Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Oct 15, 2010, at 9:13 PM, Anthony wrote: I also haven't been kicked out of Wikipedia, though you have claimed it multiple times. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Raul654/Anthony_evidence#Anthony_DiPierro http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Logtype=blockpage=User:Anthony+DiPierro http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Anthony_DiPierroaction=historysubmitdiff=150082529oldid=127296822 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Anthonydiff=prevoldid=18550249 http://miamichaela.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/moron.jpg Steve stevecoast.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Peter Körner osm-li...@mazdermind.de wrote: Am 15.10.2010 12:11, schrieb Valent Turkovic: On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:41:30 -0400, Anthony wrote: Once OSM goes ODbL, I'd expect that Mapquest will stop licensing their tiles under a free license. They distribute it now for free? Why? They are forced to by the CC-BY-SA License. Peter Sorry for this lame question, but on mapquest.com site I only see (c) by NAVTEQ, no mention of OSM, why?!? Do they use OSM data? I see some more detailed data in some parts than on OSM has so I guess they have licenced it from somewhere else, or they combine NAVTEQ and OSM data? -- pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt blog: http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com linux, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless, ronjenje, pametne kuće, zwave registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org. ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic, MSN: valent.turko...@hotmail.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Jonas Krückel o...@jonas-krueckel.de wrote: Am 15.10.2010 um 14:40 schrieb ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen: I agree that we need to have a map to demonstrate what one can do with OSM. But in my opinion, the one we currently have already surpasses, by a large margin, that which would be required to attract people to the project. And still people whine about our lack of vision! Nonsense Frederic, Justin makes a number of very valid points that make the impression on the average visitor, that show we are a unstructured community in some ways. And no-one is whining, we are trying to make a better OSM, and the mapnik map is in most of the cass the first impression the user gets. We have voluntarily choosen to use the MAP(NIK) as 80% of our frontpage. There are no statements about that are just in for data quality. That is the first (and too often) the last impression a visitor gets. I'm not sure how much we have chosen to have a big map on the front page. It has been this way for years and hasn't change while the project itself has changed and involved in a lot of ways. Why don't we display more info about our project on the front page but instead let the user more or less guess what we are about (by showing them a map and a search box that looks a little bit like yet another Google Maps clone and a small text description + a few links.) Why don't we show them different map styles to choose from. We can force them to choose a map style and they will learn that OSM has more than one map (and maybe they also understand that OSM data can be used to produce different maps, but it's a start anyway). Or do you really think that this little plus over there is discovered by anyone visiting osm.org for the first time? Why don't we show them upfront that we already have thousands of contributors mapping right now (think of something like those maps showing edits live) and make information about how this mapping is done available with just one click? Why don't we show them that OSM contributors meet up in local groups to have fun? Why don't we show them the different ways OSM data can be used - OSM data on mobile devices like smartphones and outdoor GPS devices, routing based on OSM, mashups with OSM basemaps... Why shouldn't we educate the visitors and make them learn what OSM truly is. As long as we can agree, that OSM is more than a small text description on the side and a big map, we can do a much better job showing the diversity and richness of OSM and giving the visitors reasons why they should want to contribute to this awesome project. And of course, I know that this needs someone to write the code for it and write the text and pick some images. But I think that making osm.org look even more similar to Google Maps and the like is the wrong way [1]. Also, please don't tell me that we can't put all this information on the front page, we can. Web pages can be longer than 600px because there is scrolling. Web pages can contain elements that move like a slideshow. They can contain small videos and images. We might even have all this information available in our wiki already, but why shouldn't we display it upfront on osm.org? -Jonas [1] We can still do this and make it available as maps.osm.org for example and put a pretty big link on osm.org But it shouldn't be the main element on osm.org ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk Great idea! Why not? I immediately thought about www.linuxmint.com because they have done this and executed it beuatifully. You can see on their site different products and info about each of them. This would probably also work great for OSM. OSM is clearly not onyl the map but that is what is shown to people the minute they type in www.osm.org why not place map on www.osm.org/map or map.osm.org but create a homepage that shows the beautiful diversity of OSM project? -- pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt blog: http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com linux, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless, ronjenje, pametne kuće, zwave registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org. ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic, MSN: valent.turko...@hotmail.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On 16 Oct 2010, at 11:31, Valent Turkovic wrote: On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Peter Körner osm-li...@mazdermind.de wrote: Am 15.10.2010 12:11, schrieb Valent Turkovic: On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:41:30 -0400, Anthony wrote: Once OSM goes ODbL, I'd expect that Mapquest will stop licensing their tiles under a free license. They distribute it now for free? Why? They are forced to by the CC-BY-SA License. Peter Sorry for this lame question, but on mapquest.com site I only see (c) by NAVTEQ, no mention of OSM, why?!? Do they use OSM data? I see some more detailed data in some parts than on OSM has so I guess they have licenced it from somewhere else, or they combine NAVTEQ and OSM data? open.mapquest.co.uk open.mapquest.de open.mapquest.es etc. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MapQuest has more info. Shaun ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 2:29 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: http://miamichaela.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/moron.jpg https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=User:Anthonydiff=391046808oldid=391046671 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Great and constructive suggestions Jonas! On Oct 15, 2010, at 8:16 AM, Jonas Krückel o...@jonas-krueckel.de wrote: Am 15.10.2010 um 14:40 schrieb ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen: I agree that we need to have a map to demonstrate what one can do with OSM. But in my opinion, the one we currently have already surpasses, by a large margin, that which would be required to attract people to the project. And still people whine about our lack of vision! Nonsense Frederic, Justin makes a number of very valid points that make the impression on the average visitor, that show we are a unstructured community in some ways. And no-one is whining, we are trying to make a better OSM, and the mapnik map is in most of the cass the first impression the user gets. We have voluntarily choosen to use the MAP(NIK) as 80% of our frontpage. There are no statements about that are just in for data quality. That is the first (and too often) the last impression a visitor gets. I'm not sure how much we have chosen to have a big map on the front page. It has been this way for years and hasn't change while the project itself has changed and involved in a lot of ways. Why don't we display more info about our project on the front page but instead let the user more or less guess what we are about (by showing them a map and a search box that looks a little bit like yet another Google Maps clone and a small text description + a few links.) Why don't we show them different map styles to choose from. We can force them to choose a map style and they will learn that OSM has more than one map (and maybe they also understand that OSM data can be used to produce different maps, but it's a start anyway). Or do you really think that this little plus over there is discovered by anyone visiting osm.org for the first time? Why don't we show them upfront that we already have thousands of contributors mapping right now (think of something like those maps showing edits live) and make information about how this mapping is done available with just one click? Why don't we show them that OSM contributors meet up in local groups to have fun? Why don't we show them the different ways OSM data can be used - OSM data on mobile devices like smartphones and outdoor GPS devices, routing based on OSM, mashups with OSM basemaps... Why shouldn't we educate the visitors and make them learn what OSM truly is. As long as we can agree, that OSM is more than a small text description on the side and a big map, we can do a much better job showing the diversity and richness of OSM and giving the visitors reasons why they should want to contribute to this awesome project. And of course, I know that this needs someone to write the code for it and write the text and pick some images. But I think that making osm.org look even more similar to Google Maps and the like is the wrong way [1]. Also, please don't tell me that we can't put all this information on the front page, we can. Web pages can be longer than 600px because there is scrolling. Web pages can contain elements that move like a slideshow. They can contain small videos and images. We might even have all this information available in our wiki already, but why shouldn't we display it upfront on osm.org? -Jonas [1] We can still do this and make it available as maps.osm.org for example and put a pretty big link on osm.org But it shouldn't be the main element on osm.org ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
