[OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Dave F.
davefox at madasafish.com
Wed Feb 3 15:22:10 GMT 2010
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I don't think that the line is between "hobby" and "professional".
>
> OSM with their volunteers does one kind of mapping, and TeleAtlas with
> their vans does another kind of mapping. Each has its own distinctive
> advantages. There are professional users wo spend money on OSM data when
> they *already have* TeleAtlas data.
>
> The commercial maps have fixed tagging schemes, minimum quality
> standards and only accept trained personnel as mappers. They have long
> turnaround times and cost a lot of money to maintain. At OSM we have no
> fixed tagging schema, *no minimum quality standards*
& you see that as a positive? Did you mean to write it that way?
> and anyone can map.
> We have super fast turnaround times and cost nothing to maintain.
> Different approaches - different results. Not worse or better; different.
>
> I don't see how you could have the advantages without the disadvantages.
> Add a fixed tagging scheme and peer review to OSM and you get more
> quality but less data and longer turnaround times; before long you are
> TeleAtlas v2.0 and have to charge for maps to pay your mappers because
> nobody does it for fun any more.
>
> So, yes, in my eyes the approach is really "take it or leave it", and if
> someone decides he'd rather use TeleAtlas or Navteq then by all means,
> let him do it. I don't know why Dave F finds this "VERY disillusioning";
> what was his illusion then?
A regular here (Foundation member?) said that OSM would perceived to be
a success when someone like Google used OSM data.
I agree with that when meaning Google's wide scope of deployment.
I wouldn't be disappointed if a map creator criticized OSM out of hand
because it's free & created by the public & therefore must be poor.
They could always be talked around, but the examples given here are of
organizations who have spent a lot of time, effort & money trying to
integrate OSM into their systems. For them to conclude that OSM isn't
good enough is disillusioning.
> For OSM to rule the world? I think the world
> is much better of with a few map datasets following different approaches
> that with a "one size fits all"
But the routing/tagging of OSM doesn't fit anything at the moment.
Even the maps produced now with OSM data are expected to be accepted
with the OSM foibles built in.
--------------------------------
In some following posts commercial ventures have been mentioned. I see
this as an irrelevance.
Whether the map use is to make money or not , if these ventures aren't
taking the data because it's unusable then OSM has to be considered to
be failing. Again, disillusioning.
Cheers
Dave F.
More information about the talk
mailing list