[Geopackage] Good News and Bad News from the OAB RE: GeoPackage 1.2

Even Rouault even.rouault at spatialys.com
Wed May 3 10:01:03 EDT 2017

On mercredi 3 mai 2017 09:38:30 CEST Jeff Yutzler via Geopackage wrote:
> See my blog posting:
> http://geopackage.blogspot.com/2017/05/good-news-bad-news.html

Thanks for the update Jeff.

The following isn't directed at you, but I felt like I had to open my mouth :-) Feel free to 
redirect it to anyone in charge.

I feel there's something wrong with the decision processes, so that an extension that was 
designed nearly 2 years ago is put in hold now. The concerns may be valid, but reacting with 
such a delay is really detering. There are products that will ship with it. People who have a 
veto right should be involved much earlier in the design process.

I'm wondering if the revised extension should not be given a new name and that 
gpkg_elevation_tiles is kept for the existing/past extension, so that earlier adopters break/
ignore cleanly on the revised extension, and vice versa. By the way, http://
www.geopackage.org/spec/#extension_tiled_gridded_elevation_data should probably be 
marked with big warnings.


Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opengeospatial.org/pipermail/geopackage/attachments/20170503/7d11c9b9/attachment.html>

More information about the Geopackage mailing list