<div dir="ltr"><div>Colleagues,<br><br></div><div>Please find attached the OGC Open Geospatial API Whitepaper.<br><br></div><div>As per Scott Simmon's recent email, OGC would appreciate comments from the OSGeo Community.<br><br></div><div>Please provide comments to me by 30th February using the attached template.<br><br>I will then collate responses for this list and the OGC.<br></div><div><br></div>Attached are two documents:<br><ul><li>16-019r4_OGC_Open_APIs_White_Paper</li><li>Template to use for comments</li></ul><p>Apologies for using an attachment. This is still a controlled OGC document and it is not appropriate to post it to the OSGeo Wiki.<br></p><p>Kind regards,</p><p>Bruce</p><p><br></p><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Scott Simmons <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ssimmons@opengeospatial.org" target="_blank">ssimmons@opengeospatial.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word">Bruce,<div><br></div><div>As a representative of OSGeo, you can circulate the White Paper to the entirety of the OSGeo community for their feedback. I would request that all comments be collected and forwarded to me by just one of the OSGeo reps to simplify our review!</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>Scott</div><div><div class="h5"><div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Feb 6, 2017, at 1:10 PM, Bruce Bannerman <<a href="mailto:bruce.bannerman.osgeo@gmail.com" target="_blank">bruce.bannerman.osgeo@gmail.<wbr>com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="m_1020265219876730997Apple-interchange-newline"><div><div dir="auto"><div></div><div>Hi Jody,</div><div><br></div><div>Have you seen the OGC White Paper [1] on APIs yet?</div><div><br></div><div>It had input from at least two OSGeo community members, Arnulf and Chris Holmes.</div><div><br></div><div>The paper currently requires authentication to access. </div><div><br></div><div>@Scott, when do we (as in OGC), intend opening this document so that we (as in OSGeo) can review and offer feedback? ;-)</div><div><br></div><div>Bruce</div><div><br></div><div>[1] <span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Helvetica"><a href="https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=71776&version=1" target="_blank">https://portal.<wbr>opengeospatial.org/files/?<wbr>artifact_id=71776&version=1</a></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Helvetica"><br></span></div><div><br>On 7 Feb 2017, at 03:01, Jody Garnett <<a href="mailto:jody.garnett@gmail.com" target="_blank">jody.garnett@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr">Thanks for the update - I have personally noticed the OGC being more open. How are the OGC membership reacting to the change? Are they enjoying additional feedback?<div><br></div><div>I still feel that OSGeo service as a voice for the open source industry, which often get's bottle necked on standards an interoperability. I have been concerned recently with a push towards proprietary java script apis that our industry will need to re-lean the value of open standards.<br><div><br></div><div>I feel I am missing something on the nudge nudge. I trust our representatives are behaving in a professional/responseive manner.<div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div>
</div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>