Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Andrew Harvey]

On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Michal Migurski  wrote:
>> OpenStreetMaps has its own data but it is provided by a community that does 
>> not have as much momentum as Wikipedia, even New York City data is pretty 
>> much incomplete[1]
>
> This was in response to the out-of-date NYC page on the wiki, and Russ Nelson 
> set the commenter straight in the thread. Still, the perception of lower 
> quality or at least incompleteness is lurking out there.

Not really relevant, but this point made me remember about when I
first came across OSM and had learned what it was about, I was
expecting empty patches in my city, but when I looked at the map all
the streets were there it looked complete to me so I didn't bother
looking into contributing. It was only a year later that I
rediscovered OSM and realised that even though the streets were
mapped, there were all sorts of other features that I could contribute
like bike paths, drinking fountains, public toilets, local parks...

I wonder if it was called OpenWorldMap rather than OpenStreetMap when
I first came across it, if this wouldn't have constrained myself to
solely streets when I first looked at the map...

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Steve Bennett]

On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
> But to be honest I'd prefer for tile-making to migrate more into the hands
> of users so they can choose whatever style they like, rather than everybody
> making (different) demands on our showcase cartography.
...
> This guy is clearly mistaking us for a map portal. Even if we had the money
> to buy aerial imagery it would not be our mission to serve that to the
> public; we're simply not interested. I'm a little tired of people like that
> and I hope that by drastically reducing the amount of map on our front page
> we will get rid of them. We are here to make good map data; we're not here
> to indulge those who would like a map portal with all the bells and whistles
> (and who, as someone else professed, cannot be bothered to fix data in OSM
> when there are problems).
>
> In my eyes, we are not aimed at "map consumers". We are, to borrow business
> terms, a producer or maybe a distributor, but we're not a retailer. Our
> product needs a bit of pretty packaging and customer service added before it
> can compete with the consumer friendliness of something like Google Maps;
> such pretty packaging and customer service can be provided by enthusiastic
> individuals, or nonprofits, or commercial entities - maybe even by other
> open projects. But I don't see this on our plate.

Well, IMHO, this is a fundamental mistake. The best way to attract
contributors is to provide a good product that they want even more of.
I have friends who would probably contribute to OSM, but first they
would need to *use* OSM, and it's not quite good enough for their
needs. Why do people contribute to Google Maps? Because they use
Google Maps.

If the broader goal here is maximum possible uptake of free data, then
we need to do everything possible to encourage that. Having artificial
boundaries like "oh, we're just a map data project; tools and map
servers are someone else's problem" is just wrong.

Steve

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Ben Johnson]

Hi Frederik,

Thanks for your response and all the other responses from everyone.  
I'm a bit delayed in getting back (bad time of year).  My message  
sparked a bit of debate and many people raised a lot of interesting  
points which parallel my own thinking. I'm not going to respond to  
each message individually because a) I don't have time, and b) I don't  
want to create another snowball, but it was all really appreciated and  
I think some people really hit some core issues and it shows we have a  
lot of very smart people in the community. There are some differences  
in vision but a common passion for the project which is great.


Frederik - I appreciate your insightful reply and I really do get what  
you're saying and why you're saying it. I haven't been a participant  
on the lists but I've been lurking the past few  months. I think the  
community benefits hugely from your involvement. I've trawled through  
all the various debate topics and come up with what seem to represent  
where my thought is coming from - and hopefully this might explain why  
some have a difference in our vision of what OSM can be.



SENSE OF COMMUNITY / IDENTITY
A couple of other people brought this up too and I think it's  
important. I didn't realise how important this was until reading about  
the idea to make maps less prominent on OSM.   The map is the  
representation of the fruits of our hard work - I'll be sad to see it  
relegated to a dark corner. I enthusiastically contribute because I  
feel like I am a part of something. I see the maps, and I make them  
better where I can. It's a thrill to see my updates appear. That's the  
"gamification" aspect right there - seeing contributions appear on the  
map right alongside the work of other contributors.


If we take this "we're just a database" to the extreme, and leave all  
rendering to external parties. No maps on OSM. "Come and contribute to  
our database"  well... I'd stop contributing today if it were like  
that. Why? Because that's when the project feels more like a labour- 
harvesting exercise for the benefit of others. There's just not much  
thrill putting something in a database that might appear on the maps  
used by A, B, C, X, Y, and Z companies at some stage. Do you believe  
the end users of those maps give a stuff about OSM? When you use  
Google Maps do you think about Tele Atlas?


Don't get me wrong - I love the idea our data will be shared and  
rendered externally, but I think maps need to remain prominent on the  
OSM website because it's the visual representation of our work and  
cements a sense of community.



"THE WORLD'S MAP" - MY VISION
This is getting into dream stuff, but I think it's important to share  
our dreams...  The fact you can't represent the needs of everyone on  
one map is absolutely correct. I didn't literally mean a one-size-fits- 
all approach. I mean we should provide some interface that can  
interpret and present the relevant parts of our fantastic database of  
information in flexible new ways. I was deliberately vague on this  
because it's a fuzzy concept.  There were some very interesting points  
raised about cartography, and also quite valid arguments about the  
demand to render and serve all that graphical information being cost  
prohibitive - totally agree. I didn't mean to trivialize by drawing  
comparisons with Wikipedia.


I think of the places where our data will get to...  from tiles  
externally rendered and shared through MapQuest, OpenCycleMap, etc..  
or custom-rendered maps produced on a range of personal client-side  
packages - e.g. used by journalists, government, academic, industry,  
commercial, and private use - all producing stunning customised maps,  
mashed up with statistics, wikipedia information, etc...  I really  
hope all this flourishes.


And then I think of OSM rendering all the Mapnik tiles and I get  
disheartened and it's easy to go down the path of lessening the  
relevance of maps at OSM and leaving these issues for others to  
tackle. Frederik is right when he asks why should we decide what's on  
the map?  Is there a better way to do this?  Can we do away with  
tiles?  Tiles work for graphical maps - but we have a database. Are we  
trying to make a database fit into a traditional graphical map by  
thinking in terms of tiles? I think a lot of this also ties back with  
Frederik's valid concerns raised just before Christmas about the  
volume and scope of data going into the system and the need to be able  
to drill up or down and separate data into layers of relevance.


My vision is this - for the visitor to OSM (or wikipedia-type sister  
project) to become immersed in some kind of interactive map viewing  
experience. Let them visually mine our database. Do away with rendered  
tiles. Use client-side in-browser rendering. Choose from 1000's of  
different map style sheets / templates / cartographic style sheets -  
whatever you want to call them... use t

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Stefan Keller]

Hi
Perhaps http://redesign.apis.dev.openstreetmap.org/ could also added there?
-S.

2011/12/31 Russ Nelson :
>  >      http://mike.teczno.com/img/osm-homepage-sketch.jpg
>
> How many of these have we seen? Maybe we need to just make these pages
> live, and change the default page to simply:
>
> We're testing various front pages. Please check them out, and keep
> visiting the one you like (feel free to bookmark it and go there
> directly, or else click the checkmark and we'll give you a cookie that
> takes you there automatically):
>
>
>
> Traditional page:  [ ] [small screenshot]
>
>
>
> Michal Migurski's: [ ] [small screenshot]
>
>
>
> Steve Coast's:     [ ] [small screenshot]
>
>
> And whomever else's looks reasonable.
>
>
> Then at the end of a few months, we look at the log files, and make
> that page be the new front page. I volunteer to write the index.cgi
> and frontpage.cgi which takes people to their choice of pages and sets
> the cookie and reads the cookie.
>
> Like this, only without the cookie setting: http://wifi.jfdi.org/
>
> Of course ... I'm proposing Yet Another New Front Page Design, aren't
> I? :-)
>
> --
> --my blog is at    http://blog.russnelson.com
> Crynwr supports open source software
> 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815
> Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  |     Sheepdog
>
> ___
> 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] Things People Say (also Piwik)

[Russ Nelson]

Michal Migurski writes:
 > Where's a larger version of Steve's? I seem to remember this from a long 
 > time ago.

This page works, with cookies now:
http://wifi.jfdi.org

I don't have a way to unset the cookie, so once you click save, you've
decided.

 > they have to be built, which means effort and time.

True. We have the traditional page, and Steve's page is already/still
live. That leaves only one other page. whistles

 > Also to be clear, I'm not making the suggestion above to say
 > "here's what the homepage should look like". I am saying that the
 > wider world misunderstands the project as evidenced by the quotes
 > that started this thread, the site has something to do with that,
 > and speculating on what piece of the puzzle people are missing out
 > on through the design.

-- 
--my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com
Crynwr supports open source software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | Sheepdog   

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say (also Piwik)

[Michal Migurski]

On Dec 31, 2011, at 9:14 AM, Russ Nelson wrote:

>>  http://mike.teczno.com/img/osm-homepage-sketch.jpg
> 
> How many of these have we seen? Maybe we need to just make these pages
> live, and change the default page to simply:
> 
> We're testing various front pages. Please check them out, and keep
> visiting the one you like (feel free to bookmark it and go there
> directly, or else click the checkmark and we'll give you a cookie that
> takes you there automatically):
> 
> Traditional page:  [ ] [small screenshot]
> 
> Michal Migurski's: [ ] [small screenshot]
> 
> Steve Coast's: [ ] [small screenshot]
> 
> 
> And whomever else's looks reasonable.

Where's a larger version of Steve's? I seem to remember this from a long time 
ago.

The voting process could use A/B versions with uncookied users to see what 
kinds of behavior we see on each. Screenshots may not give people the 
information they need to make a worthwhile decision; the designs have to be 
used to make sense. This means they have to be built, which means effort and 
time.

Also to be clear, I'm not making the suggestion above to say "here's what the 
homepage should look like". I am saying that the wider world misunderstands the 
project as evidenced by the quotes that started this thread, the site has 
something to do with that, and speculating on what piece of the puzzle people 
are missing out on through the design.

Richard tells me that Piwik is where we can see search and visitor logs for the 
site and wiki. Is that something I can look at?

-mike.


michal migurski- m...@stamen.com
 415.558.1610




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Russ Nelson]

 >  http://mike.teczno.com/img/osm-homepage-sketch.jpg

How many of these have we seen? Maybe we need to just make these pages
live, and change the default page to simply:

We're testing various front pages. Please check them out, and keep
visiting the one you like (feel free to bookmark it and go there
directly, or else click the checkmark and we'll give you a cookie that
takes you there automatically):



Traditional page:  [ ] [small screenshot]



Michal Migurski's: [ ] [small screenshot]



Steve Coast's: [ ] [small screenshot]


And whomever else's looks reasonable.


Then at the end of a few months, we look at the log files, and make
that page be the new front page. I volunteer to write the index.cgi
and frontpage.cgi which takes people to their choice of pages and sets
the cookie and reads the cookie.

Like this, only without the cookie setting: http://wifi.jfdi.org/

Of course ... I'm proposing Yet Another New Front Page Design, aren't
I? :-)

-- 
--my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com
Crynwr supports open source software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | Sheepdog   

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Richard Mann]

As I've said before: the map is the data. It's the best way of presenting
geoinfo. It showcases what OSM does (and doesn't) have. So keep the map.

I like the Google-style buttons. A bit more "community" stuff in a right
sidebar (to keep the map squarer) would be an improvement, but I wouldn't
let it take over.

Personally, OSM is a live project for me because I keep looking at the map.
If OSM had a Google button that launched GMaps (satellite, preferably) for
the current lon/lat/zoom, GMaps would drop off my list of favourites. First
I'd see what the community had to say about a place, then go to Google if I
wanted to know what the bots had found.

Richard

On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 6:48 AM, Michal Migurski  wrote:

> On Dec 30, 2011, at 7:42 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> > In fact, many of those arguing for OSM becoming a nice map portal
> haven't even touched the subject of editing in their argument.
> >
> >>
> > ...
> >
> > Secondly, and this touches on something from my "looking forward" post a
> few days ago, we have always made it clear that there are no official tags
> and no official list and no promise that anything gets rendered anywhere.
> This has many advantages, decoupling editing from rendering, and brings
> many freedoms, but if we were to push that "one true map" or maybe these
> "ten true maps" and try to be the map portal for everyone then that would
> be the end of saying "well the Mapnik map is just a showcase and you cannot
> expect us to render everything". We would clearly make a much stronger bond
> between editing and rendering; fewer and fewer people would be willing to
> map things that are not on our main map(s), and we'd be pushing specialist
> maps to the sidelines. Let's not kid ourselves: Competing with Google Maps
> *will* make us more like Google Maps.
>
> For what it's worth, I didn't really start editing until the Mapnik loop
> closed and I could see my edits on the same day I made them. This was a
> huge difference for me, and a step up from making an edit, waiting several
> days for it to show up, and then making another one. The "main" Mapnik
> layer is one of the only products OSM makes that's visible to regular
> humans, and even though someone like me *could* stay up-to-the-minute with
> the replication diffs it's more often the case that it doesn't happen.
>
> Serge's mention of closing the circle is critical, because it keeps the
> promise inherent in the name "Open Street Map" - somewhere, somehow, people
> should be able to see a decent map, and it would be best if it were a
> reliable enough resource to be generally usable by the world at large.
>
> At the same time, the current home page is 99% map and 1% anything else,
> so we're *already* implicitly competing with GMaps through our homepage
> design. Here's my opinion of what the front page should look like, based on
> a pastiche of elements pulled from various OSM sites including .de, the
> wiki, and the current page:
>
>http://mike.teczno.com/img/osm-homepage-sketch.jpg
>
> First, there's still a map across the top of the page, but now it's
> smaller. It's kept for two primary reasons: visitors must be able to see
> that ultimately all the work leads to a usable map, and six years of
> permalinks to specific locations should not be broken. The overall tab
> layout across the top (with the Edit tab) stays, but I expect that each tab
> might lead to a second page with a taller, more page-hogging map on it for
> roomy editing.
>
> The space below the map is there for the project to explain itself. We
> should quibble about the choice of sections (I've borrowed these wholesale
> from .de) but this area is in place to say something about what OSM is
> *for*: it's something you can join, there's data you can use, etc.
>
> In the bottom-right corner is the wiki Image Of The Week, which is so
> often the home of solid gold output from the OSM community, whether it's
> new renders or photos of mappers. This part will change, and will reinforce
> the dynamic nature of the project. There will be cool and weird pictures
> there.
>
> In the sidebar, I've just copied some stuff from the wiki. Honestly, I
> don't know what should go here—I never pay attention to sidebars on
> websites, but presumably if someone is absolutely scratching their head
> then being able to scan the page for the word "Help" or "Blog" will get
> them out of a jam.
>
> Back to the map:
>
> The OL layers menu is replaced with an old-Gmaps-style set of buttons,
> because if you don't know OpenLayers how will you know that the Blue Plus
> will give you something interesting? Buttons encourage pushing, which
> addresses the need to show a variety of cartographic outputs beyond the
> default Mapnik layer. The current choice of layers is good: "Mapnik" is
> what editors need to see what they are doing, "Cycle" and "Transport" both
> show what it means to highlight entirely different sets of tags, and
> "MapQuest" shows that third parties with r

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Nathan Edgars II]

On 12/31/2011 1:48 AM, Michal Migurski wrote:

In the bottom-right corner is the wiki Image Of The Week, which is so often the 
home of solid gold output from the OSM community, whether it's new renders or 
photos of mappers.

