[OSGeo-Standards] [OSGeo-Discuss] Supporting Standards

Seven seven at arnulf.us
Wed Nov 14 05:59:55 PST 2012

Hash: SHA1

...pulling this thread back into the standards list. See below for

Am 2012-11-13 11:21, schrieb Stefano Costa:
> Il 07/09/2012 02:49, Michael P. Gerlek ha scritto:
>> [added standards mailing list back to the distribution list]
>> Quoting all of item 4, to put Stefano's quote in context:
>> "Standards specifications are made accessible to all for 
>> implementation and deployment. Affirming standards organizations
>> have defined procedures to develop specifications that can be
>> implemented under fair terms. Given market diversity, fair terms
>> may vary from royalty-free to fair, reasonable, and
>> non-discriminatory terms (FRAND)."
>> I'm pretty pragmatic about this stuff, so I see this as a
>> perfectly reasonable position for an organization to take.
> Two months have passed since this last comment by Michael. I was 
> wondering if any decision has been taken about this?
> It may be also useful to look at this MoU
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Open_Source_and_Open_Standards
> where no mention of FRAND is found (quite the opposite I would
> say).
> Ciao steko

I am not aware of any decision needed to be taken. Did I miss anything?

Michael just explained how some non-profit organizations work. In my
opinion the OGC is doing quite well, always conscious of their own
limitations and always open for opinions from the outside. Especially
with the Open Source geospatial community this became easier when
OSGeo appeared as (some kind of) an "entitiy" you could talk. This
gave the OGC a venue to help Open Source through their free membership
offering to the Open Source community. It took quite some time for us
(OSGeo folks) to pick up on this idea but some activity at least is
now going on.

This does not mean that everything is great and we love each other
until the end of days. Instead it just opens a channel for
communication which we did not have so far. It might well be that we
discover that whatever the members of the OGC do is contrary our hopes
and vice versa. But that has to be decided on a base to base case. No,
meant ot say on a case to case, basis.

Interestingly in the most recent discussion around the upcoming
GeoServices REST API the rift between opposition and support did not
coincide with the proprietary-vendor / open source devide but rather
(as so often) between Esri and the REST of the world.


- -- 
Exploring Space, Time and Mind
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/


More information about the Standards mailing list