Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On Mon, 8 Feb 2010, SteveC wrote: I realize most people have fallen asleep on this thread, but did anyone get a detailed report on why OSM was rejected? It's like Encyclopedia Britannica looking to move to Wikipedia in 2004 or something, printing out a lot of books and getting experts to evaluate empty and broken articles. What do you expect? Of course it's not perfect, but it is very, very good and it's getting better all the time. Exponentially. And if you find a problem you can have the freedom to fix it, together with the freedom to moan about it. There is also the second point of view about the failure of the Nav4All - that it relates to their business model, and no map data provider can fix their problem. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On Feb 5, 2010, at 12:24 AM, Dave F. wrote: I realize most people have fallen asleep on this thread, but did anyone get a detailed report on why OSM was rejected? It's like Encyclopedia Britannica looking to move to Wikipedia in 2004 or something, printing out a lot of books and getting experts to evaluate empty and broken articles. What do you expect? Of course it's not perfect, but it is very, very good and it's getting better all the time. Exponentially. And if you find a problem you can have the freedom to fix it, together with the freedom to moan about it. Oh and it's Free and zero price. I don't think the people here are saying that the quality doesn't matter, far from it, probably the complete opposite. It's more that the traditional arguments about uniform ontologies, standards etc are from 1976 and it's 2010 now. If you do a lot of work to munge OSM data in to your 1976 toolchain and worldview, there are of course going to be these problems even when we do get to the quality (whatever that means to them) they want. It's like printing out Wikipedia in to 24 bound volumes every year and going door to door to sell it, it just misses the point. Yours c. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Since I was the person that called them, the point not to use open data was: it was partial. Business reason; they were still talking to other mapmakers. For them the only business case would be probably if they would get free or almost free data, and without any processing costs. Switching to OSM can be too expensive for them, due to all this non-conventional attribution system (immature quality of the tags). Jaak ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
2010/2/3 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com: Any way, back to the original post Nokia is saying Nav4All's is wrong... http://www.tietokone.fi/uutiset/nokia_kiistaa_kilpailijan_navigoinnin_tappamisen http://translate.google.com/translate?js=yprev=_thl=enie=UTF-8layout=1eotf=1u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tietokone.fi%2Fuutiset%2Fnokia_kiistaa_kilpailijan_navigoinnin_tappamisensl=fitl=en The question for me is how the hell they were able to provide free navigation in the first place? I've heard that commercial map data providers are asking up to 100 (depending on quantity) per end-user per year for their data licenses (for navigation purposes). So you need to have solid business case how to cover it (with advertisments) and a lot of money to cover the costs until you have enough revenues. Basically there should be way to show ads to each end-user in the average value of at least 100 EUR/year to break even. This sum cannot be more than a fraction of profit what is earned by the ad buyers, so considering all intermediates the total value of goods sold via the ads should be ~100 times larger than cost of the ads, i.e. 10.000 EUR/year, as average. Can you imagine that ads just in your mobile navigation software (what is typically used couple of times per month) can sell any goods for 10.000 EUR/year? You download first free (and really not so user-friendly) navigation app, and then every time you use it you also see some ads, and based on these make a purchase in the value of 100-1000 EUR, each time. This does not sound very probable to me. So the ad-supported commercial navigation business model just cannot work. I'm expecting that also Locationet's free Amaze will also shut down, or switches to to OSM or turns out to be mostly paid application. The data is so expensive, that for Nokia it was cheaper to buy whole Navteq to get it, and even for Google it was more reasonable to collect own database before they could meet their target price (zero). Of course Nav4all was not paying 100 EUR/year to Navteq for the 27 million end-users, they had to be negotiated significantly better deal, I guess next to zero. Navteq, due to demands from Nokia, or maybe even without it, was not interested to continue it this way. And it was definitely unfair for other their customers who had to pay the full price. This is my speculation. Jaak ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hello Jaak, I think your price of E100 per user for map data is much too high. Remember that you can buy a new WinCE based GPS with touchscreen, processor, flash memory and maps for that kind of money and the device will last you a couple of years. Navteq may also (try to) segment the market: If your company distributes their maps to a segment of the market they are not currently tapping into, you will get the licenses for cheap. If you supply to the top end user (e.g. iPhone app), they will charge you much more. If you look at the Tom Tom financial statements, they have significantly written down their TeleAtlas asset. Likewise, Nokia must be regretting their purchase of Navteq. Intellectual property's real value can be multiples of replacement cost (like when these mapping companies were bought), or it can be a fraction of replacement cost. Google certainly has been the disruptor, by building their own maps for the US so quickly. Regards, Nic On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Jaak Laineste (Nutiteq) j...@nutiteq.comwrote: 2010/2/3 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com: Any way, back to the original post Nokia is saying Nav4All's is wrong... http://www.tietokone.fi/uutiset/nokia_kiistaa_kilpailijan_navigoinnin_tappamisen http://translate.google.com/translate?js=yprev=_thl=enie=UTF-8layout=1eotf=1u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tietokone.fi%2Fuutiset%2Fnokia_kiistaa_kilpailijan_navigoinnin_tappamisensl=fitl=en The question for me is how the hell they were able to provide free navigation in the first place? I've heard that commercial map data providers are asking up to 100 (depending on quantity) per end-user per year for their data licenses (for navigation purposes). So you need to have solid business case how to cover it (with advertisments) and a lot of money to cover the costs until you have enough revenues. Basically there should be way to show ads to each end-user in the average value of at least 100 EUR/year to break even. This sum cannot be more than a fraction of profit what is earned by the ad buyers, so considering all intermediates the total value of goods sold via the ads should be ~100 times larger than cost of the ads, i.e. 10.000 EUR/year, as average. Can you imagine that ads just in your mobile navigation software (what is typically used couple of times per month) can sell any goods for 10.000 EUR/year? You download first free (and really not so user-friendly) navigation app, and then every time you use it you also see some ads, and based on these make a purchase in the value of 100-1000 EUR, each time. This does not sound very probable to me. So the ad-supported commercial navigation business model just cannot work. I'm expecting that also Locationet's free Amaze will also shut down, or switches to to OSM or turns out to be mostly paid application. The data is so expensive, that for Nokia it was cheaper to buy whole Navteq to get it, and even for Google it was more reasonable to collect own database before they could meet their target price (zero). Of course Nav4all was not paying 100 EUR/year to Navteq for the 27 million end-users, they had to be negotiated significantly better deal, I guess next to zero. Navteq, due to demands from Nokia, or maybe even without it, was not interested to continue it this way. And it was definitely unfair for other their customers who had to pay the full price. This is my speculation. Jaak ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On 4 February 2010 22:26, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote: Google certainly has been the disruptor, by building their own maps for the US so quickly. Google loves data and has been collecting up data sets from local governments in return for google earth licenses, then there is the tiger data set... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Philip Homburg wrote: In your letter dated Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:03:09 + you wrote: Frederik Ramm wrote: But the routing/tagging of OSM doesn't fit anything at the moment. Huh? Please take that in context with its following sentence. Can you show me a router that can get me door to door no matter where I live? If the data is not 100% complete and accurate it is useless? Get real. Realizing that the database isn't up to the job it was designed for is getting real, instead of stick heads in the sand pretending it's not happening. I just tried the Google maps app. on my G1 to get home from work by bike. It was horrible. The app itself is horrible, and the map is bad: bike paths are not there. In contrast, openstreetmap data gets me there by car and bike. The lack of house numbers is annoying though. So it is not door to door, but street to street. And for me that is good enough. But not good enough for others evidently. Comparing with Google is irrelevant. Even if Google were 100% accurate, OSM would still have been rejected by the organizations mentioned. And yes, the situation is not as bright in other countries. But I think it is pointless to wait until OSM has 100% perfection everywhere to start using it. You seem to be missing point. We've been told that they don't want to use it Of course lots of people are already using it. Promoting for example openmtbmap over other maps on a Garmin. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
In your letter dated Thu, 04 Feb 2010 16:05:11 + you wrote: Philip Homburg wrote: If the data is not 100% complete and accurate it is useless? Get real. Realizing that the database isn't up to the job it was designed for is getting real, instead of stick heads in the sand pretending it's not happening. I just tried the Google maps app. on my G1 to get home from work by bike. It was horrible. The app itself is horrible, and the map is bad: bike paths are not there. In contrast, openstreetmap data gets me there by car and bike. The lack of house numbers is annoying though. So it is not door to door, but street to street. And for me that is good enough. But not good enough for others evidently. I guess it's to bring out the duck again: If it looks like a map, swims like a navigation system and quacks turn instructions, then it probably is a pratical navigation system. I don't care about all the companies that don't want to use OSM. I am very greatful to the contributers all over the world that made OSM into a practical navigation system for me. Whether or not we tag cycleways correctly, what else the database isn't up to. Of course, if any of those companies want to work with OSM to improve the system then we should take a look at that. I wonder if it is worthwhile introducing some kind of metric of how well OSM works for navigation in a particular area. For example with the following scale: 0 total failure 1 the town you want to reach is on the map, but the street isn't 2 the street you want to reach is on the map 3 OSM gives some kind of route from where you are to your destination street (even if it doesn't make much sense) 4 OSM gives a route that mostly makes sense 5 OSM gives a route that is actually legal (and also makes sense) 6 OSM gives a good route: a route about as good as you would also get from a printed map if you don't know the area 7 OSM gives a perfect route: any improvement would be nitpicking 8 OSM guides you door to door (the exact location is on the map, not just the street) I think .nl is most of the time at level 6. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Philip Homburg wrote: In your letter dated Thu, 04 Feb 2010 16:05:11 + you wrote: Philip Homburg wrote: If the data is not 100% complete and accurate it is useless? Get real. Realizing that the database isn't up to the job it was designed for is getting real, instead of stick heads in the sand pretending it's not happening. I just tried the Google maps app. on my G1 to get home from work by bike. It was horrible. The app itself is horrible, and the map is bad: bike paths are not there. In contrast, openstreetmap data gets me there by car and bike. The lack of house numbers is annoying though. So it is not door to door, but street to street. And for me that is good enough. But not good enough for others evidently. I guess it's to bring out the duck again: If it looks like a map, swims like a navigation system and quacks turn instructions, then it probably is a pratical navigation system. Unfortunately it seems we're being told it quacks like a turkey. I don't care about all the companies that don't want to use OSM. I think that's a pointless crass statement. I am very greatful to the contributers all over the world that made OSM into a practical navigation system for me. Whether or not we tag cycleways correctly, what else the database isn't up to. Of course, if any of those companies want to work with OSM to improve the system then we should take a look at that. That appears to contradict your I don't care... statement. However it's a very good point: I realize most people have fallen asleep on this thread, but did anyone get a detailed report on why OSM was rejected? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On 5 February 2010 10:24, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: I don't care about all the companies that don't want to use OSM. I think that's a pointless crass statement. I'm still waiting to hear why the company mentioned previously doesn't want to use OSM, what was wrong with the current tagging or other aspects, or if it's a license issue. I realize most people have fallen asleep on this thread, but did anyone get a detailed report on why OSM was rejected? I asked, I didn't get a response. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On Fri, 5 Feb 2010, Dave F. wrote: I realize most people have fallen asleep on this thread, but did anyone get a detailed report on why OSM was rejected? Since I was the person that called them, the point not to use open data was: it was partial. Business reason; they were still talking to other mapmakers. Stefan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
I realize most people have fallen asleep on this thread, but did anyone get a detailed report on why OSM was rejected? Nothing heard here ... if there's a problem other than coverage, it's worth hearing about. Otherwise, did it really happen? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk-nl] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Zou het onderstaande de reden zijn waarom de Nederlandse gemeenten zo graag data geven aan Google? Stefan Originele bericht Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq Datum: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 23:46:04 +1000 Van: John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com Aan: Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com CC: OSM t...@openstreetmap.org On 4 February 2010 22:26, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote: Google certainly has been the disruptor, by building their own maps for the US so quickly. Google loves data and has been collecting up data sets from local governments in return for google earth licenses, then there is the tiger data set... ___ talk mailing list t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Roy Wallace wrote: I suspect you will have opponents, though, because having physical characteristics that can accommodate a bike is not verifiable. Actually I think it is verifiable as cycleways have design characteristics which provide inspiration for this ability to verify on the ground. But as there are only so many days in a week and I am not able to research this proposal thoroughly. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: this is valid for England and maybe Scotland and Wales (and probably some other countries), but it is not working on a worldwide basis. Your definition would in most of central Europe not be functioning: routers would lead pedestrians in areas where they are not allowed to walk (cycleways). Nobody would tag them with foot=no because it's obvious ;-) that you can't walk there. foot=yes would be the exception. Um, yes, I do know the rules vary between countries. There are two ways you can handle that. Firstly, like I say, you can accept that highway=cycleway implies foot=yes and bicycle=yes. Which it does for exactly the same reason that the tags are in English, the server code is in Ruby and this mailing list is called talk rather than frogs: the chap who got there first decides. And your argument that people won't tag highway=cycleway; foot=no but will tag highway=path; bicycle=designated; foot=no is batshit insane. Or, you can agree that highway=cycleway will mean something different in Germany to the UK. No-one is stopping you from doing this. And, funnily enough, it's exactly what we do with most other values for the highway tag: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway#International_equivalence When you write about meaning you should keep in mind that what seems obvious for you isn't for someone with a different background, but he might rather think that the opposite is obvious. When you write you should make strenuous efforts to be not quite so patronising. :p cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Fwd-Nav4All-navigation-shut-down-by-Navteq-tp4488024p4506379.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
In your letter dated Wed, 03 Feb 2010 02:18:09 +0100 you wrote: Am 03.02.2010 00:38, schrieb Frederik Ramm: Hi, NopMap wrote: In contrast, I believe that there actually are people who try to listen to the sorrows of (potential) newcomers and want to lower the learning curve. Way too few, though. Fixed tagging rules are not needed to lower the learning curve. Could you please explain this? Fixed tagging rules will very certainly lower the learning curve to getting things on the map. You failed to explain the alternatives ... I understand that the anarchy is a nightmare for tool writers. Keeping up with all new features and variants that are invented all over the world must cost a lot of effort. But from a mapper point of view, I don't see the problem. When I see a bike path, I tag it as cycleway. I'm vaguely aware of all the discussion about this, but I don't care. And I think that goes for a lot of mappers. When you know the basic set, you can start mapping. I don't know why the openstreetmap wiki doesn't work on my FreeBSD 8.0 installation, but I think one the .nl pages has a nice list of all the different road types, and how they should be tagged. I do think that, at least for road types, beginner guides should be localized. The road system is different in every country, and you have to map from the local situation, to the OSM tags. --- End of Forwarded Message ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Richard Fairhurst wrote: And your argument that people won't tag highway=cycleway; foot=no but will tag highway=path; bicycle=designated; foot=no is batshit insane. IMHO, the argument is perfectly valid. The problem with highway=cycleway and pedestrians isn't that adding a foot=no would be too much effort. The problem is that some people, while they wouldn't mind adding it, don't know that they need to add it in the first place. Therefore, the number of tags isn't the issue here, but rather whether the tags are prone to misinterpretation. Generally, the more implicit assumptions you associate with a tag, the more probable it is that someone's implicit assumptions are different from yours. That's why a largely meaningless object like path has a certain appeal. Tobias Knerr ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Any way, back to the original post Nokia is saying Nav4All's is wrong... http://www.tietokone.fi/uutiset/nokia_kiistaa_kilpailijan_navigoinnin_tappamisen http://translate.google.com/translate?js=yprev=_thl=enie=UTF-8layout=1eotf=1u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tietokone.fi%2Fuutiset%2Fnokia_kiistaa_kilpailijan_navigoinnin_tappamisensl=fitl=en ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Tobias Knerr wrote: IMHO, the argument is perfectly valid. The problem with highway= cycleway and pedestrians isn't that adding a foot=no would be too much effort. The problem is that some people, while they wouldn't mind adding it, don't know that they need to add it in the first place. Therefore, the number of tags isn't the issue here, but rather whether the tags are prone to misinterpretation. I can happily assure you your fears are groundless. In the UK, our major routes are classed as trunk roads, primary A roads, and non-primary A roads. You might recognise a few of these words. Not so fast. In fact, these map to OSM tags as follows: trunk road - highway=trunk (and, optional, operator=Highways Agency) primary A road - highway=trunk non-primary A road - highway=primary Yes, you did read that right. UK _non-primary_ A roads are tagged as highway=primary. That is 300 times more open to misinterpretation than the cycleway example. Yet we cope. In fact we cope very well: pretty much all these roads are now mapped, and tagged correctly. On rare occasions we need to point a newbie in the right place, but because we've documented it and been consistent in how we use it on the map, 99% of the time they just get it. I'm sure you super-efficient German guys could do an even better job of educating people about the highway=cycleway tag than we do about highway=trunk. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Fwd-Nav4All-navigation-shut-down-by-Navteq-tp4488024p4506571.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Generally, the more implicit assumptions you associate with a tag, the more probable it is that someone's implicit assumptions are different from yours. That's why a largely meaningless object like path has a certain appeal. I've always felt (whatever the wiki says) that path is a vague description for something which could be more accurately defined in much the same way as road is. Ed ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 5:36 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: ...routers would lead pedestrians in areas where they are not allowed to walk (cycleways). Nonsense. There'll be a footway alongside that they can use (99.999% of the time). If you want to micro-map a footway as well, and put foot=no on the cycleway, feel free. But unless you've micro-mapped the footway, you should *not* be adding foot=no explicitly or implicitly, unless there really is no route. And the simplest way to show that it has been micromapped is to put an explicit foot=no on the cycleway when you've done it. I can see why this sort of nonsense would put a commercial router off - it may not affect their current service, but it doesn't exactly inspire confidence, does it? Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi, Richard Fairhurst wrote: That is 300 times more open to misinterpretation than the cycleway example. Yet we cope. That's because the English have been trained to cope with stuff that nobody else understands for approximately the last 500 years, by way of ball games. --- start quote fixed playing rules --- There are two sides, one out in the field the other one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side hat's out comes in and the side that's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out. Sometimes you get men still in and not out. When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in. There are two men called umpires who stay out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have been out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game. --- end quote --- Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Richard Mann wrote: On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 5:36 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: ...routers would lead pedestrians in areas where they are not allowed to walk (cycleways). Nonsense. There'll be a footway alongside that they can use (99.999% of the time). If you want to micro-map a footway as well, and put foot=no on the cycleway, feel free. But unless you've micro-mapped the footway, you should *not* be adding foot=no explicitly or implicitly, unless there really is no route. And the simplest way to show that it has been micromapped is to put an explicit foot=no on the cycleway when you've done it. Micro-mapping is only appropriate where there IS a separately marked pedestrian area on the ground. SOME cycleways do have 'no pedestrian' markings, just as some footpaths have 'no cycles' but the main discussion should be providing a macro level view of the 'data'. On the whole, a simple single way may well define the route for cars, bikes, and people. What needs to be clear is where these routes separate into sections that are specific to each target. Micro-mapping the physical areas on the ground is the ultimate, but showing separate pedestrian and cycle crossing points, and linking them to foot and bike only routes is something of a mess currently? I can see why this sort of nonsense would put a commercial router off - it may not affect their current service, but it doesn't exactly inspire confidence, does it? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Thanks Andy, after all these years I finally understand cricket. My life is complete. Adrian. --- On Wed, 3/2/10, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) ajrli...@googlemail.com wrote: From: Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) ajrli...@googlemail.com Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq To: 'Frederik Ramm' frede...@remote.org, 'Richard Fairhurst' rich...@systemed.net Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Date: Wednesday, 3 February, 2010, 12:13 Frederik Ramm wrote: Sent: 03 February 2010 11:38 AM To: Richard Fairhurst Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq Hi, Richard Fairhurst wrote: That is 300 times more open to misinterpretation than the cycleway example. Yet we cope. That's because the English have been trained to cope with stuff that nobody else understands for approximately the last 500 years, by way of ball games. --- start quote fixed playing rules --- There are two sides, one out in the field the other one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side hat's out comes in and the side that's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out. Sometimes you get men still in and not out. When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in. There are two men called umpires who stay out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have been out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game. --- end quote --- Ah, but the rules have changed. We now have three umpires. The third stays in but decides if those who are in are out if those umpires who are out are unsure whether those who are in are out or in. This certainly makes the rules a lot simpler don't you think? Cheers Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
2010/2/3 Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net: Um, yes, I do know the rules vary between countries. Firstly, like I say, you can accept that highway=cycleway implies foot=yes and bicycle=yes. Which it does for exactly the same reason that the tags are in English, the server code is in Ruby and this mailing list is called talk rather than frogs: the chap who got there first decides. well, the chap that first used cycleway might have been an Englishman, and might have had in mind that pedestrians are allowed, when tagging highway=cycleway, but there is absolutely no logic or natural meaning for cycleways to deduct access rights for pedestrians. IMHO the only thing you can assume is bicycle=yes. As the wiki doesn't speak about implications on foot (or at least most of the time didn't), you cannot assume anything for pedestrians on bicycles as long as you don't a) check for the position (inside which country) and local legislation/habits b) have an explicit tag aside (like foot=no/yes) And your argument that people won't tag highway=cycleway; foot=no but will tag highway=path; bicycle=designated; foot=no is batshit insane. I wasn't talking about paths, I was pointing out that walks like a duck, talks like a duck is not working automatically, because German ducks are already too different from English ducks, and I don't want to know about Chinese ducks. Or, you can agree that highway=cycleway will mean something different in Germany to the UK. No-one is stopping you from doing this. And, funnily enough, it's exactly what we do with most other values for the highway tag: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway#International_equivalence yes, I agree, still if you made a routing application with more than national coverage you either would have to know all those implications or find detailed tags on the object. I thought the OSM-way was assuming as less implications as possible. Some time ago there weren't even national borders which could have been used to determine which jurisdiction you are in. My intention was to point out, that good documentation and definitions are IMHO needed or at least very helpful for interpreting the data. I wouldn't mind if there were international equivalence lists for every single tag. There are some other false friends btw., some time ago I was advocating to tag an Italian bar as amenity=bar well knowing that in Germany people would expect a different place when seeing a bar than what they'll get in Italy. Still as all of the Italian Bars are called Bar and as they are not really a cafe, tagging them as Bar seems easiest to me. But you cannot make reliable assumptions whether they sell tobacco or ice_cream as long as it is not tagged. The same differences you get for petrol-stations: in Germany it will be hard to find one that doesn't sell tobacco and beer, while in Italy you would hardly find any that sells other than fuel. I agree that it would be better to have a default-list about what to expect in which context, instead of tagging hundreds of redundant tags to all objects, still in particular cases like routing-relevant highway some redundancy like foot=yes/no on cycleways IMHO is improving and clarifying the situation. ... When you write you should make strenuous efforts to be not quite so patronising. :p sorry, I didn't mean to, it's lack of knowledge / practise in language, maybe I don't get the subtones of what I write. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Frederik Ramm wrote: I don't think that the line is between hobby and professional. OSM with their volunteers does one kind of mapping, and TeleAtlas with their vans does another kind of mapping. Each has its own distinctive advantages. There are professional users wo spend money on OSM data when they *already have* TeleAtlas data. The commercial maps have fixed tagging schemes, minimum quality standards and only accept trained personnel as mappers. They have long turnaround times and cost a lot of money to maintain. At OSM we have no fixed tagging schema, *no minimum quality standards* you see that as a positive? Did you mean to write it that way? and anyone can map. We have super fast turnaround times and cost nothing to maintain. Different approaches - different results. Not worse or better; different. I don't see how you could have the advantages without the disadvantages. Add a fixed tagging scheme and peer review to OSM and you get more quality but less data and longer turnaround times; before long you are TeleAtlas v2.0 and have to charge for maps to pay your mappers because nobody does it for fun any more. So, yes, in my eyes the approach is really take it or leave it, and if someone decides he'd rather use TeleAtlas or Navteq then by all means, let him do it. I don't know why Dave F finds this VERY disillusioning; what was his illusion then? A regular here (Foundation member?) said that OSM would perceived to be a success when someone like Google used OSM data. I agree with that when meaning Google's wide scope of deployment. I wouldn't be disappointed if a map creator criticized OSM out of hand because it's free created by the public therefore must be poor. They could always be talked around, but the examples given here are of organizations who have spent a lot of time, effort money trying to integrate OSM into their systems. For them to conclude that OSM isn't good enough is disillusioning. For OSM to rule the world? I think the world is much better of with a few map datasets following different approaches that with a one size fits all But the routing/tagging of OSM doesn't fit anything at the moment. Even the maps produced now with OSM data are expected to be accepted with the OSM foibles built in. In some following posts commercial ventures have been mentioned. I see this as an irrelevance. Whether the map use is to make money or not , if these ventures aren't taking the data because it's unusable then OSM has to be considered to be failing. Again, disillusioning. Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi, Dave F. wrote: The commercial maps have fixed tagging schemes, minimum quality standards and only accept trained personnel as mappers. They have long turnaround times and cost a lot of money to maintain. At OSM we have no fixed tagging schema, *no minimum quality standards* you see that as a positive? Did you mean to write it that way? I was assessing the pros and cons of either side. Not having minimum quality standards is a con on the OSM side, but the super fast turnaround times which I mentioned next are a pro that would be killed by introducing minimum quality standards. You can have one of them but not both. So, yes, in my eyes the approach is really take it or leave it, and if someone decides he'd rather use TeleAtlas or Navteq then by all means, let him do it. I don't know why Dave F finds this VERY disillusioning; what was his illusion then? A regular here (Foundation member?) said that OSM would perceived to be a success when someone like Google used OSM data. That was surely a very personal statement. Remember, Foundation members are known to hold extreme views. Luckily they are outnumbered by non-member mappers by about 1:500 ;-) But the routing/tagging of OSM doesn't fit anything at the moment. Huh? Whether the map use is to make money or not , if these ventures aren't taking the data because it's unusable then OSM has to be considered to be failing. Again, disillusioning. I think the single most important reason why some ventures don't, and will not, use OSM data is not the quality but the license. ODbL or no ODbL. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: well, the chap that first used cycleway might have been an Englishman, and might have had in mind that pedestrians are allowed, when tagging highway=cycleway, but there is absolutely no logic or natural meaning for cycleways to deduct access rights for pedestrians. Maybe whoever used it first did not think about access rights. OSM always has been a very pragmatic project, and more about what is possible than what is allowed. And there is certainly no cycleway in the world where it is not possible for a pedestrian to walk. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
2010/2/3 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: Maybe whoever used it first did not think about access rights. Yes, I'm sure he didn't. We notice these things as the project evolves. OSM always has been a very pragmatic project, and more about what is possible than what is allowed. And there is certainly no cycleway in the world where it is not possible for a pedestrian to walk. Well, I'm personally mapping holes in fences ;-), still it _is_ forbidden to walk on a German/Dutch/French/Italian cycleway, you might get fined (or get problems in case of an accident). There is also no cycleway in the world that doesn't physically permit motorbikes to ride on, and there is no motorway that doesn't physically permit bikes to use it (seeing it all pragmatically). cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On 3 February 2010 15:32, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Whether the map use is to make money or not , if these ventures aren't taking the data because it's unusable then OSM has to be considered to be failing. Again, disillusioning. I think the single most important reason why some ventures don't, and will not, use OSM data is not the quality but the license. ODbL or no ODbL. +1 Indeed, for many companies, the only good data is free (as in beer) data, that you don't need to attribute, and that you don't need to contribute back. Anything short of that is too much. Emilie Laffray ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: well, the chap that first used cycleway might have been an Englishman, and might have had in mind that pedestrians are allowed, when tagging highway=cycleway, but there is absolutely no logic or natural meaning for cycleways to deduct access rights for pedestrians. IMHO the only thing you can assume is bicycle=yes. You're missing the point entirely. It doesn't matter whether the English word cycleway, as defined by the Oxford English Dictionary, implies access rights for pedestrians, or for goats, or for St Francis of Assisi. What matters is the context in which that key/value has been used in OSM. And in that case, it's historically been used to imply pedestrian rights too. Exactly analogous to highway=trunk, which, to reiterate, doesn't mean a trunk road in Britain. As the wiki doesn't speak about implications on foot (or at least most of the time didn't) Right. This is another reason why the wiki is made of fail. IIRC Map Features originally documented that cycleway means shared use, reflecting all existing current usage. Some pillock came along and edited it to say mainly for cycles, making it out of step with all existing current usage. Consequently we now have this insane situation where some people are following the original usage and others are following the wiki-fiddlers' usage. I say usage, but there's no evidence that wiki-fiddlers actually use the tags or in fact do any mapping at all. cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, Dave F. wrote: The commercial maps have fixed tagging schemes, minimum quality standards and only accept trained personnel as mappers. They have long turnaround times and cost a lot of money to maintain. At OSM we have no fixed tagging schema, *no minimum quality standards* you see that as a positive? Did you mean to write it that way? I was assessing the pros and cons of either side. Not having minimum quality standards is a con on the OSM side, but the super fast turnaround times which I mentioned next are a pro that would be killed by introducing minimum quality standards. You can have one of them but not both. So, yes, in my eyes the approach is really take it or leave it, and if someone decides he'd rather use TeleAtlas or Navteq then by all means, let him do it. I don't know why Dave F finds this VERY disillusioning; what was his illusion then? A regular here (Foundation member?) said that OSM would perceived to be a success when someone like Google used OSM data. That was surely a very personal statement. Remember, Foundation members are known to hold extreme views. Luckily they are outnumbered by non-member mappers by about 1:500 ;-) But the routing/tagging of OSM doesn't fit anything at the moment. Huh? Please take that in context with its following sentence. Can you show me a router that can get me door to door no matter where I live? Or a search utility that returns no false-positives? Whether the map use is to make money or not , if these ventures aren't taking the data because it's unusable then OSM has to be considered to be failing. Again, disillusioning. I think the single most important reason why some ventures don't, and will not, use OSM data is not the quality but the license. ODbL or no ODbL. Evidently this incorrect. the examples given here obviously accepted the license by trying to integrate the data. It was rejected because of the lack of quality of the data. -- Emilie Laffray: Indeed, for many companies, the only good data is free (as in beer) data, that you don't need to attribute, and that you don't need to contribute back. Anything short of that is too much. This is incorrect. Let's assume OSM is PD. The above companies would have *still* rejected it. Irrelevant of the license: Garbage in - Garbage out. Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi, Dave F. wrote: Please take that in context with its following sentence. Can you show me a router that can get me door to door no matter where I live? Or a search utility that returns no false-positives? Not with OSM, nor with any other dataset available for any amount of money. OSM doesn't let you fly to the moon in 3 seconds either, one of the many shortcomings that continue to disappoint me. I think the single most important reason why some ventures don't, and will not, use OSM data is not the quality but the license. ODbL or no ODbL. Evidently this incorrect. This is getting out of hand, foundations-of-debating-logically-wise. Firstly, you cannot ever have evidence that it is incorrect when I say I think Secondly, just because one or two or indeed n examples exist where someone rejected our data because of quality, this can never prove that there are not n+1 examples where someone rejected our data for another reason. I'm happy to indulge in endless debates but if I have to start explaining the basics of logic then my patience is exhausted. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
2010/2/3 Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net: Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: What matters is the context in which that key/value has been used in OSM. And in that case, it's historically been used to imply pedestrian rights too. OK. And where can I find this information? If it is not findable, it will not be used. Right. This is another reason why the wiki is made of fail. IIRC Map Features originally documented that cycleway means shared use, reflecting all existing current usage. Some pillock came along and edited it to say mainly for cycles, making it out of step with all existing current usage. The oldest version of highway=cycleway I can find already speaks about mainly or exclusively for cyclists (Oct. 2007). http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php?title=Tag:highway%3Dcyclewayoldid=55517 I found another interesting page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php?title=OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions but it doesn't seem to be of any help for the UK: United Kingdom The defaults do not apply. Someone who cares can fix this up. Consequently we now have this insane situation where some people are following the original usage and others are following the wiki-fiddlers' usage. I say usage, but there's no evidence that wiki-fiddlers actually use the tags or in fact do any mapping at all. don't know if you would call me a wiki-fiddler but I am mapping :D cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: OK. And where can I find this information? If it is not findable, it will not be used. Well, there's the rub. As a project, we are crap at documentation. Beyond crap. How anyone ever manages to get started with OSM amazes me. (And if you'll excuse me a hobby-horse, we also have a really exasperating tendency to say: 1. Something is wrong! 2. The wrong thing was done with an editor!!! 3. BAN TEH EDITOR!!1oneas3 or, in its milder form, 3. DEMAND TEH EDITOR IS FIXED IMMEDIATELY!!!11! which is, basically, the community abrogating its responsibility to help others. It's pretty amazing that, until the last couple of weeks, no-one apart from Steve had ever filmed a screencast on how to use Potlatch; and that we still have a Beginners' Guide on the wiki which focuses on the non-beginners' editor.) The oldest version of highway=cycleway I can find already speaks about mainly or exclusively for cyclists (Oct. 2007). http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php?title=Tag:highway%3Dcyclewayoldid=55517 IIRC it was documented on Map Features before the individual pages existed. I've tried to look at the history for Map Features on the wiki but, surprise surprise, it bombs out. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Fwd-Nav4All-navigation-shut-down-by-Navteq-tp4488024p4508277.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, Dave F. wrote: Please take that in context with its following sentence. Can you show me a router that can get me door to door no matter where I live? Or a search utility that returns no false-positives? Not with OSM, nor with any other dataset available for any amount of money. OSM doesn't let you fly to the moon in 3 seconds either, one of the many shortcomings that continue to disappoint me. I think the single most important reason why some ventures don't, and will not, use OSM data is not the quality but the license. ODbL or no ODbL. Evidently this incorrect. This is getting out of hand, foundations-of-debating-logically-wise. Firstly, you cannot ever have evidence that it is incorrect when I say I think Secondly, just because one or two or indeed n examples exist where someone rejected our data because of quality, this can never prove that there are not n+1 examples where someone rejected our data for another reason. And you can't prove the opposite! Please don't use I think... as a caveat against criticism. However, please, stick to the point of the thread: Lack of quality data what can be done about it. I'm happy to indulge in endless debates but if I have to start explaining the basics of logic then my patience is exhausted. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
In your letter dated Wed, 3 Feb 2010 16:52:01 +0100 you wrote: Well, I'm personally mapping holes in fences ;-), still it _is_ forbidden to walk on a German/Dutch/French/Italian cycleway, you might get fined (or get problems in case of an accident). Sorry, it's perfectly alright to walk on a Dutch cycle path if there is no foot path nearby. I hope you didn't get this misinformation from an OSM wiki. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
In your letter dated Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:03:09 + you wrote: Frederik Ramm wrote: But the routing/tagging of OSM doesn't fit anything at the moment. Huh? Please take that in context with its following sentence. Can you show me a router that can get me door to door no matter where I live? If the data is not 100% complete and accurate it is useless? Get real. I just tried the Google maps app. on my G1 to get home from work by bike. It was horrible. The app itself is horrible, and the map is bad: bike paths are not there. In contrast, openstreetmap data gets me there by car and bike. The lack of house numbers is annoying though. So it is not door to door, but street to street. And for me that is good enough. And yes, the situation is not as bright in other countries. But I think it is pointless to wait until OSM has 100% perfection everywhere to start using it. Of course lots of people are already using it. Promoting for example openmtbmap over other maps on a Garmin. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, Richard Fairhurst wrote: that we still have a Beginners' Guide on the wiki which focuses on the non-beginners' editor.) I didn't find the Beginners' Guide of 2 years ago helpful. No I didn't write a new one. Yes I did help someone with writing one which was published elsewhere. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 7:17 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Roy Wallace wrote: I suspect you will have opponents, though, because having physical characteristics that can accommodate a bike is not verifiable. Actually I think it is verifiable as cycleways have design characteristics which provide inspiration for this ability to verify on the ground. I don't understand, but I hope you're right - look forward to hearing your definition (in a new thread or on the consolidation wiki page). ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: That is 300 times more open to misinterpretation than the cycleway example. Yet we cope. So you're arguing that, because you guys are able to cope, these kind of tags are necessarily a good idea? The only thing they avoid is a few keystrokes. Don't get me wrong - I really like your duck test, and in general it works really well. But as I implied before, a cycleway still isn't defined as well as a duck. It may never be... (though I'm still looking forward to a verifiable definition...) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: Ah, but the rules have changed. We now have three umpires. The third stays in but decides if those who are in are out if those umpires who are out are unsure whether those who are in are out or in. This certainly makes the rules a lot simpler don't you think? Then there's the fact that both teams don't necessarily need to be out twice thanks to the follow on Just when you thought you'd got it, we'll add some new rules :-) Jon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
