On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Ian Dees <ian.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Apollinaris Schoell > <ascho...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >> the way osm works is so different that this doesn't make much sense. a DB >> where anyone at any time can modify, delete data will require constant >> tracking for which they will definitely need their own db. So why even >> bother with osm at all. using the osm toolchain is an option which can make >> sense. then all kinds of extensions like limited access for can be >> implemented. > > > Part of the point I was trying to make was that if our response to requests > like this is always something along the lines of "the way OSM works is > different so it doesn't make much sense", then maybe we're doing something > wrong. Who will use our data (beyond plopping OpenLayers down and using OSM > tiles) if there are no tools to allow it to work with outside entities? > the whole point of starting osm was to do things different. to allow editing for non GIS folks, make new things possible. If someone needs traditional GIS then use traditional GIS. They want shape import and shape export. Any GIS system does this out of the box. if osm provides more or better data there will be users for it. users will combine public data from other sources and osm data. I see absolute no reason to dump all public data to osm just because it exists, maintain an external version control and do a conversion back to traditional GIS. as soon as data is exported from osm it is tainted with the license and will never be of much us for such projects.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
