[OSM-talk] Playing tagging democracy: standard building process and tag unifying towards it
davefox at madasafish.com
Wed Feb 3 17:12:25 GMT 2010
Emilie Laffray wrote:
> On 3 February 2010 15:38, Dave F. <davefox at madasafish.com
> <mailto:davefox at madasafish.com>> wrote:
> John Smith wrote:
> > No but it's a carrot, most people most of the time are only going to
> > map what they can see turn up on mapnik.
> This point is correct, & to bring the thread back to on topic, OSM is
> best promoted, not by word of mouth as some have said, but by
> visualization & mouth.
> People will tell their friends about OSM when they see a working
> map not
> when present with a long list of XML data.
> This won't happen if none of the map creators are taking the data
> because they think it's crap.
> I kind of disagree with you on that one. People will use data because
> it is there. I know several people in commercial environment who don't
> care that much about how the map is looking. They care about what the
> database is full of, like administrative boundaries, town location,
> POI etc....
And according to the examples given the (half full) database is believed
to be full of gobbledygook. Because of that the data won't be used. Or
more accurately isn't being used.
> You are just taking one point of view, but yours is not unique.
Why do people repeatedly attempt to use this inane comment to appear
superior in their argument?
Of course it's one point of view! Of course it's not unique!
> I am using the data for commercial use, and I couldn't care less about
> a map rendering. I can recognize the fact that the data is much richer
> even if I don't see a point being rendered. It all depends on what you
> are trying to do with the data. If you want beautiful map, then have a
> look at some of the rendering that companies like Cloudmade have. They
> provide some very nice map. I have been promoting OSM not by its map
> *(even though showing the map help)*
That's /my /point so I'm unsure why you're disagreeing with me.
> but for its data.
> Emilie Laffray
More information about the talk