Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Mike Thompson]

On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 5:52 PM Courtney 
wrote:

>  As well, this is not an OSMF survey, nor is it a CWG survey.  Yes, two of
> us volunteer for the CWG, but it is not formally "from" or "of" the OSMF.
>
I guess I didn't read the original email closely enough.  I got the
impression that this was a CWG survey.

Mike
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

Since this seems to be an interesting topic, I will go ahead and add more
fineness of detail.

First, the reason I personally am interested in this survey as a
communications person, is that I believe that looking at the actual data
about how OSM'ers communicate may help the community uncover more effective
ways to collaborate. It will almost certainly give much finer grained
detail on how this large, diverse, global community connects online than
any other study that I, personally, have seen. We believe that this
research will have a direct benefit to OSM users.  Though my colleagues
work at TomTom, this project is not "for" TomTom, it is adjacent to their
community engagement work and comes from our collective realization that
there is a need for this kind of data within the community, and that we
have the skills to provide it.

Second, the survey is part of a bigger project; we have been looking at the
publically available data on OSM communications channels for several
months. By sending the survey out, we are looking for qualitative data to
support our quantitative research; it is not our only data source.

Third, re: our requirements.We had several requirements for what we needed
the form to do and how we wanted to distribute it. One was that it needed
to be mobile friendly, for the aforementioned reasons. We also needed it to
be anonymous. We also needed to be able to make multiple, identical copies
of the same survey because  we are using a dedicated link for each kind of
channel so that we can correlate responses to the type of channel in which
the survey was accessed. We also needed the form to be able to handle
certain types of question/answer combinations. We also needed it to be able
to handle potentially hundreds of answers and collect the data in a way
that we, with our limited time, could process. We looked at all of these
things and also consulted with friends who are OSM users within communities
in Africa and Asia on useability of the survey, as well as on best channels
in which to post--this, as an anecdotal check on what we already knew from
our preliminary data.

Fourth, we took the feedback and are now going to offer a limesurvey as an
option for those who cannot or do not want to take the Google survey, as a
courtesy. We will report that choice as data as well.

Fifth, I appreciate the concern about software that is not OS, but I
thoroughly reviewed the FOSS policy quite recently and will call everyone's
attention to language such as "we strongly prefer" and "we will consider a
full range of criteria". https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/FOSS_Policy.
As well, this is not an OSMF survey, nor is it a CWG survey.  Yes, two of
us volunteer for the CWG, but it is not formally "from" or "of" the OSMF.
Many people study OSM and post surveys. We are amongst those people and are
looking forward to presenting our findings back to the community in several
phases over the rest of 2023.

Speaking again as a communicator, and not for my team, but just myself, I
think that we would do well to be wary of assuming that "access" means
something like "100% of everyone everywhere can easily use all the time, no
matter what". There is no such accessibility in any tool, anywhere in the
material world, nor the existential one. Our aim was to distribute the
easiest to use tool in the most often-used channels and to get as many
surveys as we can, so that we can learn more about how this remarkable
organization communicates.

Finally, the best way to increase the efficacy, access, and inclusion in
OSM communications is to get more data and study it. Therefore, I hope that
readers of this forum will share the link widely within the listserv
ecosystem.  And, if you are on other channels, please amplify the link that
is in that channel within that channel.

As mentioned before, I do hope many folks tune in to our presentation in
Richmond. I am the writer in the research group, not one of the analysts,
but I believe the results are going to be surprising and interesting for
many.


On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 6:19 PM Andy Townsend  wrote:

> On 28/04/2023 22:50, Allan Mustard wrote:
> > Rather than criticize the CWG for using Google because certain people
> > are restricted by their governments from using Google services, it
> > would be more useful to suggest alternatives that might work in those
> > countries.
>
>
> Mikel already mentioned that OSMF had used Limesurvey earlier; that was
> also what the DWG used when we last ran a survey a while back, and what
> the organisers of this survey have suggested they will use it too (in
> various of the other channels that it has been announced).  I don't have
> up to date info on where that might be blocked, but at least a couple of
> the channels in which this survey has been announced have contributors
> who may have more up to date info on whether something is reachable or
> not - from both of the countries you mentioned.**
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Andy
>
> ** I'm not 

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Andy Townsend]

On 28/04/2023 22:50, Allan Mustard wrote:
Rather than criticize the CWG for using Google because certain people 
are restricted by their governments from using Google services, it 
would be more useful to suggest alternatives that might work in those 
countries.



