GITA PNW keynote presentation: Openness in Geospatial

  • 252 views
Uploaded on

Presentation on different aspects of openness in geospatial. Just a few minor changes compared to my presentation on the same topic in Nottingham a couple of weeks before.

Presentation on different aspects of openness in geospatial. Just a few minor changes compared to my presentation on the same topic in Nottingham a couple of weeks before.

More in: Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
252
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. in geospatial Peter Batty Ubisense Openness 1
  • 2. Open... source data standards as in accessible 2
  • 3. OPEN AS IN ACCESSIBLE 3
  • 4. flic.kr/p/7rnNAD flic.kr/p/7NEJzF Location is now Pervasive and Simple in consumer applications 4
  • 5. 5
  • 6. DISRUPTIVETECHNOLOGY Functionality / performance Time Established technology Disruptive technology Mainstream Market requirements 6
  • 7. Consumer led IT 7
  • 8. Usability / simplicity flic.kr/p/3guaAu Simplicity 8
  • 9. “spatial is special” “spatial is just another data type” 9
  • 10. THE GEOSPATIAL MARKET Traditional GIS Total market Google Apple Amazon Facebook Twitter Microsoft Oracle Nokia OSGeo Mapbox CartoDB Boundless Ubisense Arc2Earth Astun Stamen and many more 10
  • 11. OPEN SOURCE 11
  • 12. OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE Open-source software (OSS) is computer software with its source code made available and licensed with a license in which the copyright holder provides the rights to study, change and distribute the software to anyone and for any purpose. Open-source software is very often developed in a public, collaborative manner. A report by the Standish Group (from 2008) states that adoption of open-source software models has resulted in savings of about $60 billion per year to consumers. 12
  • 13. Created to support and build the highest-quality open source geospatial software. Our goal is to encourage the use and collaborative development of community-led projects OSGeo also serves as an outreach and advocacy organization for the open source geospatial community, and provides a common forum and shared infrastructure for improving cross-project collaboration. Open Source Geospatial Foundation 13
  • 14. FOSS4G CONFERENCES 14
  • 15. Portland, OR FOSS4G 2014 15
  • 16. Web Mapping deegree geomajas GeoMoose GeoServer Mapbender MapBuilder MapFish MapGuide Open Source MapServer OpenLayers Team Engine ZOO-Project Desktop Applications GRASS GIS gvSIG Marble Opticks Quantum GIS Geospatial Libraries FDO GDAL/OGR GEOS GeoTools MetaCRS OSSIM PostGIS rasdaman Metadata Catalog GeoNetwork pycsw Outreach Projects Public Geospatial Data Education and Curriculum OSGeo Live Italics signify projects in incubation Software projects 27 16
  • 17. Project Name Annual Contributors Total Contributors Lines of Code Mapbender Community MapBuilder MapGuide Open Source MapServer OpenLayers GRASS GIS OSSIM Quantum GIS GDAL GeoTools GeoNetwork opensource Feature Data Objects (FDO) GEOS gvSIG Desktop deegree PostGIS Geomajas GeoServer MapFish 20 54 1,360,815 1 25 166,028 7 47 515,899 35 68 230,299 51 76 118,043 18 69 1,285,664 7 26 1,076,078 78 116 655,451 23 46 901,142 60 132 3,205,814 27 40 2,345,603 10 36 1,551,951 3 17 143,088 7 19 1,376,314 8 25 982,165 10 23 282,844 10 19 417,228 64 86 700,006 1 17 154,625 Total 440 941 17,469,057 OSGeo Project Details March 2013 17.5 million lines of code 440annual contributors all time contributors 941 19 projects listed have 17
  • 18. www.ohloh.net/stacks/151 18
  • 19. 19
  • 20. 20
  • 21. Developing open source software is not a hobby (for most people) 21
  • 22. The Web Mapping Shootout Denver 2011 22
  • 23. 23
  • 24. Functionality Cost Support Terms PredictabilityFlexibility 24
