Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[joost schouppe]

I never quite understood why all the national community portals kind of
look like this ("Hi we're a community, oh, and also we have a map here if
you just want that), but the OSM.org just highlights a map.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 18.09.2015 9:10, joost schouppe napisał(a):

I don't think a portal in the style of the Mapquest example is the
best answer. I don't really think there is going to be any specific
OSM-based Google Maps killer ever going to be built. Instead the
strength of OSM is rather being able to cater to niches. No single
Google Maps inspired project could ever reflect the diversity of what
you can do with OSM.


I support this point of view. Google strength is integration of many 
services (including commercial ones) and a lot of automatic ways to 
gather and process data; ours is great amount of details and a lot of 
human-based ways to gather and process data. They are not contradictory 
- both ways can borrow something from the other, but I think starting 
with what we already have in a good shape is better than trying to start 
with imitating the other side of spectrum.



Even though we have a diversity of news channels, I notice how many
involved OSM afficionados don't know about some of these projects. And
if they don't know, how is our average data user ever going to know.
As OSM.org gets more features and users,  a larger proportion of those
users will not know about projects like this.


Lack of integration - sometimes just underusing existing communication 
infrastructure - is the most visible problem for me in OSM. The 
ecosystem is broad, diverse and healthy, which is great, but very 
disconnected at the same time (even between the most important 
sub-projects), which makes trying to do anything crossing the boundaries 
very hard, inefficient and time-consuming.



I understand that if we want to build a data-use portal, it should be
managed separately from the current OSM.org infrastructure. But
couldn't we make a subdomain like use.openstreetmap.org [9] to
showcase projects? And maybe try and let that evolve into an ecosystem
of applications, to make it as easy as possible to integrate features
of one project to the next?


Nice idea!

--
"The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags 
down" [A. Cohen]


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Christian Pietzsch]

>
> I understand that if we want to build a data-use portal, it should be
> managed separately from the current OSM.org infrastructure. But
> couldn't we make a subdomain like use.openstreetmap.org [9] to
> showcase projects? And maybe try and let that evolve into an ecosystem
> of applications, to make it as easy as possible to integrate features
> of one project to the next?


openstreetmap.de has something thats similar to what you mentioned. On the
front page under "Schaufenster" there are mentioned a few project from
different categories.
We have a nice collection of OSM services in the Wiki.It would just have to
be made a little more pretty (pictures and co) and presented more
prominently.

Cheers
Christian

2015-09-18 15:24 GMT+02:00 Daniel Koć :

> W dniu 18.09.2015 9:10, joost schouppe napisał(a):
>
>> I don't think a portal in the style of the Mapquest example is the
>> best answer. I don't really think there is going to be any specific
>> OSM-based Google Maps killer ever going to be built. Instead the
>> strength of OSM is rather being able to cater to niches. No single
>> Google Maps inspired project could ever reflect the diversity of what
>> you can do with OSM.
>>
>
> I support this point of view. Google strength is integration of many
> services (including commercial ones) and a lot of automatic ways to gather
> and process data; ours is great amount of details and a lot of human-based
> ways to gather and process data. They are not contradictory - both ways can
> borrow something from the other, but I think starting with what we already
> have in a good shape is better than trying to start with imitating the
> other side of spectrum.
>
> Even though we have a diversity of news channels, I notice how many
>> involved OSM afficionados don't know about some of these projects. And
>> if they don't know, how is our average data user ever going to know.
>> As OSM.org gets more features and users,  a larger proportion of those
>> users will not know about projects like this.
>>
>
> Lack of integration - sometimes just underusing existing communication
> infrastructure - is the most visible problem for me in OSM. The ecosystem
> is broad, diverse and healthy, which is great, but very disconnected at the
> same time (even between the most important sub-projects), which makes
> trying to do anything crossing the boundaries very hard, inefficient and
> time-consuming.
>
> I understand that if we want to build a data-use portal, it should be
>> managed separately from the current OSM.org infrastructure. But
>> couldn't we make a subdomain like use.openstreetmap.org [9] to
>> showcase projects? And maybe try and let that evolve into an ecosystem
>> of applications, to make it as easy as possible to integrate features
>> of one project to the next?
>>
>
> Nice idea!
>
>
> --
> "The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags
> down" [A. Cohen]
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 15.09.2015 23:07, Paul Johnson napisał(a):


http://maps.randmcnally.com/ [2] sounds very close to what you're
suggesting (also, bonus points, brand recognition:  People trust Rand
McNally, and oddly enough, there's a pretty sizable attribution on the
paper maps that can be found in every gas station in the midwest,
which also has an elevator pitch for the project, IIRC).  I also tend


