<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
IMO.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Gilberto,</font>
<br><font size=2><tt><br>
> <br>
> In 2003, I did a F00S4G market survey and published the<br>
> results as a chapter of a US National Academy of Sciences book:<br>
> "Open Source GIS Software: Myths and Realities"<br>
> <www.dpi.inpe.br/gilberto/papers/camara_open_source_myths.pdf>.<br>
> <br>
> We analysed 70 FOSS4G software projects taken from the<br>
> FreeGIS list, and divided them into three categories:<br>
> networked products (e.g. GRASS), corporate products (e.g., PostGIS)<br>
> and individual products (e.g., CAVOR). From each product,<br>
> we assessed its maturity, level of support and functionality.<br>
> <br>
</tt></font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">This is an interesting read.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Are you aware of any follow up work?</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I'm particularly interested in perceptions
of the impact that OSGeo may be having as an umbrella organisation.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">wrt Government involvement:</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">- as Frank suggests, I suspect that
governments would have more impact supporting a central group of applications
rather than each one rolling their own. The problem is assessing and picking
the appropriate applications and projects to support.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">- governments often have a tender process
that they need to follow when implementing new systems. If OS products
aren't proposed or well supported, they often don't get looked at.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">- many governments also have a large
investment (in time, training, money, processes and data) in existing proprietary
products and can't easily switch arbitrarily to a new product. </font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">- Having said this, I'm aware of many
organisations that are disatisfied with the status quo and looking to the
longer term to reduce vendor lock-in. One way that people are looking to
do this is to specify support for Open Standards (e.g. ISO 19100 series
and OGC) as a key requirement. Currently OSGeo projects offer some of the
better support for these standards. I hope that this continues (though
I have noticed some derisive comments about standards w****).</font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">wrt the Brazillian TerraLib toolkit
mentioned in your paper:</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">- I've had a quick look at the web site.
The product appears to be quite mature and functional.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">- Has anyone from this list had a technical
look at the products and like to share their observations? Can they be
integrated with OSGeo apps? Do they support OGC standards etc?</font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Bruce Bannerman</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>Notice:</FONT><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ff0000"><BR></FONT><FONT size=2><FONT face=Arial>This
email and any attachments may contain information that is personal,
confidential,<BR>legally privileged and/or copyright.</FONT> <FONT face=Arial>No
part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated </FONT><FONT
face=Arial>without the prior written consent of the copyright owner.
</FONT></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=2><FONT face=Arial>It is the responsibility of the recipient to
check for and remove viruses.</FONT></FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender by return email, delete it from your system and destroy any
copies. You are not authorised to use, communicate or rely on the information
contained in this email.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Arial color=#008000 size=2>Please consider the environment before
printing this email.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </P>
<P> </P>
<P> </P>