Re: WG Action: Formed Geographic JSON (geojson)

I would say that the work is fairly complementary. GeoJSON Is already widely used. IETF standardization should just make it easier to cite as a practice. There may be some overlap between JSON-LD based extensions and  other encoding definitions, but that just results in a choice of practices for our group - not a terrible thing.

Josh

Joshua Lieberman, Ph.D.
Principal, Tumbling Walls Consultancy
Tel/Direct: +1 627-431-6431
jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com

> On Oct 6, 2015, at 07:11, <Simon.Cox@csiro.au> <Simon.Cox@csiro.au> wrote:
> 
> I'm not sure how severe the overlap is. Furthermore, the GeoJSON crew have already made their intention clear: to remain independent of all other standardization efforts. 
> 
> We can join their project or at least make comments to try to influence it - the IETF process requires them to be more inclusive than up to now, though not clear how much in practice. I am slightly encouraged by the fact that the nominated chairs are from outside the historical team. But not sure we'll see much flowing back the other way. 
> 
> Simon 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Svensson, Lars [mailto:L.Svensson@dnb.de] 
> Sent: Monday, 5 October 2015 8:26 PM
> To: public-sdw-wg@w3.org
> Subject: FW: WG Action: Formed Geographic JSON (geojson)
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> This new IETF WG probably has a severe overlap with some of our work. Is anyone in the group going to the IETF meeting in Yokohama the week after the TPAC and could try to figure out more? If not: What can we do to avoid duplicate work?
> 
> Best,
> 
> Lars
> 
>> On Friday, October 02, 2015 6:36 PM, IETF-Announce wrote:
>> 
>> A new IETF working group has been formed in the Applications and 
>> Real-Time Area. For additional information please contact the Area 
>> Directors or the WG Chairs.
>> 
>> Geographic JSON (geojson)
>> ------------------------------------------------
>> Current Status: Proposed WG
>> 
>> Chairs:
>>  Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
>>  Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
>> 
>> Assigned Area Director:
>>  Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
>> 
>> Mailing list
>>  Address: geojson@ietf.org
>>  To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geojson
>>  Archive: 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=geojson
>> 
>> Charter:
>> 
>> GeoJSON is a format for encoding data about geographic features using 
>> JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) [RFC7159]. Geographic features need 
>> not be physical things; any thing with properties that are bounded in 
>> space may be considered a feature. GeoJSON provides a means of 
>> representing both the properties and spatial extent of features.
>> 
>> The GeoJSON format specification was published at http://geojson.org 
>> in 2008. GeoJSON today plays an important and growing role in many 
>> spatial databases, web APIs, and open data platforms. Consequently the 
>> implementers increasingly demand formal standardization, improvements 
>> in the specification, guidance on extensibility, and the means to 
>> utilize larger GeoJSON datasets.
>> 
>> This WG will work on a GeoJSON Format RFC that specifies the format 
>> more precisely, serves as a better guide for implementers, and 
>> improves extensibility of the format. The work will start from an 
>> Internet-Draft written by the original GeoJSON authors: draft-butler-geojson [1].
>> 
>> This WG will work on GeoJSON mappings of 'geo' URIs, reinforcing the 
>> use of RFC 5870.
>> 
>> This WG will work on a format for a streamable sequence of GeoJSON 
>> texts based on RFC 7464 (JSON Text Sequences) to address the 
>> difficulties in serializing very large sequences of features or 
>> feature sequences of indeterminate length.
>> 
>> GeoJSON objects represent geographic features only and do not specify 
>> associations between geographic features and particular devices, 
>> users, or facilities. Any association with a particular device, user, 
>> or facility requires another protocol. When a GeoJSON object is used 
>> in a context where it identifies the location of a device, user, or 
>> facility, it becomes subject to the architectural, security, and 
>> privacy considerations in RFC 6280, An Architecture for Location and 
>> Location Privacy in Internet Applications. The application of those 
>> considerations is specific to protocols that make use of GeoJSON 
>> objects and is out of scope for the GeoJSON WG. Although the WG is 
>> chartered to improve the extensibility of the format, extensions that 
>> would allow GeoJSON objects to specify associations between geographic 
>> features and particular devices, users, or facilities are not expected to be defined in the WG.
>> Should that be needed, re-chartering will be required.
>> 
>> Deliverables:
>> 
>> * A GeoJSON format specification document including mappings of 'geo'
>> URIs
>> * A document describing a format for a streamable sequence of GeoJSON 
>> texts
>> 
>> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-butler-geojson
>> 
>> Milestones:
>> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 6 October 2015 11:51:50 UTC