<html>
<head>
<style type="text/css">
<!--
body { margin-bottom: 1px; font-variant: normal; margin-left: 4px; margin-top: 4px; line-height: normal; margin-right: 4px }
p { margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 0 }
-->
</style>
</head>
<body style="margin-bottom: 1px; margin-left: 4px; margin-top: 4px; margin-right: 4px">
<p style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0">
<br>
<font size="3" face="Comic Sans MS">All,</font> </p>
<br>
<p style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0">
<font size="3" face="Comic Sans MS">Chiming in here on this thread, good reading BTW . . .</font> </p>
<br>
<p style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0">
<font size="3" face="Comic Sans MS">I would like to expand somewhat on the idea that Open Formats should be the number one consideration.</font> </p>
<br>
<p style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0">
<font size="3" face="Comic Sans MS">I would personally like to see the data be primarily released in an open format, and then these other market related aspects taken into account. If there seems to be more users of a certain type, then by all means accommodate them, but setting out initially with an open form will further reuse of the data much faster (IMO) and allow for others to reuse much easier.</font> </p>
<br>
<p style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0">
<font size="3" face="Comic Sans MS">Too bad we could get companies to just serve things up in their repsective data forms as services and be done with it. If it's to their advantage they can maintain the data in their desired form.</font> </p>
<br>
<p style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0">
<font size="3" face="Comic Sans MS">bobb</font> </p>
<br> <br>
<p style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0">
<br>
>>> "Landon Blake" <lblake@ksninc.com> wrote:<br> </p>
<div style="padding-left: 7px; border-left: solid 1px #050505; margin-bottom: 0; background-color: #f3f3f3; margin-left: 15px; margin-top: 0; margin-right: 0">
<p style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0">
MPG,<br><br>I didn't mean to shine a spotlight on the USDA's use of MRSID. It is one<br>of several examples of an attitude I was trying to describe.<br><br>I think you and I respectfully disagree with one another on one aspect<br>of this debate. In my humble opinion sharing data acquired with tax<br>payer funding in a format that is easily accessed without the use of<br>proprietary software should be the most important factor in a file<br>format decision by a government agency. (Well, maybe the second most<br>important. The most important is the license that data is released<br>under.)<br><br>A company is well within its rights to use and promote a proprietary<br>file format. I admit that file format may even have awesome benefits<br>when compared to the best equivalent open file format.<br><br>Just don't ask me to be happy when my government decides to use this<br>proprietary file format. I think it short changes the citizens of the<br>government and give that company an unfair advantage over its<br>competitors.<br><br>I'd much rather see the government support a company that was trying to<br>build its business around open technology standards.<br><br>In my opinion, you can't have it all. If you want to build your business<br>model around a proprietary file format like DWG or MRSID you should be<br>prepared to deal with a little push back from open source and open<br>technology advocates, especially when their money (in the form of tax<br>dollars) is involved.<br><br>One of the greatest things ESRI ever did was publish the Shapefile<br>specification. I don't doubt they have a software monopoly of sorts, but<br>I will always respect them for that move. In many respects it has<br>changed my view of their company. I don't know that the free software<br>movement on the geospatial side of things would have been widely adopted<br>without that standard way to share data.<br><br>But alas, I am just one man and my opinion doesn't count for much in the<br>greater scheme of things!<br><br>I appreciate having an open source advocate like you at LizardTech, and<br>please don't take my e-mail as a personal attack. The use of open file<br>formats by our governments is just something I feel strongly about.<br><br>Landon<br><br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: discuss-bounces@lists.osgeo.org<br>[mailto:discuss-bounces@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Michael P. Gerlek<br>Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 7:23 AM<br>To: OSGeo Discussions; punkish@eidesis.org<br>Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo friendly countries to live in<br><br>Like the subject of patents from a couple weeks ago, we need to be<br>careful of painting<br>these things with too broad a brush.<br><br><br>> I've got to have MicroStation to work with CALTRANS, AutoCAD to work<br>with my local city,<br>> ESRI to work with the County's GIS department, and software from<br>LizardTech to use the<br>> imagery distributed by USDA for my County in MRSID format. To make it<br>even more pleasant,<br>> AutoDESK breaks its file compatibility every other version or so,<br>which means my company<br>> gets to purchase a license upgrade if we want to keep dealing with our<br>government clients.