  • 25. Photo by adesigna - http://flic.kr/p/7eukcs Functionality 25
  • 26. http://flic.kr/p/713m5r Cost 26
  • 27. Photo by ecstaticist - http://flic.kr/p/6fx7Ln Support 27
  • 28. Flexibility 28
  • 29. Photo by Steve Punter - http://flic.kr/p/5qXFV9 Terms 29
  • 30. Photo by Jonathan Caves - http://flic.kr/p/59T6cp Predictability 30
  • 31. How do I learn more? 31
  • 32. FOSS4G Portland 2014 2014.foss4g.org 32
  • 33. OSGeo-Live live.osgeo.org 33
  • 34. PostGIS GeoExt OpenLayers GeoServer GeoWebCache 34
  • 35. leafletjs.com 35
  • 36. cartodb.com 36
  • 37. mapbox.com 37
  • 38. D3 - d3js.org 38
  • 39. There’s a parallel geo-world out there! http://flic.kr/p/bqW9yE 39
  • 40. OPEN DATA 40
  • 41. Cost of data barrier to entry has been a traditional http://flic.kr/p/5Xb1fD 41
  • 42. OPEN DATA CROWDSOURCING 42
  • 43. Geospatial analysis Stamen Design 43
  • 44. 44
  • 45. broadbandmap.gov 45
  • 46. 46
  • 47. 47
  • 48. 48
  • 49. 49
  • 50. 50
  • 51. Crowdsourcingflickr.com/photos/jamescridland/613445810/ 51
  • 52. Web publishing participation 2.0 Web 1.0 52
  • 53. WIKIPEDIA 53
  • 54. OpenStreetMap 54
  • 55. What about quality? “OSM quality is beyond good enough, it is a product that can be used for a wide range of activities” Dr Muki Haklay of UCL Based on a detailed analysis http://tinyurl.com/mukiosm 55
  • 56. 56
  • 57. 57
  • 58. Google MapMaker! Geoweb 2009 Michael Jones, Google “The future is user created data” 58
  • 59. PASSIVE CROWDSOURCING 59
  • 60. 2007 data Database 69 countries 11m miles (18m km) of roads 18m points of interest People Field force 700 Central production 270 Technology 500 Total 3349 Financial Revenue $853m (~€604m) Data creation & distribution costs $396m(~€280m) “Creating, maintaining and delivering a comprehensive, high quality map database is a multi-step, labor-intensive process.We currently employ over 270 employees in our centralized production facility and a global workforce of over 700 geographic analysts in 32 countries” 60
  • 61. Crowdsourcing is a paradigm shift for data creation flickr.com/photos/jamescridland/613445810/ 61
  • 62. OPEN STANDARDS 62
  • 63. 9 17 29 33 46 57 63 67 94 93 99 112 123 136 137 154 162 182 191 210 225 238 254 265 278 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 1.4.7 FME 2.0 FME 2.1 FME 2.2 FME 2.3 FME 2.3a FME 2000 FME 2000 SR-1 FME 2002 FME 2002 SR-1 FME 2003 FME 2003 X2 FME 2004 FME 2004 ICE FME 2004 ICE3 FME 2005 FME 2006 FME 2006 GB FME 2007 FME 2008 FME 2009 FME 2010 Beta UC Cut FME 2010 FME 2011 FME 2012 NUMBER OF DATA FORMATS SUPPORTED BY FME OVERTIME Chart courtesy of Safe Software 63
  • 64. It’s hard to predict what will become adopted as a standard 64
  • 65. 65
  • 66. WMS – Web Map Service V1.0 from 2000, V1.3 from 2004 66
  • 67. 67
  • 68. 68
  • 69. 69
  • 70. 78%of statistics are made up 70
  • 71. 85% of data has a spatial component 71
  • 72. 72
  • 73. 73
  • 74. <entry> <title>M 3.2, Mona Passage</title> <link href="http://example.org/2005/09/09/atom01"/> <id>urn:uuid:1225c695-cfb8-4ebb-aaaa-80da344efa6a</id> <updated>2005-08-17T07:02:32Z</updated> <summary>We just had a big one.</summary> <georss:point>45.256 -71.92</georss:point> </entry> is child’s play geoRSS 74
  • 75. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <kml xmlns="http://www.opengis.net/kml/2.2"> <Placemark> <name>Simple placemark</name> <description>Attached to the ground. Intelligently places itself at the height of the underlying terrain.</description> <Point> <coordinates>-122.0822035425683,37.42228990140251,0</coordinates> </Point> </Placemark> </kml> KML is simple too (basic) 75
  • 76. Web Services Photo by MrWoodnz - http://flic.kr/p/6WB4N1 76
  • 77. SOAP …and WSDLWeb Services Description LanguageSimple Object Access Protocol 77
