Subject: Re: [dispatch] Forming and chartering a GeoJSON WG

From: Erik Wilde <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 09:59:04 -0800

hello.

On 2015-02-03 16:40 , Richard Barnes wrote:
> Sorry for the delay here.  It looks like the next step here is to send a
> charter proposal to the DISPATCH mailing list, [email-masked]

we have had conversations about establishing an IETF WG for GeoJSON, 
which would be chartered with taking the current GeoJSON definition, and 
turning it into an IETF RFC. the next step in this process seems to be 
proposing a charter. please find the proposed charter in this email to 
[email-masked], and it also is available online here:

https://github.com/geojson/draft-geojson/blob/master/charter.md

==============================================================

Proposed GeoJSON WG Charter

GeoJSON

GeoJSON is a geospatial data interchange format based on JavaScript 
Object Notation (JSON). It was published at http://geojson.org in 2008. 
It has succeeded in streamlining geographic information system standards 
and making them accessible to practitioners of modern web development. 
GeoJSON today plays an important role in many spatial databases, web 
APIs, and open data platforms.

This WG will work on a GeoJSON Format RFC that specifies the format more 
precisely and serves as a better guide for implementers. The work will 
start from an Internet-Draft written by the original authors. This I-D, 
draft-butler-geojson-04, substantially improves the format 
specification. The remaining tasks of the WG are:

* Further clarification of the GeoJSON format specification.
* Addition of implementation advice based on lessons learned since 2008.
* geoAddition of more explicit extension advice to the specification.

The addition of new features to the GeoJSON format is not within the 
scope of this WG. One possible exception to this (depending on WG 
consensus) is the adoption of JSON Text Sequences as an alternative way 
of serializing sets of GeoJSON objects.

==============================================================

thanks a lot and kind regards,

dret.

-- 
erik wilde | mailto:[email-masked]  -  tel:+1-510-2061079 |
            | UC Berkeley  -  School of Information (ISchool) |
            | http://dret.net/netdret http://twitter.com/dret |

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 10:14:40 +1100

On 13 February 2015 at 01:43, Alexandru Petrescu
<[email-masked]> wrote:
> JSON/IP will reach a number of reference systems in wide use, non-WGS-84,
> which deserve direct use instead of through conversion.

I'd be against this.  For those who need other reference systems, GML
should serve their needs.  Creating a seldom used parameter that
subtly (and sometimes not-subtly) changes the meaning of all other
parameters is an interoperability problem waiting to happen.