[Osmf-talk] osmf-talk Digest, Vol 41, Issue 5
shfeldman at gmail.com
Mon Oct 1 14:59:00 UTC 2012
Mikel (and others)
I think this conversation prompts the question of whether OSM/OSMF (I deliberately merge the two) is focussed on it's members who create maps or also has concerns for the end users (individuals, businesses and governments) of those maps and to increase usage to prompt even more contributions.
Up to now there is no "authorised" voice of OSM which can respond to questions from potential users or steer them to OSM contributors/businesses who could assist them to understand and use the data. Some people think this is fine and that large companies and governments will work it out if they are sufficiently interested, maybe they will but I doubt it (particular if there is Fear Uncertainty & Doubt out there about OSM). In a small way OSM-GB has picked up the baton to promote OSM within UK public sector and we have had some encouraging responses. I would support a more coordinated approach to our relationships with the people and organisations who use or are interested in using OSM.
On 1 Oct 2012, at 12:47, osmf-talk-request at openstreetmap.org wrote:
> Send osmf-talk mailing list submissions to
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> osmf-talk-request at openstreetmap.org
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> osmf-talk-owner at openstreetmap.org
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of osmf-talk digest..."
> Today's Topics:
> 1. What is the OSMF? (Mikel Maron)
> 2. Re: a receding opportunity (Derick Rethans)
> 3. Re: What is the OSMF? (Simon Poole)
> 4. Re: What is the OSMF? (Daniel Kastl)
> From: Mikel Maron <mikel_maron at yahoo.com>
> Date: 1 October 2012 12:08:26 GMT+01:00
> To: "osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org" <osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: [Osmf-talk] What is the OSMF?
> Reply-To: Mikel Maron <mikel_maron at yahoo.com>
> Thinking about this more broadly, there are clearly two main positions about the role of OSMF, the laissez-faire and the proactive. There's definitely a more sensible reality in between, but the discussion of anything in particular polarizes the outlooks.
> I'd really like to know what we really think. But we have no way of understanding our own views on this systematically. No way to survey membership, or an agreed strategy. It would be great to have these processes.
> But perhaps we should just accept the OSMF is what it is. Minimal organization to legally and technically hold OSM resources.
> And start another organization, with a real mandate to promote OSM. Maybe one among businesses, another governments. Just a thought.
> * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the osmf-talk