[OSGeo-Standards] [OSGeo-Discuss] [Ica-osgeo-labs] [TC-Discuss] Open Letter for the need for Open Standards in LiDAR

Tue Apr 21 07:12:02 PDT 2015

The obvious reasoning for communicating with Esri is, that a standard
with support from them gets broader user acceptance.

So I partially agree with Bruce, but I would not stop trying to talk
to Esri (and Keith).

There's actually quite another aspect, namely not delivering promised
functionality, or delivering half-baked implementations (like
requiring ArcPy patches for GeoPackage), or delivering it but not in
ArcGIS Basic license.

So, I would like to point again to the discrepancy that Esri declared
engagement and leadership in OGC (and other) standards but not
delivering.
Is LAS in the Basic license? At least for GeoPackage 1.0 (as Keith
mentioned in his reply) I guess implementation stalled and the release
is far behind announced Summer release 2014.
Fact is, that I did not get yet an answer from Esri about future
release plans regarding GeoPackage after I asked officially two months
ago.

So, instead of playing catch-up games, I propose that executives from
OSGeo contact Esri executives, remind them to their own words and sort
these issues with LAS and Geopackage out.

Yours, S.

2015-04-21 2:12 GMT+02:00 Norman Vine <nhv at cape.com>:
> Thank you Bruce
>
> +1
>
>
> On Apr 20, 2015, at 7:35 PM, Bruce Bannerman
> <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> IMHO
>
> Colleagues,
>
> Why are we as a community playing catch up on this?
>
> I saw enough interest via the open letter for a group of people and
> organisations to collaborate and actually set the agenda and define a better
> **open** LIDAR format (assuming that this is required).
>
> Just a thought from an observer...
>
> Bruce
>
>> ________________________________________
>> > From: standards-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
>> > [standards-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Michael Gerlek
>> > [mpg at flaxen.com]
>> > Sent: Tuesday, 21 April 2015 1:55 AM
>> > To: standards at lists.osgeo.org
>> > Cc: Suchith Anand
>> > Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Standards] [OSGeo-Discuss] [Ica-osgeo-labs]
>> > [TC-Discuss]    Open Letter for the need for Open Standards in LiDAR
>> >
>> > After some of us raised concerns about ESRI’s announcement, they
>> > clarified that their intended position was as Martin describes.
>> >
>> > They clearly didn’t (don’t?) understand the *intent* of the Apache
>> > license and the term “open source". While perfectly legal, it was (and is)
>> > very misleading of them to use the term “open source” anywhere in that repo…
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > aside: They also say in that repo that “it’s easy and free to convert
>> > between standard LAS and zLAS”. Until Martin’s new tool came out today, I
>> > don’t believe that conversion could possibly be considered either "free" or
>> > "easy” :-(
>> >
>> > -mpg
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Apr 18, 2015, at 9:25 PM, Martin Isenburg
>> > <martin.isenburg at gmail.com<mailto:martin.isenburg at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > ESRI's github repository contain *no* source code, except a sample *.cpp
>> > file to show how to use their (Windows-only) binary dll and/or lib files.
>> > This is *not* open source in any sense of the word but an unusal of the
>> > Apache license. Below I quote someone whom I've dicussed this with:
>> >
>> > It is allowed to use Apache License for binary-only software, but that
>> > is extremely rare that anyone does that, because it goes against the whole
>> > idea of "Open Source". It is only possible because Apache License is a
>> > so-called "permissive" license, whereas GPL, CDDL and other "copyleft"
>> > licenses will not allow such "source-less Open Source" non-sense:
>> >
>> > See this section of the FAQ on the OSI site (Open Source Initiative):
>> > http://opensource.org/faq#non-distribution
>> >
>> > Also this Apache Foundation FAQ:
>> > http://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html#WhatDoesItMEAN
>> > "[the Apache license] does not require you to include the source of the
>> > [..] software itself"
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Martin @rapidlasso
>> >
>> > On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Cameron Shorter
>> > <cameron.shorter at gmail.com<mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> > Hi Martin,
>> > Esri's reference below: https://github.com/Esri/esri-zlas-io-library
>> > states that the esri-zlas-io-library read/writes Optimized LAS, and is also
>> > Open Source, under the Apache license.
>> >
>> > Does this mean that it is possible to reverse engineer the Optimized LAS
>> > format?
>> > Would this open the possibility to integrate LASzip and Optimized LAS?
>> > Thoughts?
>> >
>> > Regards Cameron.
>> >
>> > On 17/04/2015 6:52 pm, Suchith Anand wrote:
>> > Colleagues,
>> >
>> > I would like to invite inputs from the geocommunity so I can include all
>> > concerns of the wider geospatial community in my email response . Please do
>> > email your inputs to me before 25th April 2015 for this.
>> >
>> > If you have not yet signed the letter at
>> > http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/LIDAR_Format_Letter   may I  request that all who
>> > wish to support this effort to protect Open Standards for Geospatial data to
