OGRS2016 reviewer report
Name of the reviewer Gwendall PETIT, Lab-STICC - CNRS UMR 6285, France
Title of the Short Paper NASA WorldWind: virtual globe for an open smart city
Does the submission provide adequate motivation and interesting conclusions? Fair
Does the submission address a challenging or new theoretical/practical issue? No
Does the submission present a new approach to an issue or does it put forward a novel combination of existing ideas or techniques? Yes
Is the submission technically sound? Fair
Are the results clearly described and critically evaluated? Fair
Is the submission clearly written and logically structured? Good
Does the submission correctly situate itself within the context of existing research literature? Poor
Is the paper closely related to OGRS scope with a content interesting to the OGRS attendees (geospatial research and/or education) ? Good
Does the submission aptly argue the open source approach ? Good
What is the dominant among the below elements of typology? The contribution is addressing some software development efforts
I recommend the contribution for a poster presentation
Comments for the authors "Nasa World Wind seems to be a very interesting tool, since it allows users to display Geographic Information (GI) on a virtual globe.
In this abstract the authors mainly present the web part of this project ""Web WorldWind"". This application provides most of the Nasa WorldWind features directly in a web browser.
A very brief state of the art concerning virtual globes is made. It seems that Web WorldWind is in ""competition"" only with Cesium. But no comparaison is provided. I'd appreciate to have some elements to understand what are the main differences and why Web WorldWind is better or more useful in some circumstances.
In the last part of this abstract, a study case is presented. It shown how citizens can produce GI, share and display it through the virtual globe. This part is quite interesting it adress the question of VGI.
In this context, authors introduce a tool developped in the Via Regina project. Unfortunately, this tool is not described."
Overall index of quality of the manuscript from 0 (poor quality) to 10 (good quality), passing from 5 (fair quality) 6
You can also choose to receive updates via daily or weekly email digests. If you are following multiple preprints then we will send you no more than one email per day or week based on your preferences.
Note: You are now also subscribed to the subject areas of this preprint and will receive updates in the daily or weekly email digests if turned on. You can add specific subject areas through your profile settings.
Usage since published - updated daily