[OSM-talk] Why place matters, slides from Vanessa Lawrence talk

[Artem Pavlenko]

On 11 Jan 2008, at 11:21, David Earl wrote:

> On 11/01/2008 00:55, Jon Burgess wrote:
>> On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 00:09 +0000, martin dodge wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Just found an interesting set of slides of a talk by Vanessa  
>>> Lawrence, OS
>>> http://www.w3.org/2007/06/eGov-dc/presentations/ 
>>> VL_why_place_matters.pdf
>>> with some prominent mentions for OSM. I particularly liked slide 46
>>>
>>
>> The map in his screenshot must be from quite some time ago. The same
>> area of central London now has considerably more data
>
> I think that misses the point. There are still many, many other areas
> where there is still just as little data, but that's not the point  
> either.
>
> The key thing is 'how do you know?'. If you look at the current  
> coverage
> of that London area, it probably looks quite convincing now,  
> whereas in
> her slide it was obviously incomplete, yet I bet it isn't (in fact, I
> know it isn't - there are numerous missing streets in the densely  
> mapped
> central London). How would I know this? How do I know whether I can
> trust this map or not? (*)
>
> This was and remains one of my key concerns about OSM as a project.  
> I've
> said before and I'll say again: we need a way of asserting "this  
> area is
> complete" (for one or more definitions of completeness).

I see your concerns. Having some kind of completeness test and be  
able to say : this area is 'complete' would be a strong point.
On the other hand, is Wikipedia complete? I don't think so. Nothing  
is compete:)

>
> Incidentally, this is exacerbated by the lazy rendering rule for  
> Mapnik

What do you mean by 'lazy' rule?  AFAIK, all available hardware is  
working hard day an night :)

> - I was puzzled when someone said to me the other day "why is this
> housing estate not connected to the rest of the road network?". It  
> was;
> but adjacent Mapnik tiles were inconsistent (both laterally and by  
> zoom
> level - and this wasn't a recently mapped area). You may not think  
> this
> matters, but I think this is a public face and it causes further
> confusion and mistrust.

We can certainly improve here. Suggestions ?

Artem

>
> David
>
>
> (* And how would I know how to fill in the gaps if I was there without
> revisiting every already mapped street?).
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk