Comments on: Let my plumber Jez build your SDI.. http://www.edparsons.com/2009/06/let-my-plumber-jez-build-your-sdi/ Sat, 13 Mar 2010 13:52:06 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Antony Scott http://www.edparsons.com/2009/06/let-my-plumber-jez-build-your-sdi/comment-page-1/#comment-154007 Antony Scott Wed, 24 Jun 2009 09:13:28 +0000 http://www.edparsons.com/?p=921#comment-154007 I was at the session too, and found the water metaphor interesting, like all good metaphors it got me thinking about how far it could be stretched. My frustrations at the moment are around the range of data formats, standards and practices requiring converters before you can use them, and sources which make it impossible for you to get anything useful out of them by restricting you to one drip at a time! That's probably far enough, but there's clearly a need to open the flood gates (sorry!) and get more stuff in the cloud. Although I came away from the conference not being very much clearer about what an SDI was, I know that the 'D'ata needs as much attention as the rest if we are to be able to get (as per last comment) innovation and useful services. I was at the session too, and found the water metaphor interesting, like all good metaphors it got me thinking about how far it could be stretched. My frustrations at the moment are around the range of data formats, standards and practices requiring converters before you can use them, and sources which make it impossible for you to get anything useful out of them by restricting you to one drip at a time! That’s probably far enough, but there’s clearly a need to open the flood gates (sorry!) and get more stuff in the cloud. Although I came away from the conference not being very much clearer about what an SDI was, I know that the ‘D’ata needs as much attention as the rest if we are to be able to get (as per last comment) innovation and useful services.

]]> By: Peter Barnes http://www.edparsons.com/2009/06/let-my-plumber-jez-build-your-sdi/comment-page-1/#comment-154006 Peter Barnes Wed, 24 Jun 2009 00:19:35 +0000 http://www.edparsons.com/?p=921#comment-154006 Two timely and well made points. There has been a bit of disucussion around who or what neogeos are of late, and your post highlights a couple of the major philosophical differences. I believe the first key differentiator is a strong customer and solution focus vs data and technology, the second an openness to web 2.0 concepts and an allied willingness to generate and use data and services with long and complex genealogy. I'm not suggesting that neogeos aren't interested in data and technology, it's that they regard them as the means to an end - solving a problem for real world citizens. Cloud computing and the various tools offered by Google, Microsoft, Cloudmade etc. are extremely useful tools for achieving this goal, and significantly provide a low cost of entry route for innovation. Two timely and well made points. There has been a bit of disucussion around who or what neogeos are of late, and your post highlights a couple of the major philosophical differences. I believe the first key differentiator is a strong customer and solution focus vs data and technology, the second an openness to web 2.0 concepts and an allied willingness to generate and use data and services with long and complex genealogy. I’m not suggesting that neogeos aren’t interested in data and technology, it’s that they regard them as the means to an end – solving a problem for real world citizens. Cloud computing and the various tools offered by Google, Microsoft, Cloudmade etc. are extremely useful tools for achieving this goal, and significantly provide a low cost of entry route for innovation.

]]> By: Ewan http://www.edparsons.com/2009/06/let-my-plumber-jez-build-your-sdi/comment-page-1/#comment-153998 Ewan Mon, 22 Jun 2009 12:01:08 +0000 http://www.edparsons.com/?p=921#comment-153998 Interestinng observation around the demographic of the people attending the conference. There does seem to be plenty of discussion from within the "GI Community" but little engagement from those who would get real benefits from an SDI approach. I have recently undertaken an exercise to scope out an SDI, rather than looking at the technology the focus was very much on the people and process side. After all, the technology is all avaliable, the trick is finding out requirements and getting "users" to change their behaviour and interact with an SDI, even if they dont now that. We actually found that some SDI components already existed and just needed a small tweak. In some ways I think the term SDI is mis-leading and hard to explain exactly what it is. Interestinng observation around the demographic of the people attending the conference. There does seem to be plenty of discussion from within the “GI Community” but little engagement from those who would get real benefits from an SDI approach. I have recently undertaken an exercise to scope out an SDI, rather than looking at the technology the focus was very much on the people and process side. After all, the technology is all avaliable, the trick is finding out requirements and getting “users” to change their behaviour and interact with an SDI, even if they dont now that. We actually found that some SDI components already existed and just needed a small tweak. In some ways I think the term SDI is mis-leading and hard to explain exactly what it is.

]]> By: ChrisW http://www.edparsons.com/2009/06/let-my-plumber-jez-build-your-sdi/comment-page-1/#comment-153989 ChrisW Sun, 21 Jun 2009 16:13:31 +0000 http://www.edparsons.com/?p=921#comment-153989 Good point about the absence of user perspectives on all this, and the point about "plumbing" geodata to the consumer is well-made. But when you say that Google et al "would be happy to host data on behalf of public sector bodies", you're straight back to the widespread problem of who owns "public" data in the UK. Having spoken to some public sector GIS users recently, there still seems to be a lot of FUD (often encouraged by your former employers at the OS) surrounding the question of who owns OS data when it is mixed with Google data or even just passed through a Google mapping tool. People are often ignorant and suspicious about the extent to which they "own" their own data or whether they may infringe draconian OS licences simply by using the term "Google" in the near vicinity of their spatial applications, and some believe that Google is out to claim ownership of their data. Ironically, it seems the OS tacitly encourages this belief, even while asserting its own rights over "derived" spatial data. Until there is greater clarity (and sense) around the licencing of "public" spatial data in the UK, I can't see many public sector organisations feeling brave enough to hand their data over for 3rd party hosting, least of all to Google. Good point about the absence of user perspectives on all this, and the point about “plumbing” geodata to the consumer is well-made. But when you say that Google et al “would be happy to host data on behalf of public sector bodies”, you’re straight back to the widespread problem of who owns “public” data in the UK.

Having spoken to some public sector GIS users recently, there still seems to be a lot of FUD (often encouraged by your former employers at the OS) surrounding the question of who owns OS data when it is mixed with Google data or even just passed through a Google mapping tool. People are often ignorant and suspicious about the extent to which they “own” their own data or whether they may infringe draconian OS licences simply by using the term “Google” in the near vicinity of their spatial applications, and some believe that Google is out to claim ownership of their data. Ironically, it seems the OS tacitly encourages this belief, even while asserting its own rights over “derived” spatial data.

Until there is greater clarity (and sense) around the licencing of “public” spatial data in the UK, I can’t see many public sector organisations feeling brave enough to hand their data over for 3rd party hosting, least of all to Google.

]]>