RE: [emergency] Agenda: 7/29 Call

["Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>]

Yes; as with URIs on the Semantic Web, if one sees 
a message that contradicts one's understanding, one has 
to ask.  Trust but verify.

The semantic of concern is in the normative or informative 
relationship to the specification or standard, not to the 
terms and conditions of availability, such as open source, 
IPR declarations, or licensing.

Out of curiosity:  who is responsible for indemnifying 
an OpenGIS reference implementation?  Or an OASIS 
reference implementation?  I assume, it is the vendor 
that provides it, yes?

len


From: Carl Reed [mailto:creed@opengis.org]

Interesting discussion. It points out an issue of semantic interoperability
between (among?) the various standards organizations that frequently
collaborate.

Just to "throw" some more information in the mix :-) The OGC uses the phrase
"reference implementation" to mean an open and publicly example of how to
implement one or more OpenGIS specifications in an application and/or
architecture. This would be along the lines of Len's "sample"
implementation. We also use the phrase "reference architecture" to mean an
example architecture for a given application domain, such as a portal, that
support use of OpenGIS specifications and related standards and
specifications. In all cases, these reference implementations are freely and
openly available to public. Further, they must be unencumbered by IPR.
Typically, in the OGC world, these implementations are also Open Source.

Obviously, we do not view "reference" in the same restrictive manner as some
organizations.