[OSM-talk] Not-properly-Open-but-called-Open

[Richard Fairhurst]

Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Just because user X does something propietary with OSM data doesn't mean
> that he is less of a nice guy. However (on the other hand) just because
> he is a nice guy doesn't mean that something proprietary he produces
> should be treated as if it was part of the family.

But what's "the family"?

People have written open-source OSM apps for closed platforms (Windows, 
OS X) and runtimes (Flash Player and formerly Java). Others spend time 
reverse-engineering closed formats (.img) for closed hardware (Garmin). 
I suspect the site JS has some hacks to make it render properly on (the 
closed-source) Internet Explorer. You could argue, and there are some 
reading this list who do, that these are therefore non-free and 
shouldn't be included in the OSM family.

OSM's raison-d'etre is free geodata. Nothing else. If we start getting 
doctrinal about how we think people should interact with the data, I 
think OSM, as a project, becomes more insular and less viable.

cheers
Richard