Comments on: Participating in the OGC http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/ Transmitting ideas, observations, and images from 42,000 km. Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:25:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: High Earth Orbit » Blog Archive » 2007 Year in Review http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-137342 High Earth Orbit » Blog Archive » 2007 Year in Review Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:22:02 +0000 http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-137342 [...] Mapufacture joined the OGC [...] [...] Mapufacture joined the OGC [...]

]]> By: mapufacture » Participating in the OGC OWS-5 Testbed http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-99507 mapufacture » Participating in the OGC OWS-5 Testbed Mon, 06 Aug 2007 08:35:00 +0000 http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-99507 [...] We’re pleased to announce that Mapufacture has been selected to participate in the “OGC OWS-5 Testbed”. You’ve probably seen news of this already if your read Andrew’s blog. [...] [...] We’re pleased to announce that Mapufacture has been selected to participate in the “OGC OWS-5 Testbed”. You’ve probably seen news of this already if your read Andrew’s blog. [...]

]]> By: High Earth Orbit » Blog Archive » OGC Agile Geography kick-off discussion of KML 3 http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-98984 High Earth Orbit » Blog Archive » OGC Agile Geography kick-off discussion of KML 3 Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:31:34 +0000 http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-98984 [...] As I mentioned in my previous post, the Agile Geography thread of OGC’s OWS-5 testbed is going to be more open. Therefore, I’ll summarize the two-day meeting we had earlier this week in Reston, VA, and where the current thoughts on KML 3 stand. However, keep in mind these are just the notes from the meeting and still in very active discussion (technical committees have telecons once per week, so we’ll be talking a lot). [...] [...] As I mentioned in my previous post, the Agile Geography thread of OGC’s OWS-5 testbed is going to be more open. Therefore, I’ll summarize the two-day meeting we had earlier this week in Reston, VA, and where the current thoughts on KML 3 stand. However, keep in mind these are just the notes from the meeting and still in very active discussion (technical committees have telecons once per week, so we’ll be talking a lot). [...]

]]> By: Brian Hamlin http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-98501 Brian Hamlin Wed, 01 Aug 2007 05:32:55 +0000 http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-98501 >could you please elaborate whoa, on the spot ;-) As a steering committee member at ISDE5 and instigator of the ISDE5 Wiki, I got the opportunity to see a whole lot, really fast. As someone new to the Digital Earth vision, I am relatively unburdened by the history of the sector! Lastly, as a programmer for almost 20 years, I do have some technical insights (though not of the standards process type). Without being evasive, there is a chance that Google now has what may be the Netscape Navigator 4 of the Digital Earth browsers. Standards make technology grow. Its not the blow by blow technical points [inevitably detracted by the trained professionals as not nearly adequate] of KML that caused me to say what I said. but rather something good enough, unencumbered and moving quickly via Google Earth and now others that make KML the candidate that it is. I have my eyes firmly set on results - effective societal and technical adaptation in response to environmental pressures. Thats just me. I am looking at how to deploy facts - accuracy and aesthetics - via KML. Tens of millions of eyeballs, and the popular interest in "spinny globes" makes for a whole new set of possibilities. ok, one more... I have been working with Regionator in Python from Google, and getting the hang of some of the interesting possibilities of KML as it stands now. I'll have more to say about where it could go after more hands on... http://isde5.pbwiki.com >could you please elaborate
whoa, on the spot ;-) As a steering committee member at ISDE5 and instigator of the ISDE5 Wiki, I got the opportunity to see a whole lot, really fast. As someone new to the Digital Earth vision, I am relatively unburdened by the history of the sector! Lastly, as a programmer for almost 20 years, I do have some technical insights (though not of the standards process type).

Without being evasive, there is a chance that Google now has what may be the Netscape Navigator 4 of the Digital Earth browsers. Standards make technology grow. Its not the blow by blow technical points [inevitably detracted by the trained professionals as not nearly adequate] of KML that caused me to say what I said. but rather something good enough, unencumbered and moving quickly via Google Earth and now others that make KML the candidate that it is.