I think Justin is right. The OSM community lacks an inspiring vision towards the future of OSM. Instead of focusing on GEO-data and MAP usability, the last 2 years to many of the key players of OSM have been focusing on only one topic : the license change. How can any potential user of OSM get a good impression of what is possible from the base map ? And indeed, mentioning Mapnik as a base layer is too much honour for the software creating it. Thank you Justin, for the effort you put in showing where we actually fail. Communicating with our potential users ! Lets learn our lessons, and create some kind of working group focusing on that. If we can get as many people motivated for this topic as there were for the license change, our showcase, the base map will improve quickly. Gert Gremmen - Openstreetmap.nl (alias: cetest) P Before printing, think about the environment. Van: talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org] Namens Jonas Krückel Verzonden: Thursday, October 14, 2010 5:18 PM Aan: Milo van der Linden CC: OSM Talk; 41latit...@gmail.com Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap FYI Justin posted a note to clarify his intention behind the article and a few other points: http://www.41latitude.com/post/1313261274/osm-response -Jonas Am 14.10.2010 um 14:07 schrieb Milo van der Linden: Dear 41latitude, I came accross your blog on critique of OpenStreetMap. http://www.41latitude.com/post/1310985699/openstreetmap-critique and read it with interest. Some points are true, others need better explaination and I think you misinterpreted some things. Basically your critique can be drilled down to 3 main components: [...] image001.gif___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Hi, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: The OSM community lacks an inspiring vision towards the future of OSM. Instead of focusing on GEO-data and MAP usability, the last 2 years to many of the key players of OSM have been focusing on only one topic : the license change. The license change is directly related to our focusing on GEO-data, whereas MAP usability is what our users should be concerned about, not us. I think it is about the fourth time this has been stated in this thread. I mean, there's nothing wrong with having nice map but this is certainly not at the core of the project, and certainly nothing we should aim to have an inspiring vision for. We're providing the underlying data for others to bring their inspiring visions to life. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 10:52:47 +0200 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: I mean, there's nothing wrong with having nice map but this is certainly not at the core of the project, and certainly nothing we should aim to have an inspiring vision for. We're providing the underlying data for others to bring their inspiring visions to life. That is your opinion For others, the nice map is important. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 14:07:56 +0200, Milo van der Linden wrote: Making the perfectly rendered map available to the world is *not* a mission goal for the OSMF. The OSMF is primarily responsible for maintaining the database and the services related to it. Well then OSMF should change their mission to include nice representation of data also, not to compete with commercial companies just to make defalut map not suck would be nice ;). -- pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt blog: http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com linux, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless, ronjenje, pametne kuće registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org. ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic, MSN: valent.turko...@hotmail.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 10:58:20 -0400, Paul Houle wrote: It's better to say we know we could do it better and we'll do better in the future. +1 always for constructive criticism, and should be accepted by any project that wants to go forward. -- pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt blog: http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com linux, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless, ronjenje, pametne kuće registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org. ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic, MSN: valent.turko...@hotmail.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 18:36:48 +, Ed Avis wrote: That's surely a lot of the reason why OSM looks strange from an American point of view, but he does have a couple of valid points - the map does look a bit 'washed out' at low zoom levels, with many similar shades of almost-grey (which may be tasteful for a printed map, but less good on a computer screen), and again at low zoom levels the country and city labels look very similar. This seams a simple problem to solve, right? Only some minor adjustement in mapnik colour scheme to get higher contrast ratio between different objects. Can I contribute somehow and get this done? -- pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt blog: http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com linux, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless, ronjenje, pametne kuće registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org. ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic, MSN: valent.turko...@hotmail.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:27:06 +0200 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: The cool thing about OSM is: They can go ahead and create the nice map! sometimes, you have no insight whatsoever. No, I cannot create the nice map. It doesn't belong in MY skill set. I may have a long string of qualifications, but none relate to computer stuff. There are others like me, whose skills are different, and we would like to see 'a nice map' hosted by OSM. Once again, I see people who have taken up a position of power within an organisation which is supposed to support OSM, start telling everyone else what OSM is and is not, without actually asking OSM contributors exactly what OSM is and is not. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On 15/10/2010 11:49, Valent Turkovic wrote: On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 14:07:56 +0200, Milo van der Linden wrote: Making the perfectly rendered map available to the world is *not* a mission goal for the OSMF. The OSMF is primarily responsible for maintaining the database and the services related to it. Well then OSMF should change their mission to include nice representation of data also, not to compete with commercial companies just to make defalut map not suck would be nice ;). +1 If our product is the data (and not the map) we should be making more progress towards higher data quality, which I consider will inevitably require a degree of control over tagging and less of the tagging free-for-all which we have today. We cannot have uncontrolled data and simple say it is the responsibility of the renderer to sort out all the different ways in which things are modelled. We cannot (IMHO) achieve any level of data quality without some clear and effective governance of the data model including tagging schemes. Quality is not the same as correctness or any other similar attribute of the data collection, but it's about having stated goals for these attributes and achieving them. If 50% correct is the stated goal, then we can be happy if we achieve 51% - and our quality would be perfect. Our (potential) users will know what to expect because our product is exactly what it says on the tin (in fact it's better). If we don't meet expectations then the only way is down. However you feel about the discussion about what our product is, the map presented on the home page is our calling-card and has the power to make a lasting impression on people. Colin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:39:07 +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote: But I have no problem with openstreetmap.org being British rather than some bland kind of international - we can do tiles on openstreetmap.de in a more German style, and tiles on openstreetmap.us in a more US style, and so on. Is there a way so that international groups get theri own (virtual) server but so that it is located together with other servers? I can imagine us.osm.org, uk.osm.org, hr.osm.org and so on... Ofcourse people would need to pay to get their server maintained and I see no problem there if prices would be reasonable. If lets say 20-30 osm volounteers can pay to keep the server running that would be the way to go. Then every country community could have it's rendering made as they need it. -- pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt blog: http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com linux, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless, ronjenje, pametne kuće registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org. ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic, MSN: valent.turko...@hotmail.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 20:11:34 +1100, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: That is your opinion For others, the nice map is important. Agreed, and I hope we can vote so that people who are willing to make usable maps be in OSMF board not ones that dont. -- pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt blog: http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com linux, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless, ronjenje, pametne kuće registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org. ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic, MSN: valent.turko...@hotmail.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Valent Turkovic valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 14:07:56 +0200, Milo van der Linden wrote: Making the perfectly rendered map available to the world is *not* a mission goal for the OSMF. The OSMF is primarily responsible for maintaining the database and the services related to it. Well then OSMF should change their mission to include nice representation of data also, not to compete with commercial companies just to make defalut map not suck would be nice ;). Note that Justin did not refer to OSMF. Milo brought it up. I thought Justin was addressing the community (a loose association of thousands of volunteers). OSMF has a duty to entice or motivate people to improve the map. That will be easier when the map is pretty. So making a pretty map is a means to an end. I think however that the rendering is pretty enough and that there are a lot of other things that are more important. Perform a simple test: Take someone with a reasonable computer background and ask them to plan their next journey with OSM. Will they be able to locate the places on the map ? Routing ?? After completing the journey, will they be able to register on our site and make the corrections they identified ? How long does it all take ? People value their own time. The good news is that there are a lot of improvements in testing right now. -- pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt blog: http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com linux, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless, ronjenje, pametne kuće registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org. ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic, MSN: valent.turko...@hotmail.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:41:30 -0400, Anthony wrote: Once OSM goes ODbL, I'd expect that Mapquest will stop licensing their tiles under a free license. They distribute it now for free? Why? -- pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt blog: http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com linux, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless, ronjenje, pametne kuće registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org. ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic, MSN: valent.turko...@hotmail.