OHM and the defaults on OSM are two separate things. We can (and should!) add
our own defaults on ohm.org.
But whether the historic map layers are useful or cluttered on OSM.org is not
really a concern for us here. We operate a separate database, and like most
things in OSM, do so in an informal, unstructured way.
-Mikel
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
On Saturday, November 9, 2013 7:19 AM, Rob Nickerson
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>Following on from my attempt to get new background layers added to the map
>editors, Paul Norman has decided to split the imagery list into two (current
>and historic) and is proposing removing historic layers to the historic list -
>which basically means they will not appear as default options in ID, JOSM etc..
>
>I have set out my reasons why I think this is a bad ideas here:
>
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2013-November/015482.html
>
>
>I guess my question is "Who owns Open Historical Map"? Is it part of
>OpenStreetMap, and if not, can we make it part of OpenStreetMap (i.e hand over
>to the OSM Foundation) so that it is no longer treated as a second class
>citizen?
>
>
>Best regards,
>Rob
>
>_______________________________________________
>Historic mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/historic
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Historic mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/historic
