Talk:Open Source and Open Standards - Revision history

Arnulf at 13:48, 15 May 2011

2011-05-15T13:48:34Z

Neteler: typos fixed

2011-05-05T17:28:34Z

typos fixed

Arnulf: removed working copy, added comments on the scope

2011-05-05T14:14:01Z

removed working copy, added comments on the scope

Show changes

Gfleming: /* OSGeo’s position regarding Open Standards */

2011-04-14T20:37:19Z

OSGeo’s position regarding Open Standards

Gfleming: /* Proprietary Software and the Difference */

2011-04-14T20:31:14Z

Proprietary Software and the Difference

Gfleming: /* Proprietary Software and the Difference */

2011-04-14T20:30:00Z

Proprietary Software and the Difference

Gfleming: /* Open Standards */

2011-04-14T20:27:49Z

Open Standards

Wiki-Cnreediii at 17:34, 14 April 2011

2011-04-14T17:34:33Z

Neteler: +cats

2011-04-13T20:41:05Z

+cats

Neteler: wording

2011-04-13T20:39:38Z

wording

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-''This article is a collaborative work by OGC and OSGeo. Please feel free to add comments, amend wording or open a conversation on the [http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss OSGeo Discuss] mailing list. The document should be a high level summary only and give links for further exploration of the topic. It should be under regular review to ensure up-to-dateness (check the history for latest edits and links to the stable download location).''
+''This article is a collaborative work by OGC and OSGeo. Please feel free to add comments, amend wording or open a conversation on the [http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards OSGeo Standards] mailing list. The document is a high level summary only. It should be under regular review to ensure up-to-dateness (check the history for latest edits and links to the stable download location).''
 = History  =
-The document has been initiated by
+The document was started by Carl Reed, Chief Technology Officer of The Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC). This White Paper was initially adapted partly from articles by Carl Reed published previously in Directions Magazine and GeoWorld. For a more comprehensive explanation of "openness", see another OGC White Paper by Carl Reed, "The Importance of Going Open".
-The first round of integrating OSGeo's position was done by
+The first round of integrating OSGeo's position was done by Arnulf Christl, President of The Open Source Geospatial Foundation (OSGeo). The Open Source aspect has been adapted from articles by Arnulf Christl in "[http://www.fig.net/pub/fao/floss_cadastre.pdf FLOSS in Cadastre and Land Registration - Opportunities and Risks]" in a publication by the FAO and FIG Commission 7 WG 7.3. For standardised definitions of Open Source and Free Software please refer to the Free Software Foundation (http://fsf.org) and the Open Source Initiative (http://opensource.org/).
-This White Paper was initially adapted partly from articles by Carl Reed published previously in Directions Magazine and GeoWorld. For a more comprehensive explanation of "openness", see another OGC White Paper by Carl Reed, "The Importance of Going Open". The Open Source aspect has been adapted from articles by Arnulf Christl in "FLOSS in Cadastre and Land Registration - Opportunities and Risks" in a publication by the FAO and FIG Commission 7 WG 7.3. For standardised definitions of Open Source and Free Software please refer to the Free Software Foundation (http://fsf.org) and the Open Source Initiative (http://opensource.org/).
+The text was then collaboratively reviewed, edited and finalized by a dozen active OSGeo and OGC members. Thanks especially to Gavin Fleming, Lance McKee, Markus Neteler, Athina Trakas, Michael Gerlek, Adrian Custer, Jeff McKenna, Cameron Shorter, Carl Reed, Frank Warmerdam, Steven Ramage, Daniel Morissette and Arnulf Christl for their contributions.
-== Acknowledgment ==
+The paper was approved by the OSGeo Board of Directors in their 2011-05-05 [http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2011-05-05 Board meeting].
 Thanks to all the people who have contributed to making this White Paper a comprehensive document! Please understand that it will always be a compromise because positions on Openness vary greatly from one community to the next.

