[Tagging] [Wiki Talk] Why OSM and not another collaborative mapping service?

[Volker Schmidt]

I would remove such a page from the wiki.

It is more suitable as a publicity pamphlet.
But even in that case it needs some more structuring. The individual pros
and cons have to be juxtaposed. The summary statements are not correct in
all aspects and therefore open to criticism.

On 7 May 2015 at 06:35, Ineiev <ineiev at gnu.org> wrote:

> On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 08:29:48PM -0600, Mike Thompson wrote:
> > To the extent possible I think we should focus on the positive and avoid
> > negative statements about other projects,
>
> Why not, if they are true?
>
> > or over generalizations about
> > those projects.  For example "Your mapping service is a closed system" is
> > both negative and a generalization.  There may be some other mapping
> system
> > service that is also open like OSM that the reader is part of. Perhaps
> just
> > title that box "Closed Mapping Systems"
>
> Of course there may be, but can you list any other projects aiming
> to make free maps? on the other hand, wiki could enumerate particular
> well-known services producing nonfree maps.
>
> > re:
> > "There multiple collaborative mapping services. Each of them is a direct
> > rival to OpenStreetMap in terms of competing for contributors and map
> > editing contributions. OpenStreetMap is better than any other competitor
> > for one simple and very fundamental reason"
> > This is not necessarily true.  For example, a project may capture data
> that
> > OSM is not interested in, and therefore it is not a direct rival.
>
> Again, it _may_; are there any counterexamples?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150507/212ed709/attachment.html>