[Openstreetmap] Re: [Openstreetmap-dev] openstreetmap roadmap?

[Tom Carden]

Ehud Shabtai wrote:
>
> I've been wondering what is the roadmap of openstreetmap. I'm interested 
> in creating some free maps for my country (Israel), but I'm not sure if 
> this project fits my requirements.
>

There is a "Roadmap for Version 1.0" on the wiki...

http://www.openstreetmap.org/wiki/index.php/Roadmap_For_Version_1.0

It should still be fairly up to date - errors and ommissions and suggestions
still welcome on the following pages:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/wiki/index.php/Status
http://www.openstreetmap.org/wiki/index.php/Ideas

Something should only be on the Roadmap if somebody is planning on actually
implementing it Real Soon Now.  (I'll check that in a minute).

> I understand that you are working on a new applet, is there a list of 
> features it will support?
>

Like the current applet, the first release will support the display of gps
tracks, and allow the user to trace those tracks as nodes/line-segments.  In
addition, it will support the deletion of nodes and segments.  It will also
allow the naming of segments.  It will hopefully use the same look and feel
as the static map renderer (ie use a satellite map background).

> My main interest is doing maps for routing which means I need an option to 
> add meta data for each road segment (name, street numbers, connection to 
> other segments, etc').

> The approach I'm thinking of is having a server which will receive GPS 
> tracks,

We have that.

> transfer them to road segments and nodes and merge with current map

Automatically?  How?  For "version 1.0" we're relying on tracing by hand.

> I also think that it is important to use postgis database as there are 
> already many tools which can connect to it and allow viewing (mapserver) 
> or editing (qgis, uDig, etc').

Do they support wiki-like features (change history, versioning, rollback,
etc)?

> How does this fit to openstreetmap?

Very well.  The aims for "version 1.0" are modest, but many of the things
you mention would be ideal for "version 2.0" - especially if you will be in
a position to contribute code.

Regards,

Tom.