Afraid I'm struggling with all this. <br><br>Thanks to Mikel's hard work we are given the Yahoo! imagery to use though a particular API with no restrictions at all on the mapping data we produce. That strikes me as a *good thing*. The key point is there is no restrictions on the data we produce. Thats what's important to OSM.
<br><br>Sure, we've hit an edge case with trying to extend how the API is used, but thats an issue that needs working out. Steve/Mikel have pointed out pretty clearly that the applet & potlach are perfectly good interfaces to access the imagery & now there is discussion on other ways to make it acceptable. Great!
<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">I'm sure people want improvements to the applet, and are keen to get potlach working, so why not take advantage of what we have and use them to the full. Dev'ers push on the applet & potlach to make them better. Having a browser embedded editor alone will bring in a much larger user base of people to add/edit data from the avaliable imagery/tracklogs & just updates.
<br><br>We all win. We get imagery AND more users editing with better tools to boot!<br><br>Cheers .Baz<br><br>On 3/29/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Frederik Ramm</b> <<a href="mailto:email@example.com">firstname.lastname@example.org
</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Hi Steve,<br><br>> What makes you think yahoo care about any of this? Their hands are tied
<br>> by the agreement(s) made with their imagery providers. It's not like<br>> Yahoo own this stuff and can do what they like.<br><br>Then replace "Yahoo" by "the guys owning the licenses". It doesn't make
<br>a difference for my argument.<br><br>> Really, your time is much better spent coding, suggesting a better way,<br>> getting better imagery...<br><br>I think you misunderstood me here. What I was saying that there is a
<br>possibility that using *no* hi-res imagery at all might in fact be<br>*better* than using the Yahoo imagery in the current situation because<br>of the side effects.<br><br>I was not saying "please guys, shop around for something better as I am
<br>too lazy myself". It is not as if Yahoo imagery has set a mark that we<br>cannot fall behind; we *have* the option of deciding not to use Yahoo<br>imagery even if we do not have something better.<br><br>You are suggesting that if we were to drop Yahoo we'd need a replace-
<br>ment. This is not the case.<br><br>And please don't give me that "we do all the work and you're just<br>talking" line. I am quite tired of hearing it over and over here on the<br>list. I am spending a lot of time with OSM and I am naturally concerned
<br>about the direction we're going in. And this direction is not decided by<br>three or four people but by us contributors together, and one possible<br>way to form community opinions and decisions is discussing concerns on
<br>the list.<br><br>Bye<br>Frederik<br><br>--<br>Frederik Ramm ## eMail <a href="mailto:email@example.com">firstname.lastname@example.org</a> ## N49°00.09' E008°23.33'<br><br>_______________________________________________
<br>talk mailing list<br><a href="mailto:email@example.com">firstname.lastname@example.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
</a><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Live as if you were to die tomorrow. Learn as if you were to live forever. - Gandhi.