Re: OGC basic ?s

Hi,

it's exactly like Frank says. Discussion papers do not represent an
official standing point of the OGC, while OGC specifications do.
Specifications have to follow a specific procedure in the OGC to obtain
this status.

best regards

Markus

>>>> Frank Warmerdam>>>>
> On 10/17/05, Christopher Jon Jursa <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have some basic questions about the OGC specifications.
>>
>> I am looking into the specifications and discussion papers.
>>
>> What is the difference between the two?  Are the discussion papers
>> pending specifications?
>
> Christopher,
>
> The specifications are considered mature and ready for implementation
> and deployment.  The RFC and other discussion papers are potentially
> "specification track" but considered to immature for adoption as
> finished specs.  They are made public in the hope of gathering broader
> feedback.
>
> Note that many discussion papers will stay that way forever because
> there isn't enough interest in seeing them through to proper
> specifcations or because they are essentially auxilary material.  But
> some are definately intended to evetually emerge as specifications.
>
> Well, thats my take anyways.  I'm sure there are OGC folks who could
> give their take on things.
>
> Best regards,
> --
> ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------> I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam,
> [email protected] light and sound - activate the windows |
> http://pobox.com/~warmerdam and watch the world go round - Rush    |
> Geospatial Programmer for Rent
>
> _______________________________________________
> Freegis-list mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://intevation.de/mailman/listinfo/freegis-list


-- 
Dr. Markus MÃŒller
l a t / l o n  GmbH (Hamburg)
Gluckstr. 53a			22081 Hamburg, Germany
phone ++49 +177 2470742		fax ++49 +228 18496-29
http://www.lat-lon.de		http://www.deegree.org