All this is true, but I think we are too concentrated on generating content (i.e. mapping) as opposed to actually using this data for some meaningful purpose. I guess this is natural, since majority of OSM users are mostly map data producers, and only the minority is actively involved in map consuming. It is right that we are all concentrating on creation of content. But, what we haven't had yet is any commercial map data consumers telling us what they need. Well, in a way, maybe Nav4All is telling us what it needs... and I sometimes hear Cloudmade banging on about routing. It would be interesting to have some map consumer tell us what their minimum mapping needs. Statements like OSM has been looked at but is no solution because there is no full coverage don't help us to provide what they need. While mappers might be uncomfortable to mark out an area and tag it with ok_for_Nav4All=yes, I think I would be happy to mark out areas with road_network=complete and cycle_network=complete, based on some definition provided by someone who would actually use that information. I think one of the hardest parts of OSM is that the world is very heterogeneous. You see that in the discussions about cyclepaths, you that in software that using doesn't quite do what is locally expected (or needed), and of course the quality of the data varies wildly. So, I can only speak for what I see here in .nl. And that is quite good. Whether is is yournavigation (based on gosmore), andnav2, or a Garmin gps, I can expect to get where I want to be, both by car and by bike, and with a reasonable route. Of course, 'we' got lucky, and got most of the road network from AND, but that doesn't include cycle paths, and it is not often that I come across one that is missing. But the main point is that from a tagging point of view, all of this is not very hard. There are not that many tags you really need for a road network, there are validators to help you clean up intersections, but the main thing is to get out there and try to navigate using OSM data. I think it is pity that nav4all doesn't want to OSM because you do need the eyeballs get it right. In my experience, OSM data worthless until you use it for something. If all you do is make pretty maps, you will never get what you need for navigation, because you won't spot the bugs. So, if we want to 'sell' OSM as suitable for navigation, then 'we' have to go out and use it for that purpose, ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi, You make this sound as if this is about the freedom of the new mappers. But they are, even today, free to follow any ruleset, cheatsheet, or book that they want to use. It's just that they don't get a guarantee that everyone else is using the same ruleset but that's ok - there might be rulesets much too complex for a newcomer, or the newcomer ruleset for rural Peru might be different from the one for urban Japan. Trying to make them all the same will needlessly reduce OSM's richness. These rulesets are unlikely to be devised by the same body; it would be too complex and the result would be less than optimal for everyone involved. We could have support for local tagging guides in a future version of the database without much effort. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/API_v0.7#Classes This would allow an editor to suggest tagging schemes with respect to the area where the mapping takes place. Mappers can explicitly tell what their tagging means. The advantage over hard-coded click-buttons is that it can be used across different editors. The advantage over the wiki is that it is maintained by those who really map. If different mappers want to use slightly and subtle different tagging schemes, they just can do without rants. But a simple postprocessing server can for any defined purpose still automatically derive a consistent tagging. Thus we could have rules to check minimum data quality without forcing the would into a overly complex, ill-fitting tagging scheme. Cheers, Roland ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi! Kai Krueger wrote: Interesting. I think that could also be spun positively ;-) It means people in the industry are starting to take OSM seriously and actually invest money to evaluate how far it has come and be prepared for when it does reach a sufficient quality or need to quickly switch. It also means they must have had some confidence in that the process of crowd sourcing map data can work. That's not quite the way they put it. They evaluated it in order not to miss a major development there, but concluded that it is no alternative and dropped the idea of using it for good. Kai Krueger wrote: Again I would agree with you that geometry is good and attribution still somewhat lacking. Osm is missing loads of turn restriction, height or weight restrictions, speed restrictions and housenumbers to name a few, even in areas with very good geometry coverage. But from a point of view of being disillusioned, I think in the majority of cases they are missing and seldomly wrong. So it just needs a lot more mappers and some time and that should be achievable too. Without knowing the company and any more of what they concluded I obviously can't say if the above statement is true for your example. But I have at least been peripherally involved with writing the turn-by-turn routing support of GpsMid that is based on OSM data and in my limited testing, the routes it found in high coverage areas, were not really worse than those found by a TomTom or Navigon that I had for comparison. Each had parts where it was better and worse than the others. So I do think it would be possible to make good routing from OSM, given good (commercial?) software. I guess this boils down to a matter of personal conviction. As long as we are using the same tag with three or more different meanings, I hold that there is no way to make decent conclusions from that. And I do not see a positive tendency, in my field of intereset I have now observed 14 months of repetitive discussion with zero progress towards any sort of cohesion. Kai Krueger wrote: So as I stated above, I don't think the _main_ problem at the moment is the anarchistic tagging, but still too limited coverage, especially on tagging relevant for routing. Again, this is not how the company put it. The evaluation failed due to the tagging, so even a full coverage with the same tagging would not be a sufficient basis. bye Nop -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Fwd-Nav4All-navigation-shut-down-by-Navteq-tp4488024p4500254.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi! Frederik Ramm wrote: The commercial maps have fixed tagging schemes, minimum quality standards and only accept trained personnel as mappers. They have long turnaround times and cost a lot of money to maintain. At OSM we have no fixed tagging schema, no minimum quality standards, and anyone can map. We have super fast turnaround times and cost nothing to maintain. Different approaches - different results. Not worse or better; different. Yes, I agree with it that those are very different things. That's the reason why I think that OSM should not pretend to be/be advertised as a viable alternative to commercial map data. Which was the original gist of the thread. bye Nop -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Fwd-Nav4All-navigation-shut-down-by-Navteq-tp4488024p4500271.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi! Ulf Lamping wrote: Am 01.02.2010 20:03, schrieb Frederik Ramm: I don't see how you could have the advantages without the disadvantages. Add a fixed tagging scheme and peer review to OSM and you get more quality but less data and longer turnaround times; before long you are TeleAtlas v2.0 and have to charge for maps to pay your mappers because nobody does it for fun any more. Hmmm, a lot of the mappers I was talking to told me that it was a burden to find the right tag for something, in the hope that it will appear on the map. Seems a lot of mappers would be quite happy to follow an at least more fixed tagging scheme than what we currently have today. I have heard the same from many new mappers. Initially people *expect* that there was a fixed tagging scheme for most common things. They are asking for a simple way to find the right tag. It becomes rather disillusioning when they find out how things really are. Most do not want to search wikis, read through discussion backlogs, design new tags, decide between contradictive tool presets, join meta discussions about the meaning of voting, ask questions about contradictions in wiki contents. Most simply want to map and would find a finished catalogue with a single tagging scheme a huge improvement. bye Nop -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Fwd-Nav4All-navigation-shut-down-by-Navteq-tp4488024p4500293.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
So as I stated above, I don't think the _main_ problem at the moment is the anarchistic tagging, but still too limited coverage, especially on tagging relevant for routing. Again, this is not how the company put it. The evaluation failed due to the tagging, so even a full coverage with the same tagging would not be a sufficient basis. Was this due to tagging variation within a country, or differences in tag usages between countries? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 10:48 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: I don't think that will make the we need fixed rules fraction happy. We have renderers with fixed rules today - several of them - but that kind of fixed rules is not what they are looking for. Just to make it clear: I'm neither in the fixed rules nor I'll tag the way I like camp - I try to use tags that I see are popular on Tagwatch (or on the Wiki page), but I also tag my own for stuff I think I need (like todo=continue) without resorting to long discussions on the mailing lists. And when I'm talking about tagging inconsistencies I'm not talking about differences in cycleways between Lima and Vancouver. I realize we live in a diverse world. But tagging boundaries in the same country using several different approaches doesn't really feel reasonable or useful. Of course I could go and fix it, but I'm sure I'd get criticized for that, especially since it's not my home territory. Regards, Igor ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On 2 February 2010 21:26, NopMap ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote: That's not quite the way they put it. They evaluated it in order not to miss a major development there, but concluded that it is no alternative and dropped the idea of using it for good. Can they describe a suitable tagging scheme that would appease them and/or others? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
2010/2/1 Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es El Lunes, 1 de Febrero de 2010, 80n escribió: It is right that we are all concentrating on creation of content. But, what we haven't had yet is any commercial map data consumers telling us what they need. Well, in a way, maybe Nav4All is telling us what it needs... and I sometimes hear Cloudmade banging on about routing. The problem with this is the sofixit response. No it's a different kind of problem. More like the gratification from seeing something rendered. If there's a nice rendering for embankments and cuttings then people will tag them, if there's no rendering then they won't get tagged. If you knew that your city's map would be used by Flikr once it reached a certain standard then you'd probably be more motivated to reach that standard. So if a commercial company says what their standards are, then this will motivate some people to reach for these. 80n OSM works like many other open-source projects, where someone says: Hey, X is bad - and a developer replies Yeah, and this is open source, so fix it. The OSM community works the same way. I'm not going to work for a company just because they ask for it very nicely. Dammit, if a company wants me to fix OSM in some way, I could as well get paid for that! Maybe the time is coming for the business model in where I get OSM data, fork it, fix it in some way, and stamp a certified technicial-approved version on the cover. For just a couple grand. You want OSM to comply with certain quality standards? Well, either invest in that, or pay for that. But it's not gonna magically come from the users. Cheers, -- -- Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es Un ordenador no es un televisor ni un microondas, es una herramienta compleja. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi! Frederik Ramm wrote: It is my honest belief that if all those fixed-rule-enthusiasts had their way, OSM would become uninteresting, mappers reduced to drones filling out forms that other people have provided for them. It might become more commercially viable (with businesses fighting over what presets get put into the most widely-used editors so that drones will create more valuable data), but if I had to choose I'd rather be part of an interesting project than one that's commercially viable. In contrast to that, it is my believe that it would make mapping more interesting. A consistent, easy-to-use set of tags would spare mappers from spending time trying to figure out how to do something that has been figured out many times before or which contradictive information to follow. Instead mappers would be free to simply do what they enjoy - mapping. bye Nop -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Fwd-Nav4All-navigation-shut-down-by-Navteq-tp4488024p4500476.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Richard Fairhurst wrote: It's beginning to happen already. As OSM's data structures (principally creative and unexpected uses of relations) and tags become more complex, and as the project expands beyond the initial audience of geeks, the editing tools are inevitably starting to abstract away the nitty-gritty. In two years' time, most users won't know or care what the cycleway tags are; they'll just click the cycleway icon(s) in their editor and tick the appropriate options, and the editor will invisibly sort the tags out. Is there any initiative to make sure the different editors use the same tags for the same thing? If so, I missed it completely. bye Nop -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Fwd-Nav4All-navigation-shut-down-by-Navteq-tp4488024p4500480.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
NopMap wrote: Is there any initiative to make sure the different editors use the same tags for the same thing? If so, I missed it completely. Not formally, but certainly when deciding which presets to use in Potlatch I'll look at the other editor presets; at tools like OSMdoc and Tagwatch; and at the Mapnik stylesheet. IME the editors and Mapnik tend to share a fairly common core of tags whereas the wiki can be a bit out there. Someone came up with a useful comparison chart recently but, haha, it's on our embarrassment of a wiki so forget any chances of finding that again. I will confess to being very disappointed that JOSM has now adopted the retarded why-use-one-tag-when-eighty-three-will-do cycleway scheme. Instead mappers would be free to simply do what they enjoy - mapping. I like your optimism. But people do genuinely appear to enjoy wiki-fiddling, too. Sadly. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Fwd-Nav4All-navigation-shut-down-by-Navteq-tp4488024p4500675.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
NopMap wrote: Hi! A consistent, easy-to-use set of tags would spare mappers from spending time trying to figure out how to do something that has been figured out many times before or which contradictive information to follow. As I map a road I've not visited before, I don't consider using highway=street_with_houses, I add highway=residential . If I see a road sign with a speed limit I add maxspeed=30mph, not restriction:speed=30mph or legal_constraint_on_speed=30mph. I don't agonise over the tag to use to label the plaque that describes the title of the street allocated by the council, I just add a name=* tag. All of this is listed on a single page in the wiki - it's even printed on a mug! Why is this so hard? Instead mappers would be free to simply do what they enjoy - mapping. If you have a fixed list then suddenly this enjoyable mapping experience becomes a frustrating battle when someone sees something that they want to add but it's not in the list, so it can't be added. Cheers, Chris ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
