<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: [Liblas-devel] Re: pondering about LAS 2.0 (was LAS Schema)</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'>I think the problem with 1.3 is that everyone is super excited about full waveform LiDAR data and is really looking to get their hands on it. That said, if there was a LAS spec that supported true full waveform data most people and software platforms would not understand how to view or process a waveform. The vendors who create full waveform sensors such as Riegl, Leica and Optech are really the only ones that will have software to view and process the data in the near future. Really, the end user just wants points that were derived from full waveform sensors. 7 returns is not considered full waveform...Sorry 1.3...<BR>
<BR>
Ideally, like Martin implied. Waveforms should probably be separated from the point data so that it’s an option. Or a compressed version of the waveform in the file somewhere might help:-)<BR>
<BR>
Dave<BR>
<BR>
On 3/17/10 1:02 PM, "Howard Butler" <hobu.inc@gmail.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><BR>
<BR>
On Mar 17, 2010, at 12:25 PM, Martin Isenburg wrote:<BR>
> what do you think? feel free to set me straight now ... it was not my idea in the first place so you can't hurt my feelings. (-:<BR>
<BR>
I kind of like it, but it makes the shapefile mistake (multiple files). Being used to shapefiles, I don't mind so much, but there are times when having a single thing to copy/zip/carry around has strong benefits.<BR>
<BR>
My schema proposal was trying to see if there is any wiggle room within LAS 1.x yet, not start designing LAS 2.0 :)<BR>
<BR>
Speaking of which, I think the lack of public debate and public feedback on LAS 1.3 is what in the end is going to submarine it. It doesn't cover enough breadth, and doesn't solve anyone else's problems other than a single hardware vendors. I have experience developing geospatial standards in the open <a href="http://geojson.org/geojson-spec.html"><http://geojson.org/geojson-spec.html></a>. It works. The LAS committee has no public mailing list, and we haven't heard a peep from them in quite a while. I wish some of the committee members followed what we're doing...<BR>
<BR>
Howard_______________________________________________<BR>
Liblas-devel mailing list<BR>
Liblas-devel@lists.osgeo.org<BR>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/liblas-devel">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/liblas-devel</a><BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><BR>
</SPAN></FONT>
</BODY>
</HTML>