NOTE: The galeon mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.
Gerry: While I agree with what you are saying I don't understand the references to a Gazetteer or to redefining their observation in an earth realm. Where do these requirements come from?? I think interoperating is possible if we can share common abstractions across multiple domains - it does not make sense to talk about interoperation only within one domain. So I think we are all seeking those common abstractions. To think that these all came from the geospatial community is incorrect. There is no imposition of a geospatial viewpoint that I am aware of anyways. There is an attempt to understand and represent common ideas that span multiple domains. Ron
-----Original Message----- From: galeon-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:galeon-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gerry Creager Sent: March 13, 2008 8:45 PM To: Luis Bermudez Cc: galeon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; <Simon.Cox@xxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [galeon] Fwd: CDM feature and point types docs Part of the problem here is acceptance, as Andrew pointed out. What you're saying is that a domain scientist, who is being explicit in his description of data collection, procedures, processes, and coverages now has to conform to the manner another group has dictated. An atmospheric or ocean scientist today, save a precious few will have no idea of how to relate to a gazetteer or redefine their observation in a earth realm unless it's consistent with their experience and training. We're not out to retrain the world into geospatial data conformists, but rather, to help the world interoperate. Somehow, the intent seems to get lost in this discussion. gerry
galeon archives: