<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/12/2012 9:24 AM, Barry Rowlingson
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAKGDqNznY2Du=60E98GT63Sh1dj5mDo7mwmrC4eKHGQhRtZ5mA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 9 December 2012 19:24, Cameron Shorter
<span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cameron.shorter@gmail.com" target="_blank">cameron.shorter@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
As I'm reviewing the OSGeo-Live overview contents [1], I think
that we should be recategorising some of the projects. Here
are my suggestions<br>
<br>
Rasdaman - Move from Databases to Web Services (I understand
it is best described as a WCS)<br>
<br>
GDAL - Move from "Spatial Tools" to "Geospatial Libraries"<br>
<br>
OSSIM - Move from "Desktop" to "Spatial Tools"<br>
<br>
Geopublisher & AtlasStyler - Move from "Desktop" to a new
"Prior OSGeoLive Projects" section<br>
<br>
Any objections or other suggestions?<br>
<br>
[1] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://adhoc.osgeo.osuosl.org/livedvd/docs/en/overview/overview.html"
target="_blank">http://adhoc.osgeo.osuosl.org/livedvd/docs/en/overview/overview.html</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> Some thoughts:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>1. "Browser Clients" doesn't seem a very informative or
accurate description of the projects listed, several of which
have server-side components. "Web Mapping and GIS" might be
better. Or something else.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>2. "Databases" might be better as "Spatial Data Storage and
Management". I'd take pgRouting off that category.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>3. I'd take everything after SAGA (ie OSSIM onwards) off
the Desktop GIS category, so that this category is purely
general purpose GIS packages. OSSIM, Geopublisher,
AtlasStyler, osgEarth, and MB-System are not 'Desktop GIS' as
understood by your average GIS person...</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>4. Create a new category of specialised ('vertical'?)
applications, containing such as: zyGrib, OpenCPN, MB-System
and possibly Ushahidi and Sahana Eden. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>5. Put pgRouting and the remaining GPS-related packages
into a Tracking and Routing category.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>6. Think maybe a categorical index is a bit simplistic and
maybe we should just tag everything instead.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>7. Wonder why OSSIM and OTB are in different categories and
think it's getting late I should just go to bed instead.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Barry</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Thanks Barry,<br>
As usual you have some very good suggestions about categorising
which I'll have a go at putting into practice.<br>
<br>
Point 6 about tagging is valid, but I'm still in favour of
categorising, as I think there is value in it, even if it is not
perfect.<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Cameron Shorter
Geospatial Solutions Manager
Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254
Think Globally, Fix Locally
Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.lisasoft.com">http://www.lisasoft.com</a>
</pre>
</body>
</html>