[OSGeo-Discuss] CoverageJSON

Tue Aug 30 05:53:17 PDT 2016

Hi All,

As Jon pointed out, this work is being discussed in the joint OGC/W3C Spatial Data on the Web Working Group. Also, Jon will be presenting the work formally to the OGC membership at our Opening Plenary next month. I encourage interested parties to attend in person (Orlando, FL USA) or remotely via GoTo Meeting.

Many OGC standards are now being developed in GitHub and nothing precludes this work from evolving in a very public fashion and also moving through the OGC process, if desired!

Best Regards,
Scott

Scott Simmons
Executive Director, Standards Program
Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC)
tel +1 970 682 1922
mob +1 970 214 9467
ssimmons at opengeospatial.org <mailto:ssimmons at opengeospatial.org>

The OGC: Making Location Count…
www.opengeospatial.org <http://www.opengeospatial.org/>

> On Aug 30, 2016, at 3:46 AM, Jon Blower <j.d.blower at reading.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jachym,
>  
> That’s good to know, thanks. We’ve done all our development on GitHub so far and communicated via issues and wikis there. It could be a good idea to move discussions somewhere like OSGeo in future, but for now I’d like to encourage anyone who is interested to join us on GitHub:
>  
> https://github.com/covjson/specification <https://github.com/covjson/specification>
>  
> The “public-facing” website of the project (including links to tools etc) is https://covjson.org <https://covjson.org/>. 
>  
> So I guess you could consider this email the “call for action” to the OSGeo community! ;-)  (We have announced this publicly in other forums, but it’s good to have this opportunity to directly talk to OSGeo – thanks Bruce for drawing me in!)
>  
> Best wishes,
> Jon
>  
> From: Jachym Cepicky <jachym.cepicky at gmail.com>
> Date: Tuesday, 30 August 2016 10:38
> To: Bruce Bannerman <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com>, Jon Blower <sgs02jdb at reading.ac.uk>
> Cc: OSGeo Discussions <discuss at lists.osgeo.org>, Massimiliano Cannata <massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] CoverageJSON
>  
> Hi, 
>  
> afaik, we as OSGeo, do not have formal procedure regarding standards, we offer some infrastructure (wiki, mailing list, maybe gitlab) and you can just "call for action" - you can then collaborate like any other project. It is very simple and gives you big freedom. That does not exclude you from adopt the standard by more formal organisations (W3C or (I would prefer it more) OGC) which makes sense
>  
> @sevenspatial would say: go public, announce early, wait a little for possible feedback, and either go on or merge with existing project which might be already there, we just do not know about. for this, OSGeo is great sandbox
>  
> J
>  
> út 30. 8. 2016 v 11:31 odesílatel Bruce Bannerman <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com <mailto:bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com>> napsal:
>> This is good to see Jon.
>>  
>> @All how can we make this happen within OSGeo?
>>  
>> Bruce
>> 
>> On 30 Aug 2016, at 19:09, Jon Blower <j.d.blower at reading.ac.uk <mailto:j.d.blower at reading.ac.uk>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Dear all,
>>>  
>>> (Second attempt at sending this, I wasn’t subscribed before!)
>>>  
>>> I’m the leader of the project under which CoverageJSON is being developed [1]. My colleague Maik Riechert is the main developer of this. Thanks very much to Bruce for advertising to this list! I’ll pick up on a few of the points in this thread:
>>>  
>>> 1.       Regarding adoption, it’s early days yet, but I’m aware of a few applications in development (including our own projects of course, but also some external folk). We’re building in library support for a few languages (e.g. Javascript, Python) and some tools (e.g. Leaflet and NASA’s Web World Wind).
>>> 2.       I think CovJSON can work nicely with O&M (the coverage can be the result of the observation). O&M could provide the “hooks” on which other metadata (e.g. provenance) could be hung.
>>> 3.       Regarding compression: yes, this is going to be important. JSON gzips very well on the wire, which helps a lot with transfer speed and our tests indicate that it’s typically not very much worse than a compressed binary format. We’ve worked successfully with rasters of millions of pixels in size.
>>> 4.       We’d be very happy to help people who want to implement support for CovJSON in software (e.g. istSOS). Maybe our libraries will be of some use here.
>>>  
>>> Any feedback on the spec or tools (positive or negative) is very welcome and timely, as we are moving towards a stable 1.0 release.
>>>  