2010/2/2 NopMap ekkeh...@gmx.de: It becomes rather disillusioning when they find out how things really are. Most do not want to search wikis, read through discussion backlogs, design new tags, decide between contradictive tool presets, join meta discussions about the meaning of voting, ask questions about contradictions in wiki contents. Most simply want to map and would find a finished catalogue with a single tagging scheme a huge improvement. I read very often about this, and am asking myself: why is noone proposing / offering such a catalogue? It would be simple as that: set up a catalogue with all your definitions and publish it for newbies to be used. Oh, and update it say on a daily basis ;-) I find that things are improving generally (while some might have become worse). Slowly the wiki seems to get better, more keys get documented, etc. IMHO the problem with documentation is like Liz pointed out: you have to create a proposal, look for cryptic Wiki-code-patterns, stick to dates for RFC, voting, etc., discuss your proposal with many critics, copy the proposal to features if everything went well: it's a lot of work for every single feature and in the end most of talk will laugh at you and tell you: nice you got this feature voted upon, but votings don't matter, and btw: there were only 30 people voting out of 20, the vote is pointless. You will not do this for more than a handfull of features. If I come across some weird (and mostly contradictic definitions) in the wiki, I sometimes try to correct the situation (if it's not one of the classical unsolved cases that I know of). If after every discussion on one of the mailing-list the conclusion would be transfered to the wiki, most features would probably have standard tags to rely on. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I read very often about this, and am asking myself: why is noone proposing / offering such a catalogue? It would be simple as that: set up a catalogue with all your definitions and publish it for newbies to be used. Oh, and update it say on a daily basis ;-) My answer: Behind every we need better rules to guide newbies sits an ugly we need rules to force the community to do things in a certain way and if they don't abide by the rules, we'll simply run a bot over them. Nobody is truly interested in helping newbies, that's just a fig leaf for wanting to stamp out creativity and replace it by a fixed rule set decided by a majority of 10 to 9 wiki fiddlers. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
2010/2/2 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: wanting to stamp out creativity and replace it by a fixed rule set decided by a majority of 10 to 9 wiki fiddlers. might be partially true, but by discriminating everybody who tries to document stuff in the wiki (AFAIK the wiki is the main source to do this) as wiki fiddlers IMHO nothing is gained. I'd encourage people to set up new pages for new features on the wiki as often as they can, whilst changing/improving/enriching/specifying the definitions of existing ones is potentially more harmful and should discussed prior to do it. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:04 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: I will confess to being very disappointed that JOSM has now adopted the retarded why-use-one-tag-when-eighty-three-will-do cycleway scheme. So you seriously think highway=cycleway is all that's needed to describe the various flavours of cycleways worldwide? If so, I'd be personally interested to hear your definition of a cycleway. I like your optimism. But people do genuinely appear to enjoy wiki-fiddling, too. Sadly. What's with the wiki-fiddler hatred? (not just you, Richard, in general) All those people advocating for a consistent/enforced/limited tagging scheme - how do you think such a scheme should be produced? Wiki-fiddlers (meaning those who use and edit the wiki) are the primary people who are aiming to document the meanings of tags and develop a more consistent tagging scheme...If you've got a problem with the definition of highway=cycleway, why not stop complaining about wiki-fiddlers and contribute!: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Consolidation_footway_cycleway_path If, on the other hand, you think iterative/collaborative/gradual improvement towards the goal (of a consistent tag set) by the OSM community is *impossible*, then why even bother being involved in OSM...? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On 3 February 2010 06:13, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: What's with the wiki-fiddler hatred? (not just you, Richard, in general) All those people advocating for a consistent/enforced/limited tagging scheme - how do you think such a scheme should be produced? The big problem with using a wiki for documenting this kind of thing is without a lot of effort it isn't consistent or indexed properly. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Roy Wallace wrote: Richard Fairhurst wrote: I will confess to being very disappointed that JOSM has now adopted the retarded why-use-one-tag-when-eighty-three-will-do cycleway scheme. So you seriously think highway=cycleway is all that's needed to describe the various flavours of cycleways worldwide? If so, I'd be personally interested to hear your definition of a cycleway. No, of course I don't. OSM tagging has traditionally worked by identifying fairly significant objects. This is a chemist, this is a trunk road, this is a canal. This is a farm, this is a railway station, this is a cycleway. Each object contains a fair amount of meaning. This is a railway station, so it's open to passengers, trains call here, you can wait at it until your train turns up. This is a chemist, so it's a type of shop, you can buy medical goods at it. The mapper can, of course, add extra tags to make the definition more precise. So, with the chemist, you might add opening hours if it's an all-night chemist. With the railway station, you might add an 'access=private' tag if it's, say, a military railway station (we have one of those near Bicester, UK) or a private one (we have one in Scotland called simply 'IBM' :) ). And so on. In true OSM fashion, this is often iterative. You add the basic tag first, then you go back later and refine it. This approach is because, since mappers are our most valuable resource, we optimise for ease of growing the map. The data consumer is expected to postprocess, which of course they'll be doing anyway (rendering, generating routing database, extracting and reformatting as a gazetteer, whatever). But they only need to do the postprocessing they want. A renderer may choose not to care that some chemists are 24 hours, and will show them all with the same icon. A train simulator certainly won't care about that and may well not care about the private stations - hey, the driver still stops there. And so on. Essentially, you tag according to the duck test - if it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it's a duck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test). This saves you all the work of describing the species every time. If actually it's a rare Outer Hebridean Florglenood which isn't quite a duck though looks and behaves identically, hell, you just do wildfowl=duck, species=florglenood. 'highway=cycleway' is just like this. It's a meaningful object. It means a path with physical characteristics that can accommodate a bike, where bikes and pedestrians are permitted, and motor traffic is banned. It means, basically, that it quacks like a cycleway. This saves a whole bunch of tagging work, and means that clients don't need to care about the details if they don't want to. But again, if you want to refine it, you can. You can have 'highway=cycleway; foot=no' if that's the case. The 'path=' tag turns OSM tagging on its head. It's a largely meaningless object. It shifts the burden onto the mapper, who has to start with four tags where one was enough. It makes it more difficult for, say, a renderer which now has to parse these four tags, rather than one, to know how to draw it. This isn't how we talk about ducks, it isn't how we tag railway stations, chemists, trunk roads or farms, and it shouldn't be how we tag cycleways. What's with the wiki-fiddler hatred? (not just you, Richard, in general) All those people advocating for a consistent/enforced/ limited tagging scheme - how do you think such a scheme should be produced? Wiki-fiddlers (meaning those who use and edit the wiki) are the primary people who are aiming to document the meanings of tags and develop a more consistent tagging scheme...If you've got a problem with the definition of highway=cycleway, why not stop complaining about wiki- fiddlers and contribute!: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Consolidation_footway_cycleway_path May I refer the honourable gentleman to my answer of one year and three days ago: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-January/033638.html (The tl;dr version: there are much better ways of crowdsourcing tag definitions than a MediaWiki install with no relation to the map database.) Harry's talk from last year's SOTM (community smoothness) is also worth watching. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Fwd-Nav4All-navigation-shut-down-by-Navteq-tp4488024p4504223.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Am 02.02.2010 14:32, schrieb Chris Hill: As I map a road I've not visited before, I don't consider using highway=street_with_houses, I add highway=residential . If I see a road sign with a speed limit I add maxspeed=30mph, not restriction:speed=30mph or legal_constraint_on_speed=30mph. I don't agonise over the tag to use to label the plaque that describes the title of the street allocated by the council, I just add a name=* tag. All of this is listed on a single page in the wiki - it's even printed on a mug! Why is this so hard? You're all right when it comes to common stuff, that's documented in Map Features and may already exist in the presets of JOSM/Potlatch. But that's the easy part. The hassle begins, when you come to a topic where this isn't the case. You're lucky if you find exactly one wiki page about what you're searching for and when it's not widely disputed. If you're unlucky, you'll find three wiki pages for slightly the same topic that has lot's of conflicting arguments. As a grown up mapper you may already got a feeling what seems to be a good idea and what has serious drawbacks - take the infos and go on mapping. As a newbie you're completely doomed now and feeling unsafe what to do. Several newbies told me, that they didn't add something to OSM because they were feeling completely unsafe about the right way to do it, although they had all the local infos :-( Instead mappers would be free to simply do what they enjoy - mapping. If you have a fixed list then suddenly this enjoyable mapping experience becomes a frustrating battle when someone sees something that they want to add but it's not in the list, so it can't be added. That's maybe the biggest missunderstanding here. This is NOT about closing up the tag set so you can't enter new tags. For me, this is how to get to a wider set of tags that most will agree upon - and how to get there easier and faster than the way we are doing it today. There is already a fixed set of tags as you've written yourself. You won't use highway=street_with_houses instead of highway=residential - almost 99.% of OSMer will agree here. Getting to this agreement currently takes ages. Question is: Can we improve this or is there no better way as the slow progression we have today? Regards, ULFL ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Richard Fairhurst wrote: Essentially, you tag according to the duck test - if it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it's a duck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test). This saves you all the work of describing the species every time. If actually it's a rare Outer Hebridean Florglenood which isn't quite a duck though looks and behaves identically, hell, you just do wildfowl=duck, species=florglenood. You really got me here... I actually googled Florglenood... Quaaack ! ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Frederik Ramm wrote: [lots of helpful information] Thanks for that - very useful. And legal-talk is - that way. Well, routing was one of the things mentioned previously... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Richard, Richard Fairhurst wrote: I will confess to being very disappointed that JOSM has now adopted the retarded why-use-one-tag-when-eighty-three-will-do cycleway scheme. I don't know how this has changed over time, but the current version of JOSM has Dedicated cycleway = highway=cycleway Segregated foot- and cycleway[*] = highway=path,foot=designated,bicycle=designated,segregated=yes Combined foot- and cycleway = highway=path,foot=designated,bicycle=designated That corresponds to the German signage http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2d/Zeichen_237.svg/120px-Zeichen_237.svg.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1b/Zeichen_241.svg/120px-Zeichen_241.svg.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/03/Zeichen_240.svg/120px-Zeichen_240.svg.png I don't know how one is supposed to tag a way that is suitable for cycles and pedestrians but does *not* have the above signs; I tend to use highway=cycleway for those as well, which then upsets the horse riders because if there are no signs then, in Germany, that implies horse=yes whereas something with one of the blue signs above automatically means horse=no. I'm just offering that as an explanation, I don't really want to discuss it in breadth but you're welcome to fire up your Babelfish for a night of fun on talk-de ;) Speaking of talk-de - you English don't do that language compression thing with the hyphen I highlighted above, do you? Where a phrase like motorway and byway gets shortened to motor- and byway? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi! Frederik Ramm wrote: Nobody is truly interested in helping newbies, that's just a fig leaf for wanting to stamp out creativity and replace it by a fixed rule set decided by a majority of 10 to 9 wiki fiddlers. That's a very dire view on the motivations of the community. In contrast, I believe that there actually are people who try to listen to the sorrows of (potential) newcomers and want to lower the learning curve. Way too few, though. bye Nop -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Fwd-Nav4All-navigation-shut-down-by-Navteq-tp4488024p4504471.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi, Ulf Lamping wrote: You're all right when it comes to common stuff, that's documented in Map Features and may already exist in the presets of JOSM/Potlatch. But that's the easy part. The hassle begins, when you come to a topic where this isn't the case. But this thread started with people complaining about lack of commercial usability because of tagging mayhem (Nic's term). Although I share Ivan's sentiment (producing something commercially usable should not be our #1 goal), maybe we can stick with that for a moment - let us try and find out what data the commercial providers have and which is *not* on one simple Wiki page (or a mug). It can't be the murky details of cycleways and bridleways because the commercial providers don't have that, or if they have it then only in selected areas. It can't be highway=path and all that because they don't have it. It can't be - in my opinion! - the top highway types from motorway down to residential because they aren't any better in that than we are (or are they). It could be turn restrictions; I agree that an easy editor for those is required - but while the tagging rules are a bit complex for turn restrictions, they are not mayhem - they are perfectly clear. So where is it that 1. the commercial providers have good data 2. OSM hasn't and 3. the reason for OSM not having it is not lack of coverage but lack of consensus regarding tagging? