[Board] OGC Relationship

[Jo Walsh]

On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 03:59:04AM -0800, Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
> [I pause to note that Raj's heart is in the right place here, and
> the MassMarketWG might become the exception to normal OGC processes.
> But we don't know how that works yet.  Hence current discussion.]

Right, here you have touched the point with a needle. Both OSGeo and
OGC are in the process of working out a more open model of involvement.
Raj personally is a superstar, and 'Mass Market' is where the
OSGeo-community specification efforts have wound up, so focus here?

> OGC regularly passes specs upwards to ISO for what seems like
> thumbs-up/down, almost pro-forma approval.  I'm not sure how that
> process actually works, but might that be a model worth discussing?

Nod, i refer you all again again to Jody's blog entry about this:
http://weblogs.java.net/blog/jive/archive/2006/11/wms_tiling_or_w.html

[[ The tiling "specification" is currently a bunch of hackers bashing
away at the problem. Standardization comes later, the document will be
submitted to the OGC where I imagine it will be treated as an
extension to WMS (much like the SLD specification). ]]

There *are* other avenues to 'open standardisation', specifically 
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/geo/

On the one hand this is a social negotiation between OSGeo/OGC.
On the other this is a technical negotiation about best practise.
I know it's hard to unpick the two, but perhaps is useful if we do.

Well, really i am just being a hippie here in "don't think about
it, just get on with doing things, try to make those things beautiful
and useful" mode. YMMV quite a lot, i suspect ;)

cheers,


jo