. If Microsoft really uses the Multimap patent to put the bite on Google, then you can bet your bippy that it'll affect your web mapping business too. If reading that article brings your blood to a righteous boil, and you want to know more about who really invented web mapping, see Carl Reed's 2004 article, Intellectual Property, Patents, and Web Mapping: Historical Perspective at http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=28360. - Bill Thoen GISnet - www.gisnet.com Brian Russo wrote: I've seen legends similar to that before; afraid I can't offer anything solid in terms of prior art examples but it's hardly as revolutionary as they seem to think. Pretty absurd if you ask me; On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:34 AM, René A. Enguehard ahugen...@gmail.com mailto:ahugen...@gmail.com wrote: I suspect they might be applying for the patent but in for quite a surprise when it gets rejected. Features for maps would be very tricky to patent and, more importantly, not in the interest of the general public. As such the patent applications would probably get rejected. Would we really want people patenting things like projections, north arrows, scale bars or legends? I don't think it would be productive and suspect any patent office in its right mind would see it the same way. Patents were created to help people protect their ideas for a length of time so they could reap the rewards of their work and refine it without fear of being copied or undercut. This works very well for many things but fails miserably for conceptual things like maps or layouts for books or posters. This is why many patent offices now require people to patent systems rather than things. I don't see how a wrap-around map could be explained as a system. René IANAL Landon Blake wrote: The latest issue of the ACSM Bulletin had an interesting article about a map matrix that wraps around the edge of a paper map. It seems the company that is using this feature of hard copy map design is applying for a patent. I didn't even think you could get a patent a feature of a paper map. It got me wondering who holds the patent
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] FW: Can you help spread work to any FOSS developers you know
. Acknowledgement I want to thank my FOSS developer go-to-guys -- Dan MacNeil, Peter Bull, Stéphane Alnet, and Bill de la Vega -- for providing critical feedback on this survey. -- ___ | Technology and training to advance and sustain social change | Felicia M. Sullivan Organizers’ Collaborative feli...@oc-tech.org http://organizerscollaborative.org 617.848.9513 [ voice / fax ] Gtalk/Jabber: felicia...@gmail.com AIM: forge66 Skype; forge66 Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/feliciasullivan ___ Nosi-discussion mailing list Post: nosi-discuss...@lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nosi-discussion ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Brian Russo br...@entropy.net (808) 271-4166 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