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi, NopMap wrote: In contrast, I believe that there actually are people who try to listen to the sorrows of (potential) newcomers and want to lower the learning curve. Way too few, though. Fixed tagging rules are not needed to lower the learning curve. I have the highest regard for someone who sits down and writes a tutorial for newcomers. My skepticism comes from seeing too many people whine about the lack of fixed tagging rules (oh so difficult for the poor newcomers!) while at the same time *not* writing a tutorial. That makes me think they just use the poor newcomers argument to achieve something else. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On 3 February 2010 09:32, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: It can't be the murky details of cycleways and bridleways because the commercial providers don't have that, or if they have it then only in selected areas. It can't be highway=path and all that because they don't have it. It can't be - in my opinion! - the top highway types from motorway down to residential because they aren't any better in that than we are (or are they). Actually I was confused by that too, which is why I asked for a suggested tagging scheme. It could be turn restrictions; I agree that an easy editor for those is required - but while the tagging rules are a bit complex for turn restrictions, they are not mayhem - they are perfectly clear. The problem isn't that tagging is complicated, it is how can editors make it easier. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Am 03.02.2010 00:32, schrieb Frederik Ramm: Hi, Ulf Lamping wrote: You're all right when it comes to common stuff, that's documented in Map Features and may already exist in the presets of JOSM/Potlatch. But that's the easy part. The hassle begins, when you come to a topic where this isn't the case. But this thread started with people complaining about lack of commercial usability because of tagging mayhem (Nic's term). Although I share Ivan's sentiment (producing something commercially usable should not be our #1 goal), maybe we can stick with that for a moment - let us try and find out what data the commercial providers have and which is *not* on one simple Wiki page (or a mug). It can't be the murky details of cycleways and bridleways because the commercial providers don't have that, or if they have it then only in selected areas. It can't be highway=path and all that because they don't have it. It can't be - in my opinion! - the top highway types from motorway down to residential because they aren't any better in that than we are (or are they). It could be turn restrictions; I agree that an easy editor for those is required - but while the tagging rules are a bit complex for turn restrictions, they are not mayhem - they are perfectly clear. So where is it that 1. the commercial providers have good data 2. OSM hasn't and 3. the reason for OSM not having it is not lack of coverage but lack of consensus regarding tagging? Chris argument was about the none existing problems of tag finding and I was responding to that. Your argument is about what the commercial providers have definitions that we lack of. As far as I know that definitions, I agree with you that there's no real problem for us :-) Regards, ULFL ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Am 03.02.2010 00:38, schrieb Frederik Ramm: Hi, NopMap wrote: In contrast, I believe that there actually are people who try to listen to the sorrows of (potential) newcomers and want to lower the learning curve. Way too few, though. Fixed tagging rules are not needed to lower the learning curve. Could you please explain this? Fixed tagging rules will very certainly lower the learning curve to getting things on the map. You failed to explain the alternatives ... Regards, ULFL ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi, Ulf Lamping wrote: In contrast, I believe that there actually are people who try to listen to the sorrows of (potential) newcomers and want to lower the learning curve. Way too few, though. Fixed tagging rules are not needed to lower the learning curve. Could you please explain this? Fixed tagging rules will very certainly lower the learning curve to getting things on the map. You failed to explain the alternatives ... If you want to help newcomers, then make a list of features that are rendered on the map, and write a nice tutorial explaining them, together with the fact that of course every map is different and just because a pub shows up on z16 on a certain map doesn't mean a restaurant will, too. What is so hard about this? Why do you think it means a steeper than necessary learning curve? From the newcomer's viewpoint, how would this be different with fixed tagging rules? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: If you want to help newcomers, then make a list of features that are rendered on the map, and write a nice tutorial explaining them, ... What is so hard about this? Forgive me for jumping in...but I think the hard part is to write a nice tutorial explaining them, based on what is on the wiki. The wiki is imperfect, and if it were easy to write nice explanations for all rendered tags, then those nice explanations would probably already be on the wiki, and the tutorial wouldn't be necessary... So, unless we want to defer to some higher power (???) to tell us what to tag, we need to step up and fix the situation ourselves. What's so hard about that? (:P) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
2010/2/2 Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net: Essentially, you tag according to the duck test - if it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it's a duck 'highway=cycleway' is just like this. It's a meaningful object. It means a path with physical characteristics that can accommodate a bike, where bikes and pedestrians are permitted, and motor traffic is banned. this is valid for England and maybe Scotland and Wales (and probably some other countries), but it is not working on a worldwide basis. Your definition would in most of central Europe not be functioning: routers would lead pedestrians in areas where they are not allowed to walk (cycleways). Nobody would tag them with foot=no because it's obvious ;-) that you can't walk there. foot=yes would be the exception. When you write about meaning you should keep in mind that what seems obvious for you isn't for someone with a different background, but he might rather think that the opposite is obvious. they don't want to. But again, if you want to refine it, you can. You can have 'highway=cycleway; foot=no' if that's the case. don't tag redundant stuff, just highway=cycleway; foot=yes would be worth a second tag... Actually I wasn't writing about the best way to tag cycleways. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi! Kai Krueger wrote: Even if promoting to the company did not work, it might still be worth promoting OSM in the media coverage / blogs of the Nav4All shutdown as a reason why it is important to have free and open map data to prevent anti-competitive activities by a few large companies. I am fully aware that many people will not want to hear that - but why promote something that OSM cannot deliver? I can understand why Nav4All will rather shutdown than attempt to switch to OSM. A while ago, I had approached another company which produces mobile navigation software, where I know some people. I tried to advertise OSM data and maybe get some support for their software. To my great surprise, they had spent a considerable sum of money on converting OSM data into their format and had already evaluated it. The result of the evaluation was disillusioning: The geometry is pretty good, but the attribution is way below what would be required to substitute the commercial data. They decided to not use it, in spite of the work already invested. Which is rather close to the statement from Nav4All. OSM is quite suitable for any hobby project, but I believe that the anarchistic nature and the often controversial and sometimes disputed and chaotic tagging are reason enough to deter the use of OSM in any professional area where you are talking about warranties. The commercial map data has fixed tagging schemes and minimum quality standards. It contains no nasty surprises in general and if it does fail in some places, there's a provider who is liable to fix this ASAP. As long as OSM has no comparable standards (and I don't expect it will have - I'd like to point at my favorite example that there's still no agreed way to tag something as simple as a bicycle way), it is unlikely to meet the existing standards of commercial providers. I am aware that other than Nav4All and the company I talked to, Skobbler is trying to switch to OSM. They are probably running into all the problems with ambiguities and controversial tagging right now. So I am very interested what sort of navigation they will manage. bye Nop -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Fwd-Nav4All-navigation-shut-down-by-Navteq-tp4488024p4494366.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
format and had already evaluated it. The result of the evaluation was disillusioning: The geometry is pretty good, but the attribution is way below what would be required to substitute the commercial data. Can you give any more details? Although general tagging is an anarchy, 'automobile highway' tagging is generally well defined. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
2010/2/1 NopMap ekkeh...@gmx.de: standards (and I don't expect it will have - I'd like to point at my favorite example that there's still no agreed way to tag something as simple as a bicycle way), it is unlikely to meet the existing standards of commercial providers. well, how many professional map data providers provide mapdata for simple things like cycleways? The fact that there is not one agreed way to tag cycleways, but there is 2 agreed ways to do it doesn't IMHO turn all related data useless, does it? Have a look at cyclemap for more proofs ;-) cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
NopMap wrote: Hi! Kai Krueger wrote: Even if promoting to the company did not work, it might still be worth promoting OSM in the media coverage / blogs of the Nav4All shutdown as a reason why it is important to have free and open map data to prevent anti-competitive activities by a few large companies. I am fully aware that many people will not want to hear that - but why promote something that OSM cannot deliver? I can understand why Nav4All will rather shutdown than attempt to switch to OSM. A while ago, I had approached another company which produces mobile navigation software, where I know some people. I tried to advertise OSM data and maybe get some support for their software. To my great surprise, they had spent a considerable sum of money on converting OSM data into their format and had already evaluated it. The result of the evaluation was disillusioning: The geometry is pretty good, but the attribution is way below what would be required to substitute the commercial data. They decided to not use it, in spite of the work already invested. I've been saying this since the first week I start working in OSM. I was basically told to shut up by people here claiming that OSM was a database with foibles that the maps providers would have to sort out themselves; they could take it or leave it. Sounds like they're leaving it - VERY disillusioning. Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Mike N. wrote: format and had already evaluated it. The result of the evaluation was disillusioning: The geometry is pretty good, but the attribution is way below what would be required to substitute the commercial data. Can you give any more details? Although general tagging is an anarchy, 'automobile highway' tagging is generally well defined. In the SW UK, I would say not. Inner Urban seems OK as long as you want to stop artery road rather than at the door; outer urban even less accuracy. Rural areas - it's lucky dip really, whole villages still missing even their connecting roads are absent. I would hazard a guess that foot routes are nearer to completion than vehicle. I'm off to fill in some gaps. Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 2:31 PM, NopMap ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote: OSM is quite suitable for any hobby project, but I believe that the anarchistic nature and the often controversial and sometimes disputed and chaotic tagging are reason enough to deter the use of OSM in any professional area where you are talking about warranties. I have to agree with Nop, up to a point. OSM is a great project and I invest a lot of my free time in it, but I still think it has a lot of failure points. The first time I wanted to use OSM data for a professional job, the data simply failed me. And I'm only talking about generating a high-scale UK map, not some complex routing application. Even drawing land borders between England, Scotland and Wales proved to be big PITA because of different approaches to tagging between the three regions (not to mention that England's regional boundaries were tagged the same way as the border with Scotland). I don't whether this has been improved in the meantime. So you are forced to manually post-process the data, which kind-of invalidates the whole tagging approach in OSM. I think this will sooner or later have to be addressed by the OSM community. Or we will have to build much better mapping applications which will be able to go around these obstacles. Best regards, Igor ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On 01/-10/-28163 08:59 PM, NopMap wrote: Hi! Kai Krueger wrote: Even if promoting to the company did not work, it might still be worth promoting OSM in the media coverage / blogs of the Nav4All shutdown as a reason why it is important to have free and open map data to prevent anti-competitive activities by a few large companies. I am fully aware that many people will not want to hear that - but why promote something that OSM cannot deliver? I can understand why Nav4All will rather shutdown than attempt to switch to OSM. I'd agree with you if you'd insert a OSM cannot _yet_ deliver. No, I don't think OSM can currently quite compare with the full Navteq on a global scale in those countries that Navteq has good coverage for turn-by-turn applications. And I would probably even go as far as say I can also understand why they would rather shutdown then currently use OSM depending on where their main user base is. But that doesn't mean we can't use the fact that a company (potentially) has to shutdown due to licensing dispute between competitors, to make the point why it is important to have open data and try and convince people that is worth their while to contribute to such an effort to ensure that it does become a viable alternative. And I am convinced that OSM will continue to become viable in more and more applications including eventually turn-by-turn navigation. A while ago, I had approached another company which produces mobile navigation software, where I know some people. I tried to advertise OSM data and maybe get some support for their software. To my great surprise, they had spent a considerable sum of money on converting OSM data into their format and had already evaluated it. The result of the evaluation was disillusioning: The geometry is pretty good, but the attribution is way below what would be required to substitute the commercial data. They decided to not use it, in spite of the work already invested. Interesting. I think that could also be spun positively ;-) It means people in the industry are starting to take OSM seriously and actually invest money to evaluate how far it has come and be prepared for when it does reach a sufficient quality or need to quickly switch. It also means they must have had some confidence in that the process of crowd sourcing map data can work. Again I would agree with you that geometry is good and attribution still somewhat lacking. Osm is missing loads of turn restriction, height or weight restrictions, speed restrictions and housenumbers to name a few, even in areas with very good geometry coverage. But from a point of view of being disillusioned, I think in the majority of cases they are missing and seldomly wrong. So it just needs a lot more mappers and some time and that should be achievable too. Without knowing the company and any more of what they concluded I obviously can't say if the above statement is true for your example. But I have at least been peripherally involved with writing the turn-by-turn routing support of GpsMid that is based on OSM data and in my limited testing, the routes it found in high coverage areas, were not really worse than those found by a TomTom or Navigon that I had for comparison. Each had parts where it was better and worse than the others. So I do think it would be possible to make good routing from OSM, given good (commercial?) software. Which is rather close to the statement from Nav4All. OSM is quite suitable for any hobby project, but I believe that the anarchistic nature and the often controversial and sometimes disputed and chaotic tagging are reason enough to deter the use of OSM in any professional area where you are talking about warranties. The commercial map data has fixed tagging schemes and minimum quality standards. It contains no nasty surprises in general and if it does fail in some places, there's a provider who is liable to fix this ASAP. As long as OSM has no comparable standards (and I don't expect it will have - I'd like to point at my favorite example that there's still no agreed way to tag something as simple as a bicycle way), it is unlikely to meet the existing standards of commercial providers. So as I stated above, I don't think the _main_ problem at the moment is the anarchistic tagging, but still too limited coverage, especially on tagging relevant for routing. You just need to look at the Navteq and Teleatlas maps and see how many errors they contain and particularly how outdated in many areas, even on major roads in the middle of major cities they are, that you must realize that commercial companies can and have to be able to live with errors, inaccuracies and nasty surprises. And companies aren't liable for the errors, I don't think, or has any company been successfully sued for drivers driving into railway tracks, into rivers, getting stuck on unpassable roads as one can occasionally read in the media,
