<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class="">(note: resend to make sure this gets on the lists)</div><div class=""><br class=""></div>Hi Stefan,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I will make a few comments!</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">GeoPackage: the OGC Compliance Program develops conformance test suites for OGC Standards after the Standards have been officially adopted. This process takes time and requires thorough testing itself. A GeoPackage test suite has not yet been completed, but you can see a list of tests and roadmap for test development here:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="http://cite.opengeospatial.org/roadmap" class="">http://cite.opengeospatial.org/roadmap</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The most complete listing of implementations for GeoPackage is here:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="http://www.geopackage.org/#implementations" class="">http://www.geopackage.org/#implementations</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">With another registry here:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="http://www.opengeospatial.org/resource/products/byspec" class="">http://www.opengeospatial.org/resource/products/byspec</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Yes, I know that the two registries have some differences - something we are working on in OGC to synchronize!</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">With respect to support of an OGC Standard by any organization, the OGC membership provides the Standards as free and open and thus, they can be implemented by anyone; we don’t rate nor comment on the degree to which an organization implements the Standard unless the implementation is submitted for formal Certification by OGC.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">LiDAR: the OGC is certainly open to reviewing standardization of LiDAR and other point cloud data. This thread has expressed interest for further discussion and I have been approached my other OGC members on the topic. For anyone attending the upcoming OGC TC meeting in Barcelona - find me and we can talk LiDAR. I will be happy to organize a telecon or face-to-face discussion at a future TC meeting to plan a way forward on this topic. I also recommend that interested people bring up the subject on the OGC 3D Information Management Domain Working Group (3DIM DWG) mailing list:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="mailto:3dim.wg@lists.opengeospatial.org" class="">3dim.wg@lists.opengeospatial.org</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Best Regards,</div><div class="">Scott</div><div class=""><br class=""><div class="">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class="">Scott Simmons</div><div class="">Executive Director, Standards Program</div><div class="">Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC)</div><div class=""><div class="">tel +1 970 682 1922</div><div class="">mob +1 970 214 9467</div></div><div class=""><a href="mailto:ssimmons@opengeospatial.org" class="">ssimmons@opengeospatial.org</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The OGC: Making Location Count…</div><div class=""><a href="http://www.opengeospatial.org" class="">www.opengeospatial.org</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<br class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Mar 3, 2015, at 1:18 AM, Stefan Keller <<a href="mailto:sfkeller@gmail.com" class="">sfkeller@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">Hi,<br class=""><br class="">2015-03-03 7:13 GMT+01:00 Even Rouault <<a href="mailto:even.rouault@spatialys.com" class="">even.rouault@spatialys.com</a>> wrote:<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Hi Cameron,<br class=""></blockquote>...<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Currently there's no finalized conformance test suite available for GeoPackage<br class="">to test implementations, so there's no official reference implementation or<br class="">conformant implementations.<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">I'd wish Scott or somebody from OGC could comment on this (and this<br class="">thread in general).<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">* It is probably not appropriate for OSGeo as an organisation to<br class="">directly point out ESRI's lack of support for GeoPackage write capability.<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">I agree. The best marketing, if needed, would be to point at our<br class="">implementations that do support write capability.<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">Be aware that it's not only read/write support one should report and<br class="">request in order to make a standard format an alternative to<br class="">Shapefiles.<br class="">For ArcGIS it's also edit capabilities (for whatever reason...).<br class=""><br class="">Yours, S.<br class=""><br class=""><br class="">2015-03-03 7:13 GMT+01:00 Even Rouault <<a href="mailto:even.rouault@spatialys.com" class="">even.rouault@spatialys.com</a>>:<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Hi Cameron,<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">It is difficult for OSGeo to stop a vendor from promoting their product,<br class="">or promoting a specific lock in strategy.<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">Of course. That was exactly my point.