[OSM-talk] "How We Map"

Jo Walsh metazool at fastmail.net
Fri Feb 13 04:44:15 UTC 2015


> > OpenStreetMap values community cohesion over data perfection.
> 
> Could both terms be more elaborated on?
> Does "data perfection" in practice mean "adding true but not really
> useful things, often in not-well-thought-out way"?
> Because otherwise, we should strive to be perfect.

Ah, this is exactly where i start whipping out classic references to
Jorge Luis Borges.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Exactitude_in_Science
"In that Empire, the Art of Cartography attained such Perfection that
the map of a single Province occupied the entirety of a City, and the
map of the Empire, the entirety of a Province. In time, those
Unconscionable Maps no longer satisfied, and the Cartographers Guilds
struck a Map of the Empire whose size was that of the Empire, and which
coincided point for point with it. The following Generations, who were
not so fond of the Study of Cartography as their Forebears had been, saw
that that vast map was Useless, and not without some Pitilessness was
it, that they delivered it up to the Inclemencies of Sun and Winters."

The wording here was an attempt not to set OSM up for a cultural fall by
saying anything along the lines of "data quality is not as important to
us as successful community". Suggestions for easier wording of this
statement, on the Talk page for the draft, would be appreciated. I see
this point has already been raised there:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:How_We_Map#Community_cohesion



More information about the talk mailing list