So that's good, however - keeping pure OSM perspective - it's not global 
(USA, I guess? I haven't even heard about this brand) and for me it's 
very similar to hello.mapquest.com - differences I see: POIs are static 
instead of dynamic layer, no traffic layer, no travel menu. The 
downsides are almost identical (however they have no ads).



So pull a server together and start another tileset.  Who knows?  It
might just be featured on the front page.


You got me =} - I'm not a tileseter nor enterpreneur. I just think how 
such portal should probably look like to meet the needs of people and at 
the same time help OSM be properly promoted (and grow).



GNU still plays a very important part underpinning a lot of other
projects, though, and is an irreplaceable part of the software
ecosphere at this point.  Their portfolio is so broad right now that


That's exactly the situation I'd like to avoid: they do a lot, but are 
much less visible and known. It's not a problem in itself, but FSF, 
standing behind the GNU project, have a program (mission) which is their 
primary goal and they have less opportunities

to promote it.


Well, hopefully, not something users come to begrudge like Mozilla.
Maybe more like a Wikimedia Foundation, in which, just give it time,
and we'll hit the runaway point.  We already hit the breakaway point.


Both are strong brands and quite effective in fulfilling their missions, 
even when dealing with other commercial entities.


I have also got to know that ClamAV (another open project) is 
incorporated in the commercial antivirus product with a link from the 
official project page and a logo and brand visible inside Immunet. It 
looks like if OSM had official partnership with McNally or MapQuest: not 
bad, but it's just not a project's best shot to reach end users.


--
"The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags 
down" [A. Cohen]


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Marc Zoutendijk]

> On 15 sep. 2015, at 18:19 Ian Dees :
> 
> http://beta.mapquest.com/  does not use OSM data 
> in the US, at least.
> 

But http://openpoimap.org  does and gives more control 
over the various layers.
(Be sure to check out the User Pois feature).
And the wiki is here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taglocator 


Marc.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Simon Poole]

Over the years the expectation has been that somebody would take OSM
data and create such an end user portal, but as we know, that has never
happened outside a couple of aborted or zombie projects (three that come
to mind are MapQuest, bing and skobbler, but I'm sure there have been more).

I once asked around what the original vision was for OSM, but nobody
seemed to be sure if originally the intention was to cater for
end-users, it definitely hasn't been the case for the majority of the
roughly 10 years the project has been around.

In any case the main problem is that it is not possible to build a sane
commercial business plan around providing such a portal and that
providing maps is just one (now days small, thanks to OSM) part of what
a viable map portal/app would need to offer as Frederik has already
pointed out (note this is not limited to OSM, one of the reasons for the
rapid dispatching of Here/Navteq by Nokia was the failed attempt to
provide exactly such a end-user service).

Naturally the main competitor for an audience is google which is likely
sinking billions into google maps with nearly no direct income from the
service (google doesn't actually disclose any specific numbers, what is
however known is their advertising revenue vs. other sources). I think
it is clear that competing on a commercial footing is just completely
out of the question and -not- going to happen, so Frederik is being a
bit misleading if he points to that as a realistic possibility.

What is largely unexplored is a non-commercial operation at the level
that would be necessary to provide the missing bits and pieces. Given
the intolerance of the masses for a less than google like perfection
(see the issues Strava is having and that with an audience that
historically has been sympathetic to OSM) and the problem that you have
at least one viable commercial operator in the market, obtaining
sufficient funding is likely to be -very- difficult.

Simon



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Paul Johnson]

It actually appears they are claiming to do so (based on Mapbox
attribution), though I question how recent their snapshot is or how they're
coming to some of the conclusions they are in the Tulsa area,
http://mapq.st/1fX5bwr .  Some major glaring inconsistencies are standing
out, as in this is either almost straight raw TIGER data or Mapbox is
rendering TomTom's map and attributing it to OpenStreetMap.  Lack of
construction zones along I 244 east of downtown, the south and east legs of
the downtown dispersal loop being labelled as I 444 (an unsigned_ref=*
value in OSM tagging), and the L. L. Tisdale Parkway being named Osage
Expressway (a highway that was only ever named as such on planning
documents in the 1960s and 1970s, ultimately opening in the mid to late
1980s under the name present in OSM; if it's even mentioned in the OSM
data, it'd be under old_name=* as baby-boomers who grew up here grew up
having it hyped as "coming soon" for half their life).

