[GeoJSON] Three threads coming together

[Pedro Gonçalves]

Hi Jeff

No worries, I guess you are not alone trying to push GeoJSON further on OGC services 

In the case of the OWS Context, the idea was to have a document where a view to a particular problem or scenario could be expressed.
These documents list a series of resources by direct links or inline content. 
The resources can be any OGC services or any content defined by a MIME-type (URL or inline).
For each resource the OWS Context defines core metadata (e.g. title, authors, geospatial and temporal domain)

Last years we worked on this at a conceptual model and then we applied it in an Atom feed encoding.
This information is publicly available here  http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/owc
In particular the file :
	OGC OWS Context Atom Encoding Standard OGC 12-084r2
		https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=55183

The last months I've been working with OGC on the possibility to express OWS Context documents in a JSON or GeoJSON encoding.
I delivered this assessment on engineering report available here 
	OGC® OWS-10 Rules for JSON and GeoJSON Adoption: Focus on OWS-Context 
		https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=57477

Based on the findings of that report, the OWS Context Standard Working Group decided to explore the definition of a new standard that defines the OWS Context on a GeoJSON encoding. I drafted the initial document and it is currently being reviewed by the members of that group.

Please let me know of any comments or requirements that you (and everyone on this list) might see useful to clarify or to add 

cheers

Pedro


Pedro Pereira Goncalves
@terradue
Roma, Italia | Oxford, UK 
http://www.terradue.com
https://twitter.com/gp3dr0
+44 18 65 60 06 07



On 05 Jun 2014, at 00:33, Jeff Yutzler <jeffy at imagemattersllc.com> wrote:

> Three things GeoJSON-related have happened in the last 12 hours.
> 
> OWS Context
> OGC created a standard for Context files which describe a map view in its totality, including map layers (raster and/or vector) and extents. I think this would be a good thing for the web development community (among others) - instead of hard-coding layers in JavaScript (or being stuck with defaults) you could encode them in a Context file. I'm trying to convince the OGC participants that a) a JSON encoding could potentially be adopted by the web development community where a XML encoding has no chance in hell and b) if a JSON-encoded Context contains feature data, it should be provided as GeoJSON where possible because it is the least common denominator. Now in today's discussion they are second-guessing whether they want to have multiple encodings at all. I have no idea how this will turn out.
> 
> Moving Features
> OGC established a working group to create a standard for moving features. Publishing moving features on the web should be a no-brainer and in fact I demonstrated it about 8 years ago. It should be even easier today but no one has built it yet. As with Context, a JSON encoding has potential for the web development community that an XML encoding does not. They apparently decided that my ideas have merit and today they formally asked me to write a proposal for a JSON encoding to go along with their emerging XML encoding.
> 
> GeoJSON LD
> In anticipation of wanting to encode moving features in some form of JSON, I tried to work with this group to find a reasonable, reusable way ahead and have gotten nowhere. The final insult was when Mr. Gillies summarily closed my GeoJSON-LD ticket[1] without discussion. I was expecting cooperation and instead I feel I am being thwarted. Frankly, I don't get it.
> 
> I want to be a GeoJSON ally. I believe it is in GeoJSON, OGC, and my customer's best interest to establish some level of cooperation. (I know the history and I have been as frustrated by OGC as anyone over the last twelve years.) I am trying to build that bridge but I can't do it alone. I need someone on your side to step up and work with me.
> 
> Regards,
> Jeff
> 
> [1] https://github.com/geojson/geojson-ld/issues/15
> 
> -- 
> Jeff Yutzler
> Image Matters LLC
> Mobile: (703) 981-8753
> Office: (703) 428-6731
> _______________________________________________
> GeoJSON mailing list
> GeoJSON at lists.geojson.org
> http://lists.geojson.org/listinfo.cgi/geojson-geojson.org