Mikel already mentioned that OSMF had used Limesurvey earlier; that was 
also what the DWG used when we last ran a survey a while back, and what 
the organisers of this survey have suggested they will use it too (in 
various of the other channels that it has been announced).  I don't have 
up to date info on where that might be blocked, but at least a couple of 
the channels in which this survey has been announced have contributors 
who may have more up to date info on whether something is reachable or 
not - from both of the countries you mentioned.**


Best Regards,

Andy

** I'm not being more specific because I don't want to advertise an 
activity that might be "frowned upon" in a particular country, or which 
particular OSM channel people doing that might be found in.





___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Allan Mustard]

Not to make too fine a point, but OSMF policy notwithstanding, the OSMF 
Board of Directors uses Google Mail, the OSMF participates in Google 
Summer of Code, and Google was a sponsor of SOTM 2022 in Florence.[1]


As for foreign governments restricting access to Google assets, correct 
me if I am wrong but this mainly affects China and Iran, and probably a 
few other totalitarian regimes (e.g., North Korea?), but not the vast 
majority of OSM project participants. Rather than criticize the CWG for 
using Google because certain people are restricted by their governments 
from using Google services, it would be more useful to suggest 
alternatives that might work in those countries.


My two manats' worth (having served 4-1/2 years as a diplomat in a 
totalitarian country that restricts access to 3/4 of the world's IP 
addresses).


cheers,
apm

[1] https://2022.stateofthemap.org/#sponsors



Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 16:03:49 +0100
From: Andy Townsend
To: S?ren Reinecke
Cc:talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

On 28/04/2023 15:47, S?ren Reinecke wrote:

So please stop complaining about when someone does not share your ideologic 
attitude. And wanting to use OSS only is a ideology.

In this case, it's not just my view, it's the view of the OSMF board:

https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Commitment_to_Open_Communication_Channels

I have nothing against Google per se (casual observers will note that
I'm posting this from a Gmail address), but we have to allow everyone to
access a survey like this - including those people who are restricted by
their government from using services such as Google's.



In this case privacy is not even a concern. So please stop polluting email 
threads with unnecessary replies.



Best Regards,

Andy
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[talk-ph] MapRoulette challenge: Philippines - Fix Building & Highway intersections

[Salim Baidoun]

Hi Philippines Community!
Following up on our conversation about how TomTom can support the community, I 
am pleased to announce the launch of a new MapRoulette challenge in Manila.

The challenge is about fixing intersections between buildings and highways. The 
Leads were generated based on a spatial comparison of highways and buildings 
available in the OSM data, you can Identify and fix, if needed, cases where a 
way with tag highway=* intersects with a building.
In this challenge we have 
added 292 tasks. You can always refer to our Philippines GitHub 
page and 
MapRoulette description.
Please do not hesitate to connect with me for any questions or inquiries.

Have a lovely Weekend and enjoy editing

Salim A. Baidoun / Community & Partnerships - Global / Community Engagement


___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed automated edit of some barrier=kerb kerb=raised nodes (forum crosspost)

[osmuser63783 via talk]

Please let me know if there are any unresolved concerns about this proposed 
edit. If there are no objections I would like to run it this weekend.

List of example nodes that I'm proposing to edit: 
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/proposed-edit-of-some-barrier-kerb-kerb-raised-nodes/98038/13
Wiki page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/osmuser63783
Example changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/135319439

--- Original Message ---
On Friday, April 21st, 2023 at 18:53, osmuser63783  
wrote:

