[Talk-GB] Separation of sources

Andy Allan gravitystorm at gmail.com
Tue Apr 6 09:43:46 BST 2010

On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)
<ajrlists at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Martin - CycleStreets wrote:
>>Sent: 06 April 2010 1:36 AM
>>To: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org
>>Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Separation of sources
>>If I may offer the view of a user of OSM data rather than a creator.
>>Patchy areas of OSM cause real difficulties for CycleStreets, not only in
>>reputational terms but in terms of debugging. Places where the basic road
>>pattern is absent undermine our ability to demonstrate that a UK-wide
>>system using open data works everywhere - nor can we even promote the
>>system effectively because of this. We get plenty of bug reports that
>>clearly arise simply as a result of missing basic road data, never mind the
>>subtleties of additional cycle infrastructure (which in other areas of OSM,
>>are stunningly good).
> Are you feeding this information back to OSM contributors? If we knew where
> bugs were being created then some of the community might be happy about
> tackling the worst spots to improve the data.

Cyclestreets do a great job of improving the OSM data based on their
feedback - not only the main cyclestreets developers but a few other
well-known OSM contributors (i.e. Shaun) help out too.


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list