Hi Linda, Thanks for the context this is really helpful. One small comment inline below On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 1:09 AM, Linda van den Brink < l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl> wrote: > Hi Bruce, Lewis, > > > > The scope and purpose of the common formats list in the BP hasn’t been > discussed exhaustively. What’s currently in the BP is a first draft, or > rather two; one list by Ed Parsons and one by Clemens Portele. Including > scientific spatial data formats in these lists hasn’t come up yet. > It could be argued that scientific formats weren’t considered ‘common’ > formats, > Point taken. I suppose that this could be interpreted as so, however now that I am surrounded by these multidimensional data formats all the time and seeing how many people use them across so many agencies in the world I find this really difficult to agree with. I suppose if one were also to ask the common man or woman on the street what GeoJSON-LD or GeoSPARQL was then they would not know either... does that therefore mean that these concepts are not common either? The draft specification terminology probably needs to be clarified so that it is explicit who interprets these data formats as common. > but as I said it hasn’t come up yet. Both lists only list vector data > formats. > > > > I have created an issue about this so that we don’t forget to address > this. > > https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/237 > > > > Thanks Linda Lewis
Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2016 06:47:05 UTC