<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.0.6618.4">
<TITLE>RE: [Board] OGC Relationship</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>"Well, really i am just being a hippie here in "don't think about<BR>
it, just get on with doing things, try to make those things beautiful<BR>
and useful" mode. YMMV quite a lot, i suspect ;) "<BR>
<BR>
It might, but I think this is the right approach as well.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: board-bounces@lists.osgeo.org on behalf of Jo Walsh<BR>
Sent: Sat 1/6/2007 4:13 AM<BR>
To: Michael P. Gerlek<BR>
Cc: board@lists.osgeo.org<BR>
Subject: Re: [Board] OGC Relationship<BR>
<BR>
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 03:59:04AM -0800, Michael P. Gerlek wrote:<BR>
> [I pause to note that Raj's heart is in the right place here, and<BR>
> the MassMarketWG might become the exception to normal OGC processes.<BR>
> But we don't know how that works yet. Hence current discussion.]<BR>
<BR>
Right, here you have touched the point with a needle. Both OSGeo and<BR>
OGC are in the process of working out a more open model of involvement.<BR>
Raj personally is a superstar, and 'Mass Market' is where the<BR>
OSGeo-community specification efforts have wound up, so focus here?<BR>
<BR>
> OGC regularly passes specs upwards to ISO for what seems like<BR>
> thumbs-up/down, almost pro-forma approval. I'm not sure how that<BR>
> process actually works, but might that be a model worth discussing?<BR>
<BR>
Nod, i refer you all again again to Jody's blog entry about this:<BR>
<A HREF="http://weblogs.java.net/blog/jive/archive/2006/11/wms_tiling_or_w.html">http://weblogs.java.net/blog/jive/archive/2006/11/wms_tiling_or_w.html</A><BR>
<BR>
[[ The tiling "specification" is currently a bunch of hackers bashing<BR>
away at the problem. Standardization comes later, the document will be<BR>
submitted to the OGC where I imagine it will be treated as an<BR>
extension to WMS (much like the SLD specification). ]]<BR>
<BR>
There *are* other avenues to 'open standardisation', specifically<BR>
<A HREF="http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/geo/">http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/geo/</A><BR>
<BR>
On the one hand this is a social negotiation between OSGeo/OGC.<BR>
On the other this is a technical negotiation about best practise.<BR>
I know it's hard to unpick the two, but perhaps is useful if we do.<BR>
<BR>
Well, really i am just being a hippie here in "don't think about<BR>
it, just get on with doing things, try to make those things beautiful<BR>
and useful" mode. YMMV quite a lot, i suspect ;)<BR>
<BR>
cheers,<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
jo<BR>
_______________________________________________<BR>
Board mailing list<BR>
Board@lists.osgeo.org<BR>
<A HREF="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</A><BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>