On Saturday 22 June 2019, severin.menard via talk wrote: > > At present, this policy concerning directed editions is therefore, > paradoxically, not respected or even totally neglected by the main > organizations it targeted.
This is something by the way i predicted to be the likely outcome of introducing a vague policy very early in the process leading to these guidelines. Responsible mappers would invest a lot of work into following the policy - mostly unnecessarily because since they are responsible they would do the necessary things even without there being a policy. Irresponible people however only do the absolute minimum of the most lenient interpretation of the rules - often garnished with the usual corporate communication redirection and avoidance strategies. I also predicted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Stereo/diary/45132#comment42989 what we now see with the various pro forma attempts at following the guidelines that many of them respond "in kind" with the with the same non-commital vagueness as the policy. Regarding evaluation of the guidelines - although it would certainly be good if there was a critical evaluation i have very little hope that there will be such in the near future. It is not that during the past half year there have been significant developments as a result of the policy that were not predictable and argued to be the likely outcome with clear reasoning in advance. My own conclusion meanwhile is that if there is to be any meaningful regulation of organized mapping activities it has to come from the local communities. This is particularly important for still small communities just starting off to happen before well organized corporate interests start their coordinated invasion leaving nothing but a data wasteland for locals to deal with after the invadors have left. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
