[Board] Please review: Open Letter asking to avoid format fragmentation in LiDAR standards

Bart van den Eijnden bartvde at osgis.nl
Mon Apr 20 23:34:55 PDT 2015


I share Jeff’s concerns on the seemingly "frontal attack" here, but also see it is exactly these occasions where we need to speak up and make a stand for open standards, so I’d vote +0 on this.

Part of my decision also comes from seeing so many important people signing the letter already.

Best regards,
Bart

> On 21 Apr 2015, at 02:37, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Thank you Jeff.
> I'm hopeful other board members will also express their opinions and vote on the motion as well.
> 
> Cheers Cameron.
> 
> On 21/04/2015 9:32 am, Jeff McKenna wrote:
>> Ok my last message on this; on doing some more thinking, it is as Cameron said too late to change how the letter is written.  So it tackles Esri, OGC, and ASPRS head-on (I guess this is why myself and others were voted onto the OSGeo Board).  I can see Martin's face looking at me and hear him saying with a smirk 'come on'.   I am therefore +1, after saying all that.
>> 
>> Sorry for speaking up so loudly.
>> 
>> And thanks to Martin for all his thankless work.  Special thanks to mpg for his private thoughts to the OSGeo Board today as well.
>> 
>> Cameron thanks to you also, for letting me speak on this.
>> 
>> Good night everyone.
>> 
>> -jeff
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 2015-04-20 7:51 PM, Jeff McKenna wrote:
>>> I think you used the correct term, where an open letter could be made
>>> using that term "owner" or "developer" and avoid pointing direct
>>> fingers, and then for more background information link to the excellent
>>> explanation by Martin ("clone wars" blog post).  As it is now the letter
>>> attacks Esri directly.
>>> 
>>> I guess I could be the only one who feels this way, in which case I
>>> would not hold the letter back (I am only one person in this huge open
>>> community).  So don't worry I'm not planning to hold it back.
>>> 
>>> K I'm being quiet now ha :)
>>> 
>>> -jeff
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 2015-04-20 6:18 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>>> 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
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board




More information about the Board mailing list