<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><br class="">But we can:<br class="">* Support the OGC in developing an OGC standard for LiDAR. Once a<br class="">standard is in place, there is a much stronger reason to make use of<br class="">that Open Standard. In particular, many national government agencies<br class="">have policies which promote standards over proprietary interfaces.<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">With my mostly uninformed eyes in that topic, I don't know if OGC is the most<br class="">relevant organization in that matter. It seems that the ASPRS would be a more<br class="">natural host as it has already published the spec of the (uncompressed) LAS<br class="">format:<br class=""><a href="http://www.asprs.org/Committee-General/LASer-LAS-File-Format-Exchange-" class="">http://www.asprs.org/Committee-General/LASer-LAS-File-Format-Exchange-</a><br class="">Activities.html<br class=""><br class="">I'm not sure about the LASzip format however, the compressed one, which is the<br class="">one that ESRI has "cloned" into zLAS. I skimmed through <a href="http://www.laszip.org/" class="">http://www.laszip.org/</a><br class="">and couldn't find a reference to something more formal than LGPL code that<br class="">implements it ;-)<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><br class="">* Provide a position statement (as has been suggested) which explains<br class="">technically the pros and cons of both the proprietary and open LiDAR<br class="">interface.<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">There are at least a few persons in the OSGeo community that have direct<br class="">interest in LiDAR and are likely reading this thread. Perhaps some discussions<br class="">are already happening behind the scene ?<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><br class="">Regarding OGC GeoPackage standard:<br class="">* I would hope that OGC's list of standards supported has a tick for<br class="">read only, and tick for read/write support, so consumers can tell the<br class="">difference.<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">Currently there's no finalized conformance test suite available for GeoPackage<br class="">to test implementations, so there's no official reference implementation or<br class="">conformant implementations. I guess the conformance test suite would be<br class="">similar to the KML one, in that you submit a file, and it is validated. So it<br class="">"proves" that you can write a conformant file. Funnily, read-only<br class="">implementations could not get the stamp!<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">* It is probably not appropriate for OSGeo as an organisation to<br class="">directly point out ESRI's lack of support for GeoPackage write capability.<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">I agree. The best marketing, if needed, would be to point at our<br class="">implementations that do support write capability.<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">* However, it is totally appropriate for individuals and news agencies<br class="">to write about it.<br class=""><br class="">On 2/03/2015 9:37 pm, Even Rouault wrote:<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Stefan,<br class=""><br class="">That a proprietary vendor decides not to implement a standard in its<br class="">products is mainly its problem (as well as the one of its customers).<br class="">Especially as they are plenty of FOSS alternatives that implement the<br class="">standard! So I'd say it is a selling point for FOSS.<br class=""><br class="">The annoying thing here is that a proprietary vendor aggressively pushes<br class="">his *closed* format and tries to undermine an open format implemented by<br class="">FOSS. So it really harms the FOSS community. In that matter, the<br class="">Geoservices REST API episode would have been less critical as the<br class="">protocol had been at least opened...<br class=""><br class="">Even<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Dear all, dear OSGeo Board<br class=""><br class="">While supporting this LAS related initiative I'd like to draw your<br class="">attention to a potentially similar use case which is at least of same<br class="">relevance:<br class=""><br class="">In April 2014 Esri officially announced support for >> GeoPackage <<<br class="">vector in version 10.2.2 and raster in 10.3:<br class=""><a href="http://blogs.esri.com/esri/arcgis/2014/04/14/support-for-ogc-geopackages" class="">http://blogs.esri.com/esri/arcgis/2014/04/14/support-for-ogc-geopackages</a><br class="">-in -arcgis/ ("Support for OGC GeoPackage in ArcGIS")<br class=""><br class="">Now Esri support confirmed that in ArcgIS Desktop 10.3 only read-only<br class="">access is possible. So, there's still no write nor edit capability<br class="">(and no ArcGIS Server no Runtime) despite this FAQ:<br class="">http://support.esri.com/en/knowledgebase/techarticles/detail/42567<br class="">("What versions of the OGC GeoPackage standard are supported?")<br class=""><br class="">I'm still looking for an answer for an "Enhancement Request" but I'm<br class="">really concerned about Esri's commitment to (promised OGC) standards.<br class=""><br class="">Yours, S.