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 : The Open Source Geospatial Foundation (OSGeo)
-This White Paperwas innitially adapted partly from articles by Carl Reed published previously in Directions Magazine and GeoWorld. For a more comprehensive explanation of "openness", see another OGC White Paper by Carl Reed, "The Importance of Going Open". The Open Source aspect has been adapted from articles by Arnulf Christl in "FLOSS in Cadastre and Land Registration - Opportunities and Risks" in a publication by the FAO and FIG Commission 7 WG 7.3. For standardised definitions of Open Source and Free Software please refer to the Free Software Foundation (http://fsf.org) and the Open Source Initiative (http://opensource.org/).
+This White Paper was initially adapted partly from articles by Carl Reed published previously in Directions Magazine and GeoWorld. For a more comprehensive explanation of "openness", see another OGC White Paper by Carl Reed, "The Importance of Going Open". The Open Source aspect has been adapted from articles by Arnulf Christl in "FLOSS in Cadastre and Land Registration - Opportunities and Risks" in a publication by the FAO and FIG Commission 7 WG 7.3. For standardised definitions of Open Source and Free Software please refer to the Free Software Foundation (http://fsf.org) and the Open Source Initiative (http://opensource.org/).
 == Acknowledgment ==
-Thanks to all the people who have contributed to making this White Paper a comprehensive document! Please understand that it will always be a compromise becasue positions on Openness vary greatly from one community to the next.
+Thanks to all the people who have contributed to making this White Paper a comprehensive document! Please understand that it will always be a compromise because positions on Openness vary greatly from one community to the next.

@@ Line 86: / Line 86: @@
 == OSGeo’s position regarding Open Standards ==
-As a matter of policy, OSGeo does not prescribe it's projects the implementation of open standards but it does encourage their use. Innovation often happens outside of existing standards. Also many innovations later become standards, ideally simply because they are good. Open Source innovations lend themselves ideally to standardization processes because they are not inhibited by patents or proprietary licenses.
+As a matter of policy, OSGeo does not prescribe to its projects the implementation of open standards but it does encourage their use. Innovation often happens outside existing standards. Also many innovations later become standards, ideally simply because they are good. Open Source innovations lend themselves ideally to standardization processes because they are not inhibited by patents or proprietary licenses.
 OSGeo encourages project developers to adopt open standards. These include networking standards (HTTP), data processing standards (SQL), format standards (PNG) and many more. In the geospatial domain many of these standards are maintained and developed by the OGC resulting in a natural close relationship. In this way OSGeo members have helped to identify standards requirements which have been included into OGC standards following the OGC's policy and procedures.
 OSGeo members have also contributed reference implementations for OGC standards. These are software applications that exemplify proper implementation of the standards in interfaces and encodings. Reference implementations are important resources for other programmers, who can study the source code and adapt it to suit their own applications.
 == Memorandum of Understanding ==

@@ Line 56: / Line 56: @@
 === Proprietary Software and the Difference ===
-Software that does not follow all four basic principles of the Free Software definition is considered to be proprietary software. The most important difference from Free and Open Source Software lies in the distribution terms which are typically codified in the license terms. Development style, quality processes, stability of the software, availability of service, support and maintenance are not inherently tied to the license, they have to be evaluated individually on a case by case comparison. Software is not better or worse just because of the license terms.
+Software that does not follow all four basic principles of the Free Software definition is considered to be proprietary (or privative) software. The most important difference from Free and Open Source Software lies in the distribution terms which are typically codified in the license terms. Development style, quality processes, stability of the software, availability of service, support and maintenance are not inherently tied to the license, they have to be evaluated individually on a case by case comparison. Software is not better or worse just because of the license terms.
 Sometimes the term Open Source is applied to software which is available as source code but where the distribution terms are proprietary, hence not offering the aforementioned four freedoms. This is not Open Source and not Free Software. Especially in the web and Java world and with open formats it is becoming increasingly difficult to only ship binary code. No matter what, the software must be shipped with an Open Source or Free Software license to qualify as such. This is an important distinction to easily identify real Open Source software.

@@ Line 56: / Line 56: @@
 === Proprietary Software and the Difference ===
-Software that does not follow all four basic principles of the Free Software definition is considered to be proprietary software. The most important difference to Free and Open Source Software lie the distribution terms which are typically codified in the license terms. Development style, quality processes, stability of the software, availability of service, support and maintenance are not inherently tied to the license, they have to be evaluated individually on a case by case comparison. Software is not better or worse just because of the license terms.
+Software that does not follow all four basic principles of the Free Software definition is considered to be proprietary software. The most important difference from Free and Open Source Software lies in the distribution terms which are typically codified in the license terms. Development style, quality processes, stability of the software, availability of service, support and maintenance are not inherently tied to the license, they have to be evaluated individually on a case by case comparison. Software is not better or worse just because of the license terms.
-Sometimes the term Open Source is applied to software which is available as source code but where the distribution terms are proprietary, hence not offering the aforementioned four freedoms. This is not Open Source and not Free Software. Especially in the web and Java world and with open formats it is becoming increasingly difficult to only ship binary code. No matter what, the software must be shipped with an Open Source or Free Software license to qualify as such. This is an important distinction to easily identify a real Open Source software.
+Sometimes the term Open Source is applied to software which is available as source code but where the distribution terms are proprietary, hence not offering the aforementioned four freedoms. This is not Open Source and not Free Software. Especially in the web and Java world and with open formats it is becoming increasingly difficult to only ship binary code. No matter what, the software must be shipped with an Open Source or Free Software license to qualify as such. This is an important distinction to easily identify real Open Source software.
 == Open Data ==

