dear Michal, This is an interesting set of comprehensive criticisms that gives OSM something to aim for in terms of a classical maturity model.
However, I wonder what you bring to the party apart from critique. What are your contributions to OSM? Jo / zool > * People are making discussions that come to no conclusion, this is so > notorious. > * OSMF does very little work to actually promote OSM and improve its > ecosystem (the only things they do that matter are providing servers > and the SOTM) > * There is very little collaboration between OSM-related software > developers who aren't exactly aware how their actions shape OSM (on > the top of "this would need much coding" attitude of some - so why did > you choose to maintain it?) > * The enforcement of editing standards is very hard. There is always > that user who doesn't bother to ever come by the community forum. > (compare with Wikipedia) > * Software for monitoring OSM changes is still very rudimentary. I > wanna be the f**king NSA. It's incredibly hard to check newbies' work > quickly (eg. you have to load every changeset separately into OSMHV). > * Why do these newbies make so many mistakes? The documentation is a > mess, editor presets are incomplete (whereas they should include all > approved and other widely used features) > * Many "important" people are so defensive there is stagnation instead > of doing. You can only fully evaluate a concept by implementing it. > * Data consumers not exactly make OSM appear professional. It's hard > to come by apps that are nearly as professional as Google Maps or Here > Maps. They also almost never bother to consider country-specific stuff > (like how is an address written, proper handling of abbreviations). _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
