[Bug 621416] Review Request: libgeotiff -- GeoTIFF format library

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=621416

Balint Cristian <cristian.balint at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |cristian.balint at gmail.com

--- Comment #26 from Balint Cristian <cristian.balint at gmail.com> 2011-01-31 16:32:35 EST ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> Strictly speaking no, but I would prefer if we had that right. Better to try
> for it.

Hello Folks,

 - Agree with booth, including lets try, but as last time with OGP and as for
now there are some benevolent logic they might wont agree, for some good reason
I can only explain that but only for "modify" paragraph.


 - that dataset is about some "ephemeres" and math like constants, its very
wrong if people just modify those datas for potential forks, its like I would
try some wierd math were PI is 3.15 instead if 3.14 and try even convince the
world its just a brand new view on "geometries" and nothing is wrong.
 - OGP done that database and mark with their lets say "brand/name" and their
credibility as surveyors (as Fedora guarantee certain things with their
packages with their brand), things are done in years by precise geodetical
surveys on-field and many calculus (many are done in colaboration with really
paranoic and difficult governments), so any changes are made there for any
reason as they also try state even in the very license is subject to alter
"reality" for which EPSG cannot be responsable, and such changes are only for
the damage of any community. They want by this way make sure any project is
compatible with any other distinct project in resulting outputs in any future,
like the example with PI constant. If at M.I.T. PI=3.14 at other universities
should be too !


 Would this change a bit optics of RH legal on this ?


Regarding commercial (just guesses for very good reasons):

 - big and mogul companies like ESRI (the M$ equiv in GIS) would love to just
bypass "the surveying stage of ephemers" for their products, but also would
never give 1 cent to EPSG effort (I am confident in that). So EPSG decided that
its free for "free" projects but not for ESRI or others who demonstrated
ignorance at all during the time. They should go nicely on-field, pay their
surveyors (even vaccinate them for dangerous places like those ones from
Africa,Asia or Amazon) for lets say like 10 years and gather proper dataset on
they own, then sell it just as they want. Unfortunately opensource GIS world is
at a level with many things still to be done, but, by far cannot afford even to
atempt to make a proper EPSG-like dataset without "borrowing" datas.And just
from pure surveys (on field would be cleanest effort), also its not at the
level to choke fingers with many governments to grant access to such datas, and
even license it to a crowd of peoples as they would wish !

 In worst case, without EPSG we can forget "all" about Fedora and any of
opensource GIS packages, to mention a list of:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/GIS (and counting 10x more very interesting ones
on the internet), so without EPSG _all_ those can be rendered outside of
Fedora. Google highly popularised GIS around the world just by 'google-eath'
there are the smart-phones, GPSs and cool navigation devices just spread in
last 2-3 years, there are also the geotagged photos and so on, we would be
lousy ones to skip these events out.


 I hope Volker to get a favorable answer back (I am doubting a bit), anyway I
try catch up with Him see how could I help, some smooth and clean strategy is
needed with OGP, but changing their optics will be hard.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.