[Talk-GB] Fwd: Re: Open data (Was: Parliamentary debate mentions OSM)

Rob Nickerson rob.j.nickerson at gmail.com
Tue Mar 29 10:05:37 UTC 2016


Yeah I think that is a good benefit and will be an element end users
consider. Mixing data by country is however easy to do from an OSM licence
point of view. For example telenav use (or at least did use) OSM in the USA
but something else in other countries quite easily for many months.

Thus, although this helps, it doesn't "solve" everything.

Rob
On 29 Mar 2016 10:58 p.m., "Marc Gemis" <marc.gemis at gmail.com> wrote:

> Isn't one of the main benefits to have the data for the whole world in
> 1 format ? Compare that to having to download open data files from
> government sites from all over the world from sites in different
> languages in different formats and having to combine those ...
>
> m
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Rob Nickerson
> <rob.j.nickerson at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Oh come on I'm not here to bash the history of OSM. I think what we have
> > done is incredible and I genuinely believe that the presence of OSM has
> > pushed both the government (the OS) and Google to where we are now -
> strong
> > competition and more open data.
> >
> > We have open data now - great. The question is how do we continue to push
> > the boundaries of the geospatial industry in the UK? Steve has in the
> past
> > said to focus on addresses. Perhaps if we did that then at some tipping
> > point the government will release all addresses as open data - a big
> success
> > and we move on to the next trigger...? But for how long can we continue
> to
> > be a strong trigger unless we can keep up with the status quo? Is it OK
> to
> > leave it to the data users to merge the open data with OSM or is that
> burden
> > too large for them to bother (at which point the pressure of OSM in the
> UK
> > reduces)?
> >
> > The reason I ask is because I don't have the answers. Hoping some of the
> > data users on the list may be able to suggest a point where the burden
> would
> > become too large.
> >
> > Please, don't get defensive as that gets us nowhere. Hopefully this is
> > something we can pick up in the coming year :-)
> >
> > Best,
> > Rob
> >
> >> On 29 Mar 2016 10:29 p.m., "Paul Sladen" <osm at paul.sladen.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >>> Hash: SHA1
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2016, Rob Nickerson wrote:
> >>> > P.P.S. By which I'm asking: do you think that (unless we get loads of
> >>> > new
> >>> > mappers) more availability of open data possess a threat to OSM in
> the
> >>> > UK
> >>>
> >>> A decade ago a person called Steve needed a map and couldn't get oneā€¦
> >>>
> >>> We are here to assemble and curate data for now and the future, not to
> >>> chastise others following that lead and doing the same.
> >>>
> >>>         -Paul
> >>>
> >>> ie. There is no 'threat' from having legitimately-usable open data: it
> >>> is the very premise upon OpenStreetMap was founded.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
> >>>
> >>> iD8DBQFW+kqWc444tukM+iQRAv6JAJ9tkje/oy3kI2dZS33Gc4vaWBTcpgCgxitl
> >>> KdZlblnt33m57hNtNcfe4OQ=
> >>> =hke9
> >>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20160329/08ba5cf1/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list