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Igor Brejc wrote: I have to agree with Nop, up to a point. OSM is a great project and I invest a lot of my free time in it, but I still think it has a lot of failure points. The first time I wanted to use OSM data for a professional job, the data simply failed me. And I'm only talking about generating a high-scale UK map, not some complex routing application. Even drawing land borders between England, Scotland and Wales proved to be big PITA because of different approaches to tagging between the three regions (not to mention that England's regional boundaries were tagged the same way as the border with Scotland). I don't whether this has been improved in the meantime. (1) My experience is that commercial and government GIS map data is less than perfect; particularly if you're crossing international borders. Even if you're targeting North America, it turns out the whole architecture of commercial information (generally built on top of the national census) is entirely different in Mexico, Canada and the US. Project #2 in the pipeline is a fundamentally international GIS system that wouldn't be possible at all w/o dbpedia, geonames, freebase, Yahoo's shapes, and Open Street Maps; unless I had the kind of resources that Google has. (2) A big part of the Web 2 - Web 3 transition is going to be finding a way to clean up the tagging morass. When it comes down to it, tags suck for two reasons: (i) they're a lot of work to create, and (ii) people don't use them consistently. There's are many approaches, but it's one of the biggest problems that I see in front of me personally. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi, NopMap wrote: OSM is quite suitable for any hobby project, but I believe that the anarchistic nature and the often controversial and sometimes disputed and chaotic tagging are reason enough to deter the use of OSM in any professional area where you are talking about warranties. I don't think that the line is between hobby and professional. OSM with their volunteers does one kind of mapping, and TeleAtlas with their vans does another kind of mapping. Each has its own distinctive advantages. There are professional users wo spend money on OSM data when they *already have* TeleAtlas data. The commercial maps have fixed tagging schemes, minimum quality standards and only accept trained personnel as mappers. They have long turnaround times and cost a lot of money to maintain. At OSM we have no fixed tagging schema, no minimum quality standards, and anyone can map. We have super fast turnaround times and cost nothing to maintain. Different approaches - different results. Not worse or better; different. I don't see how you could have the advantages without the disadvantages. Add a fixed tagging scheme and peer review to OSM and you get more quality but less data and longer turnaround times; before long you are TeleAtlas v2.0 and have to charge for maps to pay your mappers because nobody does it for fun any more. So, yes, in my eyes the approach is really take it or leave it, and if someone decides he'd rather use TeleAtlas or Navteq then by all means, let him do it. I don't know why Dave F finds this VERY disillusioning; what was his illusion then? For OSM to rule the world? I think the world is much better of with a few map datasets following different approaches that with a one size fits all dataset. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Frederik, All this is true, but I think we are too concentrated on generating content (i.e. mapping) as opposed to actually using this data for some meaningful purpose. I guess this is natural, since majority of OSM users are mostly map data producers, and only the minority is actively involved in map consuming. My point is that we should listen to people who are trying to use our mapping data (both for non-profit and commercially). After all, isn't it the whole point of OSM to produce something useful? Or is just so that we can show a nice world map on the main page? Regards, Igor Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, NopMap wrote: OSM is quite suitable for any hobby project, but I believe that the anarchistic nature and the often controversial and sometimes disputed and chaotic tagging are reason enough to deter the use of OSM in any professional area where you are talking about warranties. I don't think that the line is between hobby and professional. OSM with their volunteers does one kind of mapping, and TeleAtlas with their vans does another kind of mapping. Each has its own distinctive advantages. There are professional users wo spend money on OSM data when they *already have* TeleAtlas data. The commercial maps have fixed tagging schemes, minimum quality standards and only accept trained personnel as mappers. They have long turnaround times and cost a lot of money to maintain. At OSM we have no fixed tagging schema, no minimum quality standards, and anyone can map. We have super fast turnaround times and cost nothing to maintain. Different approaches - different results. Not worse or better; different. I don't see how you could have the advantages without the disadvantages. Add a fixed tagging scheme and peer review to OSM and you get more quality but less data and longer turnaround times; before long you are TeleAtlas v2.0 and have to charge for maps to pay your mappers because nobody does it for fun any more. So, yes, in my eyes the approach is really take it or leave it, and if someone decides he'd rather use TeleAtlas or Navteq then by all means, let him do it. I don't know why Dave F finds this VERY disillusioning; what was his illusion then? For OSM to rule the world? I think the world is much better of with a few map datasets following different approaches that with a one size fits all dataset. Bye Frederik -- http://igorbrejc.net ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Am 01.02.2010 20:03, schrieb Frederik Ramm: I don't see how you could have the advantages without the disadvantages. Add a fixed tagging scheme and peer review to OSM and you get more quality but less data and longer turnaround times; before long you are TeleAtlas v2.0 and have to charge for maps to pay your mappers because nobody does it for fun any more. Hmmm, a lot of the mappers I was talking to told me that it was a burden to find the right tag for something, in the hope that it will appear on the map. Seems a lot of mappers would be quite happy to follow an at least more fixed tagging scheme than what we currently have today. Unfortunately, there's no magic wand to get to this quickly ... Regards, ULFL ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hello Frederik, It is very easy to sit back and say we'll let the community fix the tagging over time. It is even conceivable that some players who build a business around OSM (and I'm not mentioning names here) may secretly want the tagging mayhem to continue because they already have software to work around the issues and they view that as a competitive advantage. It's another thing to be involved and choose a side. Something very simple is the ability to add tags for which no documentation exist (on the wiki). Someone who does that either made a spelling mistake, is too lazy to write documentation, or, even worse, did not bother to look at what other people did. And writing software to prohibit this is quite easy. Regards, Nic On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 9:03 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Hi, NopMap wrote: OSM is quite suitable for any hobby project, but I believe that the anarchistic nature and the often controversial and sometimes disputed and chaotic tagging are reason enough to deter the use of OSM in any professional area where you are talking about warranties. I don't think that the line is between hobby and professional. OSM with their volunteers does one kind of mapping, and TeleAtlas with their vans does another kind of mapping. Each has its own distinctive advantages. There are professional users wo spend money on OSM data when they *already have* TeleAtlas data. The commercial maps have fixed tagging schemes, minimum quality standards and only accept trained personnel as mappers. They have long turnaround times and cost a lot of money to maintain. At OSM we have no fixed tagging schema, no minimum quality standards, and anyone can map. We have super fast turnaround times and cost nothing to maintain. Different approaches - different results. Not worse or better; different. I don't see how you could have the advantages without the disadvantages. Add a fixed tagging scheme and peer review to OSM and you get more quality but less data and longer turnaround times; before long you are TeleAtlas v2.0 and have to charge for maps to pay your mappers because nobody does it for fun any more. So, yes, in my eyes the approach is really take it or leave it, and if someone decides he'd rather use TeleAtlas or Navteq then by all means, let him do it. I don't know why Dave F finds this VERY disillusioning; what was his illusion then? For OSM to rule the world? I think the world is much better of with a few map datasets following different approaches that with a one size fits all dataset. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 8:08 PM, Igor Brejc igor.br...@gmail.com wrote: Frederik, All this is true, but I think we are too concentrated on generating content (i.e. mapping) as opposed to actually using this data for some meaningful purpose. I guess this is natural, since majority of OSM users are mostly map data producers, and only the minority is actively involved in map consuming. It is right that we are all concentrating on creation of content. But, what we haven't had yet is any commercial map data consumers telling us what they need. Well, in a way, maybe Nav4All is telling us what it needs... and I sometimes hear Cloudmade banging on about routing. It would be interesting to have some map consumer tell us what their minimum mapping needs. Statements like OSM has been looked at but is no solution because there is no full coverage don't help us to provide what they need. While mappers might be uncomfortable to mark out an area and tag it with ok_for_Nav4All=yes, I think I would be happy to mark out areas with road_network=complete and cycle_network=complete, based on some definition provided by someone who would actually use that information. Come on guys tell us what you need. 80n My point is that we should listen to people who are trying to use our mapping data (both for non-profit and commercially). After all, isn't it the whole point of OSM to produce something useful? Or is just so that we can show a nice world map on the main page? Regards, Igor Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, NopMap wrote: OSM is quite suitable for any hobby project, but I believe that the anarchistic nature and the often controversial and sometimes disputed and chaotic tagging are reason enough to deter the use of OSM in any professional area where you are talking about warranties. I don't think that the line is between hobby and professional. OSM with their volunteers does one kind of mapping, and TeleAtlas with their vans does another kind of mapping. Each has its own distinctive advantages. There are professional users wo spend money on OSM data when they *already have* TeleAtlas data. The commercial maps have fixed tagging schemes, minimum quality standards and only accept trained personnel as mappers. They have long turnaround times and cost a lot of money to maintain. At OSM we have no fixed tagging schema, no minimum quality standards, and anyone can map. We have super fast turnaround times and cost nothing to maintain. Different approaches - different results. Not worse or better; different. I don't see how you could have the advantages without the disadvantages. Add a fixed tagging scheme and peer review to OSM and you get more quality but less data and longer turnaround times; before long you are TeleAtlas v2.0 and have to charge for maps to pay your mappers because nobody does it for fun any more. So, yes, in my eyes the approach is really take it or leave it, and if someone decides he'd rather use TeleAtlas or Navteq then by all means, let him do it. I don't know why Dave F finds this VERY disillusioning; what was his illusion then? For OSM to rule the world? I think the world is much better of with a few map datasets following different approaches that with a one size fits all dataset. Bye Frederik -- http://igorbrejc.net ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
