[OSM-talk] Policy in mapping military installations

ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.gremmen at cetest.nl
Fri Aug 24 09:06:35 BST 2012

Then we should let it alone and bow for the
international "common denominator" of forbidden
subjects and stop mapping

fugitive camps
military installations
war monuments
coffee shops 
governmental buildings

or whatever any country will put on the list
of forbidden to map ???

Isn't there a need for a official OSMF view
on these matters ?

On the topic of the Israeli airport:

Is hiding the airport not an invitation 
to attack a civil airport instead?
Or a bus stop? Or a shopping mall?
And is that why military airports must be hidden?
Or should we hide all potential terrorist attack targets?

Where does this end ?

And to Pieren:

"create huge difficulties for the local community"

is that to OSM as a "open"  community acceptable as a reason "to unmap" subjects ?


-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Pieren [mailto:pieren3 at gmail.com] 
Verzonden: Friday, August 24, 2012 9:39 AM
Aan: OSM
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Policy in mapping military installations

On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Michael Krämer <ohrosm at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think local law might apply even if you're somewhere else.

Ergh, that's an interresting new concept. My friends tell me the same when they smoke joints : it's legal in Netherland ;-)

> I'm not a lawyer
I confirm.

Btw, I remember the same issue raised in Russia few months ago. I don't know what is the consensus there. The main issue with putting something locally forbiden in OSM is that you create huge difficulties for the local community: they cannot use anymore global services provided remotely like map tiles or planet extracts. Basically, you will enforce them to do everything locally (filtered) when they don't have necessarily the resources for that.


talk mailing list
talk at openstreetmap.org

More information about the talk mailing list