I have my eyes firmly set on results - effective societal and technical adaptation in response to environmental pressures. Thats just me. I am looking at how to deploy facts - accuracy and aesthetics - via KML. Tens of millions of eyeballs, and the popular interest in “spinny globes” makes for a whole new set of possibilities.

ok, one more… I have been working with Regionator in Python from Google, and getting the hang of some of the interesting possibilities of KML as it stands now. I’ll have more to say about where it could go after more hands on…

http://isde5.pbwiki.com

]]> By: Andrew http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-98482 Andrew Wed, 01 Aug 2007 04:04:04 +0000 http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-98482 @Brian Hamlin - I will be asking for this more expressily in a forthcoming post, but could you please elaborate on your views of why KML is compelling and what you hope to see from it in the future? Your guidance helps formulate the discussion - and eventual modification - of the format. @Brian Hamlin - I will be asking for this more expressily in a forthcoming post, but could you please elaborate on your views of why KML is compelling and what you hope to see from it in the future? Your guidance helps formulate the discussion - and eventual modification - of the format.

]]> By: Andrew http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-98481 Andrew Wed, 01 Aug 2007 04:01:17 +0000 http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-98481 @Paul Ramsey - that is a very good point, and based on how the OGC has operated, wise judgement. However, I believe in response to their current appearance, as well as the goal of Google to "externalize" KML, the Agile Geography thread has an underpinning 'encouragement' to publicize the proceedings of the format. In addition, I think it is recognized that formats are better formed when given a large set of input. Granted, the final format probably will be settled by a small set of people in a room, lest the format languish forever in "committee", it will definitely be better served by input from a large audience. To answer your question simply, to my understanding, transparency of the Agile Geography thread of OWS-5 testbed has been approved. So we shouldn't be kicked out for sharing our viewpoint (and if we were, that would make a great set of blog posts ;) ) @Paul Ramsey - that is a very good point, and based on how the OGC has operated, wise judgement. However, I believe in response to their current appearance, as well as the goal of Google to “externalize” KML, the Agile Geography thread has an underpinning ‘encouragement’ to publicize the proceedings of the format.

In addition, I think it is recognized that formats are better formed when given a large set of input. Granted, the final format probably will be settled by a small set of people in a room, lest the format languish forever in “committee”, it will definitely be better served by input from a large audience.

To answer your question simply, to my understanding, transparency of the Agile Geography thread of OWS-5 testbed has been approved. So we shouldn’t be kicked out for sharing our viewpoint (and if we were, that would make a great set of blog posts ;) )

]]> By: Brian Hamlin http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-98450 Brian Hamlin Wed, 01 Aug 2007 00:09:03 +0000 http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-98450 KML is an interesting technology at an interesting time. As was explored at the 5th International Symposium on Digital Earth at UC Berkeley last June (ISDE5) in detail, there are good reasons why KML is shaping up to be central in communicating present and future environmental pressures to a mass audience. The event, although imperfect, was a huge success and inspiration to many. It seems a little ominous that Paul Ramsey looks a little concerned in the post above. There is no right answer. I would strongly encourage what is known as "well reasoned judgement." The OGC can do much good right now with this work. KML is an interesting technology at an interesting time. As was explored at the 5th International Symposium on Digital Earth at UC Berkeley last June (ISDE5) in detail, there are good reasons why KML is shaping up to be central in communicating present and future environmental pressures to a mass audience. The event, although imperfect, was a huge success and inspiration to many.

It seems a little ominous that Paul Ramsey looks a little concerned in the post above. There is no right answer. I would strongly encourage what is known as “well reasoned judgement.” The OGC can do much good right now with this work.

]]> By: Sean Gillies http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-98414 Sean Gillies Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:07:56 +0000 http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-98414 Looking forward to it. Looking forward to it.

]]> By: Paul Ramsey http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-98408 Paul Ramsey Tue, 31 Jul 2007 19:23:09 +0000 http://highearthorbit.com/participating-in-the-ogc/#comment-98408 One of the reasons the OGC was unhappy with my <a href="http://geotips.blogspot.com/2007/04/kml-ogc.html" rel="nofollow">blog post</a> on the KML process was that it publicized the internal dealings of the working group. Part of the sensitivity comes from the fact that one of the values of OGC membership is early access to working group discussions: publication of the discussions reduces that value. Another part is that in an "open hearing" where your words could be splattered online at any moment, people might be more judicious and less forthcoming in what they say, and that would detract from the standards building/honing process. Which is to say, you might want to clear your plan with the Powers That Be before embarking on your journey. One of the reasons the OGC was unhappy with my blog post on the KML process was that it publicized the internal dealings of the working group. Part of the sensitivity comes from the fact that one of the values of OGC membership is early access to working group discussions: publication of the discussions reduces that value. Another part is that in an “open hearing” where your words could be splattered online at any moment, people might be more judicious and less forthcoming in what they say, and that would detract from the standards building/honing process.

Which is to say, you might want to clear your plan with the Powers That Be before embarking on your journey.

]]>