[talk-au] Going separate ways
richard at systemeD.net
Sun Jul 10 23:16:54 BST 2011
John Smith wrote:
> On 11 July 2011 07:54, Richard Fairhurst<richard at systemed.net> wrote:
>> Indeed, I was concentrating on the big guys. Albania isn't a big guy. Not
>> sure what your point is about imports but neither GB nor Germany have
>> particularly significant numbers of imports - the only major import we've
>> ever had in Britain is a few counties' worth of bus-stops!
> It was my understanding people were importing OS data into GB?
Not importing as such, no. Tracing, generally, which means there aren't
any single big import accounts. The UK is by and large sufficiently
well-mapped that imports of roads are impractical: you'd have to do so
much correlation with existing data that it's easier to work manually
from the off. A few people have played around with small-scale imports
of streams/rivers but it's pretty piecemeal - I've not seen a single
import in the areas where I map, other than the NaPTAN bus stops.
>> No matter what point I might make, you're going to read the From: line, see
>> that "it's from one of the ODbL guys", and argue against it. And yes, I'm
>> sure some of us are guilty of that too.
> This is one of the points most people have continued to miss time and
> time again no matter how often I've said it, it's the methods being
> employed to try and get people to change is what I hate the most,
> lying by omission is very common, people aren't being given all the
> pertinent facts on the matter to make an actual judgment.
> I've spoken to one person since they've agreed and gave some of the
> cons and they were upset that they weren't informed better about the
> situation, they felt some what cheated how they were corralled into
> accepting, others have made similar comments in the last few days
> about their own experiences.
Ok. That's your opinion, and you are of course perfectly entitled to it;
others will have a different opinion and will argue vehemently that
they're not lying by omission; and so on.
But do you not see that this isn't getting us anywhere, but merely
poisoning the well?
If FOSM succeeds then it won't be by denigrating OSM. Likewise, OSM
won't succeed by pretending FOSM doesn't exist.
I seriously think that the particular circumstances of Australia mean
that you have a chance to make a CC fork _the_ dominant open map of the
continent, if it's done right. But as several people (with no particular
affiliation to either side of the argument) have posted, the endless
arguing is just putting people off mapping, full stop. FOSM's prospects
- and those of OSM, CommonMap and any other projects - are not best
served by these arguments. For every one mapper attracted because you
convince them OSM "cheated" them, five are put off because of the
acrimony. (And, of course, the arguing takes up your and my and others'
time that would be better spent on coding, evangelising and mapping!)
Can we not - both sides - agree to work on building up our own projects,
and making them as attractive as possible to users old and new, rather
than knocking the other one?
More information about the Talk-au