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Elizabeth wrote: No, I cannot create the nice map. Perhaps it's because I'm in the UK and am used to the non-garish OS maps, but I sometimes look at the Mapnik rendering and think wow. Everyone's opinion on what is nice is going to differ. We might not even agree on something as simple as at certain zoom levels highway widths are a little too wide; I doubt we'd ever get agreement on colour schemes. Ed ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote: Elizabeth wrote: No, I cannot create the nice map. I do not want to be so blunt, but I do not know any other way: then stop complaining about the map. Or anything an OSM user can complain about at OSM, for that matter. This is an open data project, so I have been told. Like many open source projects that it relies upon, specifically the tools used to render and manipulate OSM data, the ecosystem upon which it relies is meritocracy. The people you have take issue with do have the power because they have the knowledge and skills to create these tools or refine them. If you do not like the current tool set, and you are not part of a significant plurality of users and developers who can enforce such a change, you have to learn to make your own. I am sorry, but that was, is, and always will be the way open source works, at least in my mind. I have my own opinions on OSM quality, but then again I am not yet a component OSM contributor, web developer, or system administrator. It is not my place to judge until I understand the tools well enough to critique them accurately on a technical level (nice is not really specific enough for me), and then modify them or make new ones in the event a significant number of people in the community disagree with me. The point of the community is to leverage your skills with the skills of others. That way, we have a high competency level in multiple dimensions. If you do not like one component and cannot fix it yourself, it is bizarre for me, personally, to insist others conform to your wishes. I have believed that open source and open data projects specifically let go of that thinking so that skilled, inspired people can focus on what they want without organizational problems where unknowledgeable people higher in a hierarchy get in their way. Hence OSM and many other groups try to keep the hierarchy very flat (some do, anyway). I do not mean to be rude about this, but it is obvious to me. I am not sure if needs to be spelled out. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Hi, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: No, I cannot create the nice map. It doesn't belong in MY skill set. Fair enough. If you don't have the skills or the computers or the money to create a nice map, then you have to talk someone else into creating a nice map for you. But I don't think this should be OSM. That would mean diverting resources from creating valuable geodata to creating pretty end products. I would rather see someone else take up that work, using OSM data to create nice maps of all kinds. I'm not saying it should not be done, but I don't see it as a task for the OSM project. Much as the opencyclemap or the various hiking maps are not organised or funded by the OSM project. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Kai, Kai Krueger wrote: Well, Navteq and Tele Atlas also don't have to attract many hundreds of thousands of volunteers to create their data, many of whom are likely not able to or willing to have to deal with tens of Gb of raw vector data to be able to benefit from the work they put in. Thus Navteq and Tele Atlas don't really have a direct interest in the public seeing them as particularly useful or relevant. This is rather different for OpenStreetMap. I agree that we need to have a map to demonstrate what one can do with OSM. But in my opinion, the one we currently have already surpasses, by a large margin, that which would be required to attract people to the project. And still people whine about our lack of vision! Now it is possible that OpenStreetMap can successfully outsource this process of turning its data into something useful to various other (commercial) projects not associated with OSM, I'd say that e.g. MapQuest very much associate themselves with OSM, wouldn't you? And it need not be commercial enterprises either. I think there's room for an open source cartography portal where people get together to create really slick maps (from OSM data, most likely), acquire funding and resources to publish, print, or otherwise distribute them, and so on. I don't think that OpenStreetMap should be aim to take this place. If this isn't achieved, then OSM might simply not be able to attract enough mappers to create the high quality data it aims for. They'd then rather go to something like waze or google map maker who give them something back. Oh great, if the viability of OSM depends on what products *we* make from the data, why make the data open in the first place? You're painting the picture of a pure consumer, one who is unwilling and unable to make use of the most valuable asset OSM has to offer, namely the source data, one who simply wants someone else to produce a nice map for them. I say: Let these people go to Waze or Google Map Maker if they don't need what OSM has to offer. Waze or GMM deliver products created by professionals as part of their paid job; the price you pay for that as a user is that you have to take what they give you. If this works for someone, then let them take the offer. OpenStreetMap does not employ paid cartographers and product designers, and in my opinion should not aim at doing so. That is why it is sometimes useful to listen to such well illustrated critiques as this one. They show how others, potential new mappers, view OSM, and highlight where OSM should either inspire to improve or at least aim to communicate better where else to get those needs satisfied. Yes, maybe it really is time for a big banner across openstreetmap.org: This is not a slick online map web site, and not meant to be one. Of cause, many of the points of this critique actually concerned the data and its inconsistency in tagging, rather than the tools or style-sheets, and so it would be equally important for mappers to realise that perhaps inventing yet another tagging schema, even if it might locally be better, might not be particularly helpful as it wont be supported my anything. One could also go in the other direction and drop the requirement that one and the same piece of software must be able to process OSM data world-wide... Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Hi, Valent Turkovic wrote: Agreed, and I hope we can vote so that people who are willing to make usable maps be in OSMF board not ones that dont. Are you saying our current maps are unusable? Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 14:13:10 +0300 Al Haraka alhar...@gmail.com wrote: I do not want to be so blunt, but I do not know any other way: then stop complaining about the map. Or anything an OSM user can complain about at OSM, for that matter. This is an open data project, so I have been told. that is where we differ - I contribute, and in no small manner, by ground survey and mapping. It is not an open *data* project, but an open /source/ project and there is a tension between those of the computer meritocracy and those of the mapping meritocracy. We cannot exist without each other. Very few fit into both camps, but the camps cannot exist without each other. Do not forget those who document, those who test websites and coding, for again, they are all important parts of the whole. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
I thought the critique was useful for those of us who rarely look at low zooms, other than as a quick way to pan across a few hundred/thousand miles. Yes they are a bit bland; wouldn't hurt to do something about it (wouldn't spend much time on it, but worth a few tweaks). Text overlaps are something that Mapnik is supposed to be good at, so that can probably be fixed. Boundary rendering could certainly be better. It was also useful to highlight the miscategorisation of roads in the US. If a city centre is an orange blob that's because they've (we've) made too many roads secondary. It's the data that needs fixing, not the rendering. So make them all unclassified and let someone locally pick out the roads that really do have a secondary distribution function. Those turnpike labels should be loc_ref or some such. I think it's a useful learning point - look at the low zooms a bit more often. Write some trac tickets if you think there's a good solution to a rendering problem, but don't know how to do it. Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Am 15.10.2010 12:06, schrieb Valent Turkovic: Can I contribute somehow and get this done? The OSM Style is at [1], patches to the dev list [2]. [1] http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/rendering/mapnik/ [2] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Am 15.10.2010 12:11, schrieb Valent Turkovic: On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:41:30 -0400, Anthony wrote: Once OSM goes ODbL, I'd expect that Mapquest will stop licensing their tiles under a free license. They distribute it now for free? Why? They are forced to by the CC-BY-SA License. Peter ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Al hakara wrote: I have my own opinions on OSM quality, but then again I am not yet a component OSM contributor, web developer, or system administrator. It is not my place to judge until I understand the tools well enough to critique them accurately No please, critique is always needed, you may have skills the others donot. Your points may be very valueable, even if you cannot implement your ideas yourself. I really hate both the modesty, leading to no positive critiques on work others do (to the best of their skills), and the attitude of many developers to say : shut up, fixit yourselves. The OSM community consist of many type of people with a multitude of skills and talents. Please continue all to let us know your ideas, you may have a golden one. But at the other hand, do not get angry if you are not heard. The developers are volunteers too, they hev no obligation to follow up mine or your ideas, and not even to answer or comment them (though that would be nice). Gert Gremmen - Openstreetmap.nl (alias: cetest) Before printing, think about the environment. -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org] Namens Al Haraka Verzonden: Friday, October 15, 2010 1:13 PM Aan: OpenStreetMap talk mailing list Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote: Elizabeth wrote: No, I cannot create the nice map. I do not want to be so blunt, but I do not know any other way: then stop complaining about the map. Or anything an OSM user can complain about at OSM, for that matter. This is an open data project, so I have been told. Like many open source projects that it relies upon, specifically the tools used to render and manipulate OSM data, the ecosystem upon which it relies is meritocracy. The people you have take issue with do have the power because they have the knowledge and skills to create these tools or refine them. If you do not like the current tool set, and you are not part of a significant plurality of users and developers who can enforce such a change, you have to learn to make your own. I am sorry, but that was, is, and always will be the way open source works, at least in my mind. I have my own opinions on OSM quality, but then again I am not yet a component OSM contributor, web developer, or system administrator. It is not my place to judge until I understand the tools well enough to critique them accurately on a technical level (nice is not really specific enough for me), and then modify them or make new ones in the event a significant number of people in the community disagree with me. The point of the community is to leverage your skills with the skills of others. That way, we have a high competency level in multiple dimensions. If you do not like one component and cannot fix it yourself, it is bizarre for me, personally, to insist others conform to your wishes. I have believed that open source and open data projects specifically let go of that thinking so that skilled, inspired people can focus on what they want without organizational problems where unknowledgeable people higher in a hierarchy get in their way. Hence OSM and many other groups try to keep the hierarchy very flat (some do, anyway). I do not mean to be rude about this, but it is obvious to me. I am not sure if needs to be spelled out. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