I'd love to see if we could get someone from Mapbox to pipe up on this,
since it definitely appears similar to some of their styles, so they're
likely providing the rendering.  I suspect the rather strange and prevalent
presence of names 40-years-out-of-date on OklaDOT highways, and oddly
inconsistent-even-with-TIGER presence or absence of a number of streets and
alleys is a pretty deliberate easter egg of Google and NAVTEQ (and
annoyingly prevalent in this region).  No idea what data they are using to
generate tiles, but despite the attribution, it's very plainly *NOT* OSM.


On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Joseph Reeves 
wrote:

> Ah, ok, I hadn't checked the US, but the other places I'd looked at used
> OSM. The site seems to have fallen over now, however.
>
>
>
> On 15 September 2015 at 17:19, Ian Dees  wrote:
>
>> http://beta.mapquest.com/ does not use OSM data in the US, at least.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Joseph Reeves 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> http://hello.mapquest.com/ ?
>>>
>>> On 14 September 2015 at 19:25, Daniel Koć  wrote:
>>>
 I had an idea to add UMap functionality to OSM.org website and I
 discovered Mateusz Konieczny lately wanted to add a dynamic layer with
 opening hours (and some more data), which I think would be also useful for
 users:

 https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1038
 https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1056

 However the response we got is that all the features on our website are
 there because they help mappers. While I'm sure overlay showing opening
 hours falls into this category easily, map personalization is primary a
 feature for end users (of course mappers may use it too, but it may not
 have direct impact on OSM data).

 This made me wonder if we care only for having portal for mappers and
 don't like to have some useful features just because they are addressed
 rather for data consumers? In most of the cases this is not the
 contradiction, but why should we "reject" end users' needs?

 OSM-carto, which is what I'm more familiar with, tries to reach both
 these groups:


 https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/CARTOGRAPHY.md#purposes
>>>
>>>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Alex Barth]

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:

> It actually appears they are claiming to do so (based on Mapbox
> attribution), though I question how recent their snapshot is or how they're
> coming to some of the conclusions they are in the Tulsa area


Paul - Ian's spot on: the new Mapquest maps on http://beta.mapquest.com/
are OSM except in the US where they're TomTom.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Joseph Reeves]

http://hello.mapquest.com/ ?

On 14 September 2015 at 19:25, Daniel Koć  wrote:

> I had an idea to add UMap functionality to OSM.org website and I
> discovered Mateusz Konieczny lately wanted to add a dynamic layer with
> opening hours (and some more data), which I think would be also useful for
> users:
>
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1038
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1056
>
> However the response we got is that all the features on our website are
> there because they help mappers. While I'm sure overlay showing opening
> hours falls into this category easily, map personalization is primary a
> feature for end users (of course mappers may use it too, but it may not
> have direct impact on OSM data).
>
> This made me wonder if we care only for having portal for mappers and
> don't like to have some useful features just because they are addressed
> rather for data consumers? In most of the cases this is not the
> contradiction, but why should we "reject" end users' needs?
>
> OSM-carto, which is what I'm more familiar with, tries to reach both these
> groups:
>
>
> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/CARTOGRAPHY.md#purposes
>
> --
> "The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags
> down" [A. Cohen]
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Ian Dees]

http://beta.mapquest.com/ does not use OSM data in the US, at least.