>> > kindly add your name , email, affiliation details to the wikipage directly
>> > or email  Patrick Hogan (Email -
>> > patrick.hogan at nasa.gov<mailto:patrick.hogan at nasa.gov> ) with the subject
>> > heading "Support for Open Geo Standards" and the following fields (Name,
>> > Email, Affiliation ) and we will gladly add this to the wiki.
>> >
>> > Best wishes,
>> >
>> > Suchith
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> > From: TC-Discuss
>> > [tc-discuss-bounces at lists.opengeospatial.org<mailto:tc-discuss-bounces at lists.opengeospatial.org>]
>> > On Behalf Of Keith Ryden [kryden at esri.com<mailto:kryden at esri.com>]
>> > Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 7:54 PM
>> > To:
>> > tc-discuss at lists.opengeospatial.org<mailto:tc-discuss at lists.opengeospatial.org>
>> > Subject: Re: [TC-Discuss] Open Letter for the need for Open Standards in
>> > LiDAR
>> >
>> > Regarding Dr. Anand’s concerns and the referenced letter below:
>> >
>> > Esri has long understood the importance of interoperability between
>> > systems and users of geographic information and services. Esri has
>> > participated in the development of national, information community, OGC, and
>> > ISO TC 211 standards from the development of the US Spatial Data Transfer
>> > Standard in the 1980s through the development of OGC Geopackage today. As a
>> > sustaining member of ASPRS and a Principle member of OGC, Esri would gladly
>> > participate in efforts to further the development of open LIDAR and point
>> > cloud standards. Keep in mind that ASPRS owns and maintains LAS, along with
>> > other spatial information standards, and would have the lead in moving it
>> > into  OGC or ISO TC211 for further work if they so desired. Esri will
>> > continue to support and use the ASPRS LAS standard; the Optimized LAS (see
>> > FAQ at https://github.com/Esri/esri-zlas-io-library) is not intended to
>> > replace LAS but to enhance access to remotely stored LIDAR information for
>> > our users.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Keith Ryden
>> > ESRI Software Development
>> >
>> > From: TC-Discuss
>> > [mailto:tc-discuss-bounces+kryden=esri.com at lists.opengeospatial.org] On
>> > Behalf Of Suchith Anand
>> > Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 10:30 AM
>> > To: discuss at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:discuss at lists.osgeo.org>;
>> > ica-osgeo-labs at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:ica-osgeo-labs at lists.osgeo.org>;
>> > tc-discuss at lists.opengeospatial.org<mailto:tc-discuss at lists.opengeospatial.org>
>> > Subject: [TC-Discuss] Open Letter for the need for Open Standards in
>> > LiDAR
>> >
>> > To all colleagues in Academia, Government and Industry who have interest
>> > in maintaining Open Standards:
>> >
>> >
>> > On behalf of "Geo for All" community,
>> > http://www.geoforall.org<http://www.geoforall.org/>, I would like to bring
>> > to your kind attention a significant development that can lead to
>> > undermining our principle for Open Geospatial Standards. I request you
>> > review the wikipage http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/LIDAR_Format_Letter   that is
>> > meant to represent our concern and allow for ongoing input and expression by
>> > our geospatial community.
>> >
>> > We specifically thank Martin Isenburg (author of LASzip and LAStools,
>> > http://laszip.org<http://laszip.org/> and
>> > http://lastools.org<http://lastools.org/>) for  bringing this matter to our
>> > attention (email below) and an email thread of our initial discussion of
>> > this subject that highlight the wider implication of this issue
>> > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/ica-osgeo-labs/2015-March/001225.html
>> > We request all who wish to support this effort to protect Open Standards
>> > for Geospatial data to kindly add your name , email, affiliation details to
>> > the wikipage directly or email  Patrick Hogan (Email -
>> > patrick.hogan at nasa.gov<mailto:patrick.hogan at nasa.gov> ) with the subject
>> > heading "Support for Open Geo Standards" and the following fields (Name,
>> > Email, Affiliation ) and we will gladly add this to the wiki.
>> >
>> > There is current interest by the OGC in pursuing point cloud encoding
>> > standards, including a member-initiated mechanism to extend LAS data with
>> > OGC-standard XML content. The OGC invites interested members who wish to
>> > work on this effort to please contact Scott Simmons (Executive Director,
>> > Standards Program  E-mail :
>> > ssimmons at opengeospatial.org<mailto:ssimmons at opengeospatial.org>  ) to
>> > register their interest and discuss details.  OGC will also be holding an ad
>> > hoc session at our next Technical Committee meeting in Boulder, CO, USA in
>> > June 1st (more details will be send soon) to bring together all interested
>> > from all sectors (government, industry, academia) for this and plan next
>> > steps. We welcome feedback and input from Esri and invite them to join this
>> > effort to  support open LIDAR formats.
>> >
>> > I thank you all again for your attention and support for this important
>> > matter.
>> >
>> > Best wishes,
>> >
>> > Suchith Anand
>> > Founder, GeoForAll
>> > http://www.geoforall.org<http://www.geoforall.org/>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -------- Forwarded Message --------
>> > Subject:
>> >
>> > Please review: Open Letter asking to avoid format fragmentation in LiDAR
>> > standards
>> >