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 # Defined, documented, and approved by a formal, member driven consensus process. The consensus group remains in charge of changes and no single entity controls the standard.
-The OGC's open standards are specifications for interfaces and encodings that enable interoperability between geoprocessing systems from different developers, whether employed by proprietary product vendors, independent integrators, application developers or active in Open Source projets.
+The OGC's open standards are specifications for interfaces and encodings that enable interoperability between geoprocessing systems from different developers, whether employed by proprietary product vendors, independent integrators, application developers or active in Open Source projects.
 The OGC's open standards are free, publicly available specifications for interfaces, encodings and best practices. They are not software.
 == Open Source ==

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 A standard is like a blueprint that guides people who build things. A standard documents the use of rules, conditions, guidelines or characteristics for products or related processes and production methods. Standards can arise from a single company whose successful products become "de facto" standards (such as Microsoft’s Windows®). Standards can also be set by agreement among two or more software producers, or by government edict or a government-run process, or by representatives from multiple governments. Standards developed in governmental processes, such as those of the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) or INSPIRE (http://inspire.jrc.ec.europa.eu/) in Europe, are called "de jure" standards. Alternatively, standards can be developed, as in the OGC, through an inclusive and open consensus process ordered by well defined policies and procedures. These are agreed upon by the public and private sector participants in the consensus process, and they typically agree to make their standards freely available in a non-discriminatory manner. Such standards are known as "open" standards.
-Why do OGC members participate in this process? Some technology providers and users participate because their geoprocessing and geospatial information products and resources are worth more when those products and resources are part of a larger network. Some users participate because they want more choice in their selection of product vendors and better data sharing with other users. They also want to reduce their technology risk. That is, they want to ensure that the systems they buy or build will continue to provide value in years to come. Some solution provider members participate because they want more choice in their selection of platform partners. Some software producer (including Open Source developers) participate because it reduces their development costs and helps them better understand their customers' needs. There are many reasons to participate in a standards consortium like the OGC. This is substantiated by the fact that, with the growth of the Internet and Web, there are more standards consortia than ever before, and a higher percentage of IT stakeholders than ever before are participating in them. Additionally, the OGC's global membership has grown every year since the OGC was founded in 1994 and is currently more than 400 members.
+Why do OGC members participate in this process? Some technology providers and users participate because their geoprocessing and geospatial information products and resources are worth more when those products and resources are part of a larger network. Some users participate because they want more choice in their selection of product vendors and better data sharing with other users. They also want to reduce their technology risk. That is, they want to ensure that the systems they buy or build will continue to provide value in years to come. Some solution provider members participate because they want more choice in their selection of platform partners. Some software producer (including Open Source developers) participate because it reduces their development costs and helps them better understand their customers' needs. There are many reasons to participate in a standards consortium like the OGC. This is substantiated by the fact that, with the growth of the Internet and Web, there are more standards consortia than ever before, and a higher percentage of IT stakeholders than ever before are participating in them. Additionally, the OGC's global membership has grown every year since the OGC was founded in 1994 and is currently more than 410 members.
 The OGC defines open standards as standards that are:

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:41, 13 April 2011
Line 109:		Line 109:

	Users of both proprietary and Open Source software join the OGC to be sure OGC standards meet their evolving requirements, and they also join to stay abreast of changing technology and remain innovative. Users of both kinds of software have an interest in being sure their systems are part of the growing global network of interoperable geospatial resources. The best way to gain such security is to be sure that their procurement language – the terms spelled out in tenders and requests for quotes (RFQs) – asks providers to offer products that carry the Registered OGC Compliant brand.		Users of both proprietary and Open Source software join the OGC to be sure OGC standards meet their evolving requirements, and they also join to stay abreast of changing technology and remain innovative. Users of both kinds of software have an interest in being sure their systems are part of the growing global network of interoperable geospatial resources. The best way to gain such security is to be sure that their procurement language – the terms spelled out in tenders and requests for quotes (RFQs) – asks providers to offer products that carry the Registered OGC Compliant brand.
		+
		+	[[Category: Board]]
		+	[[Category: OGC]]