[Talk-GB] OSM should not be a database dump.

[Cj Malone]

On Fri, 2023-02-10 at 13:31 +0000, Dave F via Talk-GB wrote:
> This reinforces my argument that OSM should leave this professionally
> maintained (by law?) database as a separate entity & only reference
> back to it.

To play devils advocate, who cares about GB? Asking data consumers to
implement external APIs all over the world isn't viable, and it seeds
power to other projects like Overture that may make this kind of data
available with no friction.

We've added fhrs:id for how long? I don't know of a single OSM project
to pull that data in [1]. Imagine if we only added it and not
addresses, how much worse would OSM data be here?

CJ

[1] Please OsmAnd https://github.com/osmandapp/OsmAnd/issues/9825