[Geo4All] [OSGeo-Discuss] Tackling the Open Source dilemma

[Munich Orientation Convention]

Excellent, Berend! 
Now we made at least a quantum jump from zeroDialog to a quasiDialog where you decide which questions you answer.

I didn’t affirm that you’re a board member, I affirm that you’re using their uncomplete principles to block discussions about benefits. Imagine the board would expulse you from the paradise because you charge – symbolic? - fees for your books and promote w3w for a problem which simple doesn’t exist: lat/lon and “here” satisfy all their needs. 

For a better communication, please let me enumerate the arising questions (or should I use words?).

1) Where is the cow?
I suppose, the community is still waiting for your recommendation for cowboys. Or all they died on the Marlboro disease ? Or does your silence prove that your university still didn’t discover the market gap? Love and Openmania can make blind.

2) w3w

2a) 
I suppose, the community still would like to know  WHY do you promote w3w. 
What does fascinate you?
If the “where ?” problem exists, why not OpenLocationCode, NAC, Xaddress, mapcode, smart location codes etc.? 

2b) 
If w3w is not silly: who should profit from your named address approved.steered.classed?
Does it belong to Enschede, to your building, to your room or to your chair? How can we recognize this?  

2c) 
If w3w isn’t silly: what’s the distance and direction from your position to coffee.meeting.unclassed?

2d) 
if w3w is not silly: does it have benefic influences on cartography? On signage? On geocaching/navigation devices? What's the benefit at all?

Besides: I’m in contact with the owner of w3w. He has been playing music everywhere in the world and did like me suffer under the where-problem. He’s the one – not me - who was very angry about the academic arrogance, so he decided to let convert lat/lon to a less academic expression. Who knows, maybe one day he’ll promote what3values: hours, minutes and radius for cowboys etc.

3) Paul Ramsey
I never got a chance like Paul got and I don’t have his elegance. I’m still on the phase where the comments are only destructive.     

4) Merit principle
Your bridge between GeoForAll and the merit principle is not clear for me. 

5) source code
I’m not a programmer and my invention is not a software, so please don’t confuse the community. 
I don’t understand why you comb through my general license model and only pick the expression “source code”. My license model is very simple: case-by-case. It is possible to hide and seek Easter eggs just with some lines on sand.  

What is what you want? A source code for names? A source code for pictograms? A source code for education methods? A source code for imaginary clocks? A source for the r100 radius www.volksnav.de/r100 ? A source code for Easter eggs? The source code of the apps? Why? I had to pay a lot for them.     

6) quasiOpen

Each solution changes the problem. Mobile phones solved a problem, now we fight against providers and   batteries.
If the community would wake up and discover that the “where” problem really exists but a solution with an open standard would destroy the standard, so the WIN-WIN-WIN way out is simply to find another name for “open”. My suggestion is: quasiOpen.  

Would it be terrible for you if for example the Tokyo Metro would prefer to pay for a whole concept www.volksnav.de/TokyoMetro in favor of those who can’t read Japanese (you?) than to adopt the actual open solutions? See example Limux. 

The quasiOpen concept would accept symbolic fees to protect the standard AND to comply with the proven merit principle. Depending on the benefits, the fee can be from zero to …      

Let’s start with your university?

Henrique



-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: <b.j.kobben at utwente.nl>
Subject: Re: [Geo4All] [OSGeo-Discuss] Tackling the Open Source dilemma
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 11:37:04 +0100
Size: 7310
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geoforall/attachments/20171129/5f444f45/attachment.mht>