On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 22:51, Andrew Harvey
wrote:
> I did send a message to a few from New Caledonia, so I'll see if I heard
> back.
>
I got a few people reply with feedback that they thought it would be good
to include New Caledonia.
___
Talk-au
On Sun, 2 Jun 2019 at 13:31, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
> But I personally agree that we need to reach out and canvass any local
>> communities that may exist, for their thoughts. We do have some reach via
>> existing OSGeo community, mailing lists, travel grant program, and other
>> networks.
>>
Good morning,
Perhaps a general clause in there to state that we strive to encourage
local determination and to assist and support in this process within the
bounds of the master agreement and to encourage all countries and regions
to be both proactive and representative and not to
In situations where there isn't any existing representation currently, I
would see an entity as helping generate that activity. If I was a new
mapper/geospatial professional in any of those locations, I would feel more
comfortable starting out knowing that there were existing
networks/knowledge I
What is the benefit of including these regions if there is no representation?
(Based in the assumption that no one will claim representation)
What about an opt in/out for these regions? If at a later point in time a
separate chapter wants to form they should be able to. Or maybe the general
On Sat, 1 Jun 2019 at 20:08, John Bryant wrote:
>
> Re: geographic extent, one of the definitions we've been using for other
> purposes (eg conference travel grants) is the UN geoscheme for Oceania:
>
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_geoscheme_for_Oceania
>
Interesting bit I
Great questions...
Re: geographic extent, one of the definitions we've been using for other
purposes (eg conference travel grants) is the UN geoscheme for Oceania:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_geoscheme_for_Oceania
But I personally agree that we need to reach out and canvass
Andrew John, Ed et al,
The proposal looks good however do we need to discuss the inclusion of
Hawaii and perhaps Guam as they may be more appropriate under a US auspices
or is it best to use the UN definition that excludes a number of these to
be succinctly clear what is in and what is not.
On Mon, 27 May 2019 at 13:06, Edoardo Neerhut wrote:
> Simon, you raise a good point! What do you all think is an effective way
> to get this input? Reach out to people we know are active mappers in
> Oceania and see if they would like their country to be represented?
>
> On Sat, 18 May 2019 at
Thanks for the effort you've put into this Andrew.
Simon, you raise a good point! What do you all think is an effective way to
get this input? Reach out to people we know are active mappers in Oceania
and see if they would like their country to be represented?
On Sat, 18 May 2019 at 21:18,
On Sat, 18 May 2019 at 19:12, Simon Poole wrote:
> I think my immediate and largest concern if I was reviewing the
> application (which I am not) would be: Oceania isn't just about Australia.
>
I would expect nothing less from the OSMF.
Have OSM communities outside of AUS (and NZ) even been
I think my immediate and largest concern if I was reviewing the
application (which I am not) would be: Oceania isn't just about Australia.
Have OSM communities outside of AUS (and NZ) even been addressed? While
not totally cast in stone, there is an assumption that territorial
chapters are
Hi All,
As my role on the OSGeo Oceania board I've been drafting up OSGeo
Oceania's application to become an OSMF Local Chapter, at the moment
the application is still in the works but any comments are most
welcome.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GAMY_pLAUMXe-PjJhQ4C4Eqvn2rq9xEt2mse3WexNxg/
Maritjn, thank you, that would be much appreciated!
Andrew Harvey is on our Board and will likely want to be involved in this
as well, I imagine. There has been some talk about an OSM sub-committee of
sorts, I suppose this will come in due course but thought it might become
relevant to this
John — I used to be OSMF secretary and have guided multiple local groups
through the OSMF LC application process. I am no longer on the board but know
the current secretary, and am happy to help with the process if needed.
Martijn
> On Mar 4, 2019, at 8:41 PM, John Bryant wrote:
>
> Hi
lto:johnwbry...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2019 1:41 PM
To: Graeme Fitzpatrick
Cc: OSM-Au
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Local Chapter
Hi Graeme, thanks a lot for bringing it up, it's a good opportunity to share a
work-in-progress.
Yes, there is work going on right now, and apologies for not ma
Hi Graeme, thanks a lot for bringing it up, it's a good opportunity to
share a work-in-progress.
Yes, there is work going on right now, and apologies for not making it more
widely known... we're scrambling a bit to pull together both this and the
2019 conference, trying to get a number of balls
There was mention late last year of setting up a local Chapter
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2018-December/012227.html,
but haven't heard anything further since?
Just been doing some random browsing & found this
Guys,
It may be good to give also an update on the whole chapters thingy on this
mailing list.
First: the draft agreement you've been referring to is of the table. We had
a good discussion within the OSMF board about the organizational structure
of the Foundation. We concluded that this
On Sat, 20 Feb 2010, John Smith wrote:
For those interested, here's the current draft released this evening:
http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/OSM_Local_Chapters_Draft_v0_3.pdf
My concerns about this still haven't been addressed and it doesn't
look like it will happen so I won't be at
20 matches
Mail list logo
