SK53 writes:
> many contributors do it not purely to add stuff to OSM, but for a multitude
of other reasons:
> to learn more about the places around where one lives;
> to get out;
> to meet-up with like minded people;
> to get some exercise;
> to go to the less obvious places;
> to avoid stultify
I'm currently perusing the datasets of Bath & North East Somerset that's
been distributed via Bath: Hacked.
https://github.com/BathHacked/banes-geographic-data (I'll be posting a
separate thread to clarifying a couple of points about it soon).
These sets certainly contain useful information, b
Actually I enjoy the process of going out & surveying stuff for OSM.
Of course it's nice that we can be better (more up-to-date, more detail,
additional attributes etc) than other map providers, but many contributors
do it not purely to add stuff to OSM, but for a multitude of other reasons:
-
There are two huge advantages to OSM, even just looking at the UK.
The first is timeliness. OSM is almost always faster with new features than OS
(although accepting you also need a friendly local mapper). Just as a case in
point, we were looking at Wickhurst Green, near Horsham, only this morni
On 29-Mar-16 10:19, Rob Nickerson wrote:
Should we attempt to include everything that is in the open data
datasets plus our on the ground additions (manually or, unless we
suddenly get many more mappers, by some form of controlled merge) or
should we leave the end users with the task of mixing OS
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 29 Mar 2016, Rob Nickerson wrote:
> P.P.S. By which I'm asking: do you think that (unless we get loads of new
> mappers) more availability of open data possess a threat to OSM in the UK
A decade ago a person called Steve needed a map and could
Thanks all.
My other food for thought is:
Should we attempt to include everything that is in the open data datasets
plus our on the ground additions (manually or, unless we suddenly get many
more mappers, by some form of controlled merge) or should we leave the end
users with the task of mixing O
On 26 March 2016 at 06:30, Rob Nickerson wrote:
> How do we ensure the mix continues to contain a lot of OSM data?
At the highest level, by making sure the focus of OpenStreetMap is
on-the-ground mapping, which best enables us to capture valuable
information that's not available in other datasou
and make sure that on-the-ground changes get into OSM much faster than
anyone else - ideally on the day of the change ;-)
Brian
On 26 March 2016 at 12:06, Andrew Hain wrote:
> John Aldridge writes:
>
>
> > By ensuring that OSM data is of higher quality, or contains useful
> > information still
John Aldridge writes:
> By ensuring that OSM data is of higher quality, or contains useful
> information still absent from those other sources. If we can't or don't
> do that, OSM (in the UK) will cease to have a purpose, and can be left
> to wither un-mourned.
Plus, usefully be part of a wo
On 26-Mar-16 06:30, Rob Nickerson wrote:
>And there seems to be some more
>open data on the way from the OS.
Interesting. A good opportunity but maybe also a threat - I wonder what
quality of map can now be produced from OGL and other open data and how
that compares to OSM. We already have som
>And there seems to be some more
>open data on the way from the OS.
Interesting. A good opportunity but maybe also a threat - I wonder what
quality of map can now be produced from OGL and other open data and how
that compares to OSM. We already have some users that mix and match between
OSM and ot
12 matches
Mail list logo