I beg to differ. Pulling a few examples:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:MQ_uk-eur_colours.png
Hardly that interesting, and if you pan over to North America there are 
still issues with the polygons not matching land borders exactly. 
(Whether they should even be doing this is another issue - surely it's 
useful to know which roads in Mexico are toll?)


http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Power_line-in-usa.png
Yay, mostly unedited TIGER with numerous gaps.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:I-55_and_I-90.png
Just kidding, but it's interesting to see how crappy the map was back in 
2006 :)


Oh, and the bikeshed needs to be lime green.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Michal Migurski]

On Dec 30, 2011, at 7:42 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:

> In fact, many of those arguing for OSM becoming a nice map portal haven't 
> even touched the subject of editing in their argument.
> 
>> 
> ...
> 
> Secondly, and this touches on something from my "looking forward" post a few 
> days ago, we have always made it clear that there are no official tags and no 
> official list and no promise that anything gets rendered anywhere. This has 
> many advantages, decoupling editing from rendering, and brings many freedoms, 
> but if we were to push that "one true map" or maybe these "ten true maps" and 
> try to be the map portal for everyone then that would be the end of saying 
> "well the Mapnik map is just a showcase and you cannot expect us to render 
> everything". We would clearly make a much stronger bond between editing and 
> rendering; fewer and fewer people would be willing to map things that are not 
> on our main map(s), and we'd be pushing specialist maps to the sidelines. 
> Let's not kid ourselves: Competing with Google Maps *will* make us more like 
> Google Maps.

For what it's worth, I didn't really start editing until the Mapnik loop closed 
and I could see my edits on the same day I made them. This was a huge 
difference for me, and a step up from making an edit, waiting several days for 
it to show up, and then making another one. The "main" Mapnik layer is one of 
the only products OSM makes that's visible to regular humans, and even though 
someone like me *could* stay up-to-the-minute with the replication diffs it's 
more often the case that it doesn't happen.

Serge's mention of closing the circle is critical, because it keeps the promise 
inherent in the name "Open Street Map" - somewhere, somehow, people should be 
able to see a decent map, and it would be best if it were a reliable enough 
resource to be generally usable by the world at large.

At the same time, the current home page is 99% map and 1% anything else, so 
we're *already* implicitly competing with GMaps through our homepage design. 
Here's my opinion of what the front page should look like, based on a pastiche 
of elements pulled from various OSM sites including .de, the wiki, and the 
current page:

http://mike.teczno.com/img/osm-homepage-sketch.jpg

First, there's still a map across the top of the page, but now it's smaller. 
It's kept for two primary reasons: visitors must be able to see that ultimately 
all the work leads to a usable map, and six years of permalinks to specific 
locations should not be broken. The overall tab layout across the top (with the 
Edit tab) stays, but I expect that each tab might lead to a second page with a 
taller, more page-hogging map on it for roomy editing.

The space below the map is there for the project to explain itself. We should 
quibble about the choice of sections (I've borrowed these wholesale from .de) 
but this area is in place to say something about what OSM is *for*: it's 
something you can join, there's data you can use, etc.

In the bottom-right corner is the wiki Image Of The Week, which is so often the 
home of solid gold output from the OSM community, whether it's new renders or 
photos of mappers. This part will change, and will reinforce the dynamic nature 
of the project. There will be cool and weird pictures there.

In the sidebar, I've just copied some stuff from the wiki. Honestly, I don't 
know what should go here—I never pay attention to sidebars on websites, but 
presumably if someone is absolutely scratching their head then being able to 
scan the page for the word "Help" or "Blog" will get them out of a jam.

Back to the map:

The OL layers menu is replaced with an old-Gmaps-style set of buttons, because 
if you don't know OpenLayers how will you know that the Blue Plus will give you 
something interesting? Buttons encourage pushing, which addresses the need to 
show a variety of cartographic outputs beyond the default Mapnik layer. The 
current choice of layers is good: "Mapnik" is what editors need to see what 
they are doing, "Cycle" and "Transport" both show what it means to highlight 
entirely different sets of tags, and "MapQuest" shows that third parties with 
recognizable names should get involved. I can't think of a rationale for 
keeping Osmarender in the list.

"Data" is a special case - I think it should be implemented in the form of a 
combined thinline raster layer and a backing data layer driven by a data format 
similar to Mapnik's new UTF Grid feature to support clicking on features. If we 
do this smartly, then we can simultaneously solve clickable POI's which is one 
of the OSMF's list of Top Ten tasks that they want handled.


> I believe SWG are having a discussion about "core values" at the moment. 
> Suffice it to say: There are core values of this project, and if you don't 
> share them than you can care for OSM as much as you want, you're in the wrong 
> project. Now what exactly these core values or important goals are, i

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Frederik Ramm]

Serge,


They're not orthogonal. The core question is "What is the project's
goals?" and based on what you've said in the past, you want a small
project generally. Small number of editors, small OSMF, etc.


I would be absolutely thrilled to have, say, Google throw away their 
data and say "we'll be using OSM from now on". I wouldn't say that 
should be our #1 ambition but it would surely be a nice thing.


One would hope that while this would send more people our way for 
editing, the "first level support" will remain with Google in such a 
scenario, as will the considerable housekeeping effort of actually 
getting all those tiles to those who want them.


It is mainly these things I fear, and for which I think we are not well 
equipped - large scale operations dealing with large numbers of 
"consumer" type users.


Doing that would, I believe, require a transformation of OSMF that goes 
far beyond "let's put a little flattr button here any maybe we get 
enough money for an extra tile server". We're talking long-term 
financial planning, hiring staff, and hiring more staff to raise funds 
to pay for them all. We're talking continuous fundraising action and all 
that. I am not sure if those advocating "big OSM(F)" are clear on that. 
You'd look at tha balance sheets and say "Ah, obviously 99% of what this 
OSMF does is producing map tiles and distributing/selling them. And they 
seem to be doing this little community thing on the side." - and at the 
same time, 99% of all work in the OSMF board would go towards how to 
make tile serving better and the web portal nicer, and 1% would be spent 
on "this little community thing on the side".


It may be an irrational fear (they mostly are). But I would feel much 
better if someone else would hire staff, acquire funds, buy servers, 
render tiles, offset the risks and all that - someone without direct 
influence on OSM. That way, OSMF would not be tainted by such operations 
and could concentrate on what we need them to do, rather than on things 
that others can do just as well.


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] Things People Say

[Peter Wendorff]

Am 30.12.2011 17:22, schrieb Thomas Davie:

You've not been misled, you've misread.

I don't think he has.

I think, we have to find a way in between.
I already mentioned my vision to provide a VIEW on the DATA, that the 
user can define himself.


In that vision, OSM is not about maps. OSM is about the data, and the 
user (not necessarily mapper) would add the map on top - in providing 
his own stylesheet.


Again: that's a vision, and probably somebody or even I myself would try 
to implement that: to change a front page of the project to a view of 
map data - which can be styles by the user on demand.


Nevertheless: The good ideas don't come from users who add two points 
("my home" and "my work") and then repeatingly view the nice map. The 
good ideas and benefits for the project come from people who do 
something with the data: Extending the data itself (mapping) or using 
the data in a new fashion, like many projects show: quizzes generated 
from osm data, routing applications, new styled maps and many more.
Of course these ideas support the project - but I think, they do it the 
same way like LibreOffice and Mozilla support ubuntu or debian - without 
being part of the distributor or distribution project.


OSM is nothing (useful for the average user) without maps - that's true.
Linux is nothing (useful for the average user) without software.

So what? OSM can be the backend for great distributions, great software 
and nice maps.


regards
Peter

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Serge Wroclawski]

On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 12/30/11 15:37, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
>>
>> Let's remember that Frederik believes that not everyone should be a
>> map contributor, that there's value in a high bar for contribution.
>
>
> I thought that this thread was about being more consumer friendly in terms
> of providing ready-made maps, not in terms of soliciting edits.
>
> Both are orthogonal. You could have a consumer friendly ready-made maps
> department and a high bar to editing at the same time; and you could have it
> the other way round.

They're not orthogonal. The core question is "What is the project's
goals?" and based on what you've said in the past, you want a small
project generally. Small number of editors, small OSMF, etc.

I want lots of editors, and I want OpenStreetMap to be about maps, ie
people go to OSM for their catrographic needs.

> I cannot see why you would bring it up here,
> other than try to discredit my position?

it represents your view on the project as a whole. I have deep respect
for you, we just disagree on some issues.

> In fact, many of those arguing for OSM becoming a nice map portal haven't
> even touched the subject of editing in their argument.

True. I've been negligent in my efforts to do this. I should work on
editing more. I'm on vacation at the moment but when I get home, I
promise to have something, *something* to show for my efforts before
Valentine's Day. If not, I will work out some suitable amends.


>
>
>> This reminds me a lot of the early Debian arguments:   "Linux can't be
>> for the masses" turned into "I like compiling my own kernel and we
>> should have a high bar for contribution."
>>
>> Fast forward five years, and I'm using Ubuntu.

Let me clarify a bit that these aren't bad people saying stuff like "I
like compiling my own kernel". I have a friend whose the maintainer of
some core packages (coreutils and gnu utils), and these are the kinds
of things he said.

Good people who do good things, good friends who I drink with, but we
disagree on some things.

> Me too. But let's not kid ourselves: Ubuntu is the nice packaging of
> data/software provided by others. This is of course an oversimplification
> but by and large, Ubuntu is a very good example of a project that has added
> pretty packaging, user friendliness, and a help desk to things that have
> been there before.

That's true, but I think the Wikipedia analogy is also darn good. OSM
should be the Wikipedia of maps. That's my view.

> First of all, one would have to define the exact difference between "OSM is
> providing maps" and "another project is providing maps". Why exactly would
> OSM have to provide maps; is it because we think we would gain something
> from it - more visibility, more sponsors perhaps?

Excellent question! The reason I think OSM should be providing the
maps is that OSM is the one making them. It's about the full circle of
display and creation. It's also about community. OSM is not about some
random collection of facts, but about the work of thousands. I think
it's "cool" that other project use OSM data, but I like the idea that
we stay a cohesive community, able to work out issues as a group.

> And if so, would that
> advantage not be nullified by the resources that offering those maps
> consumes, and would it not be a better organisational structure overall if
> there were two separate entities? Even if we all agreed that "someone should
> do X", and even if we had people standing by willing to do the work and even
> if we had sponsors standing by willing to pay the money, would it be ideal
> for OSM/OSMF to do X?

I think a stronger OSMF, that actively fund raised to the right
parties, would reduce these resource concerns.

I know the current model, though, and I think it's sub-optimal.

> Secondly, and this touches on something from my "looking forward" post a few
> days ago, we have always made it clear that there are no official tags and
> no official list and no promise that anything gets rendered anywhere. This
> has many advantages, decoupling editing from rendering, and brings many
> freedoms, but if we were to push that "one true map" or maybe these "ten
> true maps" and try to be the map portal for everyone then that would be the
> end of saying "well the Mapnik map is just a showcase and you cannot expect
> us to render everything". We would clearly make a much stronger bond between
> editing and rendering; fewer and fewer people would be willing to map things
> that are not on our main map(s), and we'd be pushing specialist maps to the
> sidelines. Let's not kid ourselves: Competing with Google Maps *will* make
> us more like Google Maps.

I don't think that's a terrible thing. If the *only* differentiator
was that we're Free and they're not- that would be enough for me.

>> I hope strongly that the view will change, that the OSMF board will
>> reflect this view. I've seen a slight shift already in the time I've
>> been wi

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Peter Wendorff]

Am 30.12.2011 17:22, schrieb Thomas Davie:

You've not been misled, you've misread.

I don't think he has.

I think, we have to find a way in between.
I already mentioned my vision to provide a VIEW on the DATA, that the 
user can define himself.


In that vision, OSM is not about maps. OSM is about the data, and the 
user (not necessarily mapper) would add the map on top - in providing 
his own stylesheet.


Again: that's a vision, and probably somebody or even I myself would try 
to implement that: to change a front page of the project to a view of 
map data - which can be styles by the user on demand.


Nevertheless: The good ideas don't come from users who add two points 
("my home" and "my work") and then repeatingly view the nice map. The 
good ideas and benefits for the project come from people who do 
something with the data: Extending the data itself (mapping) or using 
the data in a new fashion, like many projects show: quizzes generated 
from osm data, routing applications, new styled maps and many more.
Of course these ideas support the project - but I think, they do it the 
same way like LibreOffice and Mozilla support ubuntu or debian - without 
being part of the distributor or distribution project.


regards
Peter

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Thomas Davie]

On 30 Dec 2011, at 16:36, Richard Weait wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Thomas Davie  wrote:
>>> First of all, one would have to define the exact difference between "OSM is 
>>> providing maps" and "another project is providing maps". Why exactly would 
>>> OSM have to provide maps;
>> 
>> Perhaps because that's the original, and stated purpose of the project – to 
>> make open maps.
>> 
>> As I've said many times – a database of map data is a *really* useful thing, 
>> it's probably the single most important contribution OSM can make, but 
>> ultimately, the *point* of the project is to make maps.
>> 
>> Pretty much everything you say is based on the premise that the point of the 
>> project is to make an enormous collection of map data, and damn actually 
>> being able to use it.  This premise is false.
> 
> The point of a project to create a really good text editor is to
> provide a tool for editing text.  Nobody expects vim or emacs to
> provide you with the finished document when you download vim or emacs.
Right, just like we don't provide where to go for a walk, only the map of the 
place you could go for a walk.

> Our situation in OSM is not exactly the same as a text editor.
Agreed.

Tom Davie
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Richard Weait]

On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Thomas Davie  wrote:
>> First of all, one would have to define the exact difference between "OSM is 
>> providing maps" and "another project is providing maps". Why exactly would 
>> OSM have to provide maps;
>
> Perhaps because that's the original, and stated purpose of the project – to 
> make open maps.
>
> As I've said many times – a database of map data is a *really* useful thing, 
> it's probably the single most important contribution OSM can make, but 
> ultimately, the *point* of the project is to make maps.
>
> Pretty much everything you say is based on the premise that the point of the 
> project is to make an enormous collection of map data, and damn actually 
> being able to use it.  This premise is false.

The point of a project to create a really good text editor is to
provide a tool for editing text.  Nobody expects vim or emacs to
provide you with the finished document when you download vim or emacs.
 Our situation in OSM is not exactly the same as a text editor.  The
OSM data base is a great resource.  The software stack we use is a
collection of great tools.  We, as a community, have assembled reams
of documentation and examples.  And we count among our project dozens
of people ready and able to answer questions for motivated newcomers,
via help.osm.org, irc and other channels.

"Damn being able to actually use it" rings a bit hollow.

The key to OSMs success is to continually improve the data.  That
needs people who edit (and people who write code for editors, maintain
and improve servers, document and test code, etc.)

Attracting more users is nice, but much less important than attracting
more editors.  Here's why: as we attract more editors and the data
continues to improve, we won't be able to keep users away.  We already
see that with tile scrapers.  We can't handle the load so we have to
block them.  Instead we have to (really, we HAVE TO) point them
towards the methods of consuming OSM resources responsibly.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Thomas Davie]

> 
>> Instead, we should simply have something
>> similar to what google maps had at the top of the map – a series of
>> buttons that let you select the style you want to view it in.
> 
> And how will this let the user find out that there is an iPhone app for 
> planning outdoor running tracks based on OSM? That they can turn their 
> Android tablets into car navigation systems powered by OSM? That there is an 
> educational 3D globe for their desktop? That there is an entire map portal 
> dedicated to wheelchair accessibility?
> 
> We should actively advertise the many third-party products made from OSM, 
> many of which go far beyond putting a map into your browser. We should work 
> hard on the database that makes them all possible. But we don't have to build 
> and offer these products ourselves.

We should – but not directly on the front page.  The single biggest mistake 
I've seen any open source project make is to have a web page which is all links 
to other stuff.  I don't want on my first visit to open street map to be 
confronted with a wall of text that I'll read the first paragraph of and then 
close my browser... Instead, I want to see immediately "oh hay, this is a 
project that creates maps, oh look, there's one that shows all the busses in my 
city, oh cool, there's one for wheelchair accessibility, wow, they show paths 
on some of their maps"... and *then* go "I wonder, could I get this really 
awesome cool thing on my iPhone".

Tom Davie
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Tobias Knerr]

Thomas Davie wrote:
>

I believe that the side-scrolling banner at http://openstreetmap.de
does it quite well.


I disagree – it's poor UI – it takes more clicks for a user to get to
what they care about – the map.


The banner is there to let the user discover in what ways OSM can be 
useful, and I think that it is designed well for that purpose.


As soon as the user the user finds an OSM-based app he likes, he should 
install it on his phone. As soon as he finds an web-based routing 
service he likes, he should bookmark it. And so on.


The user is *not* expected to go through openstreetmap.de every time he 
wants to use OSM-based products.



Instead, we should simply have something
similar to what google maps had at the top of the map – a series of
buttons that let you select the style you want to view it in.


And how will this let the user find out that there is an iPhone app for 
planning outdoor running tracks based on OSM? That they can turn their 
Android tablets into car navigation systems powered by OSM? That there 
is an educational 3D globe for their desktop? That there is an entire 
map portal dedicated to wheelchair accessibility?


We should actively advertise the many third-party products made from 
OSM, many of which go far beyond putting a map into your browser. We 
should work hard on the database that makes them all possible. But we 
don't have to build and offer these products ourselves.


Tobias

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Thomas Davie]

On 30 Dec 2011, at 16:15, Frederik Ramm wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On 12/30/11 16:55, Thomas Davie wrote:
>> Perhaps because that's the original, and stated purpose of the
>> project – to make open maps.
> 
> When I started using OSM, the project wasn't making maps; it was making files 
> that you could download and feed into a renderer and then you could see a map.
> 
> I probably saw the potential back then; I saw that you could make maps right 
> there on your computer, and quite possibly I also thought that one could make 
> a slippy map - but it never occurred to me that what I was seeing then was 
> somehow *not* the original purpose. A good 5000 people who joined OSM before 
> me must have seen the same thing.

Everything has to start somewhere.  Just because the best that it was possible 
to do back then was to download and render, doesn't mean that it's the best we 
can do now.

>> Pretty much everything you say is based on the premise that the point
>> of the project is to make an enormous collection of map data, and
>> damn actually being able to use it.  This premise is false.
> 
> Where did you get that idea about "the original, and stated purpose" being to 
> "make open maps"? From the Wiki history, I can see that on 26 May 2005, Steve 
> Coast added this sentence as the very first sentence on our main page:
> 
> "OpenStreetMap is a project aimed squarely at providing free geographic data 
> such as street maps to anyone who wants them."
"Such as Street Maps" ;)

> That was 6.5 years ago, OSM must have had about 500 members back then. I only 
> joined a year later, when that sentence was still up on the Wiki, and today, 
> the sentence has only slightly changed:
> 
> "OpenStreetMap creates and provides free geographic data such as street maps 
> to anyone who wants them."
Keeping the nice important bit there.

> As I said in another message, SWG are debating core values etc., and before 
> we know it that sentence may read "OpenStreetMap offers map tile downloads 
> free of charge" or something, but most people who have joined the project in 
> the last 6.5 years will probably have read in the very first sentence that 
> OSM says about itself: "OpenStreetMap creates free geographic data".
> 
> If that is indeed false then where can I complain about having been misled 
> for so long? ;)

You've not been misled, you've misread.

Tom Davie
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 12/30/11 16:55, Thomas Davie wrote:

Perhaps because that's the original, and stated purpose of the
project – to make open maps.


When I started using OSM, the project wasn't making maps; it was making 
files that you could download and feed into a renderer and then you 
could see a map.


I probably saw the potential back then; I saw that you could make maps 
right there on your computer, and quite possibly I also thought that one 
could make a slippy map - but it never occurred to me that what I was 
seeing then was somehow *not* the original purpose. A good 5000 people 
who joined OSM before me must have seen the same thing.



Pretty much everything you say is based on the premise that the point
of the project is to make an enormous collection of map data, and
damn actually being able to use it.  This premise is false.


Where did you get that idea about "the original, and stated purpose" 
being to "make open maps"? From the Wiki history, I can see that on 26 
May 2005, Steve Coast added this sentence as the very first sentence on 
our main page:


"OpenStreetMap is a project aimed squarely at providing free geographic 
data such as street maps to anyone who wants them."


That was 6.5 years ago, OSM must have had about 500 members back then. I 
only joined a year later, when that sentence was still up on the Wiki, 
and today, the sentence has only slightly changed:


"OpenStreetMap creates and provides free geographic data such as street 
maps to anyone who wants them."


As I said in another message, SWG are debating core values etc., and 
before we know it that sentence may read "OpenStreetMap offers map tile 
downloads free of charge" or something, but most people who have joined 
the project in the last 6.5 years will probably have read in the very 
first sentence that OSM says about itself: "OpenStreetMap creates free 
geographic data".


If that is indeed false then where can I complain about having been 
misled for so long? ;)


Bye
Frederik

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Thomas Davie]

if (*ra4 != 0xffc78948) { return false; }

On 30 Dec 2011, at 15:57, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:

> Serge Wroclawski  wrote:
> 
>> I agree wholeheartedly with the view that OSM should be providing
>> maps. I think as long as we continue to cling to this idea that we
>> want third parties to make the maps, then we limit the project's
>> viability, its success and its overall accuracy.
> 
> I've allready express my own opinion, but i do not really understand the
> point.
> 
> OSM hosted one rendering on its own server (using mapnik software)... Do
> you want OSM to provide other maps (with different rendering) ?

Sure – and we already do, e.g. OpenCycleMap the transport map, the osmarenderer 
layer, etc.

> I assume that what you want is OSM to provide a service without limit
> for other to use their tile server as base ?

Not at all – though I can imagine that we could make some cash by offering to 
serve tiles to people if they pay for our hardware/bandwidth, plus a bit.  Ofc, 
this requires quite a major investment in people to run it, so it's probably 
not immediately possible right now.

> I feel very unconfortable with this option. Managing a tile server has a
> cost (OSMF handle it now) and this cost goes higher has many user use
> it. We see actual limitation this summer (limited bandwidth).

I agree, providing unlimited tile data to unlimited numbers of people, for free 
is clearly not a reasonable option.  The status quo works pretty well though.

> So their is here 2 options :
> 
> 1. providing a free service open to everyone with no limits (google
> competitor to summurize) that will be adapt to demand (more power, more
> RAM...) so more cost every user use it.
> To handle cost there is 2 options : keep the service free (more
> donation, more money from ?)or made the service commercial (big users
> pay, this is what google is providing). This will require adding an API
> key (like google, bing or cloudmade).
> 
> 2. providing a basic service for small users (as it's now) and limit big
> usage without providing an laternative and let commercial compagny
> (cloudmade or openstreetmap has start this) providing services for big
> users.
> 
> Note that option 1 has a terrible issue : been a competitor to
> commercial compagny that would do business with OSM data...
Is that a terrible issue?  If a company is offering OSM with no added value on 
top of it, why do we care about competing with them?  If they're doing a better 
job than us, and make it financially unviable for us to do it, then all the 
better – we can stop worrying about this problem.

> My opinion is that OSM should provide a basic service (as now) without
> commercial issue (option 2). Big users should build their own tile
> servers or buy this service from commercial compagny : it's not OSM
> business (OSM is not in business).
There's no reason why it can't be run like one though – charities and 
philanthropic organisations usually are for one very good reason – it gives 
them sustainability.

Note – I have no problem with carrying on with 2 either for now, or 
indefinitely.  What I don't think is a good option though is option 3 that some 
people seem to be kicking about – that is, drop all rendered output to users or 
people considering what they can do with OSM, and instead concentrate on just 
having a huge database.

Tom Davie___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Pierre-Alain Dorange]

Serge Wroclawski  wrote:

> I agree wholeheartedly with the view that OSM should be providing
> maps. I think as long as we continue to cling to this idea that we
> want third parties to make the maps, then we limit the project's
> viability, its success and its overall accuracy.

I've allready express my own opinion, but i do not really understand the
point.

OSM hosted one rendering on its own server (using mapnik software)... Do
you want OSM to provide other maps (with different rendering) ?

I assume that what you want is OSM to provide a service without limit
for other to use their tile server as base ?

I feel very unconfortable with this option. Managing a tile server has a
cost (OSMF handle it now) and this cost goes higher has many user use
it. We see actual limitation this summer (limited bandwidth).
So their is here 2 options :

1. providing a free service open to everyone with no limits (google
competitor to summurize) that will be adapt to demand (more power, more
RAM...) so more cost every user use it.
To handle cost there is 2 options : keep the service free (more
donation, more money from ?)or made the service commercial (big users
pay, this is what google is providing). This will require adding an API
key (like google, bing or cloudmade).

2. providing a basic service for small users (as it's now) and limit big
usage without providing an laternative and let commercial compagny
(cloudmade or openstreetmap has start this) providing services for big
users.

Note that option 1 has a terrible issue : been a competitor to
commercial compagny that would do business with OSM data...

My opinion is that OSM should provide a basic service (as now) without
commercial issue (option 2). Big users should build their own tile
servers or buy this service from commercial compagny : it's not OSM
business (OSM is not in business).

-- 
Pierre-Alain Dorange
OSM experiences : 


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Thomas Davie]

> First of all, one would have to define the exact difference between "OSM is 
> providing maps" and "another project is providing maps". Why exactly would 
> OSM have to provide maps;

Perhaps because that's the original, and stated purpose of the project – to 
make open maps.

As I've said many times – a database of map data is a *really* useful thing, 
it's probably the single most important contribution OSM can make, but 
ultimately, the *point* of the project is to make maps.

Pretty much everything you say is based on the premise that the point of the 
project is to make an enormous collection of map data, and damn actually being 
able to use it.  This premise is false.

Tom Davie
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 12/30/11 15:37, Serge Wroclawski wrote:

Let's remember that Frederik believes that not everyone should be a
map contributor, that there's value in a high bar for contribution.


I thought that this thread was about being more consumer friendly in 
terms of providing ready-made maps, not in terms of soliciting edits.


Both are orthogonal. You could have a consumer friendly ready-made maps 
department and a high bar to editing at the same time; and you could 
have it the other way round. This thread is wide-spread already, and the 
argument about whom we should attract as editors and why is different 
from how we should represent ourselves. I cannot see why you would bring 
it up here, other than try to discredit my position?


In fact, many of those arguing for OSM becoming a nice map portal 
haven't even touched the subject of editing in their argument.



This reminds me a lot of the early Debian arguments:   "Linux can't be
for the masses" turned into "I like compiling my own kernel and we
should have a high bar for contribution."

