Hi, Dair Grant wrote: > Is the bugs database really so different in character to the map database > though? Provided there was a planet-style dump of the bug database, anyone > wishing to build an external system could easily do so.
As I tried to point out in my other message, if there is to be a central interface then this is not so. We have this situation now - while anyone can set up their own slippy map of course, the normal thing for people to do is to go to openstreetmap.org where their choice of what they can do with the data is limited by what TomH puts on there and what others have coded - a Data layer, the Potlatch editor, maybe the external Cycle map - but we do not have an infrastructure that allows third party apps to "tie in". With the multitude of bug applications that currently exist, no application can do it all, but each has a chance to offer to the user specific functionality that is *not* limited to just finding and flagging the bug, but also means presenting the bug in a specific way or even offer help in fixing it. This is something that must not be lost. Yes, any application can upload their bug via the REST interface, but they can hardly upload an algorithm on how to deal with the bug. So in order not to lose the flexibility of the ecosystem we currently have, we should make an effort to tie in all that coder creativity out there, rather than saying "do it in Rails and check in in to SVN, and I might perhaps run it on the central web site if I like it". That's my whole point. Many many words for a small concept. (Matt I'll try to be on IRC tonight. Quite busy right now.) Bye Frederik _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
