[OSGeo-Discuss] idea for an OSGeo project -- a new, open data format

Raj Singh raj at rajsingh.org
Sun Nov 18 21:23:19 PST 2007


Luis, good to hear support for a GML version of Peter Vretanos' BXML.  
When we were working on the WFS Simple API last year Peter and I did  
some more work on it here:
http://www.ogcnetwork.net/node/189
(schema and examples)

I think it's slightly different (simpler and geometry harmonized with  
GeoRSS GML) than what's at http://www.cubewerx.com/web/guest/bxml, but  
the idea is the same.
---
Raj


On Nov 17, 2007, at 2:08 PM, Luis W. Sevilla wrote:

> Hi,
>  +1 for GML with BXML encoding as next open standard. GML 3.* with his
> ability to be 'profiled' seems to be on the base of  almost all and
> every OGC norm being proposed on last 2-3 years. As Rob Atkinson  
> said to
> me, BXML may be an encoding for GML, in a way no standard needs to be
> modifyed to support this encoding, only implementors must add  
> support to it.
>    At gvSIG we're currently working both on a low level library for
> reading and writing GML 3.* + other GML alike formats, disacopled of
> our object model, and a java port of this cubewerx BXML encoder/ 
> decoder.
> We hope to release early results by the end of 1st term next year.
>    Maybe the way of push the standard (both OGC and ISO) it's by  
> simply
> implement parsers and writers, and use it a widely as possible.
>
>    greetings
>       Luis
> Paul Spencer wrote:
>
>> Cubewerx created a binary XML implementation that is open source.
>> They claim substantial benefits, so perhaps GML plus a binary XML
>> library could be an alternative?
>>
>> http://www.cubewerx.com/web/guest/bxml
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> On 15-Nov-07, at 5:21 PM, Lucena, Ivan wrote:
>>
>>> Sampson,
>>>
>>> I am not a GML guru and I don't know if a binary version exists
>>> already, but I would imagine that HDF5 would be a excellent choice
>>> by its own hierarchical nature. I mean, we can use GML as a schema
>>> to store the data in binary format in the HDF5 format.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Ivan
>>>
>>> Sampson, David wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alright,
>>>> Here are some other thoughts.
>>>> First off what about a open office (open base) type approach...  
>>>> This
>>>> mimmics the ESRI MSAccess approach and seams to work well for non
>>>> server
>>>> environments. Also open office is a good environment for some basic
>>>> applications.
>>>> Next, what ever happened to the adoption of GML... Was GML not
>>>> supposed
>>>> to be the NEXT interchange fomrat?  Perhaps this is a good
>>>> discussion to
>>>> include the GML gurus in. The whole discussion of going with a  
>>>> binary
>>>> GML format makes sense and GML is already used for many web mapping
>>>> (feature) services. It sounds like a duplication of GML to me...
>>>> Unless
>>>> someone can offer a direct compare and contrast between the concept
>>>> here
>>>> and the GML/Binary GML concept.
>>>> In either case being able to convert to and from GML would be a
>>>> necesity
>>>> for wide adoption IMHO.
>>>> Another thought is to encourage some of the proprietary formats to
>>>> open
>>>> up. What would it take to get ESRI on board to open up the format
>>>> (open
>>>> as in free speech). What about other non-open standards? Once it's
>>>> open
>>>> then we can bring the SHP format to modern day useage. Surely  
>>>> much of
>>>> the format could be salvaged.
>>>> Besides, if you want wide adoption of an open format then why not
>>>> go for
>>>> those players who hold greatest market share.
>>>> Some thoughts.
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of P Kishor
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 09:53
>>>> To: OSGeo Discussions
>>>> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] idea for an OSGeo project -- a new,  
>>>> open  data
>>>> format
>>>> So, I am thinking, Shapefile is the de facto data standard for GIS
>>>> data.
>>>> That it is open (albeit not Free) along with the deep and wide
>>>> presence
>>>> of ESRI's products from the beginning of the epoch, it has been   
>>>> widely
>>>> adopted. Existence of shapelib, various language bindings, and
>>>> ready use
>>>> by products such as MapServer has continued to cement Shapefile  
>>>> as  the
>>>> format to use. All this is in spite of Shapefile's inherent   
>>>> drawbacks,
>>>> particularly in the area of attribute data management.
>>>> What if we came up with a new and improved data format -- call it
>>>> "Open
>>>> Shapefile" (extension .osh) -- that would be completely Free,
>>>> single-file based (instead of the multiple .shp, .dbf, .shx, etc.),
>>>> and
>>>> based on SQLite, giving the .osh format complete relational data
>>>> handling capabilities. We would require a new version of Shapelib,
>>>> improved language bindings, make it the default and preferred
>>>> format for
>>>> MapServer, and provide seamless and painless import of regular .shp
>>>> data
>>>> into .osh for native rendering. Its adoption would be quick in the
>>>> open
>>>> source community. The non-opensource community would either not   
>>>> give a
>>>> rat's behind for it, but it wouldn't affect them...
>>>> they would still work with their preferred .shp until they learned
>>>> better. By having a completely open and Free single-file based,
>>>> built on
>>>> SQLite, fully relational dbms capable spatial data format, it  
>>>> would  be
>>>> positioned for continued improvement and development.
>>>> Is this too crazy?
>>>> -- 
>>>> Puneet Kishor
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
>> |Paul Spencer                          pspencer at dmsolutions.ca    |
>> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
>> |Chief Technology Officer                                         |
>> |DM Solutions Group Inc                http://www.dmsolutions.ca/ |
>> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss




More information about the Discuss mailing list