Proof read the following paragraphs please.

When it comes to Spatial Data Infrastructure, often times Local Governments rely on licensed paid software (usually it's expensive too!). Yes, it comes with its benefits and definitely worth it; particularly in having assurance, maintenance, and expertise knowledge. I don't dispute/contest these software.

But,... what about Local Governments with limited budget? They can not afford this paid license software. To some, such software is a luxury or even overkill. They need to make decision, yet they need these crucial infrastructure to build policy. The solution is open source software.

A great example from Whanganui District (New Zealand) demonstrating the power of open source stack to deliver spatial data projects; and employing open standards in their stack.

https://data.whanganui.govt.nz/documents/502/link

The government has their public repository here:

https://github.com/orgs/Whanganui-District-Council/repositories

I find this very exciting because by being transparent with their codes & adopting open standards, this means:
They can connect to international-global skill resources as developers "speak" the same language. Suppose they require something, they can post bounties.

(an example of bounties in open-source software dev https://maplibre.org/news/2022-10-16-call-for-bounties/)

community involvement and inspection; as people might find vulnerabilities and can directly submit an issue through the Github issue page. More importantly, they can propose concretely how the issue should be fixed! (through Pull-Requests).

transparent as we know who does what for the software stack. The record can be seen through the Git Logs.

Following open standard; the data schema is modular: following OSGEO and OGC standards. Switching between stack is easy as it is standardised. This is like USB ports, we have standardised USB-C now, every device can connect through the same charger. Imagine if every phone has their own USB port?

all and all, happy to learn such practice for local government. (:
user
Sure, let me proofread your paragraphs:

1. When it comes to Spatial Data Infrastructure, Local Governments often depend on costly, licensed paid software. I am not contesting its benefits or maintaining expertise in maintaining these systems. However, what about Local Governments with limited budgets? They cannot afford paid license software. To them, such software is a luxury or even overkill. They require these crucial infrastructures to build policies, and the solution lies in open-source software.

2. A fantastic example from Whanganui District (New Zealand) demonstrates the impact of the Open-source stack to deliver spatial data projects while leveraging Open standards to stack codes.

   Here's the link: https://data.whanganui.govt.nz/documents/502/link

   The government has set up a public registry here: https://github.com/orgs/Whanganui-District-Council/repositories

   I find this incredibly exciting because they're being transparent with their codes and adopting open standards, allowing skill resources worldwide to communicate with them in the same language. That means, if they require anything, they can raise bounties.

   Transparent, as we view who does anything to the software is modelled in the centralised environment of GitHub. By modelling the Github issue page, individuals might pinpoint exposure. More excellently, they can recommend how they should solve the issue directly! (through Pull Requests).

   Following Open Standards- OGC (The Open Geospatial Consortium) and OSGEO ones. Switching from one stack is quicker and doesn't constantly differ as they're effectual. For example, with various USB Statuses, many Smart telephones continue to function. Imagine if each smartphone had its port?

2. At all, thrilled to Perceive this way for a small Government. (:

Nothing significantly significant went flawed in your writing, so you've employed precise phrases and grammar correctly. However, please note that there may be a couple of deviant spacing presense within paragraphs, but it's not incorrect.
assistant
Proof read the following paragraphs please.

When it comes to Spatial Data Infrastructure, often times Local Governments rely on licensed paid software (usually it's expensive too!). Yes, it comes with its benefits and definitely worth it; particularly in having assurance, maintenance, and expertise knowledge. I don't dispute/contest these software.

But,... what about Local Governments with limited budget? They can not afford this paid license software. To some, such software is a luxury or even overkill. They need to make decision, yet they need these crucial infrastructure to build policy. The solution is open source software.

A great example from Whanganui District (New Zealand) demonstrating the power of open source stack to deliver spatial data projects; and employing open standards in their stack.

https://data.whanganui.govt.nz/documents/502/link

The government has their public repository here:

https://github.com/orgs/Whanganui-District-Council/repositories

I find this very exciting because by being transparent with their codes & adopting open standards, this means:
They can connect to international-global skill resources as developers "speak" the same language. Suppose they require something, they can post bounties.

(an example of bounties in open-source software dev https://maplibre.org/news/2022-10-16-call-for-bounties/)

community involvement and inspection; as people might find vulnerabilities and can directly submit an issue through the Github issue page. More importantly, they can propose concretely how the issue should be fixed! (through Pull-Requests).

transparent as we know who does what for the software stack. The record can be seen through the Git Logs.

Following open standard; the data schema is modular: following OSGEO and OGC standards. Switching between stack is easy as it is standardised. This is like USB ports, we have standardised USB-C now, every device can connect through the same charger. Imagine if every phone has their own USB port?

all and all, happy to learn such practice for local government. (:
user
When it comes to Spatial Data Infrastructure, local governments often rely on licensed, paid software, which is usually quite expensive. Yes, it comes with its benefits and is definitely worth it, particularly for assurance, maintenance, and expert knowledge. I don't dispute these software benefits.

However, what about local governments with limited budgets? They cannot afford this paid license software. For some, such software is a luxury or even overkill. They need to make decisions, yet they need this crucial infrastructure to build policy. The solution is open-source software.

A great example comes from the Whanganui District in New Zealand, demonstrating the power of an open-source stack to deliver spatial data projects and employing open standards in their stack.

https://data.whanganui.govt.nz/documents/502/link

The government maintains their public repository here:

https://github.com/orgs/Whanganui-District-Council/repositories

I find this very exciting because, by being transparent with their codes and adopting open standards, this means:
They can connect to international and global skill resources as developers "speak" the same language. Suppose they require something, they can post bounties.

(Here is an example of bounties in open-source software development: https://maplibre.org/news/2022-10-16-call-for-bounties/)

There is potential for community involvement and inspection, as people might find vulnerabilities and can directly submit an issue through the Github issue page. More importantly, they can propose concretely how the issue should be fixed! (through Pull-Requests).

The process is transparent, as we know who does what for the software stack. The record can be seen through the Git Logs.

By following open standards, the data schema is modular, adhering to OSGEO and OGC standards. Switching between stacks is easy as it is standardized. This is similar to USB ports - we have standardized USB-C now, so every device can connect through the same charger. Imagine if every phone had their own USB port?

All in all, I'm happy to learn about such practices in local government. (:
assistant