[OSGeo-Discuss] regarding Standards on the beta website

[Jeff McKenna]

In our case, nesting won't help (if project XXX selects "OGC" as its 
standards support in the wordpress backend, the reader of our site will 
assume that all OGC standards are met by project XXX - so yes I agree 
that the best thing is to delete the single "OGC" option.

As for other "standards", we will need to specify that somehow.

Possibly we can specify this directly in the description?  For example:

   Web Processing Service (WPS)

     would become:

   OGC: Web Processing Service (WPS)


and

   Georeferenced Tagged Image File Format (GeoTIFF)

      would become:

   Other: Web Processing Service (WPS)


thoughts?

-jeff





On 2017-08-22 3:22 PM, Jeff McKenna wrote:
> Note that the issue here is not nested or not; the issue is that we must 
> be careful with the use of the word "standard" on our new site.  -jeff
> 
> 
> 
> On 2017-08-22 3:11 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>> Never mind, you can have nesting, so OGC can contain WFS, WMS, WCS, 
>> etc...
>>
>> -- 
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 22 August 2017 at 11:09, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com 
>> <mailto:jody.garnett at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     You can click on the number, in this case 11, and see a list of the
>>     projects implementing the OGC standard. I am deleting it now...
>>
>>     --
>>     Jody Garnett
>>
>>     On 22 August 2017 at 10:17, Even Rouault <even.rouault at spatialys.com
>>     <mailto:even.rouault at spatialys.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         __
>>
>>         On mardi 22 août 2017 14:07:04 CEST Jeff McKenna wrote:
>>
>>         > Many of these don't make any sense to me, if you ask me my 
>> opinion.  We
>>
>>         > should be using the list of OGC standards and entering them 
>> into
>>
>>         > wordpress, and not allowing editors to edit/add new 
>> non-standards.  But
>>
>>         > that is all my own opinion :)  Then we can link to these 
>> standards.  As
>>
>>         > of now anyone can create a 'standard' and post it on the 
>> beta site,
>>
>>         > seems very odd to me.
>>
>>         Just a remainder that OGC is not the only source of standards.
>>         For example, GeoJSON is IETF RFC 7946 for example (and before
>>         last year, was a community standard). GeoTIFF can also be
>>         considered as a defacto standard, etc.. You have also the ISO
>>         standards for metadata, etc...
>>
>>         Probably a loose definition for standards could be a
>>         specification available somewhere (potentially behind a paywall
>>         like ISO...), and implemented by at least several 
>> software/vendors.
>>
>>         Even
>>
>>          >
>>
>>          > Is my opinion here too strong? For now I chose just to edit 
>> the
>>
>>          > descriptions for all of these 'standards', valid or not.
>>
>>          >
>>
>>          > What do you prefer?
>>
>>          >
>>
>>          > -jeff
>>
>>          >
>>
>>          > On 2017-08-22 1:59 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>
>>          > > Thanks jeff, I just noticed that work had been done in the
>>         GeoServer
>>
>>          > > meeting :) We also spotted one standard "OGC" which does
>>         not make sense.
>>
>>          > >
>>
>>          > > Do you think it is worthwhile linking to these standards?
>>
>>          > >
>>
>>          > >
>>
>>          > >
>>
>>          > > --
>>
>>          > > Jody Garnett
>>
>>          > >
>>
>>          > > On 22 August 2017 at 09:42, Jeff McKenna
>>         <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com
>>         <mailto:jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>
>>
>>          > >
>>
>>          > > <mailto:jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com
>>         <mailto:jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>>> wrote:
>>
>>          > > Since we have so many website 'editors' (currently 84),
>>         please if
>>
>>          > > you do create a new "standard" (double-quote use is on
>>         purpose, as
>>
>>          > > many of these are not actual standards) when you are
>>         editing your
>>
>>          > > project page, please let me know and I will edit the new
>>         standard
>>
>>          > > and add a description - I have just went through all of 
>> these
>>
>>          > > "standards" and set descriptions for each of the 27
>>         "standards".
>>
>>          > >
>>
>>          > > For example:
>>
>>          > >   (WPS)
>>
>>          > >
>>
>>          > >     will now appear on the project pages as:
>>
>>          > >
>>
>>          > >    Web Processing Service (WPS)
>>
>>          > >
>>
>>          > > This consistency makes it much easier to read for new users
>>         to our
>>
>>          > > site.
>>
>>          > >
>>
>>          > > thanks all!
>>
>>          > >
>>
>>          > > -jeff
>>
>>          >
>>
>>          > _______________________________________________
>>
>>          > Discuss mailing list
>>
>>          > Discuss at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>>
>>          > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>         <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>>
>>         --
>>         Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
>>
>>         http://www.spatialys.com
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Discuss mailing list
>>         Discuss at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>>         https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>         <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>>
>>
>>