From joana at doublebyte.net  Tue Nov  4 04:18:14 2025
From: joana at doublebyte.net (Joana Simoes)
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2025 12:18:14 +0000
Subject: [OSGeo-Standards] Conference: iDays Frankfurt
Message-ID: <9ceb3ec9-8019-4cb5-b68e-239591e25ebd@doublebyte.net>

Good morning,

I would like to call your attention to the OGC Innovation Days, to be 
held in Frankfurt on December 9-10.

https://www.ogc.org/event/innovation-days-frankfurt/

You can check more details in the registration link: 
https://events.ogc.org/InnovationDaysFrankfurt

 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? All the Best,

 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Joana


From volksnav at volksnav.de  Tue Nov 11 01:21:34 2025
From: volksnav at volksnav.de (volksnav at volksnav.de)
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2025 10:21:34 +0100
Subject: [OSGeo-Standards] Accra: birth of a standard for global, national,
 urban and indoor reference grids?
Message-ID: <000001dc52ec$932a61a0$b97f24e0$@volksnav.de>

To

OGC, Joana Simoes

 

Hi Joana, thank you for calling attention to the AfricaGIS 2025 in
Accra/Ghana, organized by OGC and UNGGIM. This constellation would be more
than adequate for to define two important standards: 

 

1 - consumer friendly reference grids - instead of actually none
https://volksnav.de/YouAreHere 

 

2 - imaginable - instead of enigmatic https://volksnav.de/alternatives -
location codes for global, national, urban, ingate and indoor purposes. 

Ghana has introduced own ones https://volksnav.de/GhanaScandal but, like
Google's plusCode, the population and also AfricaGIS ignore them.

 

Acc. to the video https://volksnav.de/aSimpleCircle, I've accidentally
invented a solution for both goals. Example Accra: https://volksnav.de/Accra


The problem: if it would be open, immediately hundreds of "better" standards
would arise, destroying the goal. To solve this, I'm proposing to Overture
Maps, think big investors and others to adopt the invention according to the
merit principle and simply open it for all.  

 

I'd appreciate if you and other members of this discussions list would
support this solution. Thank you in advance for the comments in favor of the
consumers,

 

Henrique

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20251111/6329c68c/attachment.htm>

From volksnav at volksnav.de  Tue Nov 11 07:23:11 2025
From: volksnav at volksnav.de (volksnav at volksnav.de)
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2025 16:23:11 +0100
Subject: [OSGeo-Standards] Complement: Accra: birth of a standard for global,
 national, urban and indoor reference grids?
Message-ID: <001c01dc531f$17637d80$462a7880$@volksnav.de>

Complement:

 

A report for Minpostel/Cameroon confirmed the superiority of the proposal
https://volksnav.de/reportMinpostel and points out that this is world's only
system which considers the street configurations. All others are mere
converters which only consider the flying route.

 

Minpostel is only waiting for financing and could start immediately.

 

Henrique 

 

Von: volksnav at volksnav.de <volksnav at volksnav.de> 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 11. November 2025 10:22
An: 'standards at lists.osgeo.org' <standards at lists.osgeo.org>
Betreff: Accra: birth of a standard for global, national, urban and indoor
reference grids?

 

To

OGC, Joana Simoes

 

Hi Joana, thank you for calling attention to the AfricaGIS 2025 in
Accra/Ghana, organized by OGC and UNGGIM. This constellation would be more
than adequate for to define two important standards: 

 

1 - consumer friendly reference grids - instead of actually none
https://volksnav.de/YouAreHere 

 

2 - imaginable - instead of enigmatic https://volksnav.de/alternatives -
location codes for global, national, urban, ingate and indoor purposes. 

Ghana has introduced own ones https://volksnav.de/GhanaScandal but, like
Google's plusCode, the population and also AfricaGIS ignore them.

 

Acc. to the video https://volksnav.de/aSimpleCircle, I've accidentally
invented a solution for both goals. Example Accra: https://volksnav.de/Accra


The problem: if it would be open, immediately hundreds of "better" standards
would arise, destroying the goal. To solve this, I'm proposing to Overture
Maps, think big investors and others to adopt the invention according to the
merit principle and simply open it for all.  

