[Journal] Fwd: Re: OSGeo-Journal: proof reading

Tue Apr 17 23:33:55 EDT 2007

I totally agree, especially with regards to setting
templates/requirements, etc.  My hope is that after doing up 1 or 2
volumes we'll have some great ideas for how to improve.

On 4/17/07, Micha Silver <micha at arava.co.il> wrote:
> Hi Tyler:
>
>
> Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo) wrote:
>
> >> I'd like to point out a similar problem with a different article:
> >> Landon Blake did a write up on spatial relations. No where in his
> >> article is FOSS (or any softwre for that matter) mentioned. It's a
> >> theoretical presentation, and the FOSS aspect is totally ignored. I
> >> have more misgivings about that article than the Mapguide one.
> > Hi everyone, I appreciate the open honesty about your concerns Micha,
> > but the last thing I want to do now is start dropping content.  I
> > would really like to keep this article in because I believe it is
> > applicable and interesting to our communities/readers.  Hopefully I
> > can convince you of this too.
> I also do not want to suggest dropping any articles at this point. I
> brought up the issue of Landon's article only to strengthen the case
> that the San Francisco article should still be included despite Martin's
> and Paulo's reservations. Besides, I'm still too green and new to OSGeo
> to be deciding the destiny of someone else's work.
> >
> > Please consider the Journal as an extension of the other parts of our
> > communities - mailing lists, web sites, conferences, articles, etc.
> > These contain a mixture of ideas, theory, discussions, debates, case
> > studies and show that we are part of a larger community of interest -
> > and a healthy community that has many diverse viewpoints.  How can we
> > help capture some of this energy, mind-share and direction?  By
> > writing articles and wrapping them up neatly for others to use, re-use
> > and share with friends and colleagues.  No one goes to print off a
> > lengthy email discussing to share it with their friends - so we help
> > do this for them by finding topics of interest to ourselves and our
> > communities.
> >
> > For example, I particularly requested the article from Landon and was
> > glad he offered to do it.  I think you would be surprised how
> > interesting is will be to many readers.  I thought it was a good
> > approach to helping educate readers to some fundamental geospatial
> > basics that Landon could then apply in a future article.
> >
> I hope to see in future issues of OSGeo Journal, as a permanent feature,
> articles on basic GIS theory. However I'd want at minimum some mention
> of FOSS- at least a link to a HowTo or some such. I want to believe that
> OSgeo readers would *expect* to find the FOSS viewpoint threaded
> throughout the Journal. There is, afterall a multitude of material
> available today, online and otherwise, on GIS theory - mostly oriented
> towards commercial software.. Most potential "converts" would
> continuously need to ask: Where is feature X from [your favorite
> proprietary GIS app] in FOSS GIS?? (GRASS, as you know has a whole wiki
> page devoted to GRASS for Arcview users.)  It would be most appropriate,
> in my mind, for OSGeo to fill this need.
> > I also believe these are important topics that help make the Journal
> > more applicable to a much larger audience than only FOSS-related
> > readers.  Please remember it is not "The GFOSS Journal" but represents
> > a much larger community of interest.  I don't want to run the risk of
> > being so tightly focused that we exclude valuable content because it
> > doesn't meet precise criteria.  100% pure FOSS-focused publications
> > can easily slip into a category that makes them only useful to those
> > who already recognise that FOSS has value.
> >
> ...and to those are are on the fence; a much larger audience, I think.
> > My hope for the Journal is to have it reflect the interests, expertise
> > and software tools of those who work in our OSGeo-related project
> > communities (and beyond).  I want this to be a publication that not
> > only talks about FOSS, but about real people, projects and solutions.
> > In the mean time I appreciate the theoretical articles because it
> > helps build knowledge and awareness.  Landon and I spoke about this
> > when I twisted his arm to write it - so that it set the stage for a
> > FOSS topology implementation example later.   Likewise with the WPS
> > topical article, a follow up article will show how Mapwindow is used
> > to implement the spec.
> >
> > In the end, if there are people interested in writing about useful and
> > applicable technology, concepts, software, examples, then I want to
> > harness their energy and put it into our journal.  First of all it
> > engages our communities to learn more about each other in a fuller
> > capacity (not just the FOS Software portion of our lives and work),
> > but it also encourages people to write more articles that could then
> > be re-used in the compilation of a book or for presentations, etc.
> > Consider also the alternatives: our community members may go and write
> > articles for magazines that usually *only* promote proprietary
> > solutions.  I'm not against those publications and think we *should*
> > be writing for them too, but I also think that our community is
> > advanced enough to be able to help itself grow and teach each other in
> > our ways.
> >
> I'm not worried about "alternatives". Open source developers, writers,
> activists very often, I believe have a "day job"  which might well
> involve exclusively, or mostly, proprietary, closed software. That
> doesn't usually compete with the time they spend on open source coding
> or activities.
> > In a nutshell, consider the journal as a way of building our image as
> > geospatial professionals, not only GFOSS advocates, while also
> > promoting open source projects to others who may not know about them.
> > I think we've got a pretty good mix in this volume, though I'd like to
> > have more case studies and a few less project introductions in the
> > next volume.
> >
>
>
> Would you want to consider for future issues spelling out guidelines for
> authors? For example there might be a "template" for developer updates,
> another for topical, theoretical articles, and another for case studies,
> etc.  Perhaps, as editors, we should exercise some judgement and give
> the Journal a more uniform structure and direction.
>
>
> > I hope that makes some sense and that the authors of SFUF case study
> > and Landon don't run away screaming ;-)
> >
> I'd certainly regret that.
> > Tyler
> Best regards,
> Micha
>
> _______________________________________________
> newsletter mailing list
> newsletter at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/newsletter
>