I agree that we need to have a map to demonstrate what one can do with OSM. But in my opinion, the one we currently have already surpasses, by a large margin, that which would be required to attract people to the project. And still people whine about our lack of vision! Nonsense Frederic, Justin makes a number of very valid points that make the impression on the average visitor, that show we are a unstructured community in some ways. And no-one is whining, we are trying to make a better OSM, and the mapnik map is in most of the cass the first impression the user gets. We have voluntarily choosen to use the MAP(NIK) as 80% of our frontpage. There are no statements about that are just in for data quality. That is the first (and too often) the last impression a visitor gets. Gert Gremmen - Openstreetmap.nl (alias: cetest) Before printing, think about the environment. -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org] Namens Frederik Ramm Verzonden: Friday, October 15, 2010 1:23 PM Aan: Kai Krueger CC: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap Kai, Kai Krueger wrote: Well, Navteq and Tele Atlas also don't have to attract many hundreds of thousands of volunteers to create their data, many of whom are likely not able to or willing to have to deal with tens of Gb of raw vector data to be able to benefit from the work they put in. Thus Navteq and Tele Atlas don't really have a direct interest in the public seeing them as particularly useful or relevant. This is rather different for OpenStreetMap. I agree that we need to have a map to demonstrate what one can do with OSM. But in my opinion, the one we currently have already surpasses, by a large margin, that which would be required to attract people to the project. And still people whine about our lack of vision! Now it is possible that OpenStreetMap can successfully outsource this process of turning its data into something useful to various other (commercial) projects not associated with OSM, I'd say that e.g. MapQuest very much associate themselves with OSM, wouldn't you? And it need not be commercial enterprises either. I think there's room for an open source cartography portal where people get together to create really slick maps (from OSM data, most likely), acquire funding and resources to publish, print, or otherwise distribute them, and so on. I don't think that OpenStreetMap should be aim to take this place. If this isn't achieved, then OSM might simply not be able to attract enough mappers to create the high quality data it aims for. They'd then rather go to something like waze or google map maker who give them something back. Oh great, if the viability of OSM depends on what products *we* make from the data, why make the data open in the first place? You're painting the picture of a pure consumer, one who is unwilling and unable to make use of the most valuable asset OSM has to offer, namely the source data, one who simply wants someone else to produce a nice map for them. I say: Let these people go to Waze or Google Map Maker if they don't need what OSM has to offer. Waze or GMM deliver products created by professionals as part of their paid job; the price you pay for that as a user is that you have to take what they give you. If this works for someone, then let them take the offer. OpenStreetMap does not employ paid cartographers and product designers, and in my opinion should not aim at doing so. That is why it is sometimes useful to listen to such well illustrated critiques as this one. They show how others, potential new mappers, view OSM, and highlight where OSM should either inspire to improve or at least aim to communicate better where else to get those needs satisfied. Yes, maybe it really is time for a big banner across openstreetmap.org: This is not a slick online map web site, and not meant to be one. Of cause, many of the points of this critique actually concerned the data and its inconsistency in tagging, rather than the tools or style-sheets, and so it would be equally important for mappers to realise that perhaps inventing yet another tagging schema, even if it might locally be better, might not be particularly helpful as it wont be supported my anything. One could also go in the other direction and drop the requirement that one and the same piece of software must be able to process OSM data world-wide... Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Hi, Peter Körner wrote: Once OSM goes ODbL, I'd expect that Mapquest will stop licensing their tiles under a free license. They distribute it now for free? Why? They are forced to by the CC-BY-SA License. CC-BY-SA would still allow them to restrict access to the site, e.g. force users to log in or use an API key, which to my knowledge they don't. CC-BY-SA would still allow them to put up a site policy that says (for example) private use only or so, which to my knowledge they don't. Also, CC-BY-SA does not force them to openly publish their map styles, yet they do. I don't share Anthony's fear that they will close down everything after the license change; I don't see any signs pointing in that direction. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Am 15.10.2010 um 14:40 schrieb ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen: I agree that we need to have a map to demonstrate what one can do with OSM. But in my opinion, the one we currently have already surpasses, by a large margin, that which would be required to attract people to the project. And still people whine about our lack of vision! Nonsense Frederic, Justin makes a number of very valid points that make the impression on the average visitor, that show we are a unstructured community in some ways. And no-one is whining, we are trying to make a better OSM, and the mapnik map is in most of the cass the first impression the user gets. We have voluntarily choosen to use the MAP(NIK) as 80% of our frontpage. There are no statements about that are just in for data quality. That is the first (and too often) the last impression a visitor gets. I'm not sure how much we have chosen to have a big map on the front page. It has been this way for years and hasn't change while the project itself has changed and involved in a lot of ways. Why don't we display more info about our project on the front page but instead let the user more or less guess what we are about (by showing them a map and a search box that looks a little bit like yet another Google Maps clone and a small text description + a few links.) Why don't we show them different map styles to choose from. We can force them to choose a map style and they will learn that OSM has more than one map (and maybe they also understand that OSM data can be used to produce different maps, but it's a start anyway). Or do you really think that this little plus over there is discovered by anyone visiting osm.org for the first time? Why don't we show them upfront that we already have thousands of contributors mapping right now (think of something like those maps showing edits live) and make information about how this mapping is done available with just one click? Why don't we show them that OSM contributors meet up in local groups to have fun? Why don't we show them the different ways OSM data can be used - OSM data on mobile devices like smartphones and outdoor GPS devices, routing based on OSM, mashups with OSM basemaps... Why shouldn't we educate the visitors and make them learn what OSM truly is. As long as we can agree, that OSM is more than a small text description on the side and a big map, we can do a much better job showing the diversity and richness of OSM and giving the visitors reasons why they should want to contribute to this awesome project. And of course, I know that this needs someone to write the code for it and write the text and pick some images. But I think that making osm.org look even more similar to Google Maps and the like is the wrong way [1]. Also, please don't tell me that we can't put all this information on the front page, we can. Web pages can be longer than 600px because there is scrolling. Web pages can contain elements that move like a slideshow. They can contain small videos and images. We might even have all this information available in our wiki already, but why shouldn't we display it upfront on osm.org? -Jonas [1] We can still do this and make it available as maps.osm.org for example and put a pretty big link on osm.org But it shouldn't be the main element on osm.org ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
+1 Jonas, can you put some of your ideas on a wiki page ? Gert Gremmen - Openstreetmap.nl (alias: cetest) Before printing, think about the environment. -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Jonas Krückel [mailto:o...@jonas-krueckel.de] Verzonden: Friday, October 15, 2010 3:17 PM Aan: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen CC: OSM Talk Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap Am 15.10.2010 um 14:40 schrieb ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen: I agree that we need to have a map to demonstrate what one can do with OSM. But in my opinion, the one we currently have already surpasses, by a large margin, that which would be required to attract people to the project. And still people whine about our lack of vision! Nonsense Frederic, Justin makes a number of very valid points that make the impression on the average visitor, that show we are a unstructured community in some ways. And no-one is whining, we are trying to make a better OSM, and the mapnik map is in most of the cass the first impression the user gets. We have voluntarily choosen to use the MAP(NIK) as 80% of our frontpage. There are no statements about that are just in for data quality. That is the first (and too often) the last impression a visitor gets. I'm not sure how much we have chosen to have a big map on the front page. It has been this way for years and hasn't change while the project itself has changed and involved in a lot of ways. Why don't we display more info about our project on the front page but instead let the user more or less guess what we are about (by showing them a map and a search box that looks a little bit like yet another Google Maps clone and a small text description + a few links.) Why don't we show them different map styles to choose from. We can force them to choose a map style and they will learn that OSM has more than one map (and maybe they also understand that OSM data can be used to produce different maps, but it's a start anyway). Or do you really think that this little plus over there is discovered by anyone visiting osm.org for the first time? Why don't we show them upfront that we already have thousands of contributors mapping right now (think of something like those maps showing edits live) and make information about how this mapping is done available with just one click? Why don't we show them that OSM contributors meet up in local groups to have fun? Why don't we show them the different ways OSM data can be used - OSM data on mobile devices like smartphones and outdoor GPS devices, routing based on OSM, mashups with OSM basemaps... Why shouldn't we educate the visitors and make them learn what OSM truly is. As long as we can agree, that OSM is more than a small text description on the side and a big map, we can do a much better job showing the diversity and richness of OSM and giving the visitors reasons why they should want to contribute to this awesome project. And of course, I know that this needs someone to write the code for it and write the text and pick some images. But I think that making osm.org look even more similar to Google Maps and the like is the wrong way [1]. Also, please don't tell me that we can't put all this information on the front page, we can. Web pages can be longer than 600px because there is scrolling. Web pages can contain elements that move like a slideshow. They can contain small videos and images. We