 

I'd appreciate if you and other members of this discussions list would
support this solution. Thank you in advance for the comments in favor of the
consumers,

 

Henrique

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20251111/83e73da8/attachment-0001.htm>

From howard at hobu.co  Tue Nov 11 19:43:13 2025
From: howard at hobu.co (Howard Butler)
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2025 21:43:13 -0600
Subject: [OSGeo-Standards] PROJJSON OGC Community Standard Submission?
In-Reply-To: <C7C3462E-44C8-49D8-9818-C4BA77FEF756@hobu.co>
References: <C7C3462E-44C8-49D8-9818-C4BA77FEF756@hobu.co>
Message-ID: <17D071F1-BBC0-45DF-B0B9-BA274F0B32D4@hobu.co>

No takers, interest, or guidance on this topic?

> On Oct 31, 2025, at 12:37?PM, Howard Butler <howard at hobu.co> wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> The PROJ project plans to submit PROJJSON as an OGC Community Standard.  The application document was initiated three years ago [1] by myself and Even Rouault, but we were waiting to see if the OGC CRS SWG would build upon PROJJSON to create a JSON based encoding of CRS. 
> 
> To date, no draft has been published, the survey at the previous OGC meeting was ambiguous about how the organization would move forward, and if the CRS SWG chooses to revisit ISO 19111 conceptual model enhancements and their reflection through a JSON CRS definition, that work will in all likelihood be backwards and forwards incompatible with PROJJSON. Given the current situation, we would like to move forward with PROJJSON as a Community Standard.
> 
> In the interim since we initiated the submission, PROJJSON adoption has continued to grow. STAC was recently recognized as a OGC Community Standard at the Boulder Members Meeting [2], and its Projection Extension references PROJJSON. GeoParquet 1.1 [3] uses PROJJSON as its CRS definition, Parquet references PROJJSON as a possible definition in its spatial types[4], and Zarr is looking at it for its geo-proj Zarr extension [5]. 
> 
> We believe it makes sense to resume the application process for PROJJSON to be also recognized as a community standard. Even has prepared an update of the application at https://github.com/OSGeo/projjson-submission/pull/3. 
> 
> Does OSGeo want to be mentioned as one of the submitting organizations? If so, what's the process for a project to submit one of its works to OSGeo as a Community Standard? A successful motion raised on this mailing list?
> Kind regards,
> 
> Howard and Even
> 
> 
> [1] https://github.com/OSGeo/projjson-submission 
> [2] https://www.ogc.org/announcement/ogc-announces-publication-of-the-spatiotemporal-asset-catalog-community-standards/
> [3] https://geoparquet.org/releases/v1.1.0/
> [4] https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/blob/master/Geospatial.md
> [5] https://github.com/zarr-experimental/geo-proj
> 


From ratkinson at ogc.org  Wed Nov 12 00:45:34 2025
From: ratkinson at ogc.org (Rob Atkinson)
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:45:34 +0000
Subject: [OSGeo-Standards] PROJJSON OGC Community Standard Submission?
In-Reply-To: <17D071F1-BBC0-45DF-B0B9-BA274F0B32D4@hobu.co>
References: <C7C3462E-44C8-49D8-9818-C4BA77FEF756@hobu.co>
 <17D071F1-BBC0-45DF-B0B9-BA274F0B32D4@hobu.co>
Message-ID: <SJ0PR01MB744804BB12202916CC788573BCCCA@SJ0PR01MB7448.prod.exchangelabs.com>

Note there is a plan to work on CRS ontologies too..

A JSON-LD mapping to this would be the reason to use PROJJSON instead of a model-derived JSON schema that provides a clean mapping.

GeoJSON has a JSON-LD mapping, this is not unprecedented.

On the other hand STAC is a bit of a mess to map to any common models - its has a lot of idiosyncratic sub-schemas that would need pre- or post-processing rules to turn into something clean - such as mapping the themes extension (used by Records) to dublin core

Some exploration of this here: https://ogcincubator.github.io/bblocks-stac/bblock/ogc.contrib.stac.extensions.themes

(if you look closely you will the challenges created by STAC's approach to mutually incompatible schemas for versions...  open to ideas how this should be handled!)



