[Talk-GB] [UK Chapter] Definition of OSM.

Amaroussi (OpenStreetMap) mapper at minoa.li
Sun Mar 20 17:55:45 UTC 2016


Dang, wrong sender email and wrong destination email again!

Maybe try:

“A free map service where users don’t need to pay elephant-sized fees to reuse the data.”

or

“Maps without borders, literally.” 

—Amaroussi

> On 20 Mar 2016, at 17:36, Gregory <nomoregrapes at googlemail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Included in the meeting on Thursday[1] was discussion on the definition of "OpenStreetMap" in the AoA.
> 
> For me, I think it is important that OSM is not controlled by a single entity, and the ability to fork and/or replicate it is essential. Some folk may feel more strong about me. I am actually happy with the OSMF protecting/guarding the data and infrastructure at the moment. It may not ever happen or be needed, but I think it's good to keep possible if two foundations existed. Technology is possible, and will get better with the ability of duplicate databases that communicate to keep up-to-date without you noticing. This already happens within OSMF having two DB servers, and I think France had a DB server with a read/write API.
> 
> Anyway, I also understand a clear/simple definition is needed.
> 
> Currently...
> "Open Data and services managed by the OpenStreetMap Foundation Ltd."
> 
> Able to make it less exclusive?, so we're not fixed to the OSMF.
> "An open dataset and connected services which are available from OpenStreetMap Foundation Ltd, and other/mirror providers."
> 
> Possible?
> "A free geographic database created by a number of people, along with initiatives and services to promote it's maintenance"
> 
> Just thought, how often do the draft AoAs mention "OpenStreetMap"?
> Answer: 9 times
> References: 5.1 (to OSM community), 5.2 & 5.3 (to OSM data), 6.6(actually a reference to OSMF), the CIC name(3 times), and the definition is 2 occurrences.
> 
> We talked about OSM community needing it's own definition.
> I still defend that the data on OSMF's servers is only one copy of it, it just happens that at the moment that copy gets accepted as the most recent. However, it seems defining the community is more important than defining OSM itself. :)
> 
> 
> From a 100-year-old terrace house,
> Gregory.
> 
> [1] Notes of our meeting https://hackpad.com/2016-03-17-OSM-GB-Meeting-UGWMWunxvTb <https://hackpad.com/2016-03-17-OSM-GB-Meeting-UGWMWunxvTb>
> [2] OSMF website has a (non-legal) description http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Main_Page <http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Main_Page>
> 
> P.S. I sent this on Thursday night, just from the wrong e-mail address so it didn't go through.
> 
> -- 
> Gregory
> osm at livingwithdragons.com <mailto:osm at livingwithdragons.com>
> http://www.livingwithdragons.com <http://www.livingwithdragons.com/>_______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20160320/b3dfbfcb/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list