[OSM-talk] Prolification of the amenity tag

[Nick Whitelegg]

>While I agree on gpx uploads of flightpaths being withheld from OSM I do
>that only because it confuses. However with respect to other geo data 
that
>represents physical features (and the wifi access point hardware is a
>physical feature) then why do we care what type of geo data the database
>holds. I'm concerned that we are not thinking outside the box if we set
>restrictions based on traditional mapping. If my kids want to produce a 
map
>of all the bubble gum machines in the area why would I not want to let 
them
>(tooth decay permitting!), they would be producing an innovative map and 
one
>which has value to a certain group of society. It was the potential for 
this
>innovation in mapping that drew me to OSM in the first place.

It's a valid point but I think that things like bubble-gum machines, or 
other custom data, would be best served in a mash-up. If someone wanted to 
do an OSM-based mashup of bubble-gum machines, it would be quite easy to 
develop (e.g. combine the OSM map as a base layer and overlay markers of 
bubblegum machines as in your typical Google mashup). 

Storing custom data in OSM itself necessitates rendering extra maps, and 
storage of extra tiles... something requiring much more overhead than a 
simple mashup. If each type of "special interest" data required its own 
renderer, the number of renderers, and the amont of storage required, 
would quickly escalate.

Nick