[OSGeo-Discuss] regarding Standards on the beta website
Jody Garnett
jody.garnett at gmail.com
Wed Aug 23 13:52:54 PDT 2017
Do you mean the difference between clients and servers? I would hope WMS
support in OpenLayers is clearly distinct from WMS support in MapServer.
Can you clarify bobb, standards are confusing / intimidating enough as it
is (especially for projects that implement a wall of them).
Ideally I would like to see projects that are certified by OGC place the
correct logos on these pages.
--
Jody Garnett
On 23 August 2017 at 08:47, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul) <
bob.basques at ci.stpaul.mn.us> wrote:
> All,
>
> “Support for” and “able to use” should be separate criteria in the OGC
> capabilities (I think) as well.
>
> bobb
>
>
> On Aug 22, 2017, at 1:41 PM, Jeff McKenna <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>
> wrote:
>
> 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 <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 <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
> <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>>
>
> > >
>
> > > <mailto:jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com
> <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>
> <mailto:jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com
> <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
> <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
> <Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>>
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
>
> "The power of accurate observation is frequently called cynicism by those
> who don't have it." - George Bernard Shaw
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170823/5311cbd6/attachment.html>
More information about the Discuss
mailing list