in response to John in response to me
thanks for the response John -i was delighted to see that i had provoked one [and i wonder if i should be editing your page instead of "posting" -i'm not au fait with this wiki cum forum mix so i'll just blaze away]
>>The objective of this competition is bring out creativity in visualising Geo-spatial data. Mashups have brought more of this information into the public arena. Obviously, the competition is trying to provide an incentive for people and companies to show innovation and creativity.<<
Is it? My sense was that it is all about making connections amongst people working on this stuff. Hi John, I'm Pete. sexcam free. I guess, simply "showing what can be done with open data" is the other big objective.
>> The point of Mashup challenge to create a level playing field. <<
I'm all for that., and I'm all for a 100% mashup based competition if it can be done. I see two problems however:
- a paucity of services to mash
- [From the draft rules (ms word)document ciruclated (i think) on nzopengis] "You will: -host and serve some or all of the data using OGC standards -make a tool for analysing and displaying the data." These are both terribly interesting (and a pragmatic response to the paucity thing) but they don't feel mashful to me. Do you disagree?
>> Promoting the use of open source tools means that hopefully we will see more entires. <<
Will we? I like the idea of promoting open source tools, and I really like the idea of more entries -but disqualifying entries running on proprietary platforms is an extreme way of promoting open source -and you are drawing a long bow to suggest that this would actually lead to more entries.
>> Not everyone has the money or the expertise to run MapInfo . <<
Hell I don't. And I don't care. I'm happy to take on a MapInfo solution with open source tools, and i bet you are too.
What worries me, is the exclusion of people who don't have the money to fund an open source powered geo-spatial startup -and are sitting at Gotham City Council with staple diet of ESRI (mapinfo -whatever). Their ideas are just as valid, and in a sense they are the new geo-spatial professional underclass -why punish them for their boss's boss's choice of platform
>> Google maps and et are like the MP3 of the GIS world. It has made mapping and spatial visualisation available to everyone with a browser. Just as MP3 maybe not be good enough for audiophiles, google maps is not going to be powerful enough for a lot of serious GIS work. The simplicity of Google maps is going drive the consumption of GIS information into a new era. <<
sorry John, what was that? -i dozed off in the middle somewhere :-) OF COURSE THIS IS TRUE
I guess you may have me pegged for a dyed in the wool, old school "professional GIS" type -i'm not. For the record, I won't be showing up with a [name your favourite proprietary GIS vendor] based entry
>> I would suggest that introducing categories ie Open-source based entires vs Product based to the competition to enable companies to demonstrate their skills. <<
Yes, i wondered about that too -but it does have that "special olympics" feel to it -but hey, your choice of the expression "vs" gives me an idea -"battle of the production paradigms"
More practically -how about a requirement that all code *that was not part of the platform* be opensource? (eg your map-basic/avenue/vba etc scripts, but not mapinfo/arcview/arcmap etc).
What appeals to me is NOT an X-prize for the NZ geospatial industry -but something more fun, with few rules and robust judges (who can tell whether the innovation came from the contestant, or from the platform they were on) -with the prize simply going to the coolest entry. We know it when we see it.
Pete F
