(Changing the subject line)
The map really needs a SPARQL server (easy), and cross-linking to URIs
in dbpedia or geonames (which are themselves alreday cross-linked)
would be a good idea (but more work).
From outside it looks as though the OSM XML format and API are
developing in the
Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
What sort of help do you think OSM will need? Money to run servers if
the load increases? An existing standards org with facilities and
process for the API and the XML format? What was it you had in mind?
Yes, the OSM Foundation is badly in need of extra money (or
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Grant Slater
openstreet...@firefishy.comwrote:
Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
What sort of help do you think OSM will need? Money to run servers if
the load increases? An existing standards org with facilities and
process for the API and the XML format? What was
Ian Dees wrote:
I think it would be very handy to have a couple database experts that
are not attached to OSM and its current setup look at the plans for API
0.6 as a code and design review. I haven't seen much about 0.6 (and I'm
not trying to bash the progress that has been made), but I
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:
Ian Dees wrote:
I think it would be very handy to have a couple database experts that are
not attached to OSM and its current setup look at the plans for API 0.6 as a
code and design review. I haven't seen much about 0.6
Ian Dees wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu
mailto:t...@compton.nu wrote:
Ian Dees wrote:
I think it would be very handy to have a couple database
experts that are not attached to OSM and its current setup
look at the plans
Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
From outside it looks as though the OSM XML format and API are
developing in the OSM community in a reasonable way. What sort of help
do you think OSM will need? Money to run servers if the load increases?
I think that's a current, rather than a future need :-)
An
Yeah, because none of us have any idea what we're doing, we're just a
bunch of clueless fuckwits that are intent on buggering up
everything.
I think this was a little harsh. When i'm working on a project, I
welcome any input I can get. It doesn't mean I stop doing what i'm
doing. It never hurts
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 5:58 PM, Grant Slater
openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote:
Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
What sort of help do you think OSM will need? Money to run servers if
the load increases? An existing standards org with facilities and
process for the API and the XML format? What was it
brendan barrett wrote:
Yeah, because none of us have any idea what we're doing, we're just a
bunch of clueless fuckwits that are intent on buggering up
everything.
I think this was a little harsh. When i'm working on a project, I
welcome any input I can get. It doesn't mean I stop doing
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 5:58 PM, Grant Slater
Yes, the OSM Foundation is badly in need of extra money (or highend
hardware) to fund the next round of server hardware upgrades. In most
cases we are already close to server capacity.
We've also started looking
brendan barrett wrote:
It never hurts getting others to review things. You don't need
to stop development on API 0.6 to do a review.
We are IMO too far down the road with API 0.6 to review the _design_. It is,
after all, mostly coded: you can check out the API 0.6 branch and use it
with JOSM,
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:
brendan barrett wrote:
Yeah, because none of us have any idea what we're doing, we're just a
bunch of clueless fuckwits that are intent on buggering up
everything.
I think this was a little harsh. When i'm working on a
I'm not going to speculate on the fruits of such an exercise. My point
is simply that if someone is willing to do so, then why stop them or
belittle their effort.
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:
brendan barrett wrote:
Yeah, because none of us have any idea
Hi,
brendan barrett wrote:
I'm not going to speculate on the fruits of such an exercise. My point
is simply that if someone is willing to do so, then why stop them or
belittle their effort.
True, and API 0.6 has been available for testing and reviewing for a
while now. If there is somebody
Ok, I give up. Sorry for damaging your egos. I was only trying to answer
Tim's question by pointing out a spot where OSM as a whole could be better
off in the long run.
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 4:32 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Finally, I think that Tim has a right to be a
Perhaps my point hasn't gotten through properly. My intention is
merely to convey that this kind of language we're just a bunch of
clueless fuckwits that are intent on buggering up
everything, does not help someone understand this API 0.6 has been
available for testing and reviewing for a while
that the rest of this thread should be poems, but I think it
would help)
From: brendan barrett shogun...@gmail.com
To: Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 3:37:35 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM and Linked Data
frede...@remote.org
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 3:37:35 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM and Linked Data, and W3C, etc ...
Perhaps my point hasn't gotten through properly. My intention is
merely to convey that this kind of language we're just a bunch of
clueless
2009/1/14 Mikel Maron mikel_ma...@yahoo.com:
(I'm not saying that the rest of this thread should be poems, but I think it
would help)
Sir Tim came along to say hi
Some people were not clear on why
His aim: conservation
But vituperation
Makes some folks just want to say bye
20 matches
Mail list logo
