Þann 28.5.2015 19:43, skrifaði Frederik Ramm:
Hi,
On 05/28/2015 09:19 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
What I would not support in OSM, and like to outsource to Wikidata or
other, is if speakers of these 20 languages were to start assigning name
tags in their language to thousands of places in, say, the UK.
*Especially* if their reasoning was that this makes it nicer for them to
run a tank through these places in their own-language war simulation
with their buddies.
Disclaimer, I own some of the tanks that might run through some of the
places. As any consumer I've been critical of their work and loved and
hated it with equal passion, depending on what they did in the last
patch release.
Having said that the one nice thing about open projects is the added
value people put into them and get out of them for a myriad of reasons.
A gaming company adding information (yes it is information) to the map
can be beneficial to another consumer, for example a Russian style
TripAdvisor or something completely different.
Is a gaming company not worthy of adding information? Again a matter of
where do you draw the line. They are not inventing new towns or places,
they are not creating battlefields. Do we now require each contributor
to disclose the reason for why they are adding information to the map?
This revert and discussions about it should not become too specific to
the contributor whose work was reverted. These edits and reverts point
at a vital issue as we try to grow the map in areas where hundreds of
languages suddenly eye the ability to get maps in their own languages
using the OSM data and tools that exist for it. I propose the OSMF
tackle these two questions, who should be able to add information to the
map and what do we do about languages and where are the limits.
--Jói / Stalfur
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