<br class=""><br class="">2015-03-01 22:38 GMT+01:00 Suchith Anand<br class=""></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><<a href="mailto:Suchith.Anand@nottingham.ac.uk" class="">Suchith.Anand@nottingham.ac.uk</a>>:<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Colleagues,<br class=""><br class="">I see these kind of developments also directly affecting Open<br class="">Principles in Geo Education that "Geo for All" , OSGeo, ICA all stand<br class="">for and are working together in our common mission of making<br class="">geospatial education and opportunities accessible to all.<br class=""><br class="">"Geo for All" will take a stand on this as it not only affects our<br class="">Academic colleagues and students working in LIDAR research and teaching<br class="">but will have long term impacts on Open Principles in Geo Education. We<br class="">will work to put our ideas in the Open Letter from OSGeo explaining<br class="">this.<br class=""><br class="">"Geo for All" started from very humble beginnings and this was only<br class="">possible because academic colleagues globally came together to change<br class="">the status of Geo education. For decades even though there was great<br class="">progress in GIS technologies, educational opportunities esp. in<br class="">developing and poor countries were very small. This is now changing<br class="">dramatically thanks to the efforts of our colleagues from Nepal to<br class="">Uruguay.<br class=""><br class="">We got excellent support from all sectors (universities, industry ,<br class="">governments etc) but to my surprise ESRI was the only proprietary<br class="">vendor who was trying to undermine this initiative indirectly from<br class="">the very start. I still cannot understand why this particular vendor<br class="">wants to do that. I really hope the proprietors of this company will<br class="">also support Open Principles in Geo Education (not just telling<br class="">externally on Openness but actually practicing this). We want to have<br class="">good relations with everyone in the Geospatial domain , so our hand of<br class="">friendship is always open. So please let us all work together.<br class=""><br class="">Hardware costs are (and will) keep coming down, internet access is<br class="">increasing (and will keep increasing) even in developing countries<br class="">and with free and open source software, even poor schools in<br class="">developing countries are getting small computer labs established ( i<br class="">know this from my experience in India) .The convergence of all these<br class="">factors with a great team of dedicated people is changing geoeducation<br class="">forever.<br class=""><br class="">I strongly believe access of good quality education is everyones<br class="">birthright and now we are for first time in history getting opportunity<br class="">to make this possible. We will not accept putting artificial barriers<br class="">like high cost proprietary software (which quite frankly they won't be<br class="">able to even think of affording) which will continue denying quality<br class="">education opportunities for millions of students globally (both in<br class="">developed and developing countries).<br class=""><br class="">So why should i care? Because i learned one of the most important<br class="">lessons in my life in my childhood from my grandmother (who though did<br class="">not get the opportunity of "proper education" herself taught me the<br class="">importance of the values of sharing and about "Vasudeva Kudumbam"<br class="">which means "We all belong to one large Universal family" and " Geo<br class="">for All" is for my Universal family and i will do everything in my<br class="">abilities to make sure education opportunities are open to all.<br class=""><br class="">Best wishes,<br class=""><br class="">Suchith<br class=""><br class="">________________________________________<br class="">From: <a href="mailto:ica-osgeo-labs-bounces@lists.osgeo.org" class="">ica-osgeo-labs-bounces@lists.osgeo.org</a><br class="">[<a href="mailto:ica-osgeo-labs-bounces@lists.osgeo.org" class="">ica-osgeo-labs-bounces@lists.osgeo.org</a>] On Behalf Of Cameron Shorter<br class="">[<a href="mailto:cameron.shorter@gmail.com" class="">cameron.shorter@gmail.com</a>] Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2015 7:37 PM<br class="">To: Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX); Paul Ramsey; Carl Reed<br class="">Cc: P Kishor; Scott Simmons; <a href="mailto:ica-osgeo-labs@lists.osgeo.org" class="">ica-osgeo-labs@lists.osgeo.org</a><br class="">Subject: Re: [Ica-osgeo-labs] [Board] [OSGeo-Discuss] The LAS format,<br class="">the ASPRS, and the “LAZ clone” by ESRI<br class=""><br class="">What would strengthen a position for use of Open LIDAR interfaces would<br class="">be if such an Open LIDAR interface were introduced into the OGC<br class="">standards program.<br class=""><br class="">Carl,<br class="">I'd be interested to hear you (or someone else from the OGC) explain<br class="">how people should approach initiating an Open LIDAR standard, and how<br class="">much effort / cost would be required to do so.<br class=""><br class="">The OSGeo community can then assess whether there is sufficient<br class="">motivation to initiate such development of a standard.<br class=""><br class="">Patrick,<br class="">For an Open Letter from OSGeo, it would be a very powerful statement if<br class="">we can list a number of influential organisations who will commit to<br class="">developing an open, interoperable standard. (This can be a section of<br class="">the open letter with signatures).