Subject: [OSGeo-Edu] American Association of Geographers April Meeting, Boston

[Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo)]

On 3-Nov-07, at 4:39 AM, Charlie Schweik wrote:

> Tyler,
>>
>> I'm still debating about presenting about OSGeo in general, or
>> perhaps on this topic:
>> http://mapguild.org/professionals - think it suits the audience?
>
> Looking at last years program, there was a number of education-related
> presentations...
> http://communicate.aag.org/eseries/aag_org/program/ 
> AbstractTopics.cfm?AbstractTopic=Geography%20Education&mtgID=52 .  
> And when I went to the keyword search there were a number around  
> GIS "collaboration" and about 6 that had "open source" as a keyword.

> If panels are being accepted and there are others from this group
> submitting, I think it would be useful to propose a panel around open
> source GIS with you presenting on OSGeo in general. I'm thinking of  
> the
> academic geographers I know who aren't familiar with this effort.

Okay, if we think we can get a full enough group, then I will plan to  
come too.  I can't get my abstract in until after the 16th though.

> Finally, the mapguild idea is great. Do you see connections between  
> what
> you are trying to do there and our OSGeo edu efforts? Or are they
> totally separate efforts?

I had been thinking about the idea for a few years, and its need was  
particularly underscored when I was in GIS management and had new  
staff needing to get up to speed on open source technology.  Map  
Guild is more about building a professional mentoring network - a  
little more formally than casual emails on a list can do.  There is a  
definite connection between it and OSGeo edu efforts - it could use  
open curriculum to help educate, but wouldn't necessary be building  
new material.

I don't see a 100% overlap with OSGeo because, at some point, I hope  
Map Guild could certify individuals and professional certification  
isn't high on the OSGeo priority list.  Also, I want to find a few  
"Masters" to help start the programme and we could get stuck in a  
chicken-egg loop as in OSGeo we might find it hard to be perfectly  
"fair" is selecting them.

In short, I don't want it to compete with OSGeo, but to build on and  
implement its values.  And I want the freedom to debate its purpose  
and structure without having to consider all the dynamics within an  
OSGeo context - does that make sense?

Tyler