[Osmf-talk] API up after maint. was: Two day of down server is not possible !!!!

Andy Robinson (blackadder) blackadderajr at googlemail.com
Mon Aug 24 08:33:51 UTC 2009


Andrew Turner wrote:
>Sent: 23 August 2009 10:45 PM
>To: Frederik Ramm
>Cc: osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [Osmf-talk] API up after maint. was: Two day of down server is
>not possible !!!!
>
>On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Frederik Ramm<frederik at remote.org> wrote:
>> We could work on educating the public so that the expectation is removed,
>> rather than do what the mainstream expects from us.
>>
>> I'm not totally against what you're suggesting but I sense some "slippery
>> slope" here; maybe it is time to get the message across more clearly that
>we
>> are not in anyway a Google Maps replacement and if people expect this
>from
>> us they should change their expectations. (Because they'll be "expecting"
>> routing, and aerial imagery, and "MyMap" features, and all that in no
>time
>> if we don't set the record straight.)
>
>Any project has a difficult transition moving from a hacking concept
>into a widely used and publicly visible project. If there is actually
>going to be perceived stability and maturity, then yes, OSM will have
>to act in a way that the public expects it to.
>
>This doesn't have to mean a full-service LBS site. Yet multinational
>organizations, governments, media outlets, companies, and individuals
>are all being made aware of what OpenStreetMap is.
>
>So at the very least, static information about the project, the basic
>utility should not disappear for days at a time.

Static information should have been available from the wiki throughout. A
link was provided to it on the static www page that replaced the map viewer.

>
>Anything less relegates the project to be seen as overly geeky,
>immature, and uninteresting. From my perspective, this is not where
>the project wants to be going. We constantly push how it is the more
>open alternative to Google MapMaker, or other data repositories. That
>can't be an actual comparison until we recognize that the basic
>aspects of OSM need to stay available.
>
>And Consider how much discussion there was at SOTM on the low
>usability of the front page. It matters a lot to the project!
>
>So lets separate and identify what are key characteristics of
>OpenstreetMap.org that be available all the time, and what pieces of
>the API, tools, that should be able to be taken offline.

I think we know what these are. That's not the issue. What's at issue is
whether we as a project have the resources of money, hardware and individual
time to administer a guaranteed service. I would argue that currently we
don't and nor do I believe it would be easy to achieve without significant
outside backing. I'm very happy to have this debate, but all should respect
that if it was easy to do we would have done it already.

Cheers

Andy






More information about the osmf-talk mailing list