<br class=""><br class="">On 2/03/2015 4:57 am, Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX) wrote:<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Paul,<br class="">I would care to refine the 'yawn' context of 'doing the right thing,'<br class="">that of standing up to actions that directly contravene an<br class="">organization's 'open exchange' mission. This would seem the kind of<br class="">*engaged integrity* quite apart from one deserving a yawn. If your<br class="">kids do something directly contrary to what the family needs for a<br class="">healthy exchange of information, if a yawn is the response, there are<br class="">even more serious issues at stake. -Patrick<br class=""><br class="">-----Original Message-----<br class="">From: Paul Ramsey [<a href="mailto:pramsey@cleverelephant.ca" class="">mailto:pramsey@cleverelephant.ca</a>]<br class="">Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2015 9:32 AM<br class="">To: Carl Reed<br class="">Cc: Cameron Shorter; P Kishor; Suchith Anand; Scott Simmons; OSGeo<br class="">Discussions; Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX); OSGeo-Board;<br class=""><a href="mailto:ica-osgeo-labs@lists.osgeo.org" class="">ica-osgeo-labs@lists.osgeo.org</a> Subject: Re: [Board] [OSGeo-Discuss]<br class="">[Ica-osgeo-labs] The LAS format, the ASPRS, and the “LAZ clone” by<br class="">ESRI<br class=""><br class="">Carl,<br class=""><br class="">No, it doesn't really clarify it. I think what people are wondering is<br class="">"does OGC have a default mission and position that closed formats are<br class="">bad for the industry and would it publicly admonish a member who took<br class="">actions that ran counter to that position". I assume that, as a<br class="">"member driven organization" whose membership includes the offender,<br class="">the OGC will not be standing up and publicly saying "this company is<br class="">contravening the spirit of our organization and mission, that it is<br class="">supposedly supportive of".<br class=""><br class="">Am I incorrect?<br class=""><br class="">WRT to OSGeo, I think that black letter cases like this come along<br class="">infrequently enough that it would not be at all inappropriate for<br class="">OSGeo to publicly state what is wrong with the direction being taken<br class="">in the world of LAS formats. The only trouble is, it's exactly what<br class="">everyone expects we would do, and therefore will be greeted with a<br class="">collective yawn. But it is the right thing, so we should still do it.<br class=""><br class="">ATB,<br class=""><br class="">P.<br class=""><br class="">On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Carl Reed <<a href="mailto:creed@opengeospatial.org" class="">creed@opengeospatial.org</a>><br class=""></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><br class="">wrote:<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">All -<br class=""><br class="">The OGC is not currently involved in activities related to defining<br class="">or maintaining LIDAR specific modeling and related encoding<br class="">standards. Any work the OGC has been doing WRT LIDAR is within the<br class="">context of processing, visualization, and analytics. Obviously,<br class="">existing OGC standards such as WCS and GMLJP2 can be used to encode<br class="">and share small, processed LIDAR data sets. Feel free to check OGC<br class="">email archives, project pages, and so forth for documentation on any<br class="">ongoing discussions in the OGC related to LIDAR.<br class=""><br class=""><a href="http://www.opengeospatial.org/pub/www/ows9/innovations.html" class="">http://www.opengeospatial.org/pub/www/ows9/innovations.html</a> : The<br class="">thread participants looked at NITF, LIDAR, and DAP/OPeNDAP, and<br class="">investigated their re-implementation in an OWS environment with a<br class="">focus on the Web.<br class=""><br class="">or<br class=""><br class=""><a href="http://koenigstuhl.geog.uni-heidelberg.de/publications/bonn/conferenc" class="">http://koenigstuhl.geog.uni-heidelberg.de/publications/bonn/conferenc</a><br class="">e /LanigGeoinformatik09.pdf<br class=""><br class="">for examples.<br class=""><br class="">Hope this clarifies the current OGC position.<br class=""><br class="">Regards<br class=""><br class="">Carl<br class=""><br class=""><br class="">-----Original Message----- From: Suchith Anand<br class="">Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2015 4:20 AM<br class="">To: Cameron Shorter ; P Kishor ; Suchith Anand<br class="">Cc: discuss@lists.osgeo.org ; Hogan, Patrick(ARC-PX) ;<br class="">board@lists.osgeo.org ; ica-osgeo-labs@lists.osgeo.org<br class="">Subject: Re: [Board] [OSGeo-Discuss] [Ica-osgeo-labs] The LAS format,<br class="">the ASPRS, and the “LAZ clone” by ESRI<br class=""><br class=""><br class="">Hi Cameron,<br class=""><br class="">Thank you for this excellent suggestion. I remember this previous<br class="">Geoservices REST API issues and discussions.<br class=""><br class="">Patrick - Could you please start a wiki page and input as much<br class="">information as you know on this (ideally in the same structure as the<br class="">Geoservices REST API wiki ). Once it is ready, please email the<br class="">community and OSGeo Board and we all can look into this.<br class=""><br class="">Anyone from OGC willing to help with this?