[Osmf-talk] DWG survey on organized editing

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Tue Oct 3 13:53:15 UTC 2017


2017-10-03 15:29 GMT+02:00 Joseph Reeves <iknowjoseph at gmail.com>:

>
> The choices are effectively presented as "no policy" or "a policy to
> curtail organised editing". There is no option to propose a policy that
> encourages and enables organised mapping.
>


I don't read the survey as promoting "curtailing" of organized editing, I
read a strong wish for transparency. Organized editors will potentially be
asked to say who is editing, will be asked to publish their instructions,
will have to say who they are, and possibly what the purpose/field of their
editing is, and how performance of their paid mappers is measured (by time,
by task, etc.). These are all very valid questions to ask IMHO, because it
is obvious that people mapping for fun and passion have a different
motivation then people mapping for income, which can easily result in very
different map quality. The danger of getting "paid map edits" in the
quality of "paid facebook likes" is real.



>
> I tried to hint in my earlier email that organised mapping is at the core
> of OSM, and has been for a very long time. Without organised mapping, would
> we have the Isle of Wight? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Isle_
> of_Wight_workshop_2006
>


yes, mapping parties have been a very important part of OSM promotion in
the beginning, and organized mapping still can be a good method to grow the
number of passionate mappers. Paid mapping less so, I fear.

Cheers,
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20171003/6c1baa03/attachment.html>


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list