  • 78. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <description xmlns="http://www.w3.org/ns/wsdl" xmlns:tns="http://www.tmsws.com/wsdl20sample" xmlns:whttp="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/http/" xmlns:wsoap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/soap/" targetNamespace="http://www.tmsws.com/wsdl20sample"> <!-- Abstract type --> <types> <xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns="http://www.tmsws.com/wsdl20sample" targetNamespace="http://www.example.com/wsdl20sample"> <xs:element name="request"> <xs:complexType> <xs:sequence> <xs:element name="header" maxOccurs="unbounded"> <xs:complexType> <xs:simpleContent> <xs:extension base="xs:string"> <xs:attribute name="name" type="xs:string" use="required"/> </xs:extension> </xs:simpleContent> </xs:complexType> </xs:element> <xs:element name="body" type="xs:anyType" minOccurs="0"/> </xs:sequence> <xs:attribute name="method" type="xs:string" use="required"/> <xs:attribute name="uri" type="xs:anyURI" use="required"/> </xs:complexType> </xs:element> <xs:element name="response"> <xs:complexType> <xs:sequence> <xs:element name="header" maxOccurs="unbounded"> <xs:complexType> <xs:simpleContent> <xs:extension base="xs:string"> <xs:attribute name="name" use="required"/> </xs:extension> </xs:simpleContent> </xs:complexType> </xs:element> <xs:element name="body" type="xs:anyType" minOccurs="0"/> </xs:sequence> <xs:attribute name="status-code" type="xs:anySimpleType" use="required"/ > <xs:attribute name="response-phrase" use="required"/> </xs:complexType> </xs:element> </xs:schema> </types> <!-- Concrete Binding Over HTTP --> <binding name="RESTfulInterfaceHttpBinding" interface="tns:RESTfulInterface" type="http://www.w3.org/ns/wsdl/http"> <operation ref="tns:Get" whttp:method="GET"/> <operation ref="tns:Post" whttp:method="POST" whttp:inputSerialization="application/x-www-form-urlencoded"/> <operation ref="tns:Put" whttp:method="PUT" whttp:inputSerialization="application/x-www-form-urlencoded"/> <operation ref="tns:Delete" whttp:method="DELETE"/> </binding> <!-- Concrete Binding with SOAP--> <binding name="RESTfulInterfaceSoapBinding" interface="tns:RESTfulInterface" type="http://www.w3.org/ns/wsdl/soap" wsoap:protocol="http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/bindings/HTTP/" wsoap:mepDefault="http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/mep/request- response"> <operation ref="tns:Get" /> <operation ref="tns:Post" /> <operation ref="tns:Put" /> <operation ref="tns:Delete" /> </binding> <!-- Web Service offering endpoints for both bindings--> <service name="RESTfulService" interface="tns:RESTfulInterface"> <endpoint name="RESTfulServiceHttpEndpoint" binding="tns:RESTfulInterfaceHttpBinding" address="http://www.example.com/rest/"/> <endpoint name="RESTfulServiceSoapEndpoint" binding="tns:RESTfulInterfaceSoapBinding" address="http://www.example.com/soap/"/> </service> </description> Example WSDL code 78
  • 79. REST Jason Birch City of Nanaimo Representational State Transfer 79
  • 80. …/a2e/data/datasources/Pole/90974 80
  • 81. …/a2e/data/datasources/Pole/90974?f=gjson 81
  • 82. …/a2e/data/datasources//Pole/search?f=gjson &lat=42.600&lon=-76.1780&d=4 82
  • 83. 83
  • 84. 84
  • 85. “If a dataset available on the web is in a format that can't be indexed by Google, does it make a sound?” Kevin Wiebe Safe Software 85
  • 86. REST benefits Simplicity Linkability Searchability Simple update (using PUT and POST) Photo by ebatty - http://flic.kr/p/2f3BUQ 86
  • 87. SUMMARY 87
  • 88. There’s a parallel geo-world out there! http://flic.kr/p/bqW9yE 88
  • 89. The geo world we know is part of a much larger universe now 89
  • 90. peter.batty@ubisense.net geothought.blogspot.com @pmbatty slideshare.net/pmbatty/presentations This is the most exciting time ever to be working in the geospatial industry 90