might even have all this information available in our wiki already, but why shouldn't we display it upfront on osm.org? -Jonas [1] We can still do this and make it available as maps.osm.org for example and put a pretty big link on osm.org But it shouldn't be the main element on osm.org ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On 15/10/10 12:30, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: No, I cannot create the nice map. It doesn't belong in MY skill set. Fair enough. If you don't have the skills or the computers or the money to create a nice map, then you have to talk someone else into creating a nice map for you. But I don't think this should be OSM. That would mean diverting resources from creating valuable geodata to creating pretty end products. I would rather see someone else take up that work, using OSM data to create nice maps of all kinds. I'm not saying it should not be done, but I don't see it as a task for the OSM project. Much as the opencyclemap or the various hiking maps are not organised or funded by the OSM project. I agree that creating a pretty map is not at the core of what OSM is about, and as time goes on there are more and more options for viewing openstreetmap data. However we can all agree that we want to provide data, and we want to improve data, and many of us will do whatever we can to plug openstreetmap whenever we can. These people will head straight to the website and probably try and find there house; we want to capture these people so that OSM is there first choice for online mapping by providing the services that they expect. Hopefully over time some of these casual users will become editors over time. This is how we will continue to grow. I think it would be a mistake to ignore these users. Obviously other users of the data are providing a lot of this I see Cyclesteets, Cyclemap, Mapquest and Cloudmade all point back to OSM and the editable-ness of the map underneath. But do we really want to leave these types of users to external sites? Cheers Chris -- e: m...@chrisfleming.org w: www.chrisfleming.org ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Peter Körner wrote: Valent Turkovic wrote: On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:41:30 -0400, Anthony wrote: Once OSM goes ODbL, I'd expect that Mapquest will stop licensing their tiles under a free license. They distribute it now for free? Why? They are forced to by the CC-BY-SA License. ...is evidently not the reason why they distribute tiles under a open licence. http://github.com/MapQuest/MapQuest-Mapnik-Style is MIT-licensed. That is more permissive than required by CC-BY-SA (of course, CC-BY-SA doesn't actually require they distribute the stylesheet at all). MapQuest aren't distributing the tiles and stylesheet under an open licence because they have to; they're doing so because they want to. Still, never let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory, etc. Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Response-to-A-critique-of-OpenStreetMap-tp5635020p5639067.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Why would you expect that? On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote: And along those lines, based on the constructive criticism, the default map shown on the main OSM page should be a pretty map, using tiles from Mapquest, while mappers that have a need to view more details can select one of the existing map styles. Once OSM goes ODbL, I'd expect that Mapquest will stop licensing their tiles under a free license. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Yeah, I might do that at some point and then post a link here. -Jonas Am 15.10.2010 um 15:35 schrieb ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen: +1 Jonas, can you put some of your ideas on a wiki page ? Gert Gremmen - Openstreetmap.nl (alias: cetest) Before printing, think about the environment. -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Jonas Krückel [mailto:o...@jonas-krueckel.de] Verzonden: Friday, October 15, 2010 3:17 PM Aan: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen CC: OSM Talk Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap Am 15.10.2010 um 14:40 schrieb ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen: I agree that we need to have a map to demonstrate what one can do with OSM. But in my opinion, the one we currently have already surpasses, by a large margin, that which would be required to attract people to the project. And still people whine about our lack of vision! Nonsense Frederic, Justin makes a number of very valid points that make the impression on the average visitor, that show we are a unstructured community in some ways. And no-one is whining, we are trying to make a better OSM, and the mapnik map is in most of the cass the first impression the user gets. We have voluntarily choosen to use the MAP(NIK) as 80% of our frontpage. There are no statements about that are just in for data quality. That is the first (and too often) the last impression a visitor gets. I'm not sure how much we have chosen to have a big map on the front page. It has been this way for years and hasn't change while the project itself has changed and involved in a lot of ways. Why don't we display more info about our project on the front page but instead let the user more or less guess what we are about (by showing them a map and a search box that looks a little bit like yet another Google Maps clone and a small text description + a few links.) Why don't we show them different map styles to choose from. We can force them to choose a map style and they will learn that OSM has more than one map (and maybe they also understand that OSM data can be used to produce different maps, but it's a start anyway). Or do you really think that this little plus over there is discovered by anyone visiting osm.org for the first time? Why don't we show them upfront that we already have thousands of contributors mapping right now (think of something like those maps showing edits live) and make information about how this mapping is done available with just one click? Why don't we show them that OSM contributors meet up in local groups to have fun? Why don't we show them the different ways OSM data can be used - OSM data on mobile devices like smartphones and outdoor GPS devices, routing based on OSM, mashups with OSM basemaps... Why shouldn't we educate the visitors and make them learn what OSM truly is. As long as we can agree, that OSM is more than a small text description on the side and a big map, we can do a much better job showing the diversity and richness of OSM and giving the visitors reasons why they should want to contribute to this awesome project. And of course, I know that this needs someone to write the code for it and write the text and pick some images. But I think that making osm.org look even more similar to Google Maps and the like is the wrong way [1]. Also, please don't tell me that we can't put all this information on the front page, we can. Web pages can be longer than 600px because there is scrolling. Web pages can contain elements that move like a slideshow. They can contain small videos and images. We might even have all this information available in our wiki already, but why shouldn't we display it upfront on osm.org? -Jonas [1] We can still do this and make it available as maps.osm.org for example and put a pretty big link on osm.org But it shouldn't be the main element on osm.org ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Oct 15, 2010, at 8:36 AM, Randy Meech wrote: Why would you expect that? Randy Anthony is just trolling. He's been kicked out of wikipedia, as noted multiple times. Ignore him. On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote: And along those lines, based on the constructive criticism, the default map shown on the main OSM page should be a pretty map, using tiles from Mapquest, while mappers that have a need to view more details can select one of the existing map styles. Once OSM goes ODbL, I'd expect that Mapquest will stop licensing their tiles under a free license. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk Steve stevecoast.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 10:22:56 -0600 SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: Anthony is just trolling. He's been kicked out of wikipedia, as noted multiple times. Ignore him. That is untruthful. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Oct 15, 2010, at 1:32 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 10:22:56 -0600 SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: Anthony is just trolling. He's been kicked out of wikipedia, as noted multiple times. Ignore him. That is untruthful. Which bit? Steve stevecoast.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Elizabeth Dodd wrote: On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 10:22:56 -0600 SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: Anthony is just trolling. He's been kicked out of wikipedia, as noted multiple times. Ignore him. That is untruthful. Don't bother; Steve is just trolling. -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Response-to-A-critique-of-OpenStreetMap-tp5635020p5640747.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 9:32 PM, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 10:22:56 -0600 SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: Anthony is just trolling. He's been kicked out of wikipedia, as noted multiple times. Ignore him. That is untruthful. I'm afraid that Steve is right to say Ignore him. He's almost always looking for an angle that will cause conflict, upset people and steer the debate off topic. Like bringing up the license change. Like suggesting that MapQuest is only here for short term gains. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 10:36 AM, Randy Meech randy.me...@gmail.com wrote: Why would you expect that? Because it would be in their best interest to do so. On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote: And along those lines, based on the constructive criticism, the default map shown on the main OSM page should be a pretty map, using tiles from Mapquest, while mappers that have a need to view more details can select one of the existing map styles. Once OSM goes ODbL, I'd expect that Mapquest will stop licensing their tiles under a free license. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: CC-BY-SA would still allow them to restrict access to the site, e.g. force users to log in or use an API key, which to my knowledge they don't. Well, no, of course not. If they did that virtually no one would use them. And their tiles would still be free to copy. CC-BY-SA would still allow them to put up a site policy that says (for example) private use only or so, which to my knowledge they don't. I'm not sure what that means. They couldn't restrict the use of the tiles to private use only. CC-BY-SA forbids that. You may not offer or impose any terms on the Work that alter or restrict the terms of this License or the recipients' exercise of the rights granted hereunder. You may not sublicense the Work. Also, CC-BY-SA does not force them to openly publish their map styles, yet they do. Might as well if they're going to release the tiles under a free license. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 4:02 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: On Oct 15, 2010, at 1:32 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 10:22:56 -0600 SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: Anthony is just trolling. He's been kicked out of wikipedia, as noted multiple times. Ignore him. That is untruthful. Which bit? I'm not trolling. I'm pointing out a fact, which happens to be an argument against ODbL. The fact of the matter is that Mapquest is required to release its tiles under a free license due to CC-BY-SA, and would not be required to release its tiles under a free license were OSM under ODbL. If you want to argue that they would continue to release their tiles under a free license even after the switch to ODbL, and that it would in fact be in their best interest to continue to do so, I suppose you can make that argument. But then I wonder what the point is of not requiring it, if it's in the best interest of companies to do it anyway. Once again, as with many other aspects of the ODbL switch, there are two contradictory arguments being used, both in favor of the ODbL. On one hand it's being claimed that the weak copyleft of ODbL provides greater incentives for companies to use OSM, and on the other hand it's being claimed that companies aren't going to take advantage of that weak copyleft. I also haven't been kicked out of Wikipedia, though you have claimed it multiple times. Feel free to tell others to ignore me, but take your own advice, and stop telling lies about me. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-us] US highway tagging (was: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap)
