so one of the things from recent discussion that concerns me are perceptions out there about projects parallel to OSM that are designed to complement it, specifically OHM. here is an outline of the view from OHM, and i'm interesting in understanding why some treat the whole project so dismissively (note that i'm a little bit of a late comer to OHM, i've been following it with interest since it started but only just recently started contributing directly.)
OHM was created because of the perceived desire to start handling historic spatial data and characterize temporal aspects of it. the whole idea is that we accept that OSM is not a good place for this data, so why not create such a place? it's a real database, using the OSM software stack. it's live, and you can pan around in it and not see much because it's pretty sparse. but you can go see historic building footprints and addresses in lower manhattan right now. in fact, we just set up a list of projects that are going on in OHM to make it easier for folks to see what's up: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Historical_Map/Projects the short summary is 1. it's real and operational 2. there's stuff in it 3. if you know OSM tools, you can join the party 4. we just set up overpass for it, still tweaking it, but overlaying interesting OHM data on OSM basemaps just got a bit easier a number of OHM oriented talk proposals were submitted for SOTM US, and some will probably make the program. i think the long term future of OSM will probably involve more OHM like projects to supplement OSM. my question is how will the core OSM community treat them? right now it seems very mixed. richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us