opensearch discussion

["Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <rden@loc.gov>]

All TC members should be subscribed to the OpenSearch listserv. If you are not, please subscribe.

 

See attached messages.

 

--Ray

--- Begin Message ---

• From: "Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <rden@loc.gov>
• To: <opensearch@googlegroups.com>
• Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:12:05 -0500

I can speak authoritatively on the OASIS question as I am co-chair of the TC 
where this work is going on.

Recall that I posted a message to this list describing the OASIS work on 
OpenSearch (I'll try to find it in the archive; it was in early November) 
and we were disappointed that the note generated little discussion at the 
time, but perhaps we can try again now.

Please see the recent article that describes our work in some detail:
http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january09/denenberg/01denenberg.html

We do intend that the resulting binding, wherever it ends up - a 
representation of draft 3, of draft 4, or version 1.0 of OpenSearch -- is a 
faithful and formal representation of that specification.  It is not our 
intent to change the specification.  The OASIS SWS TC looks forward to 
further discussion with you in the near future. We will need further 
discussion to sort out the respective roles of our two groups in this 
effort.

Ray Denenberg

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jo Walsh" <metazool@gmail.com>
To: "OpenSearch" <opensearch@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 12:49 PM
Subject: [opensearch:288] Status of OpenSearch for standards reference 
purposes?


>
> dear all,
>
> For a while I have been working with Terradue on an OpenSearch
> implementation for geospatial metadata search using the Geo
> extensions.
> Now we have been asked by the Open Geospatial Consortium to produce a
> discussion paper about it. This involves a high level of formal
> language, with normative references to hdependencies, etc etc.
>
> Last year I heard a rumour that OpenSearch was being picked up by
> OASIS as a formal specification. Searching for it now I see their
> search WG has a "binding" which basically describes the OpenSearch
> interface, but parallel to the work you are doing at OpenSearch.org.
>
> It would be great to know more about the status; is the authoritative
> reference just http://www.opensearch.org/Specifications/OpenSearch/1.1
> ?
> Is the rumour I heard ill-founded, or are there plans to punt the spec
> up to
> a formal "body"? Will Draft 4 change much of the spec?
>
> Our discussion paper would more or less be a transliteration of
> OpenSearch
> Geo as it stands, our use cases for it, and some discussion of
> dropping in
> extension vocabularies for Earth Observation source data, e.g.
> http://genesi-dr.terradue.com/news/_news.asp?id=117
>
> cheers, and thanks Doug for all your work on OpenSearch!
>
>
> jo
> --
>
> > 


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenSearch" group.
To post to this group, send email to opensearch@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to opensearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/opensearch?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

--- End Message ---

--- Begin Message ---

• From: Jo Walsh <metazool@gmail.com>
• To: OpenSearch <opensearch@googlegroups.com>
• Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:49:32 -0800 (PST)

dear all,

For a while I have been working with Terradue on an OpenSearch
implementation for geospatial metadata search using the Geo
extensions.
Now we have been asked by the Open Geospatial Consortium to produce a
discussion paper about it. This involves a high level of formal
language, with normative references to hdependencies, etc etc.

Last year I heard a rumour that OpenSearch was being picked up by
OASIS as a formal specification. Searching for it now I see their
search WG has a "binding" which basically describes the OpenSearch
interface, but parallel to the work you are doing at OpenSearch.org.

It would be great to know more about the status; is the authoritative
reference just http://www.opensearch.org/Specifications/OpenSearch/1.1
?
Is the rumour I heard ill-founded, or are there plans to punt the spec
up to
a formal "body"? Will Draft 4 change much of the spec?

Our discussion paper would more or less be a transliteration of
OpenSearch
Geo as it stands, our use cases for it, and some discussion of
dropping in
extension vocabularies for Earth Observation source data, e.g.
http://genesi-dr.terradue.com/news/_news.asp?id=117

cheers, and thanks Doug for all your work on OpenSearch!


jo
--

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenSearch" group.
To post to this group, send email to opensearch@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to opensearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/opensearch?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

--- End Message ---