> Hi all
>
> Apologies if this doesn't show correctly as a reply to the previous mail, 
> I've only just signed up to the mailing list. Also for the silly pseudonym! I 
> set up my OSM account two years ago to make one edit and never thought it 
> would turn into a hobby!
>
>> on the shared node between the footway and a road ?
>
> Yes, I'm proposing an automated edit that concerns the shared node between a 
> footway and a road. Of course highway=crossing kerb=* is perfectly acceptable 
> tagging, I am not proposing any changes related to that. The vast majority of 
> nodes that I am proposing to remove barrier=kerb from do not have 
> highway=crossing.
>
>> I propose a simpler logic: highway=crossing + barrier=* is an error -> check 
>> a series of cases to see if it is correct to mechanically remove barrier=* 
>> (for me : ok)
>
> I agree that removing barrier=* from highway=crossing is safe but that is a 
> separate problem. There is not much overlap between that and the problem I am 
> describing.
>
>> I don't understand the mix
>> kerb=* (raised or not) without a highway=crossing is a kerb at this location 
>> and is thus a barrier=kerb or a missing highway=crossing
>
> When a footway meets a road and the kerb is not lowered, StreetComplete adds 
> kerb=raised, by itself, without highway=crossing, so that kerb=raised is the 
> only tag on the node. The developer of StreetComplete did not want to add a 
> highway=crossing tag, because there are people who say that highway=crossing 
> should only be added when there is some infrastructure. It would equally be 
> wrong to add crossing=no because that suggests that it is impossible or 
> illegal to cross. Therefore, StreetComplete only adds kerb=raised.
>
> Is this the best way to tag this? I don't know. The developer of 
> StreetComplete is open to changing it, and this is being discussed here: 
> https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/tagging-kerbs-on-crossings/9290/24
>
>> you forget all values other than kerb=raised
>> you forget the highway=service which have the same problem
>
> I am proposing a mechanical edit only to nodes where I am 100% sure that the 
> barrier=kerb is wrong.
>
> I am deliberately excluding values other than kerb=raised because it has been 
> pointed out to me that barrier=kerb kerb=lowered legitimately occurs on some 
> residential roads (the cars have to drive over the kerb). So barrier=kerb on 
> roads with any other values of kerb=* in my view need to be reviewed on a 
> case by case basis.I also imagine that to reach some highway=service you have 
> to drive over a kerb. So these would also need to be reviewed case by case.
>
> The cases where I am sure the barrier=kerb is wrong are those where 
> StreetComplete added kerb=raised and then later someone added barrier=kerb in 
> iD, following the validator suggestion. kerb=raised is the only value of 
> kerb= that StreetComplete adds without a crossing tag. It also doesn't ask 
> this quest about service roads or motorways (I checked the code), so there is 
> no reason to include this in my initial Overpass query that identifies 
> candidate nodes.
>
> Hope this makes it clearer what I'm trying to do and why!___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Sören Reinecke]

> I don't know how many times this has been proposed
> here is one 
> https[https://framaforms.org]://[https://framaforms.org]framaforms.org[https://framaforms.org]


I see the problem.

1. I've heard
> https[https://framaforms.org]://[https://framaforms.org]framaforms.org[https://framaforms.org]
my first time. It is even not correctly fully translated to English. The first 
barrier :)
2. Proposing is not enough (at least where I come from). The proposer or one of 
their like minded needs to go into the lead to make others apply the new tool 
to their workflow. As I said earlier: People use what they know and feel 
comfortable with. You need to make sure that people get comfortable with the 
new tool if you cannot force them to use it.
3. Optional: The OSMF not providing guidance how to make surveys, on which 
platform etc.


> a company whose economic activity is to build a profile
> to sell it via advertising not a privacy concern ? :-O

You fill out this form without Google account required, you clear your browser 
cache after closing your browser, you use good browsers like Firefox, your ip 
address changes frequently if you're lucky living in Europe/Canada. These 
actually understand privacy (and at least Europeans turn it into an ideology or 
ignore it completely. Only the extreme sides exist here mostly).

Apr 28, 2023 17:27:58 Marc_marc :

> Le 28.04.23 à 16:47, Sören Reinecke a écrit :
>> rather to provide useful suggestion / realistic alternatives
> 
> I don't know how many times this has been proposed
> here is one https://framaforms.org
> 
>> So please stop complaining
> 
> Wasn't the aim to collect opinions on the communication ?
> 
>> wanting to use OSS only is a ideology
> 
> i'm not talking about OSS but about a privacy-friendly hoster:
> if the study is based on a closed software hosted by the team doing
> the survey, it would be a shame but you would not have heard any criticism 
> from me.
> if the study is based on open software hosted by a profiling company,
> I would have had the same issue as i have with Google form
> 
> PS : osm is also an ideology :)
> 
>> In this case privacy is not even a concern.
> 
> a company whose economic activity is to build a profile
> to sell it via advertising not a privacy concern ? :-O
> 
> Regards,
> Marc
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Marc_marc]