Fast forward five years, and I'm using Ubuntu.


Me too. But let's not kid ourselves: Ubuntu is the nice packaging of 
data/software provided by others. This is of course an 
oversimplification but by and large, Ubuntu is a very good example of a 
project that has added pretty packaging, user friendliness, and a help 
desk to things that have been there before.


If you install software on Ubuntu and it doesn't work and you are clever 
enough to provide a patch, then that patch will usually get through to 
the upstream software. You don't use Ubuntu *instead* of free software; 
you use the Ubuntu packaging. Free software has not been made obsolete 
by Ubuntu (even Debian stuff is re-used in Ubuntu).


And this is a good way to work - someone has seen that the making of the 
software and the consumer side are different, and need different 
specialists, even different projects.



I agree wholeheartedly with the view that OSM should be providing
maps. I think as long as we continue to cling to this idea that we
want third parties to make the maps, then we limit the project's
viability, its success and its overall accuracy.


I think this discussion has gone a little out of hand and maybe it 
should be repeated in another form, at another time.


First of all, one would have to define the exact difference between "OSM 
is providing maps" and "another project is providing maps". Why exactly 
would OSM have to provide maps; is it because we think we would gain 
something from it - more visibility, more sponsors perhaps? And if so, 
would that advantage not be nullified by the resources that offering 
those maps consumes, and would it not be a better organisational 
structure overall if there were two separate entities? Even if we all 
agreed that "someone should do X", and even if we had people standing by 
willing to do the work and even if we had sponsors standing by willing 
to pay the money, would it be ideal for OSM/OSMF to do X?


Secondly, and this touches on something from my "looking forward" post a 
few days ago, we have always made it clear that there are no official 
tags and no official list and no promise that anything gets rendered 
anywhere. This has many advantages, decoupling editing from rendering, 
and brings many freedoms, but if we were to push that "one true map" or 
maybe these "ten true maps" and try to be the map portal for everyone 
then that would be the end of saying "well the Mapnik map is just a 
showcase and you cannot expect us to render everything". We would 
clearly make a much stronger bond between editing and rendering; fewer 
and fewer people would be willing to map things that are not on our main 
map(s), and we'd be pushing specialist maps to the sidelines. Let's not 
kid ourselves: Competing with Google Maps *will* make us more like 
Google Maps.



I hope strongly that the view will change, that the OSMF board will
reflect this view. I've seen a slight shift already in the time I've
been with the project. There's far more room for discussion on the
point than there was just a few years ago, but I'm also worried that
the strong beliefs of respected core project members like Frederik
have driven away those who care about the project, but don't share the
same views.


If I may paraphrase: "Sadly, there are some fossils like Fred who are 
trying to chase away well-meaning people who share his passion for OSM 
but have different views. Luckily, these fossils are losing influence 
and things will become better."


The question is: How much of a fossil do you have to be? If there's 
someone who cares deeply about OSM but his view is that OSM should place 
paid advertising on its map - would it be too bad if that person were to 
be "driven away" by (borrowing from Kai's posting) a "hostile 
environment"? If there's someone who cares deeply for OSM but believes 
that community is irrelevant and we can just import Open Government data 
fro

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Thomas Davie]

On 30 Dec 2011, at 15:16, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:

> On 30/12/2011 16:05, Thomas Davie wrote:
>> You're right – it needs to be a bit clearer that there's more than one map 
>> available
> 
> I believe that the side-scrolling banner at http://openstreetmap.de does it 
> quite well.

I disagree – it's poor UI – it takes more clicks for a user to get to what they 
care about – the map.  Instead, we should simply have something similar to what 
google maps had at the top of the map – a series of buttons that let you select 
the style you want to view it in.

Then "oh no, there's no satellite view" turns into "oh wow, there's loads of 
views that are more useful than just trees from above".

Tom Davie

if (*ra4 != 0xffc78948) { return false; }

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Thomas Davie]

On 30 Dec 2011, at 15:11, Cartinus wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> 
> 
> On 12/30/2011 04:06 PM, Thomas Davie wrote:
>> On 30 Dec 2011, at 15:02, Cartinus wrote:
>> 
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>>> 
>>> On 12/30/2011 03:41 PM, Thomas Davie wrote:
 we shouldn't forget that the goal of the process is to provide
 high quality maps for people to use.
>>> 
>>> Have you ever read the tile usage policy?
>>> 
>>> How many "iDroid" apps were blocked from using OSM's tile server
>>> and told to brew their own tiles?
>>> 
>>> The OSM project doesn't have the resources to provide ready made
>>> maps for everyone. If you want OSM to be able to do that, then
>>> start working on a viable plan to get those resources.
>> 
>> The tile usage policy that says roughly "use this for your personal
>> benefit, don't scrape them" – iDroid apps don't get blocked because
>> they let people look at the map, they get blocked because they
>> create unnecessary load in some way (e.g. by scraping)
>> 
>> Tom Davie
> 
> And if everyone is going to use our map, then we run into exactly the
> same problem as when a single person is scraping.
> 
> You're still only demanding and don't have a plan, worse you actually
> deny we need a plan.

The problem with this being that what you're suggesting comes much further down 
the line.  The whole world using and caring about open street map is rather a 
nice problem to have is it not?

Tom Davie
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

On 30/12/2011 16:05, Thomas Davie wrote:
You're right – it needs to be a bit clearer that there's more than one 
map available


I believe that the side-scrolling banner at http://openstreetmap.de does 
it quite well.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Cartinus]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1



On 12/30/2011 04:06 PM, Thomas Davie wrote:
> On 30 Dec 2011, at 15:02, Cartinus wrote:
> 
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> On 12/30/2011 03:41 PM, Thomas Davie wrote:
>>> we shouldn't forget that the goal of the process is to provide
>>> high quality maps for people to use.
>> 
>> Have you ever read the tile usage policy?
>> 
>> How many "iDroid" apps were blocked from using OSM's tile server
>> and told to brew their own tiles?
>> 
>> The OSM project doesn't have the resources to provide ready made
>> maps for everyone. If you want OSM to be able to do that, then
>> start working on a viable plan to get those resources.
> 
> The tile usage policy that says roughly "use this for your personal
> benefit, don't scrape them" – iDroid apps don't get blocked because
> they let people look at the map, they get blocked because they
> create unnecessary load in some way (e.g. by scraping)
> 
> Tom Davie

And if everyone is going to use our map, then we run into exactly the
same problem as when a single person is scraping.

You're still only demanding and don't have a plan, worse you actually
deny we need a plan.

- ---
m.v.g.,
Cartinus
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJO/dSGAAoJEInLUvwrL2kIb7IH/RChI7PUR1SbIoYjxr/1jFfF
gDDWLTcYnMGwUP8Q0Biuz2wuGwMcdY7WrRDmF775i4y/nD+KvugZFgGL44GWG8r2
TxCfvxWYHY7FSjOmJmdK10LrE7chPB0NY2nYNYXJcMgiP0fcMm1z+2YaOOudIJ5Y
fmRrQMNpap4gjv63qj6ow3hlmZlHe6HMQJM4f8Sal/2OUVyt9/imtSh14DuWsmoC
G9zR+EhcGhgRz4qVJQexiHySyaYtlsD9poiAOAd+kW9n15kWyjr2eo6by3rwwu6k
i2hPKaaN9a8pylplXlVgEzM1IWPHuvaT5eWY13EcoV2x/HqeyBXIMt2sYqq3j7U=
=Hqbp
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Thomas Davie]

On 30 Dec 2011, at 15:02, Cartinus wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 12/30/2011 03:41 PM, Thomas Davie wrote:
>> we shouldn't forget that the goal of the process is to provide high
>> quality maps for people to use.
> 
> Have you ever read the tile usage policy?
> 
> How many "iDroid" apps were blocked from using OSM's tile server and
> told to brew their own tiles?
> 
> The OSM project doesn't have the resources to provide ready made maps
> for everyone. If you want OSM to be able to do that, then start
> working on a viable plan to get those resources.

The tile usage policy that says roughly "use this for your personal benefit, 
don't scrape them" – iDroid apps don't get blocked because they let people look 
at the map, they get blocked because they create unnecessary load in some way 
(e.g. by scraping)

Tom Davie

if (*ra4 != 0xffc78948) { return false; }

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Thomas Davie]

You're right – it needs to be a bit clearer that there's more than one map 
available, perhaps the right way to do this though is to make the layers box a 
bit more obvious, and give the various layers rather more user friendly names, 
so that people will experiment with a few of them.

Tom Davie
if (*ra4 != 0xffc78948) { return false; }

On 30 Dec 2011, at 14:51, Russ Nelson wrote:

> Frederik Ramm writes:
>> For me, the idea of a user friendly map portal (with a nice brand name 
>> and matching apps, with maps, routing, geocoding, aerial imagery, 
>> streetview imagery and all) is not a *bad* idea, and if someone made 
>> such a portal they should certainly be encouraged to use OSM for it. 
> 
> When I worked for Cloudmade I found a nice book on map
> projections. They bought it for me because they were nice that
> way. Without going into any of the projections, lesson #1 from that
> book is: every map has its compromises. All of them. So, purely from a
> technical standpoint, we shouldn't be telling people that Mapnik is
> the be-all and end-all of map tile sets.
> 
> IMHO, Mapnik is the tile set for OSM editors. As such, it should be
> more concerned about completeness than anything else. And as such, map
> editors will be happy to click on a http://mapnik.osm.org link on the
> front page of OSM. It's probably MUCH better for our community of
> users if we give them a list of links to maps, than if we show them
> just one map. Make it a bunch of screen shots of the same place with
> links.
> 
> -- 
> --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com
> Crynwr supports open source software
> 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815
> Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | Sheepdog   
> 
> ___
> 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] Things People Say

[Cartinus]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 12/30/2011 03:41 PM, Thomas Davie wrote:
> we shouldn't forget that the goal of the process is to provide high
> quality maps for people to use.

Have you ever read the tile usage policy?

How many "iDroid" apps were blocked from using OSM's tile server and
told to brew their own tiles?

The OSM project doesn't have the resources to provide ready made maps
for everyone. If you want OSM to be able to do that, then start
working on a viable plan to get those resources.

- ---
m.v.g.,
Cartinus
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJO/dKLAAoJEInLUvwrL2kI3FYH/3eyeuWKsHt61TNo0QLLmBGf
UIPeCoza4e8X0xm5NzQJbKc3cEISrF3heW8cZoP/b/b+wrPin0JEGkncnByOAxnR
S3U2NS2OpwwyDpUXvItydFQ42FRCWs3RMblIvw578oJCFj/1jh1xBpncDomFEcaQ
EF5RjEHnWsNofgIkvd7nCoStQDAinTHlp1jPe/K6UHScwJv2+xmF7KKX2vBYgume
4p79LvVgEdursgj4MiaGlnpXIrrtbcm5OgDxsoNRWfAbkOPoOdl8mTn4rm1H7vE3
JFairw3HVbbYFpPPoGGtoW4MLjQdRVzD5O5Qnu7ePgl0OlqsoZn/rnqtb03npc8=
=WMek
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Russ Nelson]

Frederik Ramm writes:
 > For me, the idea of a user friendly map portal (with a nice brand name 
 > and matching apps, with maps, routing, geocoding, aerial imagery, 
 > streetview imagery and all) is not a *bad* idea, and if someone made 
 > such a portal they should certainly be encouraged to use OSM for it. 

When I worked for Cloudmade I found a nice book on map
projections. They bought it for me because they were nice that
way. Without going into any of the projections, lesson #1 from that
book is: every map has its compromises. All of them. So, purely from a
technical standpoint, we shouldn't be telling people that Mapnik is
the be-all and end-all of map tile sets.

IMHO, Mapnik is the tile set for OSM editors. As such, it should be
more concerned about completeness than anything else. And as such, map
editors will be happy to click on a http://mapnik.osm.org link on the
front page of OSM. It's probably MUCH better for our community of
users if we give them a list of links to maps, than if we show them
just one map. Make it a bunch of screen shots of the same place with
links.

-- 
--my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com
Crynwr supports open source software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | Sheepdog   

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Thomas Davie]

On 30 Dec 2011, at 14:23, Frederik Ramm wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On 12/30/11 11:26, Kai Krueger wrote:
>> There is a second aspect to this too though, motivation. If every time
>> someone suggests some improvements into the consumer side of things, they
>> get shot down by the "oldtimers" and other people who decide what happens in
>> the project, because they want to stay as geeky as possible and not adapt to
>> becoming more consumer oriented, then the motivation to code any feature in
>> that direction is close to zero.
> 
> There's a lot of untrue statements in that long sentence, but I would like to 
> concentrate on the overall untrue-ness:
> 
> "If  then  to code ... is close to zero>."
> 
> This couldn't be more wrong. If *I* had a great idea for a map platform, and 
> I suggested that to OSM, and those grey-haired conservative OSM oldtimer geek 
> bastards said "no thanks we'd rather remain small and unknown", then of 
> course the first thing I would do is set it up myself, attract all the 
> consumers to *my* site and then smile at OSM when for every 1000 visitors 
> they get, I get a million!

You make it sound so easy to run a site getting a million visitors each loading 
a good few thousand (relatively) large data files.

> As I said in one of my earlier postings; if you want to make a consumer map 
> platform based on OSM, what's to stop you? OSM delivers data, you package it 
> and make a great experience out of it. It doesn't even have to be you alone, 
> or a MapQuest-like enterprise. Start a project - the "open cartography 
> project" or the "open map portal" or the "free map network" or whatever. 
> Gather UI whizkids, cartography buffs, build a nice consumer-oriented site; 
> team up with naturalearthdata.com... all this is possible *today*, and is 
> possible *with* (not against!) OpenStreetMap.

The point is that the understanding that OSM is about *only* map data is 
*incorrect.  The hint is in the name – it's OpenStreet *Map*, not 
OpenMapDatabase.  Yes, the database is a *very* important part of the project, 
and indeed should be our main focus, but we shouldn't forget that the goal of 
the process is to provide high quality maps for people to use.  I doubt SteveC 
(and he can correct me if I'm wrong), set out thinking "hey, you know what 
would be cool?  A huge database of map data that we don't show to anyone!  That 
we I can be really useless without a third party making something interesting 
out of it!"

