[OSGeo-Discuss] Re: FOSS4G Technology review presentations - Web clients

[Seven (aka Arnulf)]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Cameron Shorter wrote:
> Pieter, good to hear your interest and to hear that geomajas would be
> covered.
> Anyone interested to step forward for Openlayers, Mapfish or MabBender?

Hi,
we have given the talk "Typification of OpenLayers, Mapbender and
MapFish" [1] in German (translation pending) at FOSSGIS 2010 a few weeks
back and received good feedback. It gives an insight to the different
ways of tackling spatial data services on the Web with a JS library
(OL), a software package (MB) and a developer framework (MF). We will
will submit an extended and updated version of the talk for FOSS4G. This
goes in the same direction as what you propose.

Apart form this I believe that in general it will be hard or even
impossible to compare packages that come from so different backgrounds
and with so diverse goals on a similar basis as last year's shootout.
Even although the WMS protocol based shootout was a damn lot of effort
up front and really well done it was still up for quite a bit of
discussion. But I am open to contribute in any way.

Regards,
Arnulf.

[1]
http://www.mapbender.org/Eine_Typisierung:_OpenLayers,_Mapbender_und_MapFish

> What should be compared between web clients?
> Think of the target audience for such a comparison being a software
> developer trying to decide which webmapping framework to use. What would
> be the questions they ask?
> 
> Off the top of my head:
> * What browsers are supported/tested against for each stable release?
> 
> * How responsive is the application?
> ** How large is the javascript which needs to be downloaded to the browser?
> **
> 
> * What basemaps are supported
> ** Google Maps, WMS, WFS, ...
> 
> * What tools are supported?
> ** Pan/Zoom/Edit Feature ...
> 
> 
> Pieter De Graef wrote:
>> Cameron,
>>
>> if the others are too, I would be interested in such a comparison.
>> My main question wouls be, exactly what would we be testing?
>> Performance (how?), functionality, ease-of-use, architecture, ....
>>
>> I still have to check my schedule, but I believe I can set aside a
>> enough time. I will already forward this mail to the Geomajas mailing
>> list, to check for response there.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Cameron Shorter schreef:
>>> German Carillo has been building a gis web client comparison which
>>> will make a good basis for a foss4g presentation here:
>>>
>>> http://geotux.tuxfamily.org/index.php?option=com_myblog&task=view&id=239&Itemid=59&lang=en
>>>
>>>
>>> Does anyone know how to contact German so that we can thank him, and
>>> invite him to participate in a FOSS4G presentation?
>>>
>>> Who else would be available to help out with a browser comparison for
>>> the various projects?
>>>
>>> Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>>> Abstracts for FOSS4G are due next Thursday 15 April 2010 and I'm
>>>> hoping that we will see abstracts for:
>>>>
>>>> * LiveDVD lightening overview
>>>> * WMS/WFS/WCS Shootout
>>>> * Desktop comparison
>>>> * Browser Client comparison
>>>> * Database comparison
>>>>
>>>> I predict that these presentations will be by far the most popular
>>>> presentations of the conference. Further, I'm expecting to
>>>> incorporate results onto the LiveDVD. They will be a lot of effort
>>>> to prepare, partly because they will need a team of project
>>>> developers to contribute to it, and consequently, unless we get our
>>>> act together soon, I suspect that no-one will submit presentations
>>>> for some of the topics above.
>>>>
>>>> So I encourage people to respond to the following targeted email
>>>> threads, noting your intention to help and be part of one of the
>>>> presentation teams. (Note, the presentation will be the easy bit,
>>>> the hard bit will be collating the material for the presentation).
>>>>
>>>> A good team for these comparison projects will consist of:
>>>>
>>>> * a representative from each project in the comparison. These types
>>>> of comparisons will be the first place new users will go when
>>>> researching software, so are well worth participating in.
>>>> * users who have used more than one of the applications
>>>> * anyone involved in related comparison reviews, or development of
>>>> feature tables or similar
>>>> * coordinator/"get it done" people who can pull it all together
>>>> * people who can speak well, and efficiently. (You will have lots of
>>>> material to present is a short time)
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 
> 


- --
Arnulf Christl

Exploring Space, Time and Mind
http://arnulf.us
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkvENzcACgkQXmFKW+BJ1b3j5ACfaIQqz3cgPDOzJfqtaVKqC5wj
TgEAn3AbQJz91mqGyOvyaVeYHnLBQIJr
=IlBS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----