Rob Atkinson
Senior Research Engineer  | Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC)
Mobile: +61 419 202973
ratkinson at ogc.org<mailto:ratkinson at ogc.org> | ogc.org<http://ogc.org/> | @opengeospatial


[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/meips/ADKq_NYvdzG5CnR-DX7WeJyPCnJuhbJ_G7lH1yVbaql72titKCiG-t4HQ92DiCCRM2jU42bDT20Ge7sBVIodm8VpmVBlrnTKCg=s0-d-e1-ft#https://portal.ogc.org/files/?artifact_id=99287]

________________________________
From: Standards <standards-bounces at lists.osgeo.org> on behalf of Howard Butler via Standards <standards at lists.osgeo.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2025 2:43 PM
To: standards at lists.osgeo.org <standards at lists.osgeo.org>
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Standards] PROJJSON OGC Community Standard Submission?

No takers, interest, or guidance on this topic?

> On Oct 31, 2025, at 12:37?PM, Howard Butler <howard at hobu.co> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> The PROJ project plans to submit PROJJSON as an OGC Community Standard.  The application document was initiated three years ago [1] by myself and Even Rouault, but we were waiting to see if the OGC CRS SWG would build upon PROJJSON to create a JSON based encoding of CRS.
>
> To date, no draft has been published, the survey at the previous OGC meeting was ambiguous about how the organization would move forward, and if the CRS SWG chooses to revisit ISO 19111 conceptual model enhancements and their reflection through a JSON CRS definition, that work will in all likelihood be backwards and forwards incompatible with PROJJSON. Given the current situation, we would like to move forward with PROJJSON as a Community Standard.
>
> In the interim since we initiated the submission, PROJJSON adoption has continued to grow. STAC was recently recognized as a OGC Community Standard at the Boulder Members Meeting [2], and its Projection Extension references PROJJSON. GeoParquet 1.1 [3] uses PROJJSON as its CRS definition, Parquet references PROJJSON as a possible definition in its spatial types[4], and Zarr is looking at it for its geo-proj Zarr extension [5].
>
> We believe it makes sense to resume the application process for PROJJSON to be also recognized as a community standard. Even has prepared an update of the application at https://github.com/OSGeo/projjson-submission/pull/3.
>
> Does OSGeo want to be mentioned as one of the submitting organizations? If so, what's the process for a project to submit one of its works to OSGeo as a Community Standard? A successful motion raised on this mailing list?
> Kind regards,
>
> Howard and Even
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/OSGeo/projjson-submission
> [2] https://www.ogc.org/announcement/ogc-announces-publication-of-the-spatiotemporal-asset-catalog-community-standards/
> [3] https://geoparquet.org/releases/v1.1.0/
> [4] https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/blob/master/Geospatial.md
> [5] https://github.com/zarr-experimental/geo-proj
>

_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Standards at lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20251112/54e0f49b/attachment-0001.htm>

From ratkinson at ogc.org  Wed Nov 12 00:52:20 2025
From: ratkinson at ogc.org (Rob Atkinson)
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:52:20 +0000
Subject: [OSGeo-Standards] PROJJSON OGC Community Standard Submission?
In-Reply-To: <17D071F1-BBC0-45DF-B0B9-BA274F0B32D4@hobu.co>
References: <C7C3462E-44C8-49D8-9818-C4BA77FEF756@hobu.co>
 <17D071F1-BBC0-45DF-B0B9-BA274F0B32D4@hobu.co>
Message-ID: <SJ0PR01MB7448F7B6CF1CC53A143821D5BCCCA@SJ0PR01MB7448.prod.exchangelabs.com>

PS - fancy submitting "building Blocks" for PROJJSON and the STAC-projection extension to our experimental register of re-usable standards ?

Docs here:

Https://ogcincubator.github.io/bblocks-docs/<https://ogcincubator.github.io/bblocks-docs/>  - follow the links to the tutorial - others have successfuly used this to build sets of building blocks - in this case its simpler - just copy/edit one of the existing blocks

STAC sub-register is here - you could put things in here with a PR.

 Git: https://github.com/ogcincubator/bblocks-stac

Viewer: https://ogcincubator.github.io/bblocks-stac

I can support this if you want to give it a go.

(FYI  I have a workshop as FOSS4G in NZ but not sure if current registered attendance is going to make it viable - standards and FAIR standards is a bit of a niche subject compared to playing with tools.  Any people inspired let me know ASAP before I pull it..)