Le 28.04.23 à 16:47, Sören Reinecke a écrit :

rather to provide useful suggestion / realistic alternatives


I don't know how many times this has been proposed
here is one https://framaforms.org


So please stop complaining


Wasn't the aim to collect opinions on the communication ?


wanting to use OSS only is a ideology


i'm not talking about OSS but about a privacy-friendly hoster:
if the study is based on a closed software hosted by the team doing
the survey, it would be a shame but you would not have heard any 
criticism from me.

if the study is based on open software hosted by a profiling company,
I would have had the same issue as i have with Google form

PS : osm is also an ideology :)


In this case privacy is not even a concern.


a company whose economic activity is to build a profile
to sell it via advertising not a privacy concern ? :-O

Regards,
Marc



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Mikel Maron]

Hey all -- how about going easier here and helping each other. Rather than 
condemnation over a relatively minor decision of which platform to use for a 
survey. 

I think suggestion for another platform is easy enough to consider and remedy. 
OSMF has used limesurvey in the past, it can be looked at here.
-Mikel

* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron






On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 10:56:22 AM EDT, Sören Reinecke  
wrote: 





I am impressed that some of you always choose the path to complain about things 
going against their own world view rather to provide useful suggestion / 
realistic alternatives or even better getting involved in the implementation as 
developers do. Google or Microsoft are unfortunately the choice of many 
non-technical users because it is what they know, feel comfortable with and is 
most of the time easy to use. Only few OSS projects come near their level (the 
good ones like Linux).

So please stop complaining about when someone does not share your ideologic 
attitude. And wanting to use OSS only is a ideology. In this case privacy is 
not even a concern. So please stop polluting email threads with unnecessary 
replies.

For myself I can say that I don't like the giants too but I use what the most 
know and what is an established standard like POSIX or GDrive. I even 
administrate a Google Workspace subscription althought I do not like it because 
Google Workspace has way too limited administration options and a questionable 
permission system in GDrive.

The argumentation of "restricted internet access" is a weak one in an online 
project like OpenStreetMap.


Maybe I get a warning for saying this. But I got banned from tagging already 
because I brought up an important topic three times prior warning not to do 
that so nothing to loose here :)

Sören

Apr 28, 2023 16:27:41 Andy Townsend :

> On 28/04/2023 14:57, Marc_marc wrote:
>> part of the active opendata community
>> does not wish to ally a closeddata based enterprise
> 
> It's actually worse than that.
> 
> OpenStreetMap has mappers all around the world.  Some of those places don't 
> have the virtually unrestricted Internet access that people in the west may 
> be accustomed to, and I wouldn't assume that a website of a major American 
> company (Google) is available in all those places.  Previously the Board and 
> other OSMF working groups have taken care to ensure that everyone can 
> contribute to surveys like this.  Of all people, I'd have expected the 
> Communication Working Group to be aware of this potential issue and to have 
> taken steps to ensure that it wasn't one.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Andy
> 
> (writing in a personal capacity rather than as a member of the DWG)
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Talk-it-trentino] Mapping party OpenStreetMap a Verona

[Anisa]

Ciao a tutte e tutti,

domenica 14 maggio dalle 10:00, (dopo il merge-it.net) ci troviamo a 
Verona per un mapping party OpenStreetMap! 

Condivideremo conoscenze e pizza! 

Qui la pagina con informazioni più dettagliate.: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Italy/Events/Mapping_Party_OSM_a_MERGE-it_2023


Vi aspettiamo!

Anisa

--
Anisa Kuci
Responsabile OpenStreetMap
Wikimedia Italia - Associazione per la diffusione della conoscenza libera
Via Bergognone 34 - 20144 Milano
Tel. (+39) 02 5656 9662 | anisa.k...@wikimedia.it | www.wikimedia.it


___
Talk-it-trentino mailing list
Talk-it-trentino@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it-trentino

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Courtney]

Not only do I understand the concern about unrestricted internet access, it
is one of the reasons why we are undertaking our study of OSM community
communication practices and habits--there are hundreds of channels,
globally, and many of them have to do with working around this particular
challenge.  To the concern about Google specifically--we knew the
challenges and drawbacks of using this form, but the benefits outweighed
them, as there is no ideal option for this kind of survey available.

