Certainly Apple mark footpaths as roads in the data that they have used from us, but that's a rendering issue, not a data issue.
Tom Davie On 29 May 2012, at 09:14, Nick Whitelegg wrote: > > Whatever. I've certainly seen "footpaths classified as roads" in commercial > online maps for instance. > > This is a very one sided argument and assumes that commercial online maps are > accurate. It also completely neglects the fact that you can use OSM data > without a fee andf without someone telling you what you can and cannot do > with it. I'd imagine they're running scared at the move away from the > restrictive, closed-source model for electronic data. > > Nick > > -----Maarten Deen <md...@xs4all.nl> wrote: ----- > To: <talk@openstreetmap.org> > From: Maarten Deen <md...@xs4all.nl> > Date: 29/05/2012 08:45AM > Subject: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us > > Ok, they don't name us, but I think "a leading open source map" does > refer to us. > > <http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/> > > Oh wauw. We're not perfect. Let's close up the shop. Thanks to SteveC > for all the effort, but it wasn't enough. > > Well, probably one of the very positive effects from OSM is the fact > that when we start mapping something, the closed-source mappers follow > suit. The fact that Google needs to add gimmicks like kajak routing > across the pacific to beat us says enough. > It's a win-win situation. > > Regards, > Maarten > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
