[GeoJSON] Future plans for GeoJSON

[Stefan Drees]

Hi Sean,

On 26.04.13 18:07, Sean Gillies wrote:
> Hi Stefan,
>
> I remain interested in submitting a draft to the IETF and would love
> help. In fact, it's clear that I need help. I've been squatting on the
> idea of doing it for some time and am embarrassed to have done nothing
> much about it. I don't know if you've been through the process before,
> but I have some friends and mentors that have and am sure of getting
> good advice.

that's great! Thanks for responding so fast. I have only good 
experiences with open standards bodies and am willing to actively keep 
it that way ;-) So let's just start as soon as the OK from the authors 
is there.


> One thing I'd like to consider, either before or during the process,
> would be to strip out the CRS parts of the specification that get very
> little use. Specifically, the linked and named CRS types. I've only seen
> non-long/lat GeoJSON in the wild a couple times (City of Chicago's open
> data is one) and the producers aren't following the specification with
> regards to CRS. This suggests to me that those parts of the spec are
> either broken or superfluous.
>

I read a bit on that one in the mailing list archives. I understand that 
this would be a real good cut, now that time brought much more 
JavaScript libraries that may assist in projecting (as I read in Howards 
mail 
(http://lists.geojson.org/pipermail/geojson-geojson.org/2013-April/000721.html), 
right?

> ...

All the best,
Stefan.