<br class=""><br class="">I think this should be open letter from the OSGeo Board to the whole<br class="">Geo community. I really hope this proprietary vendor (ESRI) will be<br class="">decent enough to not keep repeating these inappropriate actions in<br class="">the future.<br class=""><br class="">Best wishes,<br class=""><br class="">Suchith<br class=""><br class="">________________________________________<br class="">From: Cameron Shorter [cameron.shorter@gmail.com]<br class="">Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2015 10:47 AM<br class="">To: P Kishor; Suchith Anand<br class="">Cc: discuss@lists.osgeo.org; Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX);<br class="">board@lists.osgeo.org; ica-osgeo-labs@lists.osgeo.org<br class="">Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Ica-osgeo-labs] The LAS format, the<br class="">ASPRS, and the “LAZ clone” by ESRI<br class=""><br class="">Patrick, others,<br class="">OSGeo and related OGC communities have been successful previously in<br class="">stopping ESRI's inappropriate creation of OGC standards. See here:<br class="">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Geoservices_REST_API<br class=""><br class="">I'd suggest that if we as OSGeo wish to be effective at blocking a<br class="">vendor lock-in tactic, as seems to be the case, then we should<br class="">consider developing a similar wiki page for the LAS format debate.<br class=""><br class="">0. Write an open letter (who to? OGC?) 1. Describe the issue. (Is<br class="">there someone who knows the issues well enough to describe them?) 2.<br class="">Describe technically why one format is or is not better than the<br class="">other, on both a technical and commercial point of view.<br class="">3. Is the Open LIDAR format an OGC standard?<br class="">4. If needed, collect signatures.<br class="">5. If needed, ask OSGeo Board to present the open letter<br class=""><br class="">On 28/02/2015 11:18 am, P Kishor wrote:<br class="">Thanks Patrick for surfacing this. Yes, this should be opened up for<br class="">scrutiny by the entire community and we should all weigh in.<br class=""><br class="">On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Suchith Anand<br class=""><Suchith.Anand@nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Suchith.Anand@nottingham.ac.uk<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">wrote:<br class=""></blockquote>Hi Patrick,<br class=""><br class="">Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I believe the OSGeo Board<br class="">need to look into this and prepare a position paper with inputs from<br class="">the community as this has wider implications. This also need to be<br class="">discussed with like minded organisations. We all can provide the<br class="">needed support for this.<br class=""><br class="">Jeff and OSGeo Board - please add this to the next month Board<br class="">meeting's agenda items. Thanks.<br class=""><br class="">Best wishes,<br class=""><br class="">Suchith<br class=""><br class=""><br class="">________________________________________<br class="">From:<br class="">ica-osgeo-labs-bounces@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:ica-osgeo-labs-bounces@<br class="">l ists.osgeo.org><br class="">[ica-osgeo-labs-bounces@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:ica-osgeo-labs-bounces<br class="">@ lists.osgeo.org>] On Behalf Of Lene Fischer<br class="">[lfi@ign.ku.dk<mailto:lfi@ign.ku.dk>]<br class="">Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 6:29 PM<br class="">To: Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX);<br class="">ica-osgeo-labs@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:ica-osgeo-labs@lists.osgeo.org><br class="">Subject: Re: [Ica-osgeo-labs] The LAS format, the ASPRS, and the “LAZ<br class="">clone” by ESRI<br class=""><br class="">+1<br class=""><br class=""><br class="">Lene Fischer<br class="">Associate Professor<br class=""><br class="">Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management University<br class="">of Copenhagen<br class=""><br class="">MOB +45 40115084<tel:%2B45%2040115084><br class="">lfi@ign.ku.dk<mailto:lfi@ign.ku.dk><mailto:lfi@ign.ku.dk<mailto:lfi@i<br class="">g n.ku.dk>><br class=""><br class=""><br class="">[cid:image001.gif@01D052C3.B23B1060]<br class=""><br class=""><br class=""><br class="">Fra:<br class="">ica-osgeo-labs-bounces@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:ica-osgeo-labs-bounces@<br class="">l ists.osgeo.org><br class="">[mailto:ica-osgeo-labs-bounces@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:ica-osgeo-labs-<br class="">b ounces@lists.osgeo.org>]<br class="">På vegne af Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)<br class="">Sendt: 27. februar 2015 18:48<br class="">Til:<br class="">ica-osgeo-labs@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:ica-osgeo-labs@lists.osgeo.org><br class="">Emne: [Ica-osgeo-labs] The LAS format, the ASPRS, and the “LAZ clone”<br class="">by ESRI<br class=""><br class="">Dear OSGEO,<br class="">For what our good name is worth. . .<br class="">Do we have an opinion on something so essential as an open standard<br class="">for a data format?<br class="">Speak now, or forever hand over your wallet. Individual and<br class="">collective response encouraged.<br class=""><br class="">Can OSGEO provide a short position paper commenting on our values?