[OSGeo-Standards] OGC liaison memberships
arnulf.christl at metaspatial.net
Mon Jun 3 05:30:47 PDT 2013
On 01.06.2013 14:48, Adrian Custer wrote:
> On 6/1/13 8:15 AM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>> Currently OSGeo doesn't have a vote at the OGC, which is something we
>> might want to ask for. If we are to ask for a vote from OGC, we would
>> need to be confident that we would have volunteers with sufficient time
>> to review the material required to vote. Such reviewing will take quite
>> a bit of time, but if we have volunteers willing to do the work, I think
>> we have a good case to ask for such a vote.
> That is a good point, that we might want to do preparation on our side.
> Because the volume of work is such that *no one* actually reads all the
> standards (probably not even the OGC Architecture Board), OGC policy
> usually proceeds by objection. So our work might be limited to informing
> OSGeo about upcoming votes and asking for any reactions. The absence of
> reactions is indication of the lack of opposition.
...which is what we have exactly (*not*) been doing in the past years.
So what good would it be to formalize it with a vote now which we will
not execute anyway? It would simply support the current OGC policy to
"proceed by not objecting" - which we all agree does not go well with
our perspectives on openness. What good would it be to not cast a vote -
if - as mentioned earlier - we will never find a consensus within the
OSGeo Foundation in time anway?
Open Source Geospatial Software, Data and Services
More information about the Standards