OK, a metaphorical gauntlet has been thrown down, and Richard makes great points. That said, is there any chance the US community can find some agreement about highway tagging? And once we do, we can broker the Israel-Palestine peace talks. :) But seriously, it seems like we need some sort of structured process for a group to look at the options, find compromises, make a decision, and then have a uniform scheme for US roads across the wiki (and hopefully the data will follow...). What has happened up to now with wiki proposals on different pages and email discussions hasn't resolved the issue for whatever reason. Maybe the OSMF-US (or a working group, or some organizationally smart person on this list) could come up with a process and timeline as a way to focus the conversation and move to a resolution? My $.02, Brad -- Forwarded message -- From: Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net Date: Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 3:48 PM Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap To: Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com Cc: t...@openstreetmap.org Kate Chapman wrote: Point 1: I'm not denying that the data in the U.S. is messed up. On the other hand I can't count the number of times people say things that I summarize to 'God, why are you Americans too stupid, lazy or import crazy to map your own country? It really makes people want to continue mapping with the project. Understood absolutely. But put that out of your mind. No matter how I or anyone else phrase it, no matter whether it's accompanied by a helpful smile or a superior sneer, you do genuinely need to sort this shit out anyway. You do need to make sure that your data is as consistently attributed as Google's (or OSM's UK data), because otherwise people, like Mr 41latitude, will compare the two to your detriment. And you need to do that for yourselves. With the awareness of being part of an international project, sure, but it needs to come from US mappers. I mean, I personally dislike the overuse of relations to model absolutely everything, but you should take no bloody notice of me whatsoever and use route relations for your roads if you think it works well and will be reasonably in keeping with the rest of OSM. So if, say, you think you need eight levels of importance within your highway network, yet OSM only has seven (motorway, trunk, primary, secondary, tertiary, unclassified, residential), screw it. Invent another one. Quaternary or minor or something. The Germans have done that (motorroad=yes) and no-one has died as a result. Yes it appears when people compare OSM to Google/Bing/etc they seem to start in the U.S. Funnily enough only US people do that. :) Personally I'm more used to UK cyclists comparing OSM and Google. Google has no cycle paths or routes. The cyclists love OSM! I think, actually, you have an advantage in that the US community is quite small: it's easier to get agreement. Whereas over here, where the community is big and fractious, it takes forever to get anything done. You're still young. Use the advantage while you can. cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap)
On 10/15/10 12:00 PM, Brad Neuhauser wrote: OK, a metaphorical gauntlet has been thrown down, and Richard makes great points. That said, is there any chance the US community can find some agreement about highway tagging? And once we do, we can broker the Israel-Palestine peace talks. :) But seriously, it seems like we need some sort of structured process for a group to look at the options, find compromises, make a decision, and then have a uniform scheme for US roads across the wiki (and hopefully the data will follow...). What has happened up to now with wiki proposals on different pages and email discussions hasn't resolved the issue for whatever reason. Maybe the OSMF-US (or a working group, or some organizationally smart person on this list) could come up with a process and timeline as a way to focus the conversation and move to a resolution? OSMF-US is putting working groups together now. a highway tagging group sounds reasonable to me, although perhaps a more general US tagging group with an initial focus on highway tagging might be useful. there aren't any requirements for working group membership (that is, you don't need to be an OSMF-US member to participate in a WG), although there is a preference that the working group chair to be a member. i have a long standing interest in some of the problems with US highway tagging, and am willing to chair such a group if no one else steps up. if someone else wants to chair, i'm happy to serve as the board liaison. note that anyone who thinks they want to chair should be aware that there is indeed some contention, someone isn't going get their way, so there will be a fair component of mediation and of providing focus/direction to the discussion. richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap)
* Brad Neuhauser brad.neuhau...@gmail.com [2010-10-15 11:00 -0500]: Nice timing. :) That said, is there any chance the US community can find some agreement about highway tagging? I think so. I hope to get some good discussion on my email. But seriously, it seems like we need some sort of structured process for a group to look at the options, find compromises, make a decision, and then have a uniform scheme for US roads across the wiki (and hopefully the data will follow...). I think this gets into areas of a little more philosophical nature. The obvious group to spearhead this sort of thing is the newly-formed OSMF US chapter. You'd need people to volunteer to do the work, though, and I suspect any group formed for this sort of thing would spend a lot of time dealing with conflicts between mappers (I understand beinf on the OSMF Data Working Group is a pretty draining task). What has happened up to now with wiki proposals on different pages and email discussions hasn't resolved the issue for whatever reason. I think it's because the wiki is contradictory on or doesn't mention a lot of topics and the data is even more contradictory. What I'd like to do (as I mentioned in my other email) is get a consensus, put that in the wiki (I've compiled a list of pages that set guidelines for tagging these things), and, ideally, update the data to match the consensus. The last is important because new mappers will absolutely be looking at the data we have and consensus doesn't mean anything if the data doesn't reflect it. -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- Oh, a sarcasm detector. *That's* useful. -- Comic Book Guy, The Simpsons --- -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap)
Hi Brad list, Well, you mentioned working groups. Have you considered standing up a US-based Tagging working group? Perhaps the WG could take on highway tagging as a first project. Here's where to go to get started: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/United_States#US_Chapter_Activities Best regards, SEJ Wretches, utter wretches, keep your hands from beans. -Empedocles On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 12:00, Brad Neuhauser brad.neuhau...@gmail.comwrote: OK, a metaphorical gauntlet has been thrown down, and Richard makes great points. That said, is there any chance the US community can find some agreement about highway tagging? And once we do, we can broker the Israel-Palestine peace talks. :) But seriously, it seems like we need some sort of structured process for a group to look at the options, find compromises, make a decision, and then have a uniform scheme for US roads across the wiki (and hopefully the data will follow...). What has happened up to now with wiki proposals on different pages and email discussions hasn't resolved the issue for whatever reason. Maybe the OSMF-US (or a working group, or some organizationally smart person on this list) could come up with a process and timeline as a way to focus the conversation and move to a resolution? My $.02, Brad -- Forwarded message -- From: Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net Date: Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 3:48 PM Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap To: Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com Cc: t...@openstreetmap.org Kate Chapman wrote: Point 1: I'm not denying that the data in the U.S. is messed up. On the other hand I can't count the number of times people say things that I summarize to 'God, why are you Americans too stupid, lazy or import crazy to map your own country? It really makes people want to continue mapping with the project. Understood absolutely. But put that out of your mind. No matter how I or anyone else phrase it, no matter whether it's accompanied by a helpful smile or a superior sneer, you do genuinely need to sort this shit out anyway. You do need to make sure that your data is as consistently attributed as Google's (or OSM's UK data), because otherwise people, like Mr 41latitude, will compare the two to your detriment. And you need to do that for yourselves. With the awareness of being part of an international project, sure, but it needs to come from US mappers. I mean, I personally dislike the overuse of relations to model absolutely everything, but you should take no bloody notice of me whatsoever and use route relations for your roads if you think it works well and will be reasonably in keeping with the rest of OSM. So if, say, you think you need eight levels of importance within your highway network, yet OSM only has seven (motorway, trunk, primary, secondary, tertiary, unclassified, residential), screw it. Invent another one. Quaternary or minor or something. The Germans have done that (motorroad=yes) and no-one has died as a result. Yes it appears when people compare OSM to Google/Bing/etc they seem to start in the U.S. Funnily enough only US people do that. :) Personally I'm more used to UK cyclists comparing OSM and Google. Google has no cycle paths or routes. The cyclists love OSM! I think, actually, you have an advantage in that the US community is quite small: it's easier to get agreement. Whereas over here, where the community is big and fractious, it takes forever to get anything done. You're still young. Use the advantage while you can. cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Dear 41latitude, I came accross your blog on critique of OpenStreetMap. http://www.41latitude.com/post/1310985699/openstreetmap-critique and read it with interest. Some points are true, others need better explaination and I think you misinterpreted some things. Basically your critique can be drilled down to 3 main components: *The website* The issues for mapkey/legend and the different maptypes are noticed by the community. These points are indeed not always obvious to newbies