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Joseph Reeves 
wrote:

> http://hello.mapquest.com/ ?
>
> On 14 September 2015 at 19:25, Daniel Koć  wrote:
>
>> I had an idea to add UMap functionality to OSM.org website and I
>> discovered Mateusz Konieczny lately wanted to add a dynamic layer with
>> opening hours (and some more data), which I think would be also useful for
>> users:
>>
>> https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1038
>> https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1056
>>
>> However the response we got is that all the features on our website are
>> there because they help mappers. While I'm sure overlay showing opening
>> hours falls into this category easily, map personalization is primary a
>> feature for end users (of course mappers may use it too, but it may not
>> have direct impact on OSM data).
>>
>> This made me wonder if we care only for having portal for mappers and
>> don't like to have some useful features just because they are addressed
>> rather for data consumers? In most of the cases this is not the
>> contradiction, but why should we "reject" end users' needs?
>>
>> OSM-carto, which is what I'm more familiar with, tries to reach both
>> these groups:
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/CARTOGRAPHY.md#purposes
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Joseph Reeves]

Ah, ok, I hadn't checked the US, but the other places I'd looked at used
OSM. The site seems to have fallen over now, however.



On 15 September 2015 at 17:19, Ian Dees  wrote:

> http://beta.mapquest.com/ does not use OSM data in the US, at least.
>
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Joseph Reeves 
> wrote:
>
>> http://hello.mapquest.com/ ?
>>
>> On 14 September 2015 at 19:25, Daniel Koć  wrote:
>>
>>> I had an idea to add UMap functionality to OSM.org website and I
>>> discovered Mateusz Konieczny lately wanted to add a dynamic layer with
>>> opening hours (and some more data), which I think would be also useful for
>>> users:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1038
>>> https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1056
>>>
>>> However the response we got is that all the features on our website are
>>> there because they help mappers. While I'm sure overlay showing opening
>>> hours falls into this category easily, map personalization is primary a
>>> feature for end users (of course mappers may use it too, but it may not
>>> have direct impact on OSM data).
>>>
>>> This made me wonder if we care only for having portal for mappers and
>>> don't like to have some useful features just because they are addressed
>>> rather for data consumers? In most of the cases this is not the
>>> contradiction, but why should we "reject" end users' needs?
>>>
>>> OSM-carto, which is what I'm more familiar with, tries to reach both
>>> these groups:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/CARTOGRAPHY.md#purposes
>>
>>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Alex Barth]

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Alex Barth  wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:
>
>> It actually appears they are claiming to do so (based on Mapbox
>> attribution), though I question how recent their snapshot is or how they're
>> coming to some of the conclusions they are in the Tulsa area
>
>
> Paul - Ian's spot on: the new Mapquest maps on http://beta.mapquest.com/
> are OSM except in the US where they're TomTom.


Actually to be precise: OSM world wide, TomTom in US + Canada + Mexico.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Ruben Maes]

Tuesday 15 September 2015 15:12:12, Alex Barth:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:
> 
> > It actually appears they are claiming to do so (based on Mapbox
> > attribution), though I question how recent their snapshot is or how they're
> > coming to some of the conclusions they are in the Tulsa area
> 
> 
> Paul - Ian's spot on: the new Mapquest maps on http://beta.mapquest.com/
> are OSM except in the US where they're TomTom.

I am disgusted to find out that (while the map is definitely OSM) they aren't 
using OSM's POIs in Belgium.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 15.09.2015 18:10, Joseph Reeves napisał(a):

http://hello.mapquest.com/ [5] ?


Nice try, Sauron!... ;-)

I would say this is not the answer for OSM and for me this is half baked 
solution at best.


Nice things:
- Dynamic POI layers (but limited to some basic types of POIs)
- Satellite view (but limited to medium scale, at least in Warsaw)
- Traffic layer (but again, not working here)
- Menu for travel planning (I don't know which parts of the world are 
available in this service).

- Better low zoom.

...and that is all good (or just not bad).

Bad (or just lacking) things:
- High zoom levels are totally lacking details (osm-carto have it).
- Lack of different styles (we have 5 to choose).
- No innovative things (vector tiles for example).
- No personalization (like UMap).
- Ads.
- Lack of community control.
- Lack of OSM brand recognition (even copyright note is just one of 3 
and it's only to comply with the license probably).


It looks like a commercial traveler help, not general tool for end users 
of OSM. It may be a nice service in itself, but as a OSM portal for most 
of the people it'd be a failure in my opinion.


Our strength is a lot of details. We can show indoor levels of railway 
stations, 3D models of some buildings, insane amount of POIs and even 
their opening hours - but nobody will see it here. There's not a 
slightest hint you can start being a mapper if you want to add/correct 
some things in your neighborhood - which is another plus for end users.