Bob
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Serge Wroclawski]

On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 7:20 PM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 12/29/2011 10:39 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
>>
>> There seems to be a duality of identity here. On one hand, some are
>> saying lets make it more accessible and friendly to "ordinary people".
>> On the other hand, some appear embarrassed by the prominence of maps to
>> represent what our community is all about, and they want to retain a
>> geeky "we are not a map, we are a database" ideology.
>
>
> This is not a geeky ideology, this is the heart of our project.
>
> Otherwise we'd all be using the Gimp (or maybe Inkscape), and not JOSM or
> Potlatch.

Let's remember that Frederik believes that not everyone should be a
map contributor, that there's value in a high bar for contribution.
Frederik, if you think I'm misrepresenting you, please say so- but I
think this belies the difference in the two views.

This reminds me a lot of the early Debian arguments:   "Linux can't be
for the masses" turned into "I like compiling my own kernel and we
should have a high bar for contribution."

Fast forward five years, and I'm using Ubuntu.

I agree wholeheartedly with the view that OSM should be providing
maps. I think as long as we continue to cling to this idea that we
want third parties to make the maps, then we limit the project's
viability, its success and its overall accuracy.

I hope strongly that the view will change, that the OSMF board will
reflect this view. I've seen a slight shift already in the time I've
been with the project. There's far more room for discussion on the
point than there was just a few years ago, but I'm also worried that
the strong beliefs of respected core project members like Frederik
have driven away those who care about the project, but don't share the
same views.

- Serge

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 12/30/11 11:26, Kai Krueger wrote:

There is a second aspect to this too though, motivation. If every time
someone suggests some improvements into the consumer side of things, they
get shot down by the "oldtimers" and other people who decide what happens in
the project, because they want to stay as geeky as possible and not adapt to
becoming more consumer oriented, then the motivation to code any feature in
that direction is close to zero.


There's a lot of untrue statements in that long sentence, but I would 
like to concentrate on the overall untrue-ness:


"If  then motivation to code ... is close to zero>."


This couldn't be more wrong. If *I* had a great idea for a map platform, 
and I suggested that to OSM, and those grey-haired conservative OSM 
oldtimer geek bastards said "no thanks we'd rather remain small and 
unknown", then of course the first thing I would do is set it up myself, 
attract all the consumers to *my* site and then smile at OSM when for 
every 1000 visitors they get, I get a million!


As I said in one of my earlier postings; if you want to make a consumer 
map platform based on OSM, what's to stop you? OSM delivers data, you 
package it and make a great experience out of it. It doesn't even have 
to be you alone, or a MapQuest-like enterprise. Start a project - the 
"open cartography project" or the "open map portal" or the "free map 
network" or whatever. Gather UI whizkids, cartography buffs, build a 
nice consumer-oriented site; team up with naturalearthdata.com... all 
this is possible *today*, and is possible *with* (not against!) 
OpenStreetMap.


Of course, if your answer to the above is "well people might not have 
the resources..." then let me tell you that OSM doesn't have resources 
coming out of their ears either; if you have a great idea that you feel 
you cannot pull off yourself but you need OSM resources to pull it off, 
then we're back at exactly what Simon said - "I would like you to make 
my idea happen".


I am absolutely not against anyone packaging OSM into a nice, free, 
open, versatile, flexible, consumer-oriented, service-desk-equipped, 
all-singing, all-dancing map portal.


I am just against diverting *our* resources which we desperately need to 
maintain and edit our data, keep our databases running smoothly, work on 
data modeling and tagging and tools to help mappers fix bugs and have a 
good data quality, work on licensing and editors and deal with vandalism 
and policy and all that, into trying to look like a map portal. Which we 
just aren't.



There is probably not much that can kill motivation to work on a project in
ones own free time more than getting told your effort isn't wanted and then
having to fight for getting something included for years...


I don't get this whole idea of "getting something included". I really 
don't. I mean look at the opencyclemap, for example. Andy set that up 
himself and nobody fought for including anything; a while ago OSM came 
to him asking whether they could use his tiles on the main page (or 
maybe he was prodded by lots of people to offer his tiles to OSM).


The only reason why you want to fight for something to be included is if 
it is a drain on resources (and you'd rather have it drain OSM's 
resources than your own), or something that nobody would care for 
otherwise and where you hope that OSM's popularity will give it a boost.



As long as there remains a hostile
environment to these things,


I don't think it is a good choice of words. Let's just say the idea and 
the environment don't match. Fresh air is a nice environment for me to 
be in but hostile to fish; that doesn't mean fresh air is bad, it just 
isn't right for fish. And neither are fish bad; they just do better in 
water.


When ideas pop up on what OSM could be, some of them will fit OSM and 
some won't. That doesn't mean that OSM is somehow generally hostile, or 
some ideas are somehow generally bad. It's just that *this* project with 
*these* people and *these* resources might not be the right match for 
every idea.


For me, the idea of a user friendly map portal (with a nice brand name 
and matching apps, with maps, routing, geocoding, aerial imagery, 
streetview imagery and all) is not a *bad* idea, and if someone made 
such a portal they should certainly be encouraged to use OSM for it. 
It's just that I don't think OSM has the spare resources to become such 
a portal, and I think it would place an undue burden on those other 
activities we have on our plates if we were to aspire to that. Because 
for every 1000 mappers we have asking for a new feature in Potlatch, 
we'd have a million consumers asking for some feature on the web site to 
make it more "user friendly", and guess what that would logically mean 
for resource allocation.


I used to say that we are the open alternative to TeleAtlas or Navteq, 
not the open alternative to Google. Now that Google starts ditching 
those providers and making their own maps, the

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Pierre-Alain Dorange]

Ben Johnson  wrote:

First apology for me "poor english" (french speaking).

> For what it's worth I also think it's very important to have a prominent
> map on the front page and I believe this whole debate just highlights the
> fact that OSM is not ready for mainstream and remains a geeky subculture.
> 
> There seems to be a duality of identity here. On one hand, some are saying
> lets make it more accessible and friendly to "ordinary people". On the
> other hand, some appear embarrassed by the prominence of maps to represent
> what our community is all about, and they want to retain a geeky "we are
> not a map, we are a database" ideology.

OSM is a geographic database., it's not an ideology, it's a fact.

> The two goals are completely incompatible because "ordinary people" expect
> OSM to be all about maps. In fact, I was drawn into the project on the
> premise that OSM is "the Wikipedia of maps", and I found it an exciting
> prospect to contribute to such a great idea.

One can build a map around OSM data, that's what do Mapnik project (the
map you see on OSM front page) and many other renderer : openmapquest,
cloudmade ans so on.

> Well... you go over to Wikipedia and the first thing you see is the front
> page of an encyclopedia, ready to be searched and used as such.

Of course, Wikipedia is an enclyclopedia.
What was difficult with OSM (and a bit geeky as you said above) is the
difference between a map and map data. This difference is important, but
not easy to understand.
You build a map (a representation) with data (OSM).
But not everyone need the same map, the same representation. Some want
emphazing on roads (use openmapquest), some prefer emphasing on footway
or bicycle or anything you want.
OSM has around lot of other project that build map (mapnik was one) and
it's good.

>  [...]
> You don't hear Wikipedia trumpeting "we are not an encyclopedia, we are a
> database of information." No... they scream from the mountain tops "we are
> the world's encyclopedia", and absolutely relish in it.

The comparaison is not correct, wikipedia is in fact an enclyclopedia.
OSM is not a map project it's more.

> Why can't OSM be also scream from a nearby mountain top, "we are the
> world's map"...

Because there not one good map, it's impossible. Map(s) is(are) a
different things that an enclyclopedia.
A single map could not represent everything, is you put too much
information on a single map, it will because useless and go to trash.
For example mapnik rendering ("default" OSM map) do not represent many
objects. For me representing foot crossing and handicap accessibility is
important (it's an example) but mapnik do not represent those items...
For example, i way a clear easy to read map for travel, i dont want to
see every shop on the map... mapnik is not the map i need.

> I mean, what's so embarrassing about providing a good,
> comprehensive, accessible map? It's an accomplishment of which we should
> all be proud, not hide away.

Yes, and some prpject to this job nicely. These are side project, not
OSM main project.
Perhaps OSM would add to it's goal a realize a "good" map (the problem
would be to define what is a good map) but its not OSM goals.

> Again, what is embarrassing about a map?

nothing.

> 
> I really do hope OSM finds its way through this quagmire of identity and
> eventually becomes the world's map, widely used, integrated, and quoted in
> all kinds of spheres.
> 
> That's my vision.

Perhaps would you have to participate to mapnik project (those who
define OSM "default" map).

-- 
Pierre-Alain Dorange
OSM experiences : 


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Yves]

A lot of good concepts are evoked here, but we should remember that osm, as a 
lot of open projects is a do-ocracy.
Things that (not involved) people say are good to listen, but in this list this 
sounds more like things people don't do.
By now, doing things may looks geeky, but there is a need of good geeks to 
attain the aims of low entry level to map or good maps, more than Osmf can or 
wants to provide. 
Any takers?
Yves
-- 
Envoyé de mon téléphone Android avec K-9 Mail. Excusez la brièveté.


Kai Krueger  a écrit :


Toby Murray-2 wrote
> 
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Ben Johnson  wrote:
>> You don't hear Wikipedia trumpeting "we are not an encyclopedia, we are a
>> database of information." No... they scream from the mountain tops "we
>> are
>> the world's encyclopedia", and absolutely relish in it.
>>
>> Why can't OSM be also scream from
>> a nearby mountain top, "we are the world's map" I mean, what's so
>> embarrassing about providing a good, comprehensive, accessible map? It's
>> an
>> accomplishment of which we should all be proud, not hide away.
> 
> [...]
> 
> I do think there is a non-trivial technical difference between OSM and
> wikipedia. The text of a given wikipedia article is 90% of the value.
> It can be displayed as-is and still be useful. Making it pretty and
> user-friendly is relatively trivial with some CSS or whatever.
> 
> Our map data is completely different. It is absolutely useless to most
> people without a rendering process which is much more complicated than
> formatting some HTML. There are color schemes, rendering choices,
> de-clutterification, regional cartographic conventions, etc, etc.
> Which is why we leave it up to other people to do this since they can
> make what they need out of our data.
> 
One can turn that example around by 180°: Despite the fact that wikipedia's
raw data, a XML dump, is so much easier to turn into something usable than
OSM's data, they still put in the effort to present it in a human usable
form.

For OSM with its "useless to most people" data, it is even more important to
present it in a human consumable fashion. This conversion doesn't have to
all be done by "OSMF", but there needs to be a central place with easy to
understand access to all of the various options. Furthermore, if no external
third party provides an adequate and easy to integrate version of something,
then OSMF has to think about if it can support the creation of consumer
facing products, as that is imho essential for the growth of OSM data.

What needs to be overcome is that one currently has to study the
organizational diagram of the OSM project with its hundreds of independent
third party sites, before one can figure out how to get anything useful out
of osm and to avoid getting an unfriendly response of that one is doing it
completely wrong.

Kai

--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Things-People-Say-tp7131801p7137794.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] Things People Say

[Dirk-Lüder Kreie]

On 12/30/11 00:50, Toby Murray wrote:
> I do think there is a non-trivial technical difference between OSM and
> wikipedia. The text of a given wikipedia article is 90% of the value.
> It can be displayed as-is and still be useful. Making it pretty and
> user-friendly is relatively trivial with some CSS or whatever.
>
> Our map data is completely different. It is absolutely useless to most
> people without a rendering process which is much more complicated than
> formatting some HTML. There are color schemes, rendering choices,
> de-clutterification, regional cartographic conventions, etc, etc.
> Which is why we leave it up to other people to do this since they can
> make what they need out of our data.

Even more importantly it's quite easy to convert a wikipedia article to
some sort of plain text as a basis for an entirely different
encyclopedia, even without access to the source text version of the
page. For Maps this is even harder to get from a pixel image back to
some meaningful vector data.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Kai Krueger]

Toby Murray-2 wrote
> 
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Ben Johnson  wrote:
>> You don't hear Wikipedia trumpeting "we are not an encyclopedia, we are a
>> database of information." No... they scream from the mountain tops "we
>> are
>> the world's encyclopedia", and absolutely relish in it.
>>
>> Why can't OSM be also scream from
>> a nearby mountain top, "we are the world's map" I mean, what's so
>> embarrassing about providing a good, comprehensive, accessible map? It's
>> an
>> accomplishment of which we should all be proud, not hide away.
> 
> [...]
> 
> I do think there is a non-trivial technical difference between OSM and
> wikipedia. The text of a given wikipedia article is 90% of the value.
> It can be displayed as-is and still be useful. Making it pretty and
> user-friendly is relatively trivial with some CSS or whatever.
> 
> Our map data is completely different. It is absolutely useless to most
> people without a rendering process which is much more complicated than
> formatting some HTML. There are color schemes, rendering choices,
> de-clutterification, regional cartographic conventions, etc, etc.
> Which is why we leave it up to other people to do this since they can
> make what they need out of our data.
> 
One can turn that example around by 180°: Despite the fact that wikipedia's
raw data, a XML dump, is so much easier to turn into something usable than
OSM's data, they still put in the effort to present it in a human usable
form.

For OSM with its "useless to most people" data, it is even more important to
present it in a human consumable fashion. This conversion doesn't have to
all be done by "OSMF", but there needs to be a central place with easy to
understand access to all of the various options. Furthermore, if no external
third party provides an adequate and easy to integrate version of something,
then OSMF has to think about if it can support the creation of consumer
facing products, as that is imho essential for the growth of OSM data.

What needs to be overcome is that one currently has to study the
organizational diagram of the OSM project with its hundreds of independent
third party sites, before one can figure out how to get anything useful out
of osm and to avoid getting an unfriendly response of that one is doing it
completely wrong.

Kai

--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Things-People-Say-tp7131801p7137794.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] Things People Say

[Kai Krueger]

SimonPoole wrote
> 
> There is nothing stopping anybody from building this great hunking 
> online map site with OSM-data with all the whizz-bang features they want 
> (and it is conceivable that the OSMF could support such an enterprise 
> parallel to "core-OSM"). Fact is that nobody has volunteered to do it

There is a second aspect to this too though, motivation. If every time
someone suggests some improvements into the consumer side of things, they
get shot down by the "oldtimers" and other people who decide what happens in
the project, because they want to stay as geeky as possible and not adapt to
becoming more consumer oriented, then the motivation to code any feature in
that direction is close to zero.

There is probably not much that can kill motivation to work on a project in
ones own free time more than getting told your effort isn't wanted and then
having to fight for getting something included for years... The first step
to getting coders, therefore, is imho to actually have a desire to want to
include these kind of features. As long as there remains a hostile
environment to these things, they won't happen and you end up having a
viscous circle.

I know full well, there is much more that is needed than just the desire to
make things happen, but the desire is equally necessary.

Kai


--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Things-People-Say-tp7131801p7137764.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] Things People Say

[Simon Poole]

I'm not quite sure where this rather emotional discussion is supposed to 
lead.


There is nothing stopping anybody from building this great hunking 
online map site with OSM-data with all the whizz-bang features they want 
(and it is conceivable that the OSMF could support such an enterprise 
parallel to "core-OSM"). Fact is that nobody has volunteered to do it, 
there hasn't been an attempt to do it commercially (hint: that might 
tell us something), there hasn't even been an attempt  to organize 
volunteers to build such a site.


My conclusion: this thread is actually about wanting -other- people to 
implement grandiose ideas in their free-time and being upset and whining 
when they are not particularly enthusiastic about it (because they want 
to do something else).


No money and/or no volunteers == nothing is going to happen.

Simon


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Peter Wendorff]

I would like to see a combination (yes, I could work on that myself, but 
neither I'm a rails coder, nor do I have the time - sorry ;) ) of a map 
and the data.
Observing Kothic.js as a client side rendering engine and some 
approaches and ideas towards tile based data delivery I wish we could 
have one example map, but a map editor, too on the front page.


Imagine, the front page would load the data you need to display the map 
style you decided to view for the area you want to display.
Imagine, you could use checkboxes to add or remove a feature, color 
choosers to choose a color and for people who want to, define your very 
own styles in a textbox accepting e.g. MapCSS-definitions.
It would probably even be possible to use the 
alternative-stylesheet-mechanisms the browsers provide to set up a 
client side stylesheet for my personal osm map view.


I know, that's a lot of work. I know, I'm not the one implementing that 
(in the next months), and I wish I would have the time to learn rails 
and do it.
But it would be a compromise between the "we are a map" and the "we are 
a data" provider.
It would be the "we are a data provider" with the addition of user 
friendly presentation of the data - and not presentation of a (the?) 
map, because: The Mapnik rendering is a presentation of data. Parts of 
the stylesheet are designed to be a presentation of the data and not to 
make the nicest map AFAIK.


Doing this rendering on client side, supported by all major browsers 
would lead to
- more diversity in maps ("share your GPX, share your Data, share your 
Map-Style (!)")

- probably better pointing to the database without being a geek-only-game
- probably forming the idea of "they have data" better at a probably 
lower user level.


regards
Peter

Am 29.12.2011 22:39, schrieb Ben Johnson:
For what it's worth I also think it's very important to have a 
prominent map on the front page and I believe this whole debate just 
highlights the fact that OSM is not ready for mainstream and remains a 
geeky subculture.


There seems to be a duality of identity here. On one hand, some are 
saying lets make it more accessible and friendly to "ordinary people". 
On the other hand, some appear embarrassed by the prominence of maps 
to represent what our community is all about, and they want to retain 
a geeky "we are not a map, we are a database" ideology.


The two goals are completely incompatible because "ordinary people" 
expect OSM to be all about maps. In fact, I was drawn into the project 
on the premise that OSM is "the Wikipedia of maps", and I found it an 
exciting prospect to contribute to such a great idea.


Well... you go over to Wikipedia and the first thing you see is the 
front page of an encyclopedia, ready to be searched and used as such. 
You know there's no bells and whistles, and thats a good thing. You're 
attracted by the clean commercial-free environment, and you have 
confidence that the information in Wikipedia has been lovingly 
provided by contributors who want to leave their legacy to the world 
by sharing their knowledge and expertise, and rigorously reviewed and 
checked by other contributors.


You don't hear Wikipedia trumpeting "we are not an encyclopedia, we 
are a database of information." No... they scream from the mountain 
tops "we are the world's encyclopedia", and absolutely relish in it.


Why can't OSM be also scream from
a nearby mountain top, "we are the world's map" I mean, what's so 
embarrassing about providing a good, comprehensive, accessible map? 
It's an accomplishment of which we should all be proud, not hide away.


Yes we don't have gimmicks like street view and satellite view. So too 
Wikipedia lacks rich multimedia content. It's simple, clean, fast, 
comprehensive, accurate - and yet very very successful.


Again, what is embarrassing about a map?

I really do hope OSM finds its way through this quagmire of identity 
and eventually becomes the world's map, widely used, integrated, and 
quoted in all kinds of spheres.


That's my vision.

BJ


On 29/12/2011, at 9:09, "Barnett, Phillip" <mailto:phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk>> wrote:


Well yes, but instead you've got a very conspicuous link saying 
'Where's the map? .. here it is."


And also four other obvious maps below that even!



PHILLIP BARNETT
SERVER MANAGER

200 GRAY'S INN ROAD
LONDON
WC1X 8XZ
UNITED KINGDOM
T +44 (0)20 7430 4474
F
E phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk <mailto:phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk>
WWW.ITN.CO.UK <http://WWW.ITN.CO.UK>
Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email?

-Original Message-
From: Frederik Ramm [mailto:frede...@remote.org]
Sent: 28 December 2011 21:51
To: Thomas Davie
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org 

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Thomas Davie]

On 30 Dec 2011, at 00:20, Frederik Ramm wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On 12/29/2011 10:39 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:
>> There seems to be a duality of identity here. On one hand, some are
>> saying lets make it more accessible and friendly to "ordinary people".
>> On the other hand, some appear embarrassed by the prominence of maps to
>> represent what our community is all about, and they want to retain a
>> geeky "we are not a map, we are a database" ideology.
> 
> This is not a geeky ideology, this is the heart of our project.
> 
> Otherwise we'd all be using the Gimp (or maybe Inkscape), and not JOSM or 
> Potlatch.

Oh god that's a ridiculous straw man and you know it, it's like saying "if 
wikipedia was an encyclopedia, not a database of information, they'd use 
notepad, and write the URL of links in, rather than using their own editor and 
a specially crafted language for writing articles".

>> The two goals are completely incompatible because "ordinary people"
>> expect OSM to be all about maps.
> 
> When in fact we're about providing the ingredients so that great maps become 
> possible.
No, we're all about a big repository of map data, what we're not about 
necessarily is cartography (though to be honest, I find that a shame - I'd love 
to see us branch into letting people decide how the maps should look on the 
front page too).

> This is the big thing about OSM: We don't decide how the map looks like.
No, that's *a* big thing about OSM.  Another big thing for me is that I get a 
quick, and easy to use map that shows footpaths, and other things I care about. 
 Another big thing to me is that the map tends to be updated far quicker than 
any other.

> We don't decide what is shown on the map.
Yep, that's why having a few layers on the front-page map to demonstrate that 
loads of different maps can be made is a good idea.

> We don't make all these decisions for you. If you want these decisions made 
> for you, use Google Maps.
Why?  You're saying "if you don't want to do a bunch of cartography before you 
even look at a map, go use someone else's tool" – that's a really sucky 
message, and not what OSM is about at all as far as I'm concerned.

> If you want to be part of a project where one guy can make a cycle map and 
> another guy can make a transport map and someone else prints posters and 
> someone else still makes nautical maps, all from the same data, and all 
> precisely because the core of the project doesn't make the map but just the 
> raw data, then OSM is for you.
Right, so what better way to attract users by having a front page which says in 
big bold letters (actually no, maps) "Hey, this project has been used to make 
this map, and this map, and this map, and this map" just like the current front 
page does.

>> Again, what is embarrassing about a map?
> 
> It is not embarassing, but misleading. If we were to convey the idea that we 
> are about "a map", then people would come and say "uh, how can I change this 
> motorway to become orange instead of blue, and also I would like the name of 
> that pub displaced a bit so it doesn't obscure the name of the nearby church."
You're confusing "being about a map" with "being about cartography".  Aside – 
as I said earlier, I don't see being about cartography as a bad thing.

> Even today we - occasionally, thank god - have people who actually delete 
> things from OSM because they don't want them on "their" map. We have to 
> educate them about how the data is the same for all, but the map need not be.
Great, carry on educating, I'd much rather have the odd one person do this than 
have the odd thousand go "hey, this isn't about maps like I expected, I'll go 
contribute to something else".

>> I really do hope OSM finds its way through this quagmire of identity and
>> eventually becomes the world's map, widely used, integrated, and quoted
>> in all kinds of spheres.
> 
> No. There is no "the world's map". Everyone wants a different map.
No, everyone wants different cartography.

Bob


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 12/29/2011 10:39 PM, Ben Johnson wrote:

There seems to be a duality of identity here. On one hand, some are
saying lets make it more accessible and friendly to "ordinary people".
On the other hand, some appear embarrassed by the prominence of maps to
represent what our community is all about, and they want to retain a
geeky "we are not a map, we are a database" ideology.


This is not a geeky ideology, this is the heart of our project.

Otherwise we'd all be using the Gimp (or maybe Inkscape), and not JOSM 
or Potlatch.



The two goals are completely incompatible because "ordinary people"
expect OSM to be all about maps.


When in fact we're about providing the ingredients so that great maps 
become possible. This is the big thing about OSM: We don't decide how 
the map looks like. We don't decide what is shown on the map. We don't 
make all these decisions for you. If you want these decisions made for 
you, use Google Maps. If you want to be part of a project where one guy 
can make a cycle map and another guy can make a transport map and 
someone else prints posters and someone else still makes nautical maps, 
all from the same data, and all precisely because the core of the 
project doesn't make the map but just the raw data, then OSM is for you.



Again, what is embarrassing about a map?


It is not embarassing, but misleading. If we were to convey the idea 
that we are about "a map", then people would come and say "uh, how can I 
change this motorway to become orange instead of blue, and also I would 
like the name of that pub displaced a bit so it doesn't obscure the name 
of the nearby church."


Even today we - occasionally, thank god - have people who actually 
delete things from OSM because they don't want them on "their" map. We 
have to educate them about how the data is the same for all, but the map 
need not be.



I really do hope OSM finds its way through this quagmire of identity and
eventually becomes the world's map, widely used, integrated, and quoted
in all kinds of spheres.


No. There is no "the world's map". Everyone wants a different map. And 
that's why we must *not* fall into the trap of trying to provide the 
right map for everyone. The great thing about us is that, given the 
right tools, people can *make* the right map for themselves. This is too 
difficult now, but it can become easier. Take our data, take your ideas, 
and make your map - not "take our map".


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] Things People Say

[Toby Murray]

On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Ben Johnson  wrote:
> You don't hear Wikipedia trumpeting "we are not an encyclopedia, we are a
> database of information." No... they scream from the mountain tops "we are
> the world's encyclopedia", and absolutely relish in it.
>
> Why can't OSM be also scream from
> a nearby mountain top, "we are the world's map" I mean, what's so
> embarrassing about providing a good, comprehensive, accessible map? It's an
> accomplishment of which we should all be proud, not hide away.

I present:

The redesigned OSM home page:
http://i.imgur.com/stvfZ.png

I'm not really saying this is good or bad but I believe OSMF currently
does not have any interest in becoming a multi-million dollar
operation with hundreds of tile servers on multiple gigabit internet
links. And it seems like there are enough people opposed to this idea
that it is not likely to happen.

I do think there is a non-trivial technical difference between OSM and
wikipedia. The text of a given wikipedia article is 90% of the value.
It can be displayed as-is and still be useful. Making it pretty and
user-friendly is relatively trivial with some CSS or whatever.

Our map data is completely different. It is absolutely useless to most
people without a rendering process which is much more complicated than
formatting some HTML. There are color schemes, rendering choices,
de-clutterification, regional cartographic conventions, etc, etc.
Which is why we leave it up to other people to do this since they can
make what they need out of our data.

Toby

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Ben Johnson]

For what it's worth I also think it's very important to have a prominent map on 
the front page and I believe this whole debate just highlights the fact that 
OSM is not ready for mainstream and remains a geeky subculture.

There seems to be a duality of identity here. On one hand, some are saying lets 
make it more accessible and friendly to "ordinary people". On the other hand, 
some appear embarrassed by the prominence of maps to represent what our 
community is all about, and they want to retain a geeky "we are not a map, we 
are a database" ideology.

The two goals are completely incompatible because "ordinary people" expect OSM 
to be all about maps. In fact, I was drawn into the project on the premise that 
OSM is "the Wikipedia of maps", and I found it an exciting prospect to 
contribute to such a great idea.

Well... you go over to Wikipedia and the first thing you see is the front page 
of an encyclopedia, ready to be searched and used as such. You know there's no 
bells and whistles, and thats a good thing. You're attracted by the clean 
commercial-free environment, and you have confidence that the information in 
Wikipedia has been lovingly provided by contributors who want to leave their 
legacy to the world by sharing their knowledge and expertise, and rigorously 
reviewed and checked by other contributors.

You don't hear Wikipedia trumpeting "we are not an encyclopedia, we are a 
database of information." No... they scream from the mountain tops "we are the 
world's encyclopedia", and absolutely relish in it.

Why can't OSM be also scream from
a nearby mountain top, "we are the world's map" I mean, what's so 
embarrassing about providing a good, comprehensive, accessible map? It's an 
accomplishment of which we should all be proud, not hide away.

