wcsplus mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.
Jon (cc list), I'm not sure that I feel best placed to answer the important question of how likely is "WCS 1.0+" to be accepted as a standard...but I won't let that stop me :-)=20 My understanding is that WCS 1.0+ is really being used as an initiative to add to the WCS 1.0 spec and evaluate in the FES community, with the intention of feeding into the future standards being developed by the WCS Revision Working Group (WCS.RWG) (I guess this is actually called a Standards Working Group now). So we might expect (hope) that this work would feed into WCS 1.2 standard, rather than becoming a divergent standard in the longer term.=20 See also Ben Domenico's earlier posting: http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/archives/wcsplus/2007-October/ 000020.html Regards, Bruce
-----Original Message----- From: jon.blower@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:jon.blower@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jon Blower Sent: 30 October 2007 15:33 To: Wright, Bruce Cc: wcsplus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [wcsplus] WCS 1.0+ interoperability and application profiles Hi Bruce (cc list), These are important points, thanks. I think GALEON extracted some best-practice conventions that will probably help here. A wider question - having missed the Boulder TC that spawned this list and the concept of a "WCS 1.0.0+" I'd like to know how this effort is regarded in OGC and the WCS community? How likely is "WCS+" to be accepted as a standard (and, more importantly, how many people are likely to actually implement it)? Is it likely to be superseded very quickly by WCS1.2? How much effort is it really worth putting in to this? Cheers, Jon