Difference between revisions of "Software Standards"
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
==Suggested Standards== | ==Suggested Standards== | ||
| − | Binary Open Feature Format (BOFF) – As part of my work on OpenJUMP I was interested in creating a file format that could serve as an alternative to ESRI Shapefiles. ESRI publishes the Shapefile [http://www.esri.com/library/whitepapers/pdfs/shapefile.pdf specification], but Shapefiles have some limitations that I would like to overcome. For example, the mix big-endian and little-endian data, they use DBF files to store attribute information, they have very little built-in support for metadata, and they can’t be extended to support information like topology. Still, certain aspects of Shapefiles appealed to me. The file format is binary, which means its compact and quicker to import/export. It is also conveys relatively simple information, which has allowed it to become the de facto means of transporting geospatial information. You can learn more about my intital sketches of BOFF [http://thejumppilotproject.pbwiki.com/Binary%20Open%20Feature%20Format here]. | + | Binary Open Feature Format (BOFF) – As part of my work on OpenJUMP I was interested in creating a file format that could serve as an alternative to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shapefile ESRI Shapefiles]. ESRI publishes the Shapefile [http://www.esri.com/library/whitepapers/pdfs/shapefile.pdf specification], but Shapefiles have some limitations that I would like to overcome. For example, the mix big-endian and little-endian data, they use DBF files to store attribute information, they have very little built-in support for metadata, and they can’t be extended to support information like topology. Still, certain aspects of Shapefiles appealed to me. The file format is binary, which means its compact and quicker to import/export. It is also conveys relatively simple information, which has allowed it to become the de facto means of transporting geospatial information. You can learn more about my intital sketches of BOFF [http://thejumppilotproject.pbwiki.com/Binary%20Open%20Feature%20Format here]. |
Revision as of 11:04, 24 July 2007
About
There was recently some discussion on the main OSGeo mailing list about software standards. There was some general discussion about software standards, and also some specific discussion about the role of the OSGeo in the OGC, the primary geospatial standards body. I thought I would create a page on the wiki to hold some OSGeo members thoughts on software standards.
Please feel free to add content to the following sections. What I’m providing below is just a skeleton.
OSGeo Software Standards Mailing List
Some of the members expressed interest in an OSGeo mailing list dedicated to software standards, but nothing materialized. Add your name to the list below if you would be interested in subscribing to such a list.
The Sunburned Surveyor
Why Do Software Standards Succeed?
Why Do Software Standards Fail?
Do We Really Need Software Standards?
What Role Do Software Standards Have In The Development Of Open Source Geospatial Software?
Suggested Standards
Binary Open Feature Format (BOFF) – As part of my work on OpenJUMP I was interested in creating a file format that could serve as an alternative to ESRI Shapefiles. ESRI publishes the Shapefile specification, but Shapefiles have some limitations that I would like to overcome. For example, the mix big-endian and little-endian data, they use DBF files to store attribute information, they have very little built-in support for metadata, and they can’t be extended to support information like topology. Still, certain aspects of Shapefiles appealed to me. The file format is binary, which means its compact and quicker to import/export. It is also conveys relatively simple information, which has allowed it to become the de facto means of transporting geospatial information. You can learn more about my intital sketches of BOFF here.