Yes we don't have gimmicks like street view and satellite view. So too 
Wikipedia lacks rich multimedia content. It's simple, clean, fast, 
comprehensive, accurate - and yet very very successful.

Again, what is embarrassing about a map?

I really do hope OSM finds its way through this quagmire of identity and 
eventually becomes the world's map, widely used, integrated, and quoted in all 
kinds of spheres. 

That's my vision.

BJ


On 29/12/2011, at 9:09, "Barnett, Phillip"  wrote:

> Well yes, but instead you've got a very conspicuous link saying 'Where's the 
> map? .. here it is."
> 
> And also four other obvious maps below that even!
> 
> 
> 
> PHILLIP BARNETT
> SERVER MANAGER
> 
> 200 GRAY'S INN ROAD
> LONDON
> WC1X 8XZ
> UNITED KINGDOM
> T +44 (0)20 7430 4474
> F
> E phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk 
> WWW.ITN.CO.UK
> Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Frederik Ramm [mailto:frede...@remote.org]
> Sent: 28 December 2011 21:51
> To: Thomas Davie
> Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org 
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On 12/28/2011 10:41 PM, Thomas Davie wrote:
> > This is a lot better though than "Can you believe it, OpenStreetMap doesn't 
> > even have an open street map on their home page!".
> 
> We've been using http://www.openstreetmap.de/ in its current form for 6 
> weeks now. I'll let you know when someone complains that it has no map.
> (The earlier version did have an OpenLayers map on the front page but
> using only about 1/3 of screen real estate.)
> 
> 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 
> 
> Please Note:
> 
> Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily 
> represent those of Independent Television News Limited unless specifically 
> stated. This email and any files attached are confidential and intended 
> solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. 
> If you have received this email in error, please notify postmas...@itn.co.uk 
> 
> Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of 
> our clients and business, we may monitor and read messages sent to and from 
> our systems.
> 
> Thank You.
> ___
> 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] Things People Say

[Nick Hocking]

I'd like to see the main page "induce" people to contribute by
becomimg local mappers.

I.E The main page would have a world OSM map (such as on  the
informationfreeway site) where density is colour coded and shows
how good, or bad, we are in a particular area.

The caption could read along the lines of

"Are you on the map? - click where you live to find out"

Then, so long as the zooming is really fast they will not be able
to stop themselves zooming in to their street.

When zoomed in there we could ask


"Well, is your street there?  --
 If not, you can click HERE to easily add it now"

" If you street is there - could it be improved?  -
 If so, maybe click HERE"

"If your street is perfect then maybe you could add a post box,
 house number or something else of interest - click HERE"

etc,... etc

Yes, I know it sounds corny, but once you have convinced someone
that they can actually improve there own street/area, they are sunk
  - they're an OSM mapper for life!
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Willi]

On 28. December 2011 17:21 Frederik Ramm [mailto:frede...@remote.org] wrote:

> I think that this is an attitude problem with some of the potential users
of OSM; 
> they assume that it is our job to make them like us. "Show me what you've
got", they say. 
> ...
> But as a project, I don't think it is not our job to reach out to users
and
> "sell" ourselves to them.
> ...
> In my eyes, we are not aimed at "map consumers". We are, to borrow
business terms, 
> a producer or maybe a distributor, but we're not a retailer.

Fully agree with the statements, especially with the above ones. For me too,
OSM is a free and open project to collect and offer geographical data and
not a map producer. I regard this as the project's advantage and strength
and thus should never be changed.

Willi


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Yves]

I really like this design too!
Yves


Cartinus  a écrit :

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Hello,

Or you can do both by improving on the idea used here:
;

In the floating box you can put a lot of information about the
project. Then when you click on "Toon kaart" (just above the logo),
you get a big map.

On 12/28/2011 10:41 PM, Thomas Davie wrote:
> On 28 Dec 2011, at 21:26, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> On 12/28/2011 09:58 PM, John Sturdy wrote:
>>> I think we need to keep the "big map with a search box" quite 
>>> prominently, partly because that is a major use, and partly
>>> because that is what will attract newcomers' attention and give
>>> them a way to evaluate the quality of our data
>> 
>> This is all nice discussion among us "osm educated" people but as
>> the thread that Mike was referring to shows: The average newcomer
>> will measure us against somthing like Bing or Google and say
>> things like, "then I searched for the satellite view and could
>> you believe it, shabby OpenStreetMap doesn't even offer that".
>> We're not a map/imagery/streetview portal and we should be
>> upfront about that.
> 
> This is a lot better though than "Can you believe it, OpenStreetMap
> doesn't even have an open street map on their home page!".
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Bob

- -- 
- ---
m.v.g.,
Cartinus
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJO+77jAAoJEInLUvwrL2kIXrQH+wSeFVLS/RCzxsNT9bWXWOJ6
3xCy7/a8pFh52TyyDnpbiXM7xgiKt6j6ulo9poZ2XJc8VYva/V6esiJ6Z6t75GVd
LaE5Yl6Uske0RbkyzTztZEme2tzpkPg8HDplLbKavA0xUkrLV1FuR20/Jv+/Sbm3
nw8S0XU0SMtgk3CUl0QR9w4emesaAKYtdTEHcdZER2jHSmQb57ET5pnrwvGEFYT0
yu8ZwhnR2jEW9s8WzgPq4hxv3tN3KMfq5i9EEapXqeESAjqVenKIM3S7rmEajaAH
kJCsak9OIvt1/9jmZiH8HDPK9KCGAPyizztPP9QgTY0wMqSusAvfPp4dHtXugIs=
=xf6a
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

_

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] Things People Say

[Cartinus]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Hello,

Or you can do both by improving on the idea used here:


In the floating box you can put a lot of information about the
project. Then when you click on "Toon kaart" (just above the logo),
you get a big map.

On 12/28/2011 10:41 PM, Thomas Davie wrote:
> On 28 Dec 2011, at 21:26, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> On 12/28/2011 09:58 PM, John Sturdy wrote:
>>> I think we need to keep the "big map with a search box" quite 
>>> prominently, partly because that is a major use, and partly
>>> because that is what will attract newcomers' attention and give
>>> them a way to evaluate the quality of our data
>> 
>> This is all nice discussion among us "osm educated" people but as
>> the thread that Mike was referring to shows: The average newcomer
>> will measure us against somthing like Bing or Google and say
>> things like, "then I searched for the satellite view and could
>> you believe it, shabby OpenStreetMap doesn't even offer that".
>> We're not a map/imagery/streetview portal and we should be
>> upfront about that.
> 
> This is a lot better though than "Can you believe it, OpenStreetMap
> doesn't even have an open street map on their home page!".
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Bob

- -- 
- ---
m.v.g.,
Cartinus
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJO+77jAAoJEInLUvwrL2kIXrQH+wSeFVLS/RCzxsNT9bWXWOJ6
3xCy7/a8pFh52TyyDnpbiXM7xgiKt6j6ulo9poZ2XJc8VYva/V6esiJ6Z6t75GVd
LaE5Yl6Uske0RbkyzTztZEme2tzpkPg8HDplLbKavA0xUkrLV1FuR20/Jv+/Sbm3
nw8S0XU0SMtgk3CUl0QR9w4emesaAKYtdTEHcdZER2jHSmQb57ET5pnrwvGEFYT0
yu8ZwhnR2jEW9s8WzgPq4hxv3tN3KMfq5i9EEapXqeESAjqVenKIM3S7rmEajaAH
kJCsak9OIvt1/9jmZiH8HDPK9KCGAPyizztPP9QgTY0wMqSusAvfPp4dHtXugIs=
=xf6a
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Barnett, Phillip]

Well yes, but instead you've got a very conspicuous link saying 'Where's the 
map?  .. here it is."

And also four other obvious maps below that even!



PHILLIP BARNETT
SERVER MANAGER

200 GRAY'S INN ROAD
LONDON
WC1X 8XZ
UNITED KINGDOM
T +44 (0)20 7430 4474
F
E phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk
WWW.ITN.CO.UK
Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email?

-Original Message-
From: Frederik Ramm [mailto:frede...@remote.org]
Sent: 28 December 2011 21:51
To: Thomas Davie
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

Hi,

On 12/28/2011 10:41 PM, Thomas Davie wrote:
> This is a lot better though than "Can you believe it, OpenStreetMap doesn't 
> even have an open street map on their home page!".

We've been using http://www.openstreetmap.de/ in its current form for 6
weeks now. I'll let you know when someone complains that it has no map.
(The earlier version did have an OpenLayers map on the front page but
using only about 1/3 of screen real estate.)

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

Please Note:

Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily 
represent those of Independent Television News Limited unless specifically 
stated. This email and any files attached are confidential and intended solely 
for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you 
have received this email in error, please notify postmas...@itn.co.uk 

Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of our 
clients and business, we may monitor and read messages sent to and from our 
systems.

Thank You.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Thomas Davie]

On 28 Dec 2011, at 21:50, Frederik Ramm wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On 12/28/2011 10:41 PM, Thomas Davie wrote:
>> This is a lot better though than "Can you believe it, OpenStreetMap doesn't 
>> even have an open street map on their home page!".
> 
> We've been using http://www.openstreetmap.de/ in its current form for 6 weeks 
> now. I'll let you know when someone complains that it has no map. (The 
> earlier version did have an OpenLayers map on the front page but using only 
> about 1/3 of screen real estate.)

I would imagine that the reason you've had no such complaints is because 
there's an easily visible link (even to a non-german-speaker) to the OSM front 
page there.

Bob
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 12/28/2011 10:41 PM, Thomas Davie wrote:

This is a lot better though than "Can you believe it, OpenStreetMap doesn't even 
have an open street map on their home page!".


We've been using http://www.openstreetmap.de/ in its current form for 6 
weeks now. I'll let you know when someone complains that it has no map. 
(The earlier version did have an OpenLayers map on the front page but 
using only about 1/3 of screen real estate.)


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] Things People Say

[Thomas Davie]

On 28 Dec 2011, at 21:26, Frederik Ramm wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On 12/28/2011 09:58 PM, John Sturdy wrote:
>> I think we need to keep the "big map with a search box" quite
>> prominently, partly because that is a major use, and partly because
>> that is what will attract newcomers' attention and give them a way to
>> evaluate the quality of our data
> 
> This is all nice discussion among us "osm educated" people but as the thread 
> that Mike was referring to shows: The average newcomer will measure us 
> against somthing like Bing or Google and say things like, "then I searched 
> for the satellite view and could you believe it, shabby OpenStreetMap doesn't 
> even offer that". We're not a map/imagery/streetview portal and we should be 
> upfront about that.

This is a lot better though than "Can you believe it, OpenStreetMap doesn't 
even have an open street map on their home page!".

Thanks

Bob


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 12/28/2011 09:58 PM, John Sturdy wrote:

I think we need to keep the "big map with a search box" quite
prominently, partly because that is a major use, and partly because
that is what will attract newcomers' attention and give them a way to
evaluate the quality of our data


This is all nice discussion among us "osm educated" people but as the 
thread that Mike was referring to shows: The average newcomer will 
measure us against somthing like Bing or Google and say things like, 
"then I searched for the satellite view and could you believe it, shabby 
OpenStreetMap doesn't even offer that". We're not a 
map/imagery/streetview portal and we should be upfront about that.



I'm a little tired of people like that and I hope that by drastically reducing 
the amount of map on our front page we will get rid of them.


The problem is, that that might get rid of a lot of other people, too.


People who are unwilling to read a main page that doesn't shove the map 
in their faces right away, are also less likely to be willing and able 
to contribute. In the thread that Mike quoted there were a few people 
who demanded everything and were not prepared to offer anything. I'm 
quite happy if we don't have to put up with them, or at least not *now*, 
at this phase of the project, when there's plenty of helpful potential 
OSMers to recruit. We can start tackling those who take but never give 
at a later stage, when we've got more manpower.


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] Things People Say

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Michal Migurski  wrote:
> On Dec 28, 2011, at 2:21 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:

> I should be more specific: this person goes to maps.google.com, they see a 
> big map with a search box, they enter an address and pan around to look at 
> their house or hometown. They go to openstreetmap.org, and they see a big map 
> with a search box so they assume OSM is filling the same need. It's clear 
> from your mails that you think OSM fills a lower-level, more data-oriented 
> need so we should *change our public presentation to fit what we're actually 
> trying to do.*

I think we need to keep the "big map with a search box" quite
prominently, partly because that is a major use, and partly because
that is what will attract newcomers' attention and give them a way to
evaluate the quality of our data (reading an XML file in an editor
isn't an easy way of seeing whether we cover a particular area well).
We should make the availability of the underlying data visible by
drawing attention to it *in addition to* the rendered maps, not
instead of them --- perhaps a textual link on the front page to the
downloads page.

For example, we could re-write "OpenStreetMap is a free editable map
of the whole world." (on the front page) to something like
"OpenStreetMap is an editable map of the whole world, freely available
both as displayable map and as underlying data."  We could add a
"Data" link to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Planet.osm to the
list that currently has:
Help Centre
Documentation
Copyright & License
Community Blogs
Foundation
Map Key
as it currently takes quite a bit of searching (from a newcomer's
knowledge) to find the Planet page on the wiki.

>> I'm a little tired of people like that and I hope that by drastically 
>> reducing the amount of map on our front page we will get rid of them.

The problem is, that that might get rid of a lot of other people, too.

__John

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Michal Migurski]

On Dec 28, 2011, at 2:21 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:

> Google has a sales force - people who are paid to make you use their product. 
> If Google brainwash their staff well enough, then it may even be a personal 
> goal for their staff to make you use their product; but the second the 
> employment contract ends, that's it.

Strictly speaking that's true, but Google's product is also good enough to 
overcome their lackluster sales team. Remember that the API was effectively 
beaten out of them by Paul Rademacher, Adrian Holovaty and others after their 
public release. Google Maps is *really good* at being a map portal, and we 
can't dismiss their organizational effectiveness by assuming that they're 
brainwashed.


> I hope that we are all very clear on this issue - OSM does not want a sales 
> force. Advocates who come to like OSM and "sell" it to their friends are of 
> course fine!