>> > Date:
>> >
>> > Sat, 11 Apr 2015 12:14:51 +1000
>> >
>> > From:
>> >
>> > Cameron Shorter
>> > <cameron.shorter at gmail.com><mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
>> >
>> > To:
>> >
>> > standards at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:standards at lists.osgeo.org>
>> > <standards at lists.osgeo.org><mailto:standards at lists.osgeo.org>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Hi all,
>> > A number of us have been collaboratively developing an Open Letter
>> > asking key stakeholders to avoid fragmentation in LiDAR standards.
>> >
>> > It starts:
>> > We, the undersigned, are concerned that the current interoperability
>> > between LiDAR applications, through use of the open "LAS" format, is being
>> > threatened by ESRI's introduction and promotion of an alternative "Optimized
>> > LAS" proprietary format. This is of concern since the fragmentation of the
>> > LAS format will lead to reduced interoperability between applications and
>> > organisations, and introduce vendor lock-in.
>> >
>> > Could all interested please:
>> > 1. Review and provide feedback to this standards email list
>> > 2. If you agree with the letter, please add your name to the "Signed"
>> > section
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > Cameron Shorter,
>> >
>> > Software and Data Solutions Manager
>> >
>> > LISAsoft
>> >
>> > Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>> >
>> > 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > P +61 2 9009 5000<tel:%2B61%202%209009%205000>,  W
>> > www.lisasoft.com<http://www.lisasoft.com/>,  F +61 2 9009
>> > 5099<tel:%2B61%202%209009%205099>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
>> >
>> > and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
>> >
>> > message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
>> >
>> > message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
>> >
>> > author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
>> >
>> > University of Nottingham.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>> >
>> > attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
>> >
>> > computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
>> >
>> > communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
>> >
>> > permitted by UK legislation.
>> >
>> > This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
>> > and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
>> > message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>> >
>> > Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
>> > message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
>> > author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
>> > University of Nottingham.
>> >
>> > This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>> > attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
>> > computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
>> > communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
>> > permitted by UK legislation.
>> >
>> >
>> > This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
>> > and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
>> > message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>> >
>> > Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
>> > message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
>> > author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
>> > University of Nottingham.
>> >
>> > This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>> > attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
>> > computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
>> > communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
>> > permitted by UK legislation.
>> >
>> >
>> > This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
>> > and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
>> > message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>> >
>> > Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
>> > message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
>> > author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
>> > University of Nottingham.
>> >
>> > This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>> > attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
>> > computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
>> > communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
>> > permitted by UK legislation.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Discuss mailing list
>> > Discuss at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Cameron Shorter,
>> > Software and Data Solutions Manager
>> > LISAsoft
>> > Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>> > 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>> >
>> > P +61 2 9009 5000<tel:%2B61%202%209009%205000>,  W
>> > www.lisasoft.com<http://www.lisasoft.com/>,  F +61 2 9009
>> > 5099<tel:%2B61%202%209009%205099>
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Standards mailing list
>> > Standards at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:Standards at lists.osgeo.org>
>> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Standards mailing list
>> > Standards at lists.osgeo.org
>> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Standards mailing list
> Standards at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Standards mailing list
> Standards at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards