(Note:I used to work for the BoM a number of years ago - I DO NOT speak on 
their behalf. These opinions are my own entirely.)
This is getting off topic but.....

When I was at the BoM they certainly did talk about WOW (and I even have my 
weather station reporting to it) but I don't recall it going any further. 
(That could have been after I left.)
However there always was a tension between what were considered commercial 
services (and some like the airline forecasts were clearly commercial) and 
what were public interest and therefore freely available.
With the Governments 'efficiency dividends' being on-going, the end result 
is that they may be re-classifying some of their services, especially when 
there are apps around that use the BoM data by 'screen scraping' and other 
techniques.
My opinion is that the Government should fund the various federal 
departments properly so they can provide basic services (and I consider the 
'warnings' that were the original problem as a basic service) in a freely 
accessible way. However there is probably a grey area - some of the 'basic' 
services may come as a by-product of the more 'expensive to create' 
products that would otherwise be classified as commercial.
Susan

On Sunday, 30 May 2021 at 10:57:29 pm UTC+10 [email protected] wrote:

> i thought BOM was pushing non-commercial ‘citizen scientist’ stuff to 
> project based on/in UK’s WOW 
>
> On 30 May 2021, at 10:42 pm, 'Cameron D' via weewx-user <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> Yes, I "entered into the conversation" a couple of weeks ago.  So far it's 
> been very one-sided.
> The impression I got from the introductory pages was that they are only 
> interested in commercial opportunities.
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"weewx-user" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/weewx-user/fbe7984d-f43c-4451-841a-dc58ea62df2fn%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to