Hi All, While I agree that hardware is a significant challenge I do not think it's the only challenge. A distributed approach can greatly alleviate many of the burdens of central hosting. This would also be more in-line with OGC style web-services where OAM can act more as a registry, processing service, and/or distributed cache.
Another thing to keep in mind that I feel will be a much greater challenge is interface design. OAM was never meant to serve one monolithic mosaic. In the initial inception OAM was to be much more OSM/Wiki like, allowing users to rank and tag imagery as it was added to the archive. Something like a dynamic mosaic were the imagery severed is a function of user preferences (acquisition date, spatial resolution, clouds, event tags, etc, etc). There is little reason these dynamic mosaics cannot be compiled on the fly with some well designed data-structures and a maybe a little client side (javascript) processing. Another important design goal was to maintain the original imagery. As this project was born in an academic setting we'd like to maintain its usefulness to academia. Both in terms of an outlet for institutions to share their imagery, but also as a source of data for research projects. A topic raised at the recent experiments was that of licensing. There are many cases were US Government agencies (and probably others) are able to share their imagery with the Disaster Management Community, NGOs, etc, but not everyone. An OAM framework could potentially serve as a bridge between the Govt. data silos and these communities. However, the framework needs to be flexible enough to support limited distribution imagery without mucking up the licensing considerations for others. Sincerely, "Charles" Schmidt. On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Richard Weait <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:44 AM, David William > Bitner<[email protected]> wrote: > > Greetings all, > > [ ... ] > > It appears as though there may be > > an opportunity to provide travel and accommodations support if we were to > > have a desire/need to have a face-to-face meetup to see what we can do to > > bring OAM back online in a sustainable (human and technology) fashion. > If > > we were to seek this funding, I would want to be able to go to them with > a > > very clear plan of what we were trying to accomplish. > > The discussion at State of the Map was interesting and important. The > in-person discussions you had at NDU appear to have been inspirational > as well. Have we enough interest here and now to just do it? Or do we > need to put more heads together and get further inspired? > > So what items would we put on the agenda for this meeting? Can we > tackle these items in email-space? > > Agenda > ===== > 1. discover current hosting and hardware details. > 2. establish future hosting and hardware requirements and wish list. > ... > n. meet in person, raise toasts. > > Please add to the agenda. The agenda should tell us if we need to > meet in person. > > > In addition, if there > > were any "players" in the world that we might want to get involved, this > > could be a good opportunity to bring them in. > > I wonder if this is easier if we can point them to the working, relaunched > site? > > Best regards, > Richard > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://openaerialmap.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_openaerialmap.org >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://openaerialmap.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_openaerialmap.org