and might be better understandable by simply changing text and labels. *Rendering* There is a huge misunderstanding with the rendering done on the map at www.openstreetmap.org. www.openstreetmap.org is maintained by the Openstreetmap foundation. Their mission goals are clearly stated here: http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/OSMF:About Making the perfectly rendered map available to the world is *not* a mission goal for the OSMF. The OSMF is primarily responsible for maintaining the database and the services related to it. Everybody in the world is free to make their own online-map, but it is impossible for the OSMF to fund the hours that would need to be spent to have the perfect map available from their website for all the different wishes on maps that exist in the world today. To get a good idea of what is possible with rendering, you would need to investigate further. For instance, look at what Geofabrik: http://www.geofabrik.de/maps/tiles.html and Cloudmade: http://cloudmade.com/products/web-maps-studio have to offer, or look at open mapquest is also busy: http://open.mapquest.co.uk/ Please compare those rendering possibilities and see if you would need to rephrase your conclusions on the rendering part. I agree that the rendering issues could be removed from your critique if the OSMF mission statement was better proclaimed at the main openstreetmap map since it's primary goal is to showcase what might be possible. It is up to map developers all over the world to make beautiful, fit for purpose, maps. *Data quality* OpenStreetMap is a young project, with a extremely fast momentum, unrivaled anywhere in the world of mapdata. Data is entered by volunteers all over the world and there is NO restriction as to what data can be entered or how it can be entered. This is the great power of openstreetmap, you are in control! If you feel that labels like “Departamento de Santa Cruz” are no good idea; suggest a new key-mapping, or fix the labels by changing the tag/value pairs for the particular departemento to name=Santa Cruz admin_level=6 and so fort. OpenStreetMap as a whole is not responsible for incorrect labeling, we as volunteers are. If we come across data that is wrong, and we KNOW what is right, fix it. I hope this give you some new insight. Please feel free to sign up for an OpenStreetMap account and join the process of correcting what in your opinion is not completely right. And when you are in doubt on how to correct things, drop by on the mailing-lists and ask for review of your ideas. That is the true beauty of the structure at OSM. Kind regards, -- Milo van der Linden Open Source Geospatial consultant ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Just a comment not all the data is the map database is presented on these map renders. I've been using Maperitive to selectively select data to be displayed for a particular purpose and working with the rule set to display the information in the way I wish it to be displayed. Working with a local copy of the database gives you a lot more control over the display options including what is displayed and how it is displayed at different zoom levels. OpenStreetMap and its tools do have a learning curve but they are very powerful. It's interesting to note that it is possible to use the tool set and environment to create private maps where cc-by-sa is not available for one reason or another. Cheerio John On 14 October 2010 08:07, Milo van der Linden m...@dogodigi.net wrote: Dear 41latitude, I came accross your blog on critique of OpenStreetMap. http://www.41latitude.com/post/1310985699/openstreetmap-critique and read it with interest. Some points are true, others need better explaination and I think you misinterpreted some things. Basically your critique can be drilled down to 3 main components: *The website* The issues for mapkey/legend and the different maptypes are noticed by the community. These points are indeed not always obvious to newbies and might be better understandable by simply changing text and labels. *Rendering* There is a huge misunderstanding with the rendering done on the map at www.openstreetmap.org. www.openstreetmap.org is maintained by the Openstreetmap foundation. Their mission goals are clearly stated here: http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/OSMF:About Making the perfectly rendered map available to the world is *not* a mission goal for the OSMF. The OSMF is primarily responsible for maintaining the database and the services related to it. Everybody in the world is free to make their own online-map, but it is impossible for the OSMF to fund the hours that would need to be spent to have the perfect map available from their website for all the different wishes on maps that exist in the world today. To get a good idea of what is possible with rendering, you would need to investigate further. For instance, look at what Geofabrik: http://www.geofabrik.de/maps/tiles.html and Cloudmade: http://cloudmade.com/products/web-maps-studio have to offer, or look at open mapquest is also busy: http://open.mapquest.co.uk/ Please compare those rendering possibilities and see if you would need to rephrase your conclusions on the rendering part. I agree that the rendering issues could be removed from your critique if the OSMF mission statement was better proclaimed at the main openstreetmap map since it's primary goal is to showcase what might be possible. It is up to map developers all over the world to make beautiful, fit for purpose, maps. *Data quality* OpenStreetMap is a young project, with a extremely fast momentum, unrivaled anywhere in the world of mapdata. Data is entered by volunteers all over the world and there is NO restriction as to what data can be entered or how it can be entered. This is the great power of openstreetmap, you are in control! If you feel that labels like “Departamento de Santa Cruz” are no good idea; suggest a new key-mapping, or fix the labels by changing the tag/value pairs for the particular departemento to name=Santa Cruz admin_level=6 and so fort. OpenStreetMap as a whole is not responsible for incorrect labeling, we as volunteers are. If we come across data that is wrong, and we KNOW what is right, fix it. I hope this give you some new insight. Please feel free to sign up for an OpenStreetMap account and join the process of correcting what in your opinion is not completely right. And when you are in doubt on how to correct things, drop by on the mailing-lists and ask for review of your ideas. That is the true beauty of the structure at OSM. Kind regards, -- Milo van der Linden Open Source Geospatial consultant ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On 10/14/2010 8:07 AM, Milo van der Linden wrote: Dear 41latitude, I came accross your blog on critique of OpenStreetMap. http://www.41latitude.com/post/1310985699/openstreetmap-critique and read it with interest. Some points are true, others need better explaination and I think you misinterpreted some things. Justin's written detailed critiques of Yahoo, Google and Bing maps as well. As one of the people who encouraged him to write about OSM, I think his criticism ought to be taken as constructive criticism. Of course, you're right to point out that the community nature of OSM means that different people and organizations can create their own renderings. I've talk with Justin, for instance, about Cloudmade's ability to render custom map tiles, and we're both really impressed with that. However, I'll say that the claim that we don't have the resources to do it right is a bad smell that I often perceive around organizations that are in a death spiral. Back when I worked in the library field, it struck me that librarians were just conceding everything to the likes of AMZN and GOOG. Making little effort to take their fate into their own hands, I'm afraid that things are going to continue to get worse for them. It's better to say we know we could do it better and we'll do better in the future. As for the licensing thing, I do believe that CC-BY-SA licensing would allow OSM to join the 'giant component' of generic databases (particularly centering around wikipedia) which would in turn let third parties improve OSM. I am afraid that license proliferation could lead to a number of 'data ghettos', eviscerating the disruptive power of open data, thus granting control of the information future to Tele Atlas, Google, Elsevier and other commercial organizations that don't spend vast amounts of intellectual effort by hobbling themselves. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Am 14.10.2010 16:58, schrieb Paul Houle: However, I'll say that the claim that we don't have the resources to do it right is a bad smell that I often perceive around organizations that are in a death spiral. I'd read it like: I'ts not in our interest to do it right. The purpose of the mail map on osm.org is to show what we have in our database (as much as possible). We don't want companies to use our tiles directly. And we don't want to have an end-user ready map. This map is targeted at the mappers who want to see their bakery on the map and it fulfills this goal. Peter ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
FYI Justin posted a note to clarify his intention behind the article and a few other points: http://www.41latitude.com/post/1313261274/osm-response -Jonas Am 14.10.2010 um 14:07 schrieb Milo van der Linden: Dear 41latitude, I came accross your blog on critique of OpenStreetMap. http://www.41latitude.com/post/1310985699/openstreetmap-critique and read it with interest. Some points are true, others need better explaination and I think you misinterpreted some things. Basically your critique can be drilled down to 3 main components: [...] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Paul, Paul Houle wrote: However, I'll say that the claim that we don't have the resources to do it right is a bad smell that I often perceive around organizations that are in a death spiral. Back when I worked in the library field, it struck me that librarians were just conceding everything to the likes of AMZN and GOOG. I think you haven't understood what Milo said. OSM is not a competitor to Goole, Bing, or Mapquest. OSM is a competitor to Navteq and Tele Atlas. We do have the resources to do that right and we're using them. Navteq and Tele Atlas have rubbish map web sites, if any, because it is not their core competency to make cool map web sites - they are a supplier to those who do. And so are we. We are indeed conceding making cool map web sites to the users of our data, because this is not our core competency and not our strategic aim. Anyone can make a cool web site showing off OSM data. That's why we don't have to. A rendered map is a real motivator for contributors. That's why osm.org has maps. If the map looks rubbish, and Google MapMaker for example, had better looking maps then you can expect some percentage of contributors to go there instead. It is in the best interest of OSM to have really cool renderings up front in OSM. 80n ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