Rob Atkinson
Senior Research Engineer  | Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC)
Mobile: +61 419 202973
ratkinson at ogc.org<mailto:ratkinson at ogc.org> | ogc.org<http://ogc.org/> | @opengeospatial


[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/meips/ADKq_NYvdzG5CnR-DX7WeJyPCnJuhbJ_G7lH1yVbaql72titKCiG-t4HQ92DiCCRM2jU42bDT20Ge7sBVIodm8VpmVBlrnTKCg=s0-d-e1-ft#https://portal.ogc.org/files/?artifact_id=99287]

________________________________
From: Standards <standards-bounces at lists.osgeo.org> on behalf of Howard Butler via Standards <standards at lists.osgeo.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2025 2:43 PM
To: standards at lists.osgeo.org <standards at lists.osgeo.org>
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Standards] PROJJSON OGC Community Standard Submission?

No takers, interest, or guidance on this topic?

> On Oct 31, 2025, at 12:37?PM, Howard Butler <howard at hobu.co> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> The PROJ project plans to submit PROJJSON as an OGC Community Standard.  The application document was initiated three years ago [1] by myself and Even Rouault, but we were waiting to see if the OGC CRS SWG would build upon PROJJSON to create a JSON based encoding of CRS.
>
> To date, no draft has been published, the survey at the previous OGC meeting was ambiguous about how the organization would move forward, and if the CRS SWG chooses to revisit ISO 19111 conceptual model enhancements and their reflection through a JSON CRS definition, that work will in all likelihood be backwards and forwards incompatible with PROJJSON. Given the current situation, we would like to move forward with PROJJSON as a Community Standard.
>
> In the interim since we initiated the submission, PROJJSON adoption has continued to grow. STAC was recently recognized as a OGC Community Standard at the Boulder Members Meeting [2], and its Projection Extension references PROJJSON. GeoParquet 1.1 [3] uses PROJJSON as its CRS definition, Parquet references PROJJSON as a possible definition in its spatial types[4], and Zarr is looking at it for its geo-proj Zarr extension [5].
>
> We believe it makes sense to resume the application process for PROJJSON to be also recognized as a community standard. Even has prepared an update of the application at https://github.com/OSGeo/projjson-submission/pull/3.
>
> Does OSGeo want to be mentioned as one of the submitting organizations? If so, what's the process for a project to submit one of its works to OSGeo as a Community Standard? A successful motion raised on this mailing list?
> Kind regards,
>
> Howard and Even
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/OSGeo/projjson-submission
> [2] https://www.ogc.org/announcement/ogc-announces-publication-of-the-spatiotemporal-asset-catalog-community-standards/
> [3] https://geoparquet.org/releases/v1.1.0/
> [4] https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/blob/master/Geospatial.md
> [5] https://github.com/zarr-experimental/geo-proj
>

_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Standards at lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20251112/60ed1878/attachment.htm>

From luis.de.sousa at protonmail.ch  Wed Nov 12 01:58:10 2025
From: luis.de.sousa at protonmail.ch (=?utf-8?Q?Lu=C3=AD=C2=ADs_Moreira_de_Sousa?=)
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 09:58:10 +0000
Subject: [OSGeo-Standards] PROJJSON OGC Community Standard Submission?
In-Reply-To: <17D071F1-BBC0-45DF-B0B9-BA274F0B32D4@hobu.co>
References: <C7C3462E-44C8-49D8-9818-C4BA77FEF756@hobu.co>
 <17D071F1-BBC0-45DF-B0B9-BA274F0B32D4@hobu.co>
Message-ID: <kzo_NQLr5Y6lu8WoCYM_8zdGZp1PM-_bMEBHqyi8SJU_BkisZb6ZYCg2A04JBk5t9xWlt2AIb_u5JY1cAEMSeqDAu7MlvE8pNfUG8l9-e3Q=@protonmail.ch>

Hi Howard,

thank you for the heads up, the initial message slipped past me. 

I am one of the people working on the CRS web ontology Rob mentioned, meant for joint approval by the W3C and the OGC. We are coming close to a first draft, you may follow that work here:
https://github.com/opengeospatial/ontology-crs

This web ontology does nor propose a new domain model, rather a semantic web counterpart to existing specifications. Namely, it is compatible with:
- ISO 19111
- IGN CRS ontology
- PROJ4RDF ontology
- PROJ data model

Within the PROJ4RDF initiative, Timo Homburg developed tools for the seamless transformation between WKT and RDF. Therefore we'll largely get a JSON-LD serialisation for free. Eventually, this web ontology will allow for the creation of a semantically accurate, machine-readable, on-line CRS registry.