>>> Best wishes, >>> Jon
>>>  
>>> [1] http://www.melodiesproject.eu <http://www.melodiesproject.eu/>
>>>  
>>> -- 
>>> Dr Jon Blower,
>>> MELODIES project coordinator,
>>> University of Reading
>>> j.d.blower at reading.ac.uk <mailto:j.d.blower at reading.ac.uk>
>>>  
>>> From: Massimiliano Cannata <massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch <mailto:massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>>
>>> Date: Thursday, 18 August 2016 09:47
>>> To: Bruce Bannerman <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com <mailto:bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com>>
>>> Cc: Jachym Cepicky <jachym.cepicky at gmail.com <mailto:jachym.cepicky at gmail.com>>, OSGeo Discussions <discuss at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:discuss at lists.osgeo.org>>, Jon Blower <sgs02jdb at reading.ac.uk <mailto:sgs02jdb at reading.ac.uk>>
>>> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] CoverageJSON
>>>  
>>> Dear All,
>>> the coverage in O&M is addressed also at EU level within the SOS but in XML.
>>>  
>>> I may be interested in exploring this format and add this capability to istSOS in the next future...
>>>  
>>> Maxi
>>>  
>>> 2016-08-17 22:58 GMT+02:00 Bruce Bannerman <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com <mailto:bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com>>:
>>>> Thanks Jachym.
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> I can also see the potential of this format.
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> I like the potential for tying in the Observations and Measurements Observed Property with associated community agreed definitions to the coverage. This has been a missing piece of the puzzle for some time.
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> I understand that Jon and his team would welcome collaboration to further test and develop the format.
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> I expect that Jon will respond when he gets back off his holiday.
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> Bruce
>>>> 
>>>> On 17 Aug 2016, at 19:03, Jachym Cepicky <jachym.cepicky at gmail.com <mailto:jachym.cepicky at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Bruce and Jon,
>>>>>  
>>>>> I went through the spec, and I like it in general (not that it would be so important) 
>>>>>  
>>>>> JSON usage is certainly still growing, so is size of the data. Are you guys using the CoverageJSON in some application already? I like the metadata verbosity, and overall readiness for international environment.
>>>>>  
>>>>> Have you been thinking about data compression too? For raster data, this could be key issue IMHO.
>>>>>  
>>>>> good luck
>>>>>  
>>>>> Jachym
>>>>>  
>>>>> čt 11. 8. 2016 v 0:47 odesílatel Bruce Bannerman <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com <mailto:bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com>> napsal:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Are any projects doing any work with the emerging data format, CoverageJSON?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> See:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> - https://covjson.org/ <https://covjson.org/>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> - https://github.com/covjson/specification/blob/master/spec.md <https://github.com/covjson/specification/blob/master/spec.md>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I understand that this is still a work in progress, but is in a fairly stable state at the moment.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If anyone has looked at the format in detail, what are your thoughts on its viability for:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> - data exchange; and
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> - to underpin spatial and image analysis?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Bruce
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> --
>>> Massimiliano Cannata
>>> Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica
>>> Responsabile settore Geomatica
>>>  
>>> Istituto scienze della Terra
>>> Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design
>>> Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana
>>> Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio
>>> Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14
>>> Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09
>>> massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch <mailto:massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>
>>> www.supsi.ch/ist <http://www.supsi.ch/ist>_______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20160830/3007e14c/attachment-0002.html>