And along those lines, based on the constructive criticism, the default map shown on the main OSM page should be a pretty map, using tiles from Mapquest, while mappers that have a need to view more details can select one of the existing map styles. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Mike N. wrote: And along those lines, based on the constructive criticism, the default map shown on the main OSM page should be a pretty map, using tiles from Mapquest, while mappers that have a need to view more details can select one of the existing map styles. 41latitude is a really interesting blog and I like it, including this latest post. I think you could largely sum up his criticisms in two broad headings: 1. US OSM contributors need to get their shit together 2. European maps don't look like American ones For 1 - seriously, you do. In the UK we don't have some roads tagged A3400 and others tagged A-3400 and others tagged CNSE (Chipping Norton Stratford Expressway, _obviously_): they're all tagged a la A3400. Our roads are coherently classified according to the UK highway system, even though it might seem counterintuitive (we tag non-primary A roads as highway=primary - well, so what). As a result our map looks lovely. If you get your shit together than your map will look lovely too. For 2 - right. That's why you're saying use MapQuest tiles. But over here we're used to the Ordnance Survey and its subtle use of colouring, and so OSM looks just right and Google et al look spartan. It's no coincidence that when Mary Spence of the British Cartographic Society was all over the newspapers criticising Internet cartography, she qualified it with but OpenStreetMap looks lovely. Now the way that Google and friends solve this is by having country-specific rendering rules. They're all within a certain framework, of course, but it means that Google US has shields and orange interstates, while Google UK has boxes and blue motorways. We really ought to do this. But AIUI there will need to be some Mapnik/osm2pgsql patches before it can happen. svn is that way :) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Response-to-A-critique-of-OpenStreetMap-tp5635020p5635967.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On 10/14/2010 12:52 PM, Mike N. wrote: And along those lines, based on the constructive criticism, the default map shown on the main OSM page should be a pretty map, using tiles from Mapquest, while mappers that have a need to view more details can select one of the existing map styles. I don't think that Justin is advocating pretty, he's advocating usable. If highways are labeled I 85 sometimes and I-85 sometimes and I:85 sometimes, that doesn't make things easier for contributors. If roads are too thick and merge into a blob, that doesn't help contributors either. Some of these issues, such as the labels, are data quality issues too and could be addressed in the actual OSM database. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
For 1 - seriously, you do. In the UK we don't have some roads tagged A3400 and others tagged A-3400 and others tagged CNSE (Chipping Norton Stratford Expressway, _obviously_): they're all tagged a la A3400. Our roads are coherently classified according to the UK highway system, even though it might seem counterintuitive (we tag non-primary A roads as highway=primary - well, so what). As a result our map looks lovely. If you get your shit together than your map will look lovely too. First we even have to agree on how it *should* be in the US. There were some arguments on one of the lists, but like everything else, I don't think it's settled. Now that we have relations, etc, the single agreed-on style can be applied later with a bot after we decide how they should be ref'd or named in the relation. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Richard, Point 1: I'm not denying that the data in the U.S. is messed up. On the other hand I can't count the number of times people say things that I summarize to 'God, why are you Americans too stupid, lazy or import crazy to map your own country? It really makes people want to continue mapping with the project. Yes it appears when people compare OSM to Google/Bing/etc they seem to start in the U.S. This is unfortunate for the rest of the community that has some amazing maps in their own countries. It is going to take a long time to fix the U.S. map with the number of contributors we currently have, even long if it is hard to get new ones to join. Mapping in the U.S. started after Europe and I think it is simply and unfortunately going to take some time. Point 2: I think this would fix a lot of the issues as well and make U.S. data look better in the U.S. -Kate On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Mike N. wrote: And along those lines, based on the constructive criticism, the default map shown on the main OSM page should be a pretty map, using tiles from Mapquest, while mappers that have a need to view more details can select one of the existing map styles. 41latitude is a really interesting blog and I like it, including this latest post. I think you could largely sum up his criticisms in two broad headings: 1. US OSM contributors need to get their shit together 2. European maps don't look like American ones For 1 - seriously, you do. In the UK we don't have some roads tagged A3400 and others tagged A-3400 and others tagged CNSE (Chipping Norton Stratford Expressway, _obviously_): they're all tagged a la A3400. Our roads are coherently classified according to the UK highway system, even though it might seem counterintuitive (we tag non-primary A roads as highway=primary - well, so what). As a result our map looks lovely. If you get your shit together than your map will look lovely too. For 2 - right. That's why you're saying use MapQuest tiles. But over here we're used to the Ordnance Survey and its subtle use of colouring, and so OSM looks just right and Google et al look spartan. It's no coincidence that when Mary Spence of the British Cartographic Society was all over the newspapers criticising Internet cartography, she qualified it with but OpenStreetMap looks lovely. Now the way that Google and friends solve this is by having country-specific rendering rules. They're all within a certain framework, of course, but it means that Google US has shields and orange interstates, while Google UK has boxes and blue motorways. We really ought to do this. But AIUI there will need to be some Mapnik/osm2pgsql patches before it can happen. svn is that way :) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Response-to-A-critique-of-OpenStreetMap-tp5635020p5635967.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Hi, Richard Fairhurst wrote: For 2 - right. That's why you're saying use MapQuest tiles. But over here we're used to the Ordnance Survey and its subtle use of colouring, and so OSM looks just right and Google et al look spartan. It's no coincidence that when Mary Spence of the British Cartographic Society was all over the newspapers criticising Internet cartography, she qualified it with but OpenStreetMap looks lovely. Whereas in Old Europe nobody really understands those blue motorways and the cartography we're used to is much more like that in the US than that in the UK! But I have no problem with openstreetmap.org being British rather than some bland kind of international - we can do tiles on openstreetmap.de in a more German style, and tiles on openstreetmap.us in a more US style, and so on. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Richard Fairhurst richard at systemed.net writes: But over here we're used to the Ordnance Survey and its subtle use of colouring, and so OSM looks just right and Google et al look spartan. That's surely a lot of the reason why OSM looks strange from an American point of view, but he does have a couple of valid points - the map does look a bit 'washed out' at low zoom levels, with many similar shades of almost-grey (which may be tasteful for a printed map, but less good on a computer screen), and again at low zoom levels the country and city labels look very similar. -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Am 14.10.2010 14:07, schrieb Milo van der Linden: Dear 41latitude, I came accross your blog on critique of OpenStreetMap. http://www.41latitude.com/post/1310985699/openstreetmap-critique and read it with interest. Some points are true, others need better explaination and I think you misinterpreted some things. Looking at the blog entry, I must say that I like this kind of feedback. The blog entry is well written (you understand what he wants to say) and most of the points he mentioned made sense to me - from the point of view he mentioned. I don't want to argue if all of the points make sense from an OSM point of view - or if the points he mentioned should be actually improved - as that's not the right question here. Let's take it what it is: An OSM outsider tells us what he thinks about what he has seen from OSM. Gives us the opportunity to rethink some stuff that we get used to over the years. I get used to the mapnik rendering of state borders - but is it really that good? E.g.: Sounds like a good idea to draw borders with a dashed line to distinguish them from other stuff ;-) That's the way to get better ... Regards, ULFL P.S: Sorry, I really can't follow the argument of some, that there's no reason to improve the OSM main map as there are already many other OSM maps around. It's very certainly not our primary goal, but what prevents us from improving it? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote: For 1 - seriously, you do. In the UK we don't have some roads tagged A3400 and others tagged A-3400 and others tagged CNSE (Chipping Norton Stratford Expressway, _obviously_): they're all tagged a la A3400. Our roads are coherently classified according to the UK highway system, even though it might seem counterintuitive (we tag non-primary A roads as highway=primary - well, so what). As a result our map looks lovely. If you get your shit together than your map will look lovely too. First we even have to agree on how it *should* be in the US. There were some arguments on one of the lists, but like everything else, I don't think it's settled. Now that we have relations, etc, the single agreed-on style can be applied later with a bot after we decide how they should be ref'd or named in the relation. Aside from labels, the main issue is what trunk/primary/secondary means in the US, as we're trying to shoehorn the US system into the British schema. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
Kate Chapman wrote: Point 1: I'm not denying that the data in the U.S. is messed up. On the other hand I can't count the number of times people say things that I summarize to 'God, why are you Americans too stupid, lazy or import crazy to map your own country? It really makes people want to continue mapping with the project. Understood absolutely. But put that out of your mind. No matter how I or anyone else phrase it, no matter whether it's accompanied by a helpful smile or a superior sneer, you do genuinely need to sort this shit out anyway. You do need to make sure that your data is as consistently attributed as Google's (or OSM's UK data), because otherwise people, like Mr 41latitude, will compare the two to your detriment. And you need to do that for yourselves. With the awareness of being part of an international project, sure, but it needs to come from US mappers. I mean, I personally dislike the overuse of relations to model absolutely everything, but you should take no bloody notice of me whatsoever and use route relations for your roads if you think it works well and will be reasonably in keeping with the rest of OSM. So if, say, you think you need eight levels of importance within your highway network, yet OSM only has seven (motorway, trunk, primary, secondary, tertiary, unclassified, residential), screw it. Invent another one. Quaternary or minor or something. The Germans have done that (motorroad=yes) and no-one has died as a result. Yes it appears when people compare OSM to Google/Bing/etc they seem to start in the U.S. Funnily enough only US people do that. :) Personally I'm more used to UK cyclists comparing OSM and Google. Google has no cycle paths or routes. The cyclists love OSM! I think, actually, you have an advantage in that the US community is quite small: it's easier to get agreement. Whereas over here, where the community is big and fractious, it takes forever to get anything done. You're still young. Use the advantage while you can. cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