Now, if indeed PROJJSON is not compatible with ISO 19111 then we might need some extra alignment. This should also mean PROJJSON cannot be (completely?) translated into WKT, and would not be entirely compatible with this coming W3C/OGC CRS web ontology. Do I read this correctly? Have you documented these divergences from ISO 19111 in a new domain model of some kind?

Regarding the application procedure, possibly the best is to submit a motion to the OSGeo Board. That would lend formal support by OSGeo. However, it might be useful to square these efforts together. As Rob mentioned, STAC is at best a counter-example here. I hope we can take this forwards in a better coordinated way.  

Regards.

--
Lu?s Moreira de Sousa
Mastodon:?https://mastodon.social/@luis_de_sousa
URL: https://ldesousa.codeberg.page

Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

On Wednesday, 12 November 2025 at 03:43, Howard Butler via Standards <standards at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:

> No takers, interest, or guidance on this topic?
> 
> > On Oct 31, 2025, at 12:37?PM, Howard Butler howard at hobu.co wrote:
> > 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > The PROJ project plans to submit PROJJSON as an OGC Community Standard. The application document was initiated three years ago [1] by myself and Even Rouault, but we were waiting to see if the OGC CRS SWG would build upon PROJJSON to create a JSON based encoding of CRS.
> > 
> > To date, no draft has been published, the survey at the previous OGC meeting was ambiguous about how the organization would move forward, and if the CRS SWG chooses to revisit ISO 19111 conceptual model enhancements and their reflection through a JSON CRS definition, that work will in all likelihood be backwards and forwards incompatible with PROJJSON. Given the current situation, we would like to move forward with PROJJSON as a Community Standard.
> > 
> > In the interim since we initiated the submission, PROJJSON adoption has continued to grow. STAC was recently recognized as a OGC Community Standard at the Boulder Members Meeting [2], and its Projection Extension references PROJJSON. GeoParquet 1.1 [3] uses PROJJSON as its CRS definition, Parquet references PROJJSON as a possible definition in its spatial types[4], and Zarr is looking at it for its geo-proj Zarr extension [5].
> > 
> > We believe it makes sense to resume the application process for PROJJSON to be also recognized as a community standard. Even has prepared an update of the application at https://github.com/OSGeo/projjson-submission/pull/3.
> > 
> > Does OSGeo want to be mentioned as one of the submitting organizations? If so, what's the process for a project to submit one of its works to OSGeo as a Community Standard? A successful motion raised on this mailing list?
> > Kind regards,
> > 
> > Howard and Even
> > 
> > [1] https://github.com/OSGeo/projjson-submission
> > [2] https://www.ogc.org/announcement/ogc-announces-publication-of-the-spatiotemporal-asset-catalog-community-standards/
> > [3] https://geoparquet.org/releases/v1.1.0/
> > [4] https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/blob/master/Geospatial.md
> > [5] https://github.com/zarr-experimental/geo-proj
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Standards mailing list
> Standards at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards

From rajatshinde2303 at gmail.com  Tue Nov 18 10:11:19 2025
From: rajatshinde2303 at gmail.com (Rajat Shinde)
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2025 12:11:19 -0600
Subject: [OSGeo-Standards] Discussing GeoCroissant Support with the OSGeo
 Standards Committee
Message-ID: <CAKyj99ncMdJpmaa-Wwc9amB+d0vBZ3=awGsUr+4C6ZBi4HCn7w@mail.gmail.com>

Dear OSGeo Standards Committee,

I'm sending this email as a lead of GeoCroissant
<https://www.earthdata.nasa.gov/news/blog/introducing-croissant-format-machine-learning-datasets>,
an AI-ready datasets metadata standard co-developed with MLCommons
Croissant Working Group
<https://mlcommons.org/working-groups/data/croissant/>. I'd like to discuss
synergies with y'all.

I'll be on conference travel attending NeurIPS during the week of next
meeting
<https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Standards_Committee/Meetings/Meeting-2025-12-05>
but I can join the meeting, if we can put it on the agenda.

Many thanks,
Rajat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20251118/22457b9c/attachment.htm>