<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Luis,<br>
<br>
Thank you very much for your thoughtful comments, I hope you don't
mind that I've referenced the mail link on the page for resource
reading!<br>
<br>
<br>
On 30/04/2014 00:10, Luis Villa wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAM2wSz5f2_Ndbjx2Z5jKfDPvQHxTWi8bjUSpLvUYeGPOdd39ng@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">I think it is pretty clear that this rule
is only for OSM/ODBL, but it wouldn't hurt to make that more
explicit. (It *has* to be only about OSM, because you can't
judge whether something is substantial without knowing about the
nature of the database (quantitative) and how the data was
obtained (qualitative).)<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
Good point and done on the general Community Guideline page.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAM2wSz5f2_Ndbjx2Z5jKfDPvQHxTWi8bjUSpLvUYeGPOdd39ng@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_quote">Few other comments:<br>
<ul>
<li>It might be helpful to link to <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_features">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_features</a>
when talking about Features, assuming those are the same
concept, which I admit I'm still not 100% sure about?</li>
<li>It might be helpful to explain better why the page is
focused on insubstantial rather than substantial. <br>
</li>
<li>The village/town distinction doesn't seem very helpful to
me. If the goal really is to push out commercial projects,
very few commercial projects are going to be viable at the
town level - the vast majority will be national level, with
a few exceptions for London/Paris/NY-level cities. So saying
"you can use towns" would still block out most commercial
use while perhaps allowing some small governments to do
useful things. But I may be misunderstanding the goal here?<br>
</li>
<li>I find "This definition aims to:...Build a case for the
"qualitative" interpretation of Substantial" to be slightly
confusing - I <i>think</i> that what is meant is something
like "This guideline attempts to clarify what uses would
constitute a substantial qualitative use of OSM data"
(perhaps implying that many important uses are not going to
be quantitatively substantial?), but I'm really not sure. I
would clarify or remove that.<br>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
</blockquote>
I've done some rewording to the summary which I hope addresses
these. I've not added a link to the map features page, they are not
(really) the same concept. A "Feature" is how an ordinary map
viewing individual would see things: a single road (even if broken
into different segments for speed limits), a lake, a pub (even if
tagged with multitudinous detail on the beer and ATM machines). A
general note to all: these guidelines are directed at folks who are
not familiar with OSM, so need to worded accordingly using simple,
hopeful translatable, wording and sentences.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAM2wSz5f2_Ndbjx2Z5jKfDPvQHxTWi8bjUSpLvUYeGPOdd39ng@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<ul>
<li>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
Hope this is helpful-</blockquote>
<br>
Indeed!<br>
<br>
Mike<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>