[Board] Please review: Open Letter asking to avoid format fragmentation in LiDAR standards
Cameron Shorter
cameron.shorter at gmail.com
Mon Apr 20 14:18:51 PDT 2015
Do other members of the board share Jeff's opinion? Please speak up.
I'm in an awkward situation. We have 70+ OSGeo community members who
have signed this Open Letter, expecting it to be delivered as we said we
would.
If you wish to see the background (story) moved to another page, eg
blog, we could do that.
Jeff, I understand that you don’t want the letter delivered unless the
word “Esri” removed? I’d argue to the they thing needing changing is
that the owner of “Optimized LAS” publish as an open format. So the
letter needs to be delivered to Esri. Is this a point you'd be prepared
to accept being included in an Open Letter?
Regards,
Cameron
On 21/04/2015 3:52 am, Jeff McKenna wrote:
> Hi Cameron,
>
> I personally feel topics like "the story" as you mention are for
> places like blogs, which I believe Martin documented very well already
> (I've retweeted his post months ago). What I see here on this wiki
> page is the story re-written again. I have a difficult time though
> officially supporting this story with my OSGeo Board hat on though, as
> it doesn't add anything more (throws salt on the wound, so to speak).
>
> I would like to see the OSGeo Board in fact support a request for
> LiDAR standards, and leave out this unfortunate "story".
>
> -jeff
>
>
>
> On 2015-04-20 12:35 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>> Hi Jeff,
>> Thanks for your feedback.
>> We did address specific comments (similar to yours) during the request
>> for comment phase, before we asked for signatures.
>>
>> 1. Now that we have asked for signatures (for the last week or so), it
>> is inappropriate of us to change the text that people have signed up to.
>>
>> 2. I do acknowledge your concerns about directly singling out one
>> vendor, and I initially tried writing the story without mentioning them.
>> Unfortunately, this one vendor is so central to the format fragmentation
>> story that it is difficult to tell the story and be specific about the
>> request without mentioning them.
>>
>> 3. I'm also mindful that the story has already been breaking on some
>> spatial media for a while now (one of the features of open
>> communication), and mass media is likely to break the story soon - I'd
>> estimate within 12 to 48 hours. In that timeframe, I personally don't
>> have the time for a rewrite.
>>
>> So unfortunately, for these 3 reasons, I think it inappropriate to
>> rewrite this Open Letter.
>>
>> Jeff, I think you have made your vote clear, but can you please
>> officially vote +1, +0, 0, -0, -1 to these 2 proposals. Can the rest of
>> the board please do so also as we need to decide whether the mass media
>> report on this story with or without OSGeo board endorsement.
>>
>> Regards, Cameron
>>
>>
>> On 21/04/2015 12:59 am, Jeff McKenna wrote:
>>> Hi Cameron,
>>>
>>> In terms of my own feedback to your letter (I cannot speak for the
>>> entire OSGeo Board), I would prefer to remove any reference to any
>>> specific company or institution (such as Esri), and focus the goal of
>>> the letter (as opposed to a flame war) on the needs for standards for
>>> LiDAR data. As this page is written now, it is not a surprise to me
>>> that media outlets are drooling over this letter. But what good can
>>> come out of that, other than upsetting a large geospatial vendor in
>>> our ecosystem?
>>>
>>> Personally, I have spoken to Martin about this face-to-face, and I was
>>> at a presentation he did on this exact topic at FOSS4G-Asia in
>>> December (I moderated his session, small world sometimes isn't it); it
>>> is a frustrating situation that he was put through, and I support him
>>> though this.
>>>
>>> But, since you are asking the OSGeo Board now, I cannot support such
>>> an attack against one organization formally.
>>>
>>> Short story: can you reword your wiki/letter to focus on standards for
>>> the LiDAR format, and not attack one organization?
>>>
>>>
>>> -jeff
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2015-04-20 11:28 AM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>>> As Bart mentioned,
>>>> * After initially being written, the letter was sent to OSGeo
>>>> standards
>>>> list, asking for review.
>>>> * Suchith sent to OGC TC-Discuss list for review, and ESRI responded.
>>>> * After ~ 1 week for review, the letter was forwarded to OSGeo discuss
>>>> and a few others, asking for signatures (we have ~ 70 signatures,
>>>> growing every day)
>>>> * As per this email thread below, I've asked OSGeo board's approval to
>>>> officially present this letter.
>>>> * Today I've had inquiries from mass media. I've asked them to hold
>>>> off
>>>> on breaking the story until the board gives approval to officially
>>>> present the letter, which will add extra weight to the letter. They
>>>> didn't publish today, but may publish in 12 to 48 hours. (Media
>>>> organisations have a strong desire to be the first to publish).
>>>>
>>>> So now the board has had time to consider, can you please all vote on
>>>> following 2 proposals:
>>>>
>>>> I request the board support an OSGeo Community developed Open
>>>> Letter aimed at protecting open LiDAR standards.
>>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/LIDAR_Format_Letter
>>>>
>>>> Proposal 1: The OSGeo Board agree to include the following
>>>> statement (or similar wording) into the letter:
>>>>
>>>> = Cover Letter from the OSGeo Board =
>>>>
>>>> The board of the [http://osgeo.org <http://osgeo.org/> Open
>>>> Source Geospatial Foundation] (OSGeo) is presenting this
>>>> letter to the OGC, ESRI and ASPRS. The letter highlights
>>>> concerns about fragmentation in LiDAR standards from many
>>>> people within the OSGeo community. As always, if there is
>>>> anything the OSGeo board can do to help, then please let us
>>>> know.
>>>>
>>>> Signed: <OSGeo Board Members>
>>>>
>>>> Proposal 2:
>>>> Once the letter has completed the signature phase, the letter
>>>> be emailed from the OSGeo President to key people within these
>>>> organisations:
>>>>
>>>> Mark Reichardt <mreichardt AT opengeospatial.org
>>>> <http://opengeospatial.org>
>>>> <http://opengeospatial.org>>, OSGeo President
>>>> David Danko <DDanko AT esri.com <http://esri.com>
>>>> <http://esri.com>>, ESRI's
>>>> Senior Consultant for GIS Standards
>>>> Stephen D. DeGloria < sdd4 AT cornell.edu <http://cornell.edu>
>>>> <http://cornell.edu>>, President of the ASPRS
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 20/04/2015 10:50 pm, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:
>>>>> Jeff,
>>>>>
>>>>> this was sent to discuss 1 week ago [1]. It has also been sent to the
>>>>> OGC TC-Discuss list where Esri has even responded.
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]
>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2015-April/014137.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Bart
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 20 Apr 2015, at 14:44, Jeff McKenna
>>>>>> <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com
>>>>>> <mailto:jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That would be good Maxi, as my concern is getting community feedback
>>>>>> before the Board reviews such a request.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Has this letter been sent yet to the general OSGeo community for
>>>>>> review? (the Discuss list) I think it is great that the Standards
>>>>>> group reviewed it, maybe now it is ready for the general OSGeo
>>>>>> community.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -jeff
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2015-04-20 6:18 AM, Massimiliano Cannata wrote:
>>>>>>> Thare are interesting discussions running on the italian chapter
>>>>>>> list.
>>>>>>> It would be nice if someone could wrap-up a short summary of
>>>>>>> interesting
>>>>>>> points.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I could do it in the next days if none is available.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maxi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2015-04-20 10:30 GMT+02:00 Jachym Cepicky <jachym.cepicky at gmail.com
>>>>>>> <mailto:jachym.cepicky at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> <mailto:jachym.cepicky at gmail.com>>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm fine with that
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> pá 17. 4. 2015 v 8:56 odesílatel Bart van den Eijnden
>>>>>>> <bartvde at osgis.nl <mailto:bartvde at osgis.nl>
>>>>>>> <mailto:bartvde at osgis.nl>> napsal:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello board,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> do people still need time to comment on the letter or can we
>>>>>>> call for a motion on this?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>> Bart
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 16 Apr 2015, at 13:52, Cameron Shorter
>>>>>>>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com
>>>>>>>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi OSGeo Board,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I request the board support an OSGeo Community developed
>>>>>>>> Open
>>>>>>>> Letter aimed at protecting open LiDAR standards.
>>>>>>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/LIDAR_Format_Letter
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Proposal 1: The OSGeo Board agree to include the following
>>>>>>>> statement (or similar wording) into the letter:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> = Cover Letter from the OSGeo Board =
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The board of the [http://osgeo.org <http://osgeo.org/> Open
>>>>>>>> Source Geospatial Foundation] (OSGeo) is presenting this
>>>>>>>> letter to the OGC, ESRI and ASPRS. The letter highlights
>>>>>>>> concerns about fragmentation in LiDAR standards from many
>>>>>>>> people within the OSGeo community. As always, if there is
>>>>>>>> anything the OSGeo board can do to help, then please let us
>>>>>>>> know.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed: <OSGeo Board Members>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Proposal 2:
>>>>>>>> Once the letter has completed the signature phase, the
>>>>>>>> letter
>>>>>>>> be emailed from the OSGeo President to key people within
>>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>>> organisations:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mark Reichardt <mreichardt AT opengeospatial.org
>>>>>>>> <http://opengeospatial.org>
>>>>>>>> <http://opengeospatial.org>>, OSGeo President
>>>>>>>> David Danko <DDanko AT esri.com <http://esri.com>
>>>>>>>> <http://esri.com>>, ESRI's
>>>>>>>> Senior Consultant for GIS Standards
>>>>>>>> Stephen D. DeGloria < sdd4 AT cornell.edu
>>>>>>>> <http://cornell.edu>
>>>>>>>> <http://cornell.edu>>, President of the ASPRS
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 11/04/2015 12:14 pm, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>> A number of us have been collaboratively developing an
>>>>>>>>> Open
>>>>>>>>> Letter asking key stakeholders to avoid fragmentation in
>>>>>>>>> LiDAR standards.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It starts:
>>>>>>>>> /We, the undersigned, are concerned that the current
>>>>>>>>> interoperability between LiDAR applications, through
>>>>>>>>> use of
>>>>>>>>> the open "LAS" format, is being threatened by ESRI's
>>>>>>>>> introduction and promotion of an alternative "Optimized
>>>>>>>>> LAS"
>>>>>>>>> proprietary format. This is of concern since the
>>>>>>>>> fragmentation of the LAS format will lead to reduced
>>>>>>>>> interoperability between applications and
>>>>>>>>> organisations, and
>>>>>>>>> introduce vendor lock-in./
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Could all interested please:
>>>>>>>>> 1. Review and provide feedback to this standards email
>>>>>>>>> list
>>>>>>>>> 2. If you agree with the letter, please add your name
>>>>>>>>> to the
>>>>>>>>> "Signed" section
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Cameron Shorter,
>>>>>>>>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
>>>>>>>>> LISAsoft
>>>>>>>>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>>>>>>>>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> P +61 2 9009 5000, Wwww.lisasoft.com
>>>>>>>>> <http://Wwww.lisasoft.com> <http://www.lisasoft.com/>, F +61 2
>>>>>>>>> 9009 5099
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
--
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
P +61 2 9009 5000, W www.lisasoft.com, F +61 2 9009 5099
More information about the Board
mailing list