<br class="">I.e., “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all [data] are<br class="">created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain<br class="">unalienable Rights, that among these [is Life, Liberty and the<br class="">pursuit of Openness].”<br class=""><br class="">The LAS format, the ASPRS, and the “LAZ clone” by ESRI<br class="">http://rapidlasso.com/2015/02/22/lidar-las-asprs-esri-and-the-laz-clo<br class="">n e/<br class=""><br class="">[First paragraph]<br class="">We are concerned about ESRI’s next moves in forcing yet another<br class="">proprietary format into wide-spread deployment. Forwarded emails,<br class="">retold conversations, and personal experiences suggest that sneaky<br class="">tactics<http://rapidlasso.com/2014/11/06/keeping-esri-honest/> are<br class="">being used to disrupt the harmony in open LiDAR formats that we have<br class="">enjoyed for many years.<br class="">[cid:image002.jpg@01D052C3.B23B1060]<br class=""><br class="">Thanks much,<br class="">-Patrick<br class="">Project Manager<br class="">NASA World Wind<br class=""><br class=""><br class=""><br class=""><br class=""><br class=""><br class="">--<br class="">Puneet Kishor<br class="">Manager, Science and Data Policy<br class="">Creative Commons<br class=""><br class=""><br class=""><br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">Discuss mailing list<br class="">Discuss@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:Discuss@lists.osgeo.org><br class="">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss<br class=""><br class=""><br class="">--<br class="">Cameron Shorter,<br class="">Software and Data Solutions Manager<br class="">LISAsoft<br class="">Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,<br class="">26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009<br class=""><br class="">P +61 2 9009 5000, W www.lisasoft.com<http://www.lisasoft.com>, F<br class="">+61 2<br class="">9009 5099<br class=""><br class=""><br class=""><br class=""><br class="">This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee<br class="">and may contain confidential information. If you have received this<br class="">message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete<br class="">it.<br class=""><br class="">Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this<br class="">message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the<br class="">author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the<br class="">University of Nottingham.<br class=""><br class="">This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an<br class="">attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your<br class="">computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email<br class="">communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as<br class="">permitted by UK legislation.<br class=""><br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">Board mailing list<br class="">Board@lists.osgeo.org<br class="">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board<br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">Board mailing list<br class="">Board@lists.osgeo.org<br class="">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board<br class=""></blockquote></blockquote><br class="">--<br class="">Cameron Shorter,<br class="">Software and Data Solutions Manager<br class="">LISAsoft<br class="">Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,<br class="">26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009<br class=""><br class="">P +61 2 9009 5000, W <a href="http://www.lisasoft.com" class="">www.lisasoft.com</a>, F +61 2 9009 5099<br class=""><br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">ica-osgeo-labs mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:ica-osgeo-labs@lists.osgeo.org" class="">ica-osgeo-labs@lists.osgeo.org</a><br class="">http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ica-osgeo-labs<br class=""><br class=""><br class=""><br class=""><br class="">This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee<br class="">and may contain confidential information. If you have received this<br class="">message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.<br class=""><br class="">Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this<br class="">message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the<br class="">author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the<br class="">University of Nottingham.<br class=""><br class="">This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an<br class="">attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your<br class="">computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email<br class="">communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as<br class="">permitted by UK legislation.<br class=""><br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">Discuss mailing list<br class="">Discuss@lists.osgeo.org<br class="">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">Discuss mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:Discuss@lists.osgeo.org" class="">Discuss@lists.osgeo.org</a><br class="">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss<br class=""></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><br class="">--<br class="">Spatialys - Geospatial professional services<br class=""><a href="http://www.spatialys.com" class="">http://www.spatialys.com</a><br class=""></blockquote></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>