Also, as it was already pointed out, we can't be sure what data are used 
and if one day it won't become YAMS (Yet-Another-Map-Service) which has 
nothing to do with OSM - or even simply hostile takeover by anyone with 
their own maps an agenda. And if we will promote it as a portal for our 
end users, we will make only this brand stronger, not our project brand 
(ever heard about GNU project eclipsed by other labels?). Or they can 
use our brand as a honeypot for mediocre/suspected services (ever heard 
about people downloading "Open Office" from third parties and mad about 
spam apps it brings?).


***

I'm happy to hear we may just have not enough horsepower at the moment, 
but we're not ignoring end users. It means we can mimic for example 
Mozilla in the future (dual social/commercial entity) or develop fair 
partnership with existing (or start-up) commercial enterprises, but we 
don't have to. We can also act as a hub and integrate some more external 
services, just like we already do with static map layers or routing 
services.


So if there are services like dynamic data layers or something 
UMap-driven which are ready to be a part of our hub, we won't have to 
rely entirely on our resources, while having the overall community 
control and brand recognition, with a smooth end user/mapper transition 
as a bonus.


Thanks for all your responses!

--
"The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags 
down" [A. Cohen]


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Christoph Hormann]

On Tuesday 15 September 2015, Alex Barth wrote:
>
> Actually to be precise: OSM world wide, TomTom in US + Canada +
> Mexico.

Not that it matters much but Canada north of Lancaster Sound is OSM 
(though coastline is at least a few months old).

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Paul Johnson]

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Daniel Koć  wrote:

> W dniu 15.09.2015 18:10, Joseph Reeves napisał(a):
>
>> http://hello.mapquest.com/ [5] ?
>>
>
> Nice try, Sauron!... ;-)
>
> I would say this is not the answer for OSM and for me this is half baked
> solution at best.
>
> Nice things:
> - Dynamic POI layers (but limited to some basic types of POIs)
> - Satellite view (but limited to medium scale, at least in Warsaw)
> - Traffic layer (but again, not working here)
> - Menu for travel planning (I don't know which parts of the world are
> available in this service).
> - Better low zoom.
> ...and that is all good (or just not bad).
>
> Bad (or just lacking) things:
> - High zoom levels are totally lacking details (osm-carto have it).
> - Lack of different styles (we have 5 to choose).
> - No innovative things (vector tiles for example).
> - No personalization (like UMap).
> - Ads.
> - Lack of community control.
> - Lack of OSM brand recognition (even copyright note is just one of 3 and
> it's only to comply with the license probably)
>

http://maps.randmcnally.com/ sounds very close to what you're suggesting
(also, bonus points, brand recognition:  People trust Rand McNally, and
oddly enough, there's a pretty sizable attribution on the paper maps that
can be found in every gas station in the midwest, which also has an
elevator pitch for the project, IIRC).  I also tend to use Rand McNally's
OSM-based maps as a form of dog-fooding it when I have to break out the
orienteering compass and ruler because something broke or ran out of
batteries (I like OklaDOT, but the state's official paper maps aren't worth
what I paid, and they send 'em free by mail on request in any quantity you
want by law).

It looks like a commercial traveler help, not general tool for end users of
> OSM. It may be a nice service in itself, but as a OSM portal for most of
> the people it'd be a failure in my opinion.
>

Well, to be fair, AOL is trying to figure out how to generate revenue now
that the majority of online users aren't interested in a graphical BBS that
happens to have an internet gateway.  No marks off for effort since they're
having the same problems we're having with coming up with a portal (if
that's something we want to do).


> Our strength is a lot of details. We can show indoor levels of railway
> stations, 3D models of some buildings, insane amount of POIs and even their
> opening hours - but nobody will see it here. There's not a slightest hint
> you can start being a mapper if you want to add/correct some things in your
> neighborhood - which is another plus for end users.
>

So pull a server together and start another tileset.  Who knows?  It might
just be featured on the front page.