2010/2/1 80n 80n...@gmail.com: Come on guys tell us what you need. 80n How about generic tagging system for the start and improve from there? Some sort of *generic* standards for tagging before tag it and it will come. Problem is that there are people who are ready to map before working on tagging. And people who would like to work on tagging, but have difficulties to get first party to agree. We need some kind of beloved imperator, be it human being or unofficial tagging/mapping guide, who says what is what and that's it. Problem is that we *know* what map consumers want - consistent data where they are available - but there are people in OSM who simply aren't ready to agree for this. People like me have been talking about this for some year. Cheers, Peter. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Ulf Lamping wrote: Seems a lot of mappers would be quite happy to follow an at least more fixed tagging scheme than what we currently have today. Unfortunately, there's no magic wand to get to this quickly ... It's beginning to happen already. As OSM's data structures (principally creative and unexpected uses of relations) and tags become more complex, and as the project expands beyond the initial audience of geeks, the editing tools are inevitably starting to abstract away the nitty-gritty. In two years' time, most users won't know or care what the cycleway tags are; they'll just click the cycleway icon(s) in their editor and tick the appropriate options, and the editor will invisibly sort the tags out. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Fwd-Nav4All-navigation-shut-down-by-Navteq-tp4488024p4496813.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi, Richard Fairhurst wrote: It's beginning to happen already. As OSM's data structures (principally creative and unexpected uses of relations) and tags become more complex, and as the project expands beyond the initial audience of geeks, the editing tools are inevitably starting to abstract away the nitty-gritty. In two years' time, most users won't know or care what the cycleway tags are; they'll just click the cycleway icon(s) in their editor and tick the appropriate options, and the editor will invisibly sort the tags out. I don't think that will make the we need fixed rules fraction happy. We have renderers with fixed rules today - several of them - but that kind of fixed rules is not what they are looking for. If we have several different editors with different icons, I don't think that will help. You'll only move the fight to somewhere else. People will discuss endlessly about what should be on the tool tip of the cycleway button. Use this only if there is a blue sign with a bicycle on it - But my country has no blue signs with bicycles. Ulf wrote: Seems a lot of mappers would be quite happy to follow an at least more fixed tagging scheme than what we currently have today. You make this sound as if this is about the freedom of the new mappers. But they are, even today, free to follow any ruleset, cheatsheet, or book that they want to use. It's just that they don't get a guarantee that everyone else is using the same ruleset but that's ok - there might be rulesets much too complex for a newcomer, or the newcomer ruleset for rural Peru might be different from the one for urban Japan. Trying to make them all the same will needlessly reduce OSM's richness. These rulesets are unlikely to be devised by the same body; it would be too complex and the result would be less than optimal for everyone involved. (In my OSM talks I like to show a communist-era poster about a five-year command economy plan. Command economy sounds like a good idea on paper but it turns out that the amount of planning required to get it to work is more than mankind can muster. The same, I think, is true for a world-wide OSM Ontology.) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi Frederik, On Lun 01 Feb 2010, Frederik Ramm wrote: (In my OSM talks I like to show a communist-era poster about a five-year command economy plan. Command economy sounds like a good idea on paper but it turns out that the amount of planning required to get it to work is more than mankind can muster. The same, I think, is true for a world-wide OSM Ontology.) But hey, the old failed communists had bad computers. Modern logistics planning today would be a totally different ... failure, as you can see in Haiti. Cheers, Jochen ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Nic, It is very easy to sit back and say we'll let the community fix the tagging over time. It is even conceivable that some players who build a business around OSM (and I'm not mentioning names here) may secretly want the tagging mayhem to continue because they already have software to work around the issues and they view that as a competitive advantage. It is conceivable but would be very short-sighted of them. I can't speak for others of course but if I had something that neatly streamlined OSM data and removed the issues then I would try to make the community (and first and foremost the renderers) use it - because that would be the only way to make sure it works across the breadth of OSM and stays in sync with what's en vogue. And as for competitive advantage - that'd be gone with the new license anyway. It's another thing to be involved and choose a side. It is my honest belief that if all those fixed-rule-enthusiasts had their way, OSM would become uninteresting, mappers reduced to drones filling out forms that other people have provided for them. It might become more commercially viable (with businesses fighting over what presets get put into the most widely-used editors so that drones will create more valuable data), but if I had to choose I'd rather be part of an interesting project than one that's commercially viable. Something very simple is the ability to add tags for which no documentation exist (on the wiki). Someone who does that either made a spelling mistake, is too lazy to write documentation, or, even worse, did not bother to look at what other people did. And writing software to prohibit this is quite easy. Very good, you've come far already: 1. You have named the problem: Tagging mayhem! 2. You have found the culprit: Lazy mappers. 3. You know they are bad people, because they are either not diligent enough, or lazy, or careless. 4. You suggest technical means for getting rid of them: Prohibit! Nothing personal but this is because I react badly to all these rules discussions. Mappers are reduced to lazy idiots, and software has to be written to make them useful. I don't like the thinking behind this. We are a project to which people contribute out of their free will in their spare time. We are not a meat grinder. Having said that, if lack of documentation is your main concern, I could well envisage a pop-up in JOSM that goes: You have just entered a tag that is not documented on the Wiki. Please provide one line of documentation for this new tag in the language of your choice, or click here if you do not want to be asked about this tag again. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Am 01.02.2010 22:48, schrieb Frederik Ramm: Hi, Richard Fairhurst wrote: It's beginning to happen already. As OSM's data structures (principally creative and unexpected uses of relations) ROFL ;-) and tags become more complex, and as the project expands beyond the initial audience of geeks, the editing tools are inevitably starting to abstract away the nitty-gritty. In two years' time, most users won't know or care what the cycleway tags are; they'll just click the cycleway icon(s) in their editor and tick the appropriate options, and the editor will invisibly sort the tags out. Yes, like the presets in JOSM, and I guess this will continue. The current relation editing e.g. still has a *lot* of room for improvements. I don't think that will make the we need fixed rules fraction happy. We have renderers with fixed rules today - several of them - but that kind of fixed rules is not what they are looking for. The problem is, that the renderers don't show enough of the variety the mappers want to map. Seems to me that tag discussions very often cool down once a map really is showing a specific feature - maybe except cycleways ;-) Ulf wrote: Seems a lot of mappers would be quite happy to follow an at least more fixed tagging scheme than what we currently have today. You make this sound as if this is about the freedom of the new mappers. But they are, even today, free to follow any ruleset, cheatsheet, or book that they want to use. The problem is: There is no such thing, once you leave the warm and cozy world of presets and Map Features. If you enter the wonderful world of Wiki proposal pages, this becomes a jungle of inconsistent, disputed information. This might be fun for the initial audience of geeks, but today most mappers are pragmatic and just want to get this damn thing on the map :-) I don't think of them as lazy idiots, but simply pragmatic in the way they spend their time. Not everyone want's to spend his/her whole life in the OSM universe. It's just that they don't get a guarantee that everyone else is using the same ruleset but that's ok - there might be rulesets much too complex for a newcomer, or the newcomer ruleset for rural Peru might be different from the one for urban Japan. Trying to make them all the same will needlessly reduce OSM's richness. These rulesets are unlikely to be devised by the same body; it would be too complex and the result would be less than optimal for everyone involved. I'm not convinced that this is actually true. (In my OSM talks I like to show a communist-era poster about a five-year command economy plan. Command economy sounds like a good idea on paper but it turns out that the amount of planning required to get it to work is more than mankind can muster. The same, I think, is true for a world-wide OSM Ontology.) There are lot's of possible solutions somewhere between a five year plan and the Wiki confusion of today ... Regards, ULFL ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
El Lunes, 1 de Febrero de 2010, Richard Fairhurst escribió: [...] they'll just click the cycleway icon(s) in their editor and tick the appropriate options, and the editor will invisibly sort the tags out. *If* we don't ban the editor before :-) -- -- Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es Your object is to save the world, while still leading a pleasant life. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
El Lunes, 1 de Febrero de 2010, 80n escribió: It is right that we are all concentrating on creation of content. But, what we haven't had yet is any commercial map data consumers telling us what they need. Well, in a way, maybe Nav4All is telling us what it needs... and I sometimes hear Cloudmade banging on about routing. The problem with this is the sofixit response. OSM works like many other open-source projects, where someone says: Hey, X is bad - and a developer replies Yeah, and this is open source, so fix it. The OSM community works the same way. I'm not going to work for a company just because they ask for it very nicely. Dammit, if a company wants me to fix OSM in some way, I could as well get paid for that! Maybe the time is coming for the business model in where I get OSM data, fork it, fix it in some way, and stamp a certified technicial-approved version on the cover. For just a couple grand. You want OSM to comply with certain quality standards? Well, either invest in that, or pay for that. But it's not gonna magically come from the users. Cheers, -- -- Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es Un ordenador no es un televisor ni un microondas, es una herramienta compleja. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Having said that, if lack of documentation is your main concern, I could well envisage a pop-up in JOSM that goes: You have just entered a tag that is not documented on the Wiki. Please provide one line of documentation for this new tag in the language of your choice, or click here if you do not want to be asked about this tag again. How long does it take to log into the wiki and write one or two sentences ? I'm not saying my proposal is the magic wand. A number of small things will slowly shrink the problem. * Richard's idea of an abstraction layer in the editor (that the user can hopefully bypass...). * Various users cleaning up the wiki. Some pages look so much better than a year or two ago. * And when all of the above failed : Bots. But dealing with it upstream is so much better than dealing with it down stream. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi, Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote: El Lunes, 1 de Febrero de 2010, Richard Fairhurst escribió: [...] they'll just click the cycleway icon(s) in their editor and tick the appropriate options, and the editor will invisibly sort the tags out. *If* we don't ban the editor before :-) Needless to say that banning Potlatch is one of the core elements of professionalising OSM. Now where was my five year masterplan again ;-) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Igor Brejc wrote: ... I think we are too concentrated on generating content (i.e. mapping) as opposed to actually using this data for some meaningful purpose. I guess this is natural, since majority of OSM users are mostly map data producers, and only the minority is actively involved in map consuming. My point is that we should listen to people who are trying to use our mapping data (both for non-profit and commercially). After all, isn't it the whole point of OSM to produce something useful? Or is just so that we can show a nice world map on the main page? Personally, I'm here as a map consumer. I was looking for handheld GPS maps about 18 months ago and OSM was the only option that was not (a) expensive, (b) a bit rubbish or (c) both. Also, Ordnance Survey paper coverage was a bit poor where I live because it hadn't kept pace with landscape changes (railways, mining etc.). Speaking as someone who spends the occasional weekend walking around the Peak District and dropping by a pub or two, I'm a happy camper - where OSM has coverage it's usually better than anything else. However, wearing another hat, I work for a company that occasionally gets asked by customers how to display business information on a map. Usually they don't have much money to spend (does anyone?). OSM data ought to be an option, but there are a couple of issues: One is coverage, discussed better here: http://fakestevec.blogspot.com/2010/01/shitholes.html than I could. The other is licensing (yes - I know - I'm sorry). I'm not a lawyer, but even I can have a go at navigating through Google's maze of twisty little licence pages, all different and come out with an answer at the end (which is usually no, you can't legally do what you were hoping to). Unfortunately, OSM seems to be more complicated. I've read the legal FAQ in the wiki. I've read the Common licence interpretations page - and I still have no idea whether a particular use constitutes a derivative or a collective work. I suspect that many prospective users will have given up before the we strongly advise you to obtain legal advice bit (despite that being the correct answer, of course). What would really help the interpretations page would be some examples, similar to the ODL Use Cases, but for the current licence. For instance, a company (let's call them Elcheapotech) wants to plot its customers' locations on a map. It doesn't want to update the data, or sell anything based upon it - it just wants a background seeing where things are. They won't object to displaying an attribution on-screen. They probably wouldn't object if someone said that they had to host a copy of the original OSM data, but they would object if they had to make public their overlay. They're not selling their overlaid data - just using it internally. Is that allowed? If yes (or no), why? (or why not?). The way that I read the 1st part of the 4th paragraph of the interpretations page suggests that someone thinks that this would be a derivative work, but the last part suggests collective work. If the 2nd of these is correct, what happens if Elcheapotech wants to sell the expertise that it has gained by doing the same thing that it has internally as a service for other companies? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
Hi, Someoneelse wrote: For instance, a company (let's call them Elcheapotech) wants to plot its customers' locations on a map. [...] but they would object if they had to make public their overlay. If they publish their overlay (for example in their yearly report - it counts as publishing even if the report is only given to selected people) then they have to do so under CC-BY-SA which will allow those who receive the work to copy from it. If they don't publish, then they don't publish. Much like the GPL, this doesn't mean that you have to give the work to everyone - it's just that those whom you give it to have the right to do with it whatever they please (under CC-BY-SA). what happens if Elcheapotech wants to sell the expertise that it has gained by doing the same thing that it has internally as a service for other companies? I give my secret data to Elcheapotech. They plot it on an OSM map and give me a PDF. The PDF is now under CC-BY-SA (because, having left Elcheapotech's business, it is considered published). However, Elcheaptoech hasn't given the PDF to anyone else but me, and doesn't have to. I, in turn, use it internally and neither I nor my employees have an interest in publishing it. So everything is fine. This interpretation of public/publish (as soon as it leaves your house, even if you only hand it to a print shop for copying, it is published) is not shared by everyone; some say that having a contractor work on your data for you does not count as publish. But the distinction is not relevant in your case. And legal-talk is - that way. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
On 2 February 2010 11:44, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: If they publish their overlay (for example in their yearly report - it counts as publishing even if the report is only given to selected people) then they have to do so under CC-BY-SA which will allow those who receive the work to copy from it. If they don't publish, then they don't publish. If they have their customer locations as a kml file which gets over laid on base tiles then it's not a derivative, just like drawing on a sheet of clear plastic and putting it on top of a map doesn't make it a derivative. This is usually the most common option anyway since people want pointy clicky to pop-up additional information. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
