[Strategic] 2012

[Mikel Maron]

Hi ... IRC log attached. Will upload to wiki soon, but swamped right now.
 
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron


>________________________________
> From: Dermot McNally <dermotm at gmail.com>
>To: Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> 
>Cc: strategic at openstreetmap.org 
>Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 8:38 AM
>Subject: Re: [Strategic] 2012
> 
>Hi Frederik,
>
>I'll try to address your questions:
>
>On 30 January 2012 08:32, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
>
>>   who was present in Friday's IRC meeting?
>>
>> (Not wanting to nag since I know minutes are a pain, but I would have
>> checked myself on
>> http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes#Strategic_Working_Group
>> if there had been any more recent minutes/logs than 2nd December 2012.)
>
>Firstly on the apparent minutes backlog - what that in fact represents
>is a meeting backlog, as SWG hadn't got back into the habit of meeting
>since the Christmas break. Not ideal, but it's worth being clear that
>there has not been a batch of unminuted meetings.
>
>As to the attendees, I have neither a firm list nor a complete IRC
>transcript. Mikel chaired, but it took him 10 minutes after the usual
>start time to get a reaction from other participants (that was when I
>spotted that there was in fact activity), during which time he had
>begun to compose his Friday email, which he intended to send in lieu
>of the meeting, so that the next meeting could take place in the
>framework of a planned list of topics, seeded by his email and
>enriched by contributions from others.
>
>It may be that Mikel has the IRC transcript and could post it as a
>"best set" of minutes, but in effect, after our late start with a
>small group, we resolved instead to discuss those items that we felt
>should be on agenda for SWG in 2012. I agreed to send my followup mail
>by way of communicating the matters discussed at the meeting.
>
>Participants who were certainly present: Me, Mikel, apmon, TomH.
>Others please shout if I have overlooked you. Mikel, do you have the
>complete transcript? I have only the very tail end which RichardF
>happened still to have in his buffer.
>
>> On 01/30/12 00:55, Dermot McNally wrote:
>>>
>>> Arising once again because of the switch2osm campaign: Confront the
>>> issue of where users wishing to use OSM instead of other providers
>>> should get their services. Base assumption (also for discussion): That
>>> there should be suitable map services for such users, that it should
>>> be a strategic goal to ensure this become so. This is without
>>> prejudice to the question of who should operate the services.
>>
>>
>> I have difficulty in parsing the above.
>>
>> Is there already a definition of what is "suitable", or is defining the
>> "suitability" something that is part of SWG's role? If the latter, is there
>> already an idea of what is "suitable" or is this copletely open?
>
>Completely open, including the definition of suitability. Both this
>list item and switch2osm arise out of the (granted not universal in
>the project) principle that we want end users to use our data instead
>of other map data, among other reasons, because we see that as
>demonstrating relevance in ways that will attract a bigger and more
>useful community.
>
>So in accepting this into the SWG plan for the year, we are resolving
>to consider this issue, with all possible outcomes open, including the
>possibility that we will decide that nothing new needs to be done.
>
>> (Is SWG looking for an one-fits-all definition of "suitable" or is it
>> possible that different tile services are "suitable" for different users?)
>
>Granted it hasn't been discussed yet, just accepted as a topic, but
>I'll peep into my own crystal ball and suggest that not only different
>tile servers will prove important, but also different data extraction
>services, search engines, geocoders, routing engines, JavaScript
>slippy map embedders, whatever. If other map services are providing
>them and end users rely on them, we should be considering whether the
>OSM world does, should or could offer them too.
>
>> Would that then mean that SWG would evaulate whether the services already
>> listed on http://switch2osm.org/providers/ are "suitable", and if it is
>> found they are not, endeavour to create "suitable" services?
>
>I'd be more cautious and go with "cause/encourage to be created". But
>certainly, if a service doesn't exist and we come to the conclusion
>that it ought to, that does identify a vacuum that it becomes our task
>to see filled.
>
>> Does "it should be a strategic goal to ensure this *become* so" mean that an
>> evaluation has already been made and the existing services have been found
>> to be not "suitable"?
>
>No, no evaluation has been made, and this would need to feature in how
>we address the issue. Informally, it does seem like an awful lot of
>users are not finding an OSM solution to their problem in spaces where
>it seems like they could be helped, though.
>
>> Is "the existing services are good enough and the market is going to do the
>> rest" still a possible outcome of the analysis, or have SWG already decided
>> that OSMF needs to either operate their own commercial tileserver or
>> contract someone to do so?
>
>The former is still a possible outcome - albeit, probably with a lot
>more provision of information to end-users, in the spirit of
>switch2osm.
>
>
>Dermot
>
>-- 
>--------------------------------------
>Igaühel on siin oma laul
>ja ma oma ei leiagi üles
>
>_______________________________________________
>Strategic mailing list
>Strategic at openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/strategic
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/strategic/attachments/20120130/1805e8af/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: 2012-01-27.101330-0500EST.txt
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/strategic/attachments/20120130/1805e8af/attachment-0001.txt>