> Also, as it was already pointed out, we can't be sure what data are used
> and if one day it won't become YAMS (Yet-Another-Map-Service) which has
> nothing to do with OSM - or even simply hostile takeover by anyone with
> their own maps an agenda. And if we will promote it as a portal for our end
> users, we will make only this brand stronger, not our project brand (ever
> heard about GNU project eclipsed by other labels?). Or they can use our
> brand as a honeypot for mediocre/suspected services (ever heard about
> people downloading "Open Office" from third parties and mad about spam apps
> it brings?).
>

GNU still plays a very important part underpinning a lot of other projects,
though, and is an irreplaceable part of the software ecosphere at this
point.  Their portfolio is so broad right now that computing as we know it
today would not exist, and their tenacity means they'll still be around
after Microsoft's an interesting case study for project management and
legal students; they suck in projects and tend to kill 'em rather quickly
(see the many and various, and sometimes even competing, formerly separate
software products that make up Microsoft Office's thesaurus, spellchecker,
grammar checker, and various previously unix-style "do one thing well"
3rd-party tools Microsoft bought just to roll 'em in to that).  GNU tends
to have things snowball (Wikipedia nee GNUpedia) or inspire a more
successful, yet complementary project (Hurd, eclipsed by Linux).

That said, on your third point, that is a valid concern.  See also:
SourceForge (may it rest in pieces).  However, really the only way to
protect against a SourceForge scenario is not to become a "walled garden"
of open development, as happened with the collection of properties and
projects that make up Andover.net/Dice Interactive/whatever that collection
of stuff that lost momentum when it couldn't ride Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda's
coat-tails anymore calls itself this senate term.  Which means

I'm happy to hear we may just have not enough horsepower at the moment, but
> we're not ignoring end users. It means we can mimic for example Mozilla in
> the future (dual social/commercial entity) or develop fair partnership with
> existing (or start-up) commercial 

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Steve Coast]

> On Sep 15, 2015, at 1:21 AM, Simon Poole  wrote:
> Over the years the expectation has been that somebody would take OSM
> data and create such an end user portal, but as we know, that has never
> happened outside a couple of aborted or zombie projects (three that come
> to mind are MapQuest, bing and skobbler, but I'm sure there have been more).
> 
> I once asked around what the original vision was for OSM, but nobody
> seemed to be sure if originally the intention was to cater for
> end-users, it definitely hasn't been the case for the majority of the
> roughly 10 years the project has been around.

It was. Why that didn’t happen is a long story.

As for the rest of the email - a kickstarter project would probably work, but 
not by committee.

> In any case the main problem is that it is not possible to build a sane
> commercial business plan around providing such a portal and that
> providing maps is just one (now days small, thanks to OSM) part of what
> a viable map portal/app would need to offer as Frederik has already
> pointed out (note this is not limited to OSM, one of the reasons for the
> rapid dispatching of Here/Navteq by Nokia was the failed attempt to
> provide exactly such a end-user service).
> 
> Naturally the main competitor for an audience is google which is likely
> sinking billions into google maps with nearly no direct income from the
> service (google doesn't actually disclose any specific numbers, what is
> however known is their advertising revenue vs. other sources). I think
> it is clear that competing on a commercial footing is just completely
> out of the question and -not- going to happen, so Frederik is being a
> bit misleading if he points to that as a realistic possibility.
> 
> What is largely unexplored is a non-commercial operation at the level
> that would be necessary to provide the missing bits and pieces. Given
> the intolerance of the masses for a less than google like perfection
> (see the issues Strava is having and that with an audience that
> historically has been sympathetic to OSM) and the problem that you have
> at least one viable commercial operator in the market, obtaining
> sufficient funding is likely to be -very- difficult.
> 
> Simon
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 09/14/2015 08:25 PM, Daniel Koć wrote:
> This made me wonder if we care only for having portal for mappers and
> don't like to have some useful features just because they are addressed
> rather for data consumers? 

A portal for data consumers would be most welcome, just not run by OSMF
and our volunteers (our manpower and money is sufficient to run a portal
for mappers but not one for end users too).

You must be aware that if you target end users, you'll have to answer
questions like "where is your aerial imagery", "why don't you have
feature  that  has", etc. - this is going to be a
whole new project to its own, with its own support staff, its own help
site, its own developers, its own servers, its own admins. I think
setting up such a site is not a bad idea, if someone can think of a way
to raise the money needed and how to finance it long-term.

It could be done by anyone (and if it existed, we could send anyone who
comes to OSM complaining about lack of user friendliness there), but it
hasn't been done yet. OSMF lacks the resources to do it but it is not
something that OSMF has to do because it doesn't require any kind of
privileged access to the web site.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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