[OSM-talk] What to call OSM data?

[Colin Smale]

>
> On 26 Nov 2012, at 09:58, Pieren <pieren3 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:34 AM, Kate Chapman <kate at maploser.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So for example crowdsourced infromation, volunteered geographic
>>> information, non-authoritative data, or something else?
>>
>> Crowdsourced non-authoritative geographic data ?
>
> I'm personally not sure I agree with the non-authoritative part.  Half the
> point of OpenStreetMap is that it's made by authorities on the subject of
> their local area.  Of course, I guess that doesn't hold for all editors.

OSM is not authoritative in the sense that it is not the "owner" of data
which has its origins elsewhere. I am speaking from a data architecture
perspective, not about copyright/licensing. We cannot guarantee
completeness/correctness/timeliness. If someone is looking for
"authoritative" data (with guaranteed quality) they must go back to the
source, and not some database which was probably nearly correct at one
time based on best efforts from thousands of volunteers.

The key question is "who decides", e.g. what a new road is to be called or
where a boundary lies. They are the only authoritative source, everything
else is a derivative. If derivative sources are suitably managed, they are
frequently "good enough", but that doesn't make them "authoritative".

Colin