Speaking personally about what large orgs and what they want, I think it's pretty simple. Have a look at commercial data and OSM and do a diff, what are the main things missing? Addressing for geocoding and turn restrictions for routing.
On Nov 26, 2010, at 1:27 AM, Ed Avis wrote: > I think everyone agrees that detailed legal discussion belongs on the legal > list. > > Questions such as how any licence transition should proceed, deletion of > existing > bits of map, and how to organize the voting process are not legal arcana but > questions of project governance, and surely belong on this list. > > I am sorry I asked about what Microsoft and others would like to see from > OSM's > licensing terms. I hoped that some concrete answers would help discussion to > move on from the mostly fixed positions and legal nitpicking we see on the > legal > mailing list (of which I am just as guilty as anyone else). But I guess the > big mapping sites are not willing to make a public statement for fear of being > seen to influence the project. That is a shame, since we are somewhat in the > dark about what the rest of the world thinks. > > -- > Ed Avis <e...@waniasset.com> > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > Steve stevecoast.com _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
