Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Chris Puttick
- James Fee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Benjamin Henrion Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 1:56 PM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration And force its

RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Bruce . Bannerman
IMO: Good points Michael. I'm not looking to start a debate, but... ditto. (perhaps I should stay out of this...) We call on all governments to: 1. Procure only information technology that implements free and open standards; This is desirable, however consider: There is

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread P Kishor
On 5/15/08, Lester Caine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: P Kishor wrote: On 5/14/08, Michael P. Gerlek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not looking to start a debate, but... you just did, and a good one at that. We call on all governments to: 1. Procure only information

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Lester Caine
P Kishor wrote: free and open digital standards is all well and good but a meaningless concept. Standard for what? But disagree there. Switching from M$ documents to 'real' open source documents and dropping licensed graphical data in favour of OSM and other free map data opens the door to

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread P Kishor
On 5/15/08, Chris Puttick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - P Kishor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But disagree there. Switching from M$ documents to 'real' open source documents and dropping licensed graphical data in favour of OSM and other free map data opens the door to

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Chris Puttick
- P Kishor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But disagree there. Switching from M$ documents to 'real' open source documents and dropping licensed graphical data in favour of OSM and other free map data opens the door to 'Standardising' on something that we can all cooperate on. It

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread jo
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 05:53:16AM +0100, Lester Caine wrote: You must not mean a M$ Office Open XML document since it is of course and open standard. *shrug* Well since M$ do not have any software that actually produces OOXML documents yet At least not to the format submitted to

RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Fee, James
Benjamin Henrion wrote: Exclude proprietary file formats from public nuisance, yes. Public nuisance? Surely the public at large gets to choose what they view as a nuisance rather than you? -- James Fee, GISP Associate TEC Inc. voice: 480.736.3976 data: 480.736.3677 internet: [EMAIL

RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Landon Blake
Discussions Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration Chris Puttick wrote: I'm sorry. In what way does requiring digital information to be in an open standard force or exclude anyone? Be very sure those companies desperately resisting the development and/or support

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Benjamin Henrion
Fee, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080515]: Benjamin Henrion wrote: Exclude proprietary file formats from public nuisance, yes. Public nuisance? Surely the public at large gets to choose what they view as a nuisance rather than you? Public nuisance is for example promotion of monopolies,

RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Fee, James
Landon Blake wrote I would remind Mr. Fee, very humbly (of course), that he is on the OSGeo mailing list, so in some respects he's chosen a fight in which he is very outnumbered. I don't know how productive it is to aggressively defend something like the .doc format on a mailing list for

RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Landon Blake
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fee, James Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 9:57 AM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration Landon Blake wrote I would remind Mr. Fee, very humbly (of course), that he

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Benjamin Henrion
Of Fee, James Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 9:40 AM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration Chris Puttick wrote: I'm sorry. In what way does requiring digital information to be in an open standard force or exclude anyone? Be very sure those

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Frank Warmerdam
Landon Blake wrote: I thought it might be wise to point out that this discussion seems to be getting a little aggressive, and possibly a little personal. All sides have made valid points. It's obvious that Mr. Fee isn't going to agree with many of us on this particular issue, and his opinion is

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Benjamin Henrion
Fee, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080515]: Benjamin Henrion wrote: And I have a right to find out what my governement is doing, how is it possible if the governement forces me to buy a copy Microsoft Word 2003 (TM), and thus also a copy of Microsoft Windows (TM), and thus also an intel

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Benjamin Henrion
Frank Warmerdam [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080515]: Landon Blake wrote: I thought it might be wise to point out that this discussion seems to be getting a little aggressive, and possibly a little personal. All sides have made valid points. It's obvious that Mr. Fee isn't going to agree with many of

RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Landon Blake
Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration Landon Blake wrote: I thought it might be wise to point out that this discussion seems to be getting a little aggressive, and possibly a little personal. All sides have made valid points. It's obvious that Mr. Fee isn't

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Benjamin Henrion
Fee, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080515]: Benjamin Henrion wrote: The only application that reads 100% proprietary file formats is the application that goes with it. Well shoot, that can be said about a lot of formats even those that are open. Does OO read/write ODF better than Google

RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Landon Blake
be mistaken. Landon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frank Warmerdam Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 10:59 AM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration Benjamin Henrion wrote: Another example often

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Paulo Marcondes
2008/5/15 Frank Warmerdam [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I think there is a great danger to the open source, open data, and open standards efforts in the attempts to legislate them. Done carelessly, legislation will inevitably lead to situations that are rediculous and this will discredit the whole

RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Landon Blake
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Bowden Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 10:40 AM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 09:53 -0700, Landon Blake wrote: I thought it might be wise

Re: [work] Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread Tara Athan
I find some parts of this discussion interesting, but would it be possible to focus our discussion on geographic standards? My email inbox is overflowing. Thanks, Tara Benjamin Henrion wrote: Fee, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080515]: Benjamin Henrion wrote: And I have a right to find

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-15 Thread P Kishor
On 5/15/08, Benjamin Henrion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fee, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080515]: Benjamin Henrion wrote: The only application that reads 100% proprietary file formats is the application that goes with it. Well shoot, that can be said about a lot of formats even those

RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-14 Thread Michael P. Gerlek
Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration Hi all A new group is being formed to promote open digital standards, starting with a declaration regarding the importance of digital standards being truly open: http://www.digistan.org/hague-declaration:en Please read it and sign

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-14 Thread P Kishor
rely on the proprietary works in those cases. -mpg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Puttick Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 11:28 AM To: discuss@lists.osgeo.org Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-14 Thread Benjamin Henrion
Michael P. Gerlek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080514]: I'm not looking to start a debate, but... We call on all governments to: 1. Procure only information technology that implements free and open standards; 2. Deliver e-government services based exclusively on free and open standards;

RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-14 Thread Fee, James
Lester Caine wrote: It 'somewhat annoys me' when I receive an M$ document from a council and am expected to edit and return it. They get back a PDF because I know that the format will be as I laid it out. You must not mean a M$ Office Open XML document since it is of course and open

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

2008-05-14 Thread Lester Caine
Fee, James wrote: Lester Caine wrote: It 'somewhat annoys me' when I receive an M$ document from a council and am expected to edit and return it. They get back a PDF because I know that the format will be as I laid it out. You must not mean a M$ Office Open XML document since it is of