I agree that you are very clear on this issue, but I don't think the rest of us 
are. Successful projects grow to a point where specialization is needed, and I 
think OSM should have a better sales or evangelism function. Some companies 
call this "sales engineering", which means technically-oriented people who also 
see their job as smoothing the path for new users. Think about the change in 
Mapnik when Dane Springmeyer joined Artem Pavlenko and over a period of two 
years the "hard to install" joke became a thing of the past.


>> I believe it's time to
>> remove a few fire hydrants and turning circles and bump up some font
>> sizes in the service of a less-busy, more-comprehensible selection of
>> elements.
> 
> Doesn't MapQuest do that reasonably well, or were you thinking something 
> different? We already have their tiles on our www.openstreetmap.org page, and 
> we could easily switch the default style to use their tiles if everyone 
> believes they are nicer. Saves us a lot of traffic too.

MapQuest's cartography is completely awesome, but it's not exactly what I was 
thinking of.

I like that tile-making is currently in the hands of users, but I'm also 
arguing that if we have a map on the front page, it should be a real, official 
set of tiles as a reliable service that people can really use. When I was 
making my terrain layer recently, a friend kept prodding me with the final 
goal: "all this code is nice, but the most widely-useful products is tiles."


>>> ETA: And as I go to OpenStreetMaps and see it struggle to serve me
>>> a page showing my house (and showing exactly the same wrong place
>>> for my house that Google Maps does, because it's using the exact
> 
> [...]
> 
>> This person is caught between the "it's a map" / "it's a project"
>> divide.
> 
> I think that this person is also caught between the "I'm in the USA" / "I'm 
> not in the USA" divide.

I should be more specific: this person goes to maps.google.com, they see a big 
map with a search box, they enter an address and pan around to look at their 
house or hometown. They go to openstreetmap.org, and they see a big map with a 
search box so they assume OSM is filling the same need. It's clear from your 
mails that you think OSM fills a lower-level, more data-oriented need so we 
should *change our public presentation to fit what we're actually trying to do.*


> I'm a little tired of people like that and I hope that by drastically 
> reducing the amount of map on our front page we will get rid of them.


Yes. Well, I would phrase this as "shape their expectations" but yes. =)


> Our product needs a bit of pretty packaging and customer service added before 
> it can compete with the consumer friendliness of something like Google Maps; 
> such pretty packaging and customer service can be provided by enthusiastic 
> individuals, or nonprofits, or commercial entities - maybe even by other open 
> projects. But I don't see this on our plate.

I believe that you are underestimating the importance of first impressions by 
using words like "pretty". I'm thinking of something like accessibility, in all 
its forms - how can OSM help the new visitor? If someone searches for 
information on what they can do with OSM data, does a useful wiki page come up 
in the results? Do we have a log of search terms people have used when entering 
the wiki or other pages? Can it be made public so we know what people out there 
think they're looking for when they find us?

Part of this process is acknowledging that certain tools and services have 
graduated from being somebody's volunteer pet project to core elements of the 
critical infrastructure, and should be handled as such. Osmosis, Osm2pgsql, the 
Planet downloads, and Potlatch all spring to mind.


>> Setting up your own tile
>> infrastructure is something that's easier now thanks to all the work
>> that's gone into Mapnik, Planet replication and other tools. Can we
>> make it easier in the eyes of a business, by showing how the costs
>> too are predictable and doable?
> 
> I think we could, but then I don't think t

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Michal Migurski]

On Dec 28, 2011, at 6:23 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On 12/28/11 14:56, Thomas Davie wrote:
>> I think this actually may be an opportunity for OSM to make some
>> money.  Could we not (given the appropriately motivated person, and I
>> freely admit I'm not he) set up distributing images for servers that
>> are able to run right out the box... Want to run OpenStreetMap?
>> Download this iso, clone it into a VM or onto a real machine, boot,
>> access http:/// and there's your map, all set up and
>> ready to go.
> 
> There's "TileDrawer" already, where you can download ready-made Amazon images 
> for free, and there's a series of Ubuntu packages by Kai Krueger that you 
> just have to install to get a tile server. Or, for smaller-scale operations, 
> you can even use Maperitive for an out-of-the-box solution. And many of us, 
> including myself, spend time answering questions for free on the lists, on 
> help.osm, and elsewhere.

*embarassed that Tile Drawer doesn't actually work at the moment and has it on 
the to-do list to fix this week or next*

-mike.


michal migurski- m...@stamen.com
 415.558.1610




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 12/28/11 14:56, Thomas Davie wrote:

I think this actually may be an opportunity for OSM to make some
money.  Could we not (given the appropriately motivated person, and I
freely admit I'm not he) set up distributing images for servers that
are able to run right out the box... Want to run OpenStreetMap?
Download this iso, clone it into a VM or onto a real machine, boot,
access http:/// and there's your map, all set up and
ready to go.


There's "TileDrawer" already, where you can download ready-made Amazon 
images for free, and there's a series of Ubuntu packages by Kai Krueger 
that you just have to install to get a tile server. Or, for 
smaller-scale operations, you can even use Maperitive for an 
out-of-the-box solution. And many of us, including myself, spend time 
answering questions for free on the lists, on help.osm, and elsewhere.


The reason that people pay for this is not that they want a CD-ROM or a 
download link; these things exist. The reason that people pay for this 
is that they want customer service. Someone to tell them what hardware 
to buy; someone to ask them what they want and recommend a good strategy 
to achieve that with minimal cost; someone to fix a problem when it occurs.


If OSMF wanted to do this then they'd probably have to hire people to 
provide the service, and that would bring with it a considerable 
adminsitrative overhead and fixed costs and likely detract them from 
what they should be doing.


Bye
Frederik

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Thomas Davie]

On 28 Dec 2011, at 10:21, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> 
> I think that this person is also caught between the "I'm in the USA" / "I'm 
> not in the USA" divide. It seems to me that while 90% of OSM activity happens 
> outside the US, 90% of activity in that thread comes from inside the US, so I 
> am not surprised at seeing a distorted image. Nowhere in the world would 
> someone claim that OSM was using the "exact same data as Google", except 
> maybe in the US. And in many European countries a statement like "80% of my 
> town is unmapped" would simply be impossible.

You are over-exagerating.  Within the last 12 months my town (in scotland) was 
100% unmapped.  The most that was there was the major road that travels through 
it's centre and a label saying "Elgin is here".  I would be *very* surprised if 
there weren't significant towns in europe that are still totally unmapped.


>> Setting up your own tile
>> infrastructure is something that's easier now thanks to all the work
>> that's gone into Mapnik, Planet replication and other tools. Can we
>> make it easier in the eyes of a business, by showing how the costs
>> too are predictable and doable?
> 
> I think we could, but then I don't think that we need to worry. I do this as 
> a business, and I am by far not the only person to do it. At the moment the 
> market is still small but it is only a question of time until many other 
> players big and small will start offering ready-made OSM tile servers, and 
> they will become a commodity with lots of competition. Companies selling them 
> will make sure that their advantages vis-a-vis a GMaps service are well known 
> and advertised - better, I like to think, that we could do it ourselves. I 
> don't think that we need to spend valuable volunteer resources on making OSM 
> fly commercially; we can count on capitalism to do that for us.

I think this actually may be an opportunity for OSM to make some money.  Could 
we not (given the appropriately motivated person, and I freely admit I'm not 
he) set up distributing images for servers that are able to run right out the 
box... Want to run OpenStreetMap?  Download this iso, clone it into a VM or 
onto a real machine, boot, access http:/// and there's your map, 
all set up and ready to go.

Want to tweak the rendering?  Choose from a number of pre-defined stylesheets.
Worried about data replication?  Don't worry, it's already set up in cron to 
update its data from planet files reasonably regularly.
Worried about the hardware you need?  Here's the specs necessary to get this to 
work at various loads...

Bob
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Yves CAINAUD]

2011/12/28 Michal Migurski 

> > I think the key factor here is something Google does very, very well: UI.
>
A control style contest for OpenLayer could be a good idea too, even if
it's out of this list's scope.

Yves
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Stefan de Konink]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Op 28-12-11 11:21, Frederik Ramm schreef:
> I hope that we are all very clear on this issue - OSM does not want
> a sales force. Advocates who come to like OSM and "sell" it to
> their friends are of course fine!

Why doesn't OSM want a 'salesforce'? If these sales people come from
GeoFabrik, MapQuest, etc. it is the same thing right? Or is selling a
concept with data not the same as services on data.


> In my eyes, we are not aimed at "map consumers". We are, to borrow 
> business terms, a producer or maybe a distributor, but we're not a 
> retailer.

The sad point is, that if you want to attract 'contributors' they
require something to show off to their friend. "I contributed to this".
In the extreme it would be interesting _not_ to show a map at all. But
just show a page where these portals with our data are.

This will result in a debate, a big one, but might actually be
beneficial to us. There is no direct need for 'mass tile rendering'.
And users are direct in the spotlight.


>> Setting up your own tile infrastructure is something that's
>> easier now thanks to all the work that's gone into Mapnik, Planet
>> replication and other tools. Can we make it easier in the eyes of
>> a business, by showing how the costs too are predictable and
>> doable?
> 
> I think we could, but then I don't think that we need to worry. I
> do this as a business, and I am by far not the only person to do
> it. At the moment the market is still small but it is only a
> question of time until many other players big and small will start
> offering ready-made OSM tile servers, and they will become a
> commodity with lots of competition. Companies selling them will
> make sure that their advantages vis-a-vis a GMaps service are well
> known and advertised - better, I like to think, that we could do it
> ourselves. I don't think that we need to spend valuable volunteer
> resources on making OSM fly commercially; we can count on
> capitalism to do that for us.

I think starting with a tile server (vector) replication service could
be a great starting point to facilitate that. But like other
discussions started by you: we first need to make sure that what is in
the stylesheet, is considered 'the standard distributable data'.


Stefan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEAREKAAYFAk77FiQACgkQYH1+F2Rqwn3MewCfeQ8hzYfGkOuep4so1wuB57P6
+h8AnjK3+pXfCDgaYOWNzTpxyrd0sS6e
=yvHd
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say

[Frederik Ramm]

Mike,

On 12/28/11 06:19, Michal Migurski wrote:

Here are a few interesting snippets from that thread, and why I think
they're worth calling out:


I'll comment on a few only.


According to the article, the Google "sales force" seems to leave
much to desire. They don't keep appointments, they can't explain
their product, they don't understand their client, and they
overprice their product.


Google is deeply good at a lot of different things, but interaction
with actual human beings isn't one of them. On the other hand, I've
been snarked at on this list by influential OSMers enough times to
acknowledge that our project isn't great at this, either. I view this
as an opportunity for us to make a good impression, though.


Google has a sales force - people who are paid to make you use their 
product. If Google brainwash their staff well enough, then it may even 
be a personal goal for their staff to make you use their product; but 
the second the employment contract ends, that's it.


I hope that we are all very clear on this issue - OSM does not want a 
sales force. Advocates who come to like OSM and "sell" it to their 
friends are of course fine!


I think that this is an attitude problem with some of the potential 
users of OSM; they assume that it is our job to make them like us. "Show 
me what you've got", they say. And if they're lucky there will indeed be 
a local OSMer who is "on fire" and goes through some effort to show them 
what is possible with OSM. But as a project, I don't think it is not our 
job to reach out to users and "sell" ourselves to them.



I believe it's time to
remove a few fire hydrants and turning circles and bump up some font
sizes in the service of a less-busy, more-comprehensible selection of
elements.


Doesn't MapQuest do that reasonably well, or were you thinking something 
different? We already have their tiles on our www.openstreetmap.org 
page, and we could easily switch the default style to use their tiles if 
everyone believes they are nicer. Saves us a lot of traffic too.


But to be honest I'd prefer for tile-making to migrate more into the 
hands of users so they can choose whatever style they like, rather than 
everybody making (different) demands on our showcase cartography.



ETA: And as I go to OpenStreetMaps and see it struggle to serve me
a page showing my house (and showing exactly the same wrong place
for my house that Google Maps does, because it's using the exact


[...]


This person is caught between the "it's a map" / "it's a project"
divide.


I think that this person is also caught between the "I'm in the USA" / 
"I'm not in the USA" divide. It seems to me that while 90% of OSM 
activity happens outside the US, 90% of activity in that thread comes 
from inside the US, so I am not surprised at seeing a distorted image. 
Nowhere in the world would someone claim that OSM was using the "exact 
same data as Google", except maybe in the US. And in many European 
countries a statement like "80% of my town is unmapped" would simply be 
impossible.



Also, I didn't see the option for satellite view.


This guy is clearly mistaking us for a map portal. Even if we had the 
money to buy aerial imagery it would not be our mission to serve that to 
the public; we're simply not interested. I'm a little tired of people 
like that and I hope that by drastically reducing the amount of map on 
our front page we will get rid of them. We are here to make good map 
data; we're not here to indulge those who would like a map portal with 
all the bells and whistles (and who, as someone else professed, cannot 
be bothered to fix data in OSM when there are problems).


In my eyes, we are not aimed at "map consumers". We are, to borrow 
business terms, a producer or maybe a distributor, but we're not a 
retailer. Our product needs a bit of pretty packaging and customer 
service added before it can compete with the consumer friendliness of 
something like Google Maps; such pretty packaging and customer service 
can be provided by enthusiastic individuals, or nonprofits, or 
commercial entities - maybe even by other open projects. But I don't see 
this on our plate.



Setting up your own tile
infrastructure is something that's easier now thanks to all the work
that's gone into Mapnik, Planet replication and other tools. Can we
make it easier in the eyes of a business, by showing how the costs
too are predictable and doable?


I think we could, but then I don't think that we need to worry. I do 
this as a business, and I am by far not the only person to do it. At the 
moment the market is still small but it is only a question of time until 
many other players big and small will start offering ready-made OSM tile 
servers, and they will become a commodity with lots of competition. 
Companies selling them will make sure that their advantages vis-a-vis a 
GMaps service are well known and advertised - better, I like to think, 
that we could do it ourselves. I don't think that we