[OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Paul Johnson]

It actually appears they are claiming to do so (based on Mapbox
attribution), though I question how recent their snapshot is or how they're
coming to some of the conclusions they are in the Tulsa area,
http://mapq.st/1fX5bwr .  Some major glaring inconsistencies are standing
out, as in this is either almost straight raw TIGER data or Mapbox is
rendering TomTom's map and attributing it to OpenStreetMap.  Lack of
construction zones along I 244 east of downtown, the south and east legs of
the downtown dispersal loop being labelled as I 444 (an unsigned_ref=*
value in OSM tagging), and the L. L. Tisdale Parkway being named Osage
Expressway (a highway that was only ever named as such on planning
documents in the 1960s and 1970s, ultimately opening in the mid to late
1980s under the name present in OSM; if it's even mentioned in the OSM
data, it'd be under old_name=* as baby-boomers who grew up here grew up
having it hyped as "coming soon" for half their life).

I'd love to see if we could get someone from Mapbox to pipe up on this,
since it definitely appears similar to some of their styles, so they're
likely providing the rendering.  I suspect the rather strange and prevalent
presence of names 40-years-out-of-date on OklaDOT highways, and oddly
inconsistent-even-with-TIGER presence or absence of a number of streets and
alleys is a pretty deliberate easter egg of Google and NAVTEQ (and
annoyingly prevalent in this region).  No idea what data they are using to
generate tiles, but despite the attribution, it's very plainly *NOT* OSM.


On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Joseph Reeves <iknowjoseph at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Ah, ok, I hadn't checked the US, but the other places I'd looked at used
> OSM. The site seems to have fallen over now, however.
>
>
>
> On 15 September 2015 at 17:19, Ian Dees <ian.dees at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> http://beta.mapquest.com/ does not use OSM data in the US, at least.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Joseph Reeves <iknowjoseph at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> http://hello.mapquest.com/ ?
>>>
>>> On 14 September 2015 at 19:25, Daniel Koć <daniel at koć.pl> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I had an idea to add UMap functionality to OSM.org website and I
>>>> discovered Mateusz Konieczny lately wanted to add a dynamic layer with
>>>> opening hours (and some more data), which I think would be also useful for
>>>> users:
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1038
>>>> https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1056
>>>>
>>>> However the response we got is that all the features on our website are
>>>> there because they help mappers. While I'm sure overlay showing opening
>>>> hours falls into this category easily, map personalization is primary a
>>>> feature for end users (of course mappers may use it too, but it may not
>>>> have direct impact on OSM data).
>>>>
>>>> This made me wonder if we care only for having portal for mappers and
>>>> don't like to have some useful features just because they are addressed
>>>> rather for data consumers? In most of the cases this is not the
>>>> contradiction, but why should we "reject" end users' needs?
>>>>
>>>> OSM-carto, which is what I'm more familiar with, tries to reach both
>>>> these groups:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/CARTOGRAPHY.md#purposes
>>>
>>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20150915/d20332b9/attachment.html>