In general, there is no perfect form and no perfect software for collecting
this kind of data, and we are doing the best with available resources. For
example, we are reaching out to the OSM community through Telegram, Reddit,
Matrix, Discourse, Discord, and many other forums, and we are also looking
at other forms of communications data in our analysis.

To the specific comment about a CWG member knowing better. It is precisely
because we are on the CWG that we are seeking to understand the community's
communication behaviors, so that we can study it and offer our findings
back to the community. We don't have perfect tools, we don't have unlimited
means, and we are doing the best that we can do informed, considered,
inclusive work. Interestingly, one of our questions has to do with "do you
find OSM community forums to be positive and encouraging."  I am finding
the irony of this to be a bit rich at the moment.

I would encourage skeptics to fill out the survey and tune in to our
presentation in June and then judge our approaches.

Courtney Williamson


On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 10:56 AM Sören Reinecke  wrote:

> I am impressed that some of you always choose the path to complain about
> things going against their own world view rather to provide useful
> suggestion / realistic alternatives or even better getting involved in the
> implementation as developers do. Google or Microsoft are unfortunately the
> choice of many non-technical users because it is what they know, feel
> comfortable with and is most of the time easy to use. Only few OSS projects
> come near their level (the good ones like Linux).
>
> So please stop complaining about when someone does not share your
> ideologic attitude. And wanting to use OSS only is a ideology. In this case
> privacy is not even a concern. So please stop polluting email threads with
> unnecessary replies.
>
> For myself I can say that I don't like the giants too but I use what the
> most know and what is an established standard like POSIX or GDrive. I even
> administrate a Google Workspace subscription althought I do not like it
> because Google Workspace has way too limited administration options and a
> questionable permission system in GDrive.
>
> The argumentation of "restricted internet access" is a weak one in an
> online project like OpenStreetMap.
>
>
> Maybe I get a warning for saying this. But I got banned from tagging
> already because I brought up an important topic three times prior warning
> not to do that so nothing to loose here :)
>
> Sören
>
> Apr 28, 2023 16:27:41 Andy Townsend :
>
> > On 28/04/2023 14:57, Marc_marc wrote:
> >> part of the active opendata community
> >> does not wish to ally a closeddata based enterprise
> >
> > It's actually worse than that.
> >
> > OpenStreetMap has mappers all around the world.  Some of those places
> don't have the virtually unrestricted Internet access that people in the
> west may be accustomed to, and I wouldn't assume that a website of a major
> American company (Google) is available in all those places.  Previously the
> Board and other OSMF working groups have taken care to ensure that everyone
> can contribute to surveys like this.  Of all people, I'd have expected the
> Communication Working Group to be aware of this potential issue and to have
> taken steps to ensure that it wasn't one.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > (writing in a personal capacity rather than as a member of the DWG)
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 

--Courtney Cook Williamson
survivalbybook.substack.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Andy Townsend]

On 28/04/2023 15:47, Sören Reinecke wrote:

So please stop complaining about when someone does not share your ideologic 
attitude. And wanting to use OSS only is a ideology.


In this case, it's not just my view, it's the view of the OSMF board:

https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Commitment_to_Open_Communication_Channels

I have nothing against Google per se (casual observers will note that 
I'm posting this from a Gmail address), but we have to allow everyone to 
access a survey like this - including those people who are restricted by 
their government from using services such as Google's.




In this case privacy is not even a concern. So please stop polluting email 
threads with unnecessary replies.



:)

Best Regards,

Andy




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] (small) automated edit of name:fiu-vro -> name:vro

[Jules Bouton]

No idea, it was way before I started contributing to OSM, but I guess 
(and hope!) someone had a look at this licensing point.


A changeset from that time : 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/17267685#map=1/12/56


If you look, for example, at Tonga, compare versions 2 (before) and 3 
(after) : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2186665/history


Le 28/04/2023 à 16:34, Mateusz Konieczny via talk a écrit :




Apr 25, 2023, 17:06 by jules.bou...@gmail.com:

10 years ago, many multilingual country names were imported from
wikipedia/wikidata.

Has anyone checked licensing situation when it was done?


