[Osmf-talk] wish list to osmf board

[Joseph Reeves]

Hi Martin,

My email is perhaps a bit clunky because when you say "people are choosing
OSM", I don't know if "people" are map providers (Mapbox, etc), map
consuming service providers (Etsy, LA Times, etc), or end user consumers.
So please bear with me:

I would argue that many consumers are accessing OSM via one of the
professional geodata providers: These providers are providing,
professionally, OpenStreetMap data.

In my experience, as a consumer, I'd say that less organisations or
businesses are choosing the amateur provided data / tiles / services. As
such, the OSM data that makes it to me, the end-user, is most likely to
have come via a professional third party. But I'm a bad example because I
can spot OSM data when I see it in use. In instances like this I think of
people such as my parents: They use services that use OSM data, but they
have no knowledge or interest in that fact; the services they use aren't
osm.org slippy maps.

I don't believe there will be a breakdown, there just won't be the
realisation of potential. I'm hoping the future Board, and any others
beyond that, will release the potential of OSM in ways that we haven't even
started to dream about yet.

Cheers, Joseph



On 5 December 2017 at 13:23, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 2017-12-05 14:12 GMT+01:00, Joseph Reeves <iknowjoseph at gmail.com>:
> >> once a group takes on responsibility for providing reliable services at
> a
> >> global scale,
> >> with industries of small, medium, and global businesses depending on the
> >> underlying infrastructure and millions of contributors, amateur
> >> structures
> >> break down.
> >
> >
> > This is something I agree with, although I wouldn't have been able to
> > make the points in the two emails as eloquently myself.
>
>
> If this were true, why are people choosing OSM and not one of the
> professional geodata providers? OSM was founded in 2004 and has since
> been managed by amateurs, why is it still operating and not "broken
> down"? Or is it broken down, and I just don't see it? Or is the
> breakdown imminent?
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20171205/bcc3a6a3/attachment.html>