[Imports-us] OSM US Import Committee

Randal Hale rjhale at northrivergeographic.com
Mon Nov 4 20:11:11 UTC 2013


Actually Carol was at the first Atlanta Meeting also.

Lets do this - I've been thinking (I know - not good). Carol was as 
confused as I was on the intent of the landing page  - then lets get 
through that. I don't know how we're going to collaborately edit it and 
have it make some sense but I see why you're wanting to stick it on the 
OSM US site since it deals with the US OSM imports. It needs to tie in 
somehow to the wiki (which I agree is confusing). I guess we probably 
need to wait for Martijn since we've most likely caused him to go 
running for cover.

Don't get frustrated - that's how it sounds to us (GIS folk) most of the 
time. In general comments get thrown around like "imports are hard" and 
"OSM is different" - I think you likened it to flying a 747 when you 
can't pilot a hang glider (or something). It's a data format that has 
it's quirks much like everything else. The kicker is not destroying data 
that already existed. That and having a useful import (landcover in 
Georgia not being one).

Take the feed back as confusion on our part - we thought we were going 
in Direction A - it seemed to change to Direction B. There's a lot of 
talk that goes on on our side of the fence. I know it may not look like 
it but we want to help.

Anyway - My .02 cents.

Randy






-----------------
Randal Hale, GISP
North River Geographic Systems, Inc
http://www.northrivergeographic.com
423.653.3611 rjhale at northrivergeographic.com
<mailto:rjhale at northrivergeographic.com>
twitter:rjhale
http://about.me/rjhale

On 11/04/2013 02:46 PM, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> Carol,
>
> My issue is this is not "Serge vs Carol" or "Serge vs Randal". In
> fact, I liked Randal for the few hours I met him back in Atlanta so
> many years ago (that doesn't mean I don't like you- I've just never
> met you).
>
> I will tell you that I'm quite frustrated when I read comments like
> this from you, "The fact that you have brought up on many occasions
> that GIS folk couldn't possibly understand how perform high level
> geospatial problem solving is quite frankly more than a little
> insulting." - as I've never said, or implied any such thing.  You
> might as well have said "Oh Serge, he tortures puppies and eats
> babies". It certainly doesn't make me excited to work collaboratively
> with you.
>
>
> What I'm trying to do is limit the scope of the discussion to one
> document because the other documents (the guidelines, the role of the
> other groups, the role of the DWG) are separate. That doesn't mean I
> don't care about them, but I was asked by Martijn (OSM US president)
> to do something and that is what I'm doing for now.
>
> Of course the import guidelines need modification. I agree they need
> radical modification, and I bet if you polled most of the DWG they'd
> say the same thing. But changing that will take more time than "Let's
> throw a web page up talking about this issue directly".
>
> I've been frustrated because I'm looking for feedback on one thing,
> and the response has had a lot of other issues mixed in. It really
> muddies the waters, which is why I've been saying "Let's stick just to
> this, and only this way"- in order to try to get this done so that we
> could move onto other topics. I just want to avoid taking on too much
> at first and never getting it done. We've gone down that road a few
> times, and I'm trying to learn from past mistakes.
>
> - Serge
>
> _______________________________________________
> Imports-us mailing list
> Imports-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports-us




More information about the Imports-us mailing list