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Sören Reinecke]

I am impressed that some of you always choose the path to complain about things 
going against their own world view rather to provide useful suggestion / 
realistic alternatives or even better getting involved in the implementation as 
developers do. Google or Microsoft are unfortunately the choice of many 
non-technical users because it is what they know, feel comfortable with and is 
most of the time easy to use. Only few OSS projects come near their level (the 
good ones like Linux).

So please stop complaining about when someone does not share your ideologic 
attitude. And wanting to use OSS only is a ideology. In this case privacy is 
not even a concern. So please stop polluting email threads with unnecessary 
replies.

For myself I can say that I don't like the giants too but I use what the most 
know and what is an established standard like POSIX or GDrive. I even 
administrate a Google Workspace subscription althought I do not like it because 
Google Workspace has way too limited administration options and a questionable 
permission system in GDrive.

The argumentation of "restricted internet access" is a weak one in an online 
project like OpenStreetMap.


Maybe I get a warning for saying this. But I got banned from tagging already 
because I brought up an important topic three times prior warning not to do 
that so nothing to loose here :)

Sören

Apr 28, 2023 16:27:41 Andy Townsend :

> On 28/04/2023 14:57, Marc_marc wrote:
>> part of the active opendata community
>> does not wish to ally a closeddata based enterprise
> 
> It's actually worse than that.
> 
> OpenStreetMap has mappers all around the world.  Some of those places don't 
> have the virtually unrestricted Internet access that people in the west may 
> be accustomed to, and I wouldn't assume that a website of a major American 
> company (Google) is available in all those places.  Previously the Board and 
> other OSMF working groups have taken care to ensure that everyone can 
> contribute to surveys like this.  Of all people, I'd have expected the 
> Communication Working Group to be aware of this potential issue and to have 
> taken steps to ensure that it wasn't one.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Andy
> 
> (writing in a personal capacity rather than as a member of the DWG)
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] (small) automated edit of name:fiu-vro -> name:vro

[Mateusz Konieczny via talk]

Apr 25, 2023, 17:06 by jules.bou...@gmail.com:

>
> 10 > years>  ago, manymultilingual country names were imported from > 
> wikipedia> /> wikidata> .
>
>
Has anyone checked licensing situation when it was done?

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Andy Townsend]

On 28/04/2023 14:57, Marc_marc wrote:

part of the active opendata community
does not wish to ally a closeddata based enterprise


It's actually worse than that.

OpenStreetMap has mappers all around the world.  Some of those places 
don't have the virtually unrestricted Internet access that people in the 
west may be accustomed to, and I wouldn't assume that a website of a 
major American company (Google) is available in all those places.  
Previously the Board and other OSMF working groups have taken care to 
ensure that everyone can contribute to surveys like this.  Of all 
people, I'd have expected the Communication Working Group to be aware of 
this potential issue and to have taken steps to ensure that it wasn't one.


Best Regards,

Andy

(writing in a personal capacity rather than as a member of the DWG)



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Marc_marc]

Hello,

Le 28.04.23 à 15:29, Marjan Van de Kauter a écrit :
We are doing a research project on how OpenStreetMap  
users interact with each other.


I am impressed (and disappointed) that those who do these surveys
have still not learned that part of the active opendata community
does not wish to ally a closeddata based enterprise (nominally:
no use of google forms for some of us).
I leave it to you to poll those who have a reduced sensitivity
on the subject

Regards,
Marc



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Survey about OSM communication behaviors

[Marjan Van de Kauter]

Hi everyone,

We are doing a research project on how OpenStreetMap users interact with each 
other. Are you willing to help us learn more about communication behaviors in 
OSM? Take this quick and anonymous survey and tell us if and how you use the 
OSM community forum, mailing lists, social media and other channels:

https://forms.gle/UeAGs3VahuxBN7Ec7

We will share the results of this survey, along with other data, with the 
community. This can help users better understand communication habits in OSM, 
so they can identify the most effective ways to reach other community members. 
We will be presenting our findings at State of the Map US in Richmond, Virginia 
and in diary entries. So stay tuned for more and thank you for participating in 
our survey.

Have a great weekend!

Marjan Van de Kauter (OSMF Communication Working Group member and TomTom 
community engager)
Courtney Williamson (OSMF Communication Working Group member)
Keara Dennehy (TomTom business analyst)
L.J. Lambert (TomTom business analyst)
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk