[OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

[Benjamin Henrion]

Frank Warmerdam <warmerdam at pobox.com> [080515]:
> Landon Blake wrote:
> >I thought it might be wise to point out that this discussion seems to be
> >getting a little aggressive, and possibly a little personal.
> >
> >All sides have made valid points. It's obvious that Mr. Fee isn't going
> >to agree with many of us on this particular issue, and his opinion is
> >worth considering.
> >
> >I would remind Mr. Fee, very humbly (of course), that he is on the OSGeo
> >mailing list, so in some respects he's chosen a fight in which he is
> >very outnumbered. I don't know how productive it is to aggressively
> >defend something like the .doc format on a mailing list for proponents
> >of open source software. :]
> >
> >You'll probably have about as much success as you would touting the .odt
> >format on a mailing list for the Microsoft Word fan club. :]
> 
> Landon,
> 
> James is making valid points about practical aspects of openness.  I
> hesitate to sign the declaration because it seems to absolutist and
> not recognizing of practical aspects of openness (as opposed to de-jure
> definitions of open standards).
> 
> I personally am dubious this discussion will accomplish anything useful
> because of the vague generalities of the original proposition, and the
> lack of a real purpose to the discussion.  But I'm also not inclined to
> discourage James or others from expressing their position once the
> discussion has started.
> 
> Another example often given a bit more in our realm than .doc files is
> shapefiles.  They are technically a proprietary format belonging to
> one proprietary vendor.  But the format is published, widely implemented
> in free and proprietary software and quite understandable. So I think it
> is reasonable for government data to be distributed in this format.

Free of patents? ESRI has always been the "Microsoft of GIS", so beware
of patents on this particular format.

> On the other hand, in many cases, government agencies have ended up
> publishing data in formats like SAIF, SDTS and various highly custom
> GML schemas that are technically open, but for practical purposes they
> are very difficult to utilize.
> 
> What I would like to discourage is governments distributing in file
> formats (like the mentioned new ESRI File Geodatabase) that are effectively
> closed - at least for the time being.
> 
> Like MPG, I'm sympathetic to the goals of the declaration but am concerned
> it is not sufficiently practical.  And I'm a very practical guy.

"Practical guys" makes compromises with freedom. As a citizen, I don't
accept the government rolling over my basic rights.

-- 
Benjamin Henrion <bhenrion at ffii.org>
FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403