[OSGeo-Standards] glossary discussion on osgeo-standards ....
cameron.shorter at gmail.com
Wed Oct 2 21:00:41 PDT 2019
<resending as my last email was too big for the list>
I can see that you have documented the OGC process, and HOW external
people can engage with this process.
However, I'm really looking for a Vision and Technical Roadmap which
OSGeo can follow (re Terminology definitions). I feel you haven't
addressed our OSGeo use case. And in particular, I'm not seeing an
integration strategy between OGC and OSGeo.
On behalf of the OSGeo community, I'm offering to help source extra
terminology, but I don't want to start a new incompatible system. I'm
hoping we can set up something which seamlessly integrates with ISO 211
and OGC. And for that I'm asking for help. Think about the reality of
sourcing terms from thousands of individuals. These people are not
interested in managing a glossary, but would be fine with suggesting a
missing term, or refining a definition - if we make the process easy.
So if you were to advise on setting up an OSGeo Terminology system from
scratch what would you suggest? I'm thinking advice should cover
crowdsourcing information, include a review process, and particularly
pertinent to the OGC, should describe seamlessly integrate into OGC and
ISO 211 systems (because we have agreed on the same field names and
Note: In my first 30 sec look I can see there are gaps in OGC
definitions. I can't find an edge case word "GeoJSON", but can find a
similar transport format "XML".
I can't find package names such as "QGIS". I'm sure there are more. I
feel the OSGeo community could complement OGC hugely in supporting the
spatial community around terminology - and we would be so much better
with OGC's help.
After collating your thoughts, I suggest we should follow up with a
video conference call.
On 2/10/19 11:50 pm, Gobe Hobona wrote:
> The OGC publishes definitions through the OGC Definitions Server at
> The definitions include, amongst others, terms from the OGC Glossary of
> Terms https://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/glossary
> The glossary is represented in the Definitions Server by this resource
> The RDF Turtle files used to populate the Definitions Server with the
> glossary are at
> Once published, the definitions are available in RDF/XML, RDF Turtle,
> JSON-LD and a series of other formats. Some specific definitions, such
> as those for Coordinate Reference Systems are available in GML.
> Any OGC member or Alliance Partner can submit a proposal for terms or
> names of resources to be registered. OSGeo is an alliance partner so can
> also submit a proposal. Upon receipt of the proposal, the proposal is
> discussed and voted on by the OGC-NA. The OGC-NA relies on subject
> matter experts from the Domain Working Groups and Standards Working
> Groups for guidance on whether to approve a proposal.
> The Definitions Server has been developed to support implementors of OGC
> standards and also the work of the OGC Naming Authority (OGC-NA), a
> subcommittee of the OGC Technical Committee. It’s procedures are at
> Other policies are at https://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/na
> The definitions are published through the OGC Definitions Server at
> Below the Definitions Server is infrastructure to support redirection
> and proxying to other registers (e.g. Sensor Model Registers, Coordinate
> Reference System registers, UoM registers etc).
> OGC is not currently looking to replace the Definitions Server, nor the
> infrastructure on which it is built.
> Some key lessons that we can share are that:
> * The governance, policies and procedures (many of which are described
> in ISO 19135-1:2015) are very important.
> * The role of subject matter experts is also very important.
Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant
M +61 (0) 419 142 254
More information about the Standards