<br>><br>> Money talks in United States politics, and I'm sure the big boys in<br>the software development<br>> throw plenty of greenbacks around when it suits there purpose.<br><br>I'm not sure what you mean by this -- lobbying? Campaign contributions?<br>Yes, MrSID is widely<br>used in parts of the federal government but it is certainly not the case<br>that LizardTech has<br>ever "thrown plenty of greenbacks around" to get anyone to use our file<br>format. (I doubt the<br>various owners of ECW ever have either.)<br><br><br>> I'm not saying there is a malicious intent on government agencies to<br>make life difficult.<br>> But I certainly don't see a widespread effort to embrace open source<br>for its benefits, or<br>> to look for any alternatives to the widely established monopolies.<br><br>In the case of one very prominent use of MrSID in the US federal<br>government, an open standard<br>solution was explicitly considered as an alternative, but it was notably<br>rejected in large part<br>because of the lack of penetration and technical expertise in the target<br>marketplace and<br>ecosystem.<br><br>I actually see a lot of explicit government consideration of open<br>standards and open source<br>software -- and it gets better every year. However, adoption of new<br>technologies (when done<br>right!) requires evaluation of a myriad of criteria, only one of which<br>is open access.<br><br><br>-mpg (not speaking officially for LizardTech)<br><br><br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: discuss-bounces@lists.osgeo.org<br>[mailto:discuss-bounces@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Landon Blake<br>Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 9:10 AM<br>To: punkish@eidesis.org; OSGeo Discussions<br>Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo friendly countries to live in<br><br>I'm a long ways from Washington DC and a lot closer to the Silicon<br>Valley, which may be a reason why I perceive different attitudes.<br><br>I do think the new US Administration seems friendlier towards open<br>source software. Still, when I think about the fight over using ODF in<br>Maryland and other similar situations I realize open source software<br>still has an uphill battle in many parts of the United States. This may<br>even be truer in the geospatial arena than in others.<br><br>Autodesk and ESRI may be great corporate citizens, but there is no doubt<br>in my mind that the control software monopolies, especially in the<br>government market. This isn't just true at the federal level, but at the<br>state and local level as well.<br><br>I've got to have MicroStation to work with CALTRANS, AutoCAD to work<br>with my local city, ESRI to work with the County's GIS department, and<br>software from LizardTech to use the imagery distributed by USDA for my<br>County in MRSID format. To make it even more pleasant, AutoDESK breaks<br>its file compatibility every other version or so, which means my company<br>gets to purchase a license upgrade if we want to keep dealing with our<br>government clients.<br><br>Money talks in United States politics, and I'm sure the big boys in the<br>software development throw plenty of greenbacks around when it suits<br>there purpose.<br><br>I'm not saying there is a malicious intent on government agencies to<br>make life difficult. But I certainly don't see a widespread effort to<br>embrace open source for its benefits, or to look for any alternatives to<br>the widely established monopolies.<br><br>(I do know of a couple cases where some state agencies in California are<br>making an effort to use open source GIS desktop software.)<br><br>Things may be very different in the web-mapping world. I'm talking about<br>desktop software, since that is what I deal with 98% of the time.<br><br>But, like you, I speak from personal experience, and don't have any hard<br>facts or statistics to back up my wild claims. :]<br><br>Landon<br>Office Phone Number: (209) 946-0268<br>Cell Phone Number: (209) 992-0658<br><br><br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: discuss-bounces@lists.osgeo.org<br>[mailto:discuss-bounces@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of P Kishor<br>Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 7:53 AM<br>To: OSGeo Discussions<br>Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo friendly countries to live in<br><br>On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Landon Blake<lblake@ksninc.com> wrote:<br>> Cameron wrote:<br>><br>> " Canada looks preferable to the US. I wonder how much the Canadian<br>> GeoConnections program is responsible for Canada's strong OSGeo<br>> industry."<br>><br>> I believe governments in Canada are much more supportive of open<br>source<br>> software than governments in the United States. In my experience, the<br>> attitude towards open source software held by many organizations in<br>the<br>> United States is still skeptical, if not hostile.<br>><br><br>Well, I would make that assertion if I can back it up.<br><br>A quick check shows me that while I don't know what Whitehouse.gov<br>uses on the backend, it uses the open source jquery framework on the<br>front-end, and publishes all its content under a CC3.0 Attribution<br>license.<br><br>Similarly for data.gov, and its <a href="http://www.data.gov/catalog/geodata">http://www.data.gov/catalog/geodata</a><br>catalog.<br><br>Reminds me of the story --<br><br>Reporter sees Bill Gates' dog swimming. Next day the headlines says,<br>"Bill Gates' dog can't walk on water!"<br><br>My feeling is (_feeling_, not an assertion backed by evidence) that<br>the US govt. agencies stay out of supporting or not supporting any<br>particular kind of software or technology. They use what they think is<br>best, without creating a policy out of it, and generally let the<br>provider and the consumer of technologies duke it out. Of course, I<br>have no scientific evidence for this statement. But the proliferation<br>of Canadian Blackberries in the US Senate and House is a fairly decent<br>reflection of this.<br><br>Other govts. may choose to support a particular vendor or sector<br>because of various reasons -- one reason might be to make a concerted<br>effort to develop an alternative to US vendors and technologies.<br><br><br><br><br>> I believe this may be due in part to successful lobbying and marketing<br>> campaigns by big software companies in the US. We also seem to be more<br>> tolerant of software monopolies than other industrialized nations.<br>> Microsoft's trouble with the EU might be one example demonstrating the<br>> differences in attitude.<br>><br>> Go Canada! (Home of the original JUMP desktop GIS, I might add.) :]<br>><br>> Landon<br>> Office Phone Number: (209) 946-0268<br>> Cell Phone Number: (209) 992-0658<br>><br>><br>><br>> -----Original Message-----<br>> From: discuss-bounces@lists.osgeo.org<br>> [mailto:discuss-bounces@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Cameron Shorter<br>> Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2009 1:43 PM<br>> To: OSGeo Discussions<br>> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo friendly countries to live in<br>><br>> Yves Jacolin has sliced FOSS4G <<a href="http://2009.foss4g.org/">http://2009.foss4g.org/</a>> website hits<br>to<br>><br>> determine the number of FOSS4G attendees per million people, broken<br>down<br>><br>> by country. From this, you can get a feeling for the most OSGeo<br>tolerant<br>><br>> populations in the world (distorted around Australia due to the<br>> conference location).<br>><br>> So what can we learn?<br>><br>> * Japan and Mongolia are the place be in Asia<br>> * Chilli is the place to be in Latin America<br>> * Canada looks preferable to the US. I wonder how much the Canadian<br>> GeoConnections program is responsible for Canada's strong OSGeo<br>> industry.<br>> * There is a lot of interest across Europe, so FOSS4G 2010 should<br>be<br>> a crowded event.<br>> * Africa seems to have learned all they need to know when FOSS4G<br>> attended Johannesburg last year, and won't be heading to<br>Australia<br>> in force.<br>><br>><br>> You can view the maps here:<br>><br><a href="http://cameronshorter.blogspot.com/2009/08/osgeo">http://cameronshorter.blogspot.com/2009/08/osgeo</a>-friendly-countries-to-l<br>> ive-in.html<br>><br>> and in French on Yves blog:<br>><br><a href="http://georezo.net/blog/geolibre/2009/08/16/geolocalisation">http://georezo.net/blog/geolibre/2009/08/16/geolocalisation</a>-des-visite-d<br>> u-site-foss4g-2009/<br>><br>> --<br>> Cameron Shorter<br>> Geospatial Systems Architect<br>> Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050<br>> Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254<br>><br>> Think Globally, Fix Locally<br>> Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source<br>> <a href="http://www.lisasoft.com">http://www.lisasoft.com</a><br>><br>> _______________________________________________<br>> Discuss mailing list<br>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org<br>> <a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>><br>><br><br><br><br><br>--<br>Puneet Kishor <a href="http://www.punkish.org">http://www.punkish.org</a><br>Carbon Model <a href="http://carbonmodel.org">http://carbonmodel.org</a><br>Charter Member, Open Source Geospatial Foundation <a href="http://www.osgeo.org">http://www.osgeo.org</a><br>Science Commons Fellow, <a href="http://sciencecommons.org/about/whoweare/kishor">http://sciencecommons.org/about/whoweare/kishor</a><br>Nelson Institute, UW-Madison <a href="http://www.nelson.wisc.edu">http://www.nelson.wisc.edu</a><br>-----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>Assertions are politics; backing up assertions with evidence is science<br>=======================================================================<br>Sent from Madison, WI, United States<br>_______________________________________________<br>Discuss mailing list<br>Discuss@lists.osgeo.org<br><a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br><br><br>Warning:<br>Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against<br>defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is<br>not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any<br>dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly<br>prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please<br>notify the sender immediately.<br>_______________________________________________<br>Discuss mailing list<br>Discuss@lists.osgeo.org<br><a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>_______________________________________________<br>Discuss mailing list<br>Discuss@lists.osgeo.org<br><a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>_______________________________________________<br>Discuss mailing list<br>Discuss@lists.osgeo.org<br><a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
</p>
</div>
</body>
</html>