Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-06-12 Thread Strainu
2012/5/29 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
 On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
 Yes, TomTom is dying.  But it's because of Google, not because of OSM.


 I'd actually flag smartphones as the culprit.

Well, the empire strikes back:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/06/11/apple-tomtom-ios-6-maps/ :) Another
usable app for Romania.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-06-08 Thread Anthony
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote:
 The more you play with OpenStreetMap, the more magical ways you start
 discovering that you can use the data. Two that I've recently found...

 1. Water fountains. Here in London, we used to have lots of water
 fountains. Then modern capitalism found a much better way of
 delivering water to people: put it in plastic bottles, drive it half
 way around the country (or world) and sell it to people and a massive
 profit, who then drink it and throw the plastic bottle away.  There
 are a few water fountains in London though, and they are listed on
 OpenStreetMap. Any movement to campaign for change requires actual
 data to start with.

This only works if you verify that all the water fountains in London
are in OSM (which is pretty much tantamount to mapping them yourself).

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-06-07 Thread Marcin Cieslak
 Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru wrote:
 On Tue, 29 May 2012 13:23:25 +0100, Tom Morris wrote:
 On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
 The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, 
 whereas
 OSM, for the most part, is not.

 Yes, TomTom is dying.  But it's because of Google, not because of 
 OSM.


 I'd say OSM is beginning to be pretty usable in the real world. It's
 usable for a lot of things where there's not so much commercial
 interest in the map data...


  From my personal experience: Twice per year I travel into middle-size 
 towns of Russia, usually visiting several of then on a single trip. 
 Google maps suck badly; Google's Russian counterpart, Yandex Maps, are 
 better, but they suck as well; TomTom is nonexistent, and OSM had for 
 all places I visited in 2010 (with one exception - for the record, this 
 was the city of Tayga, Kemerovo Region in Siberia) reasonably good maps, 
 often with reliable house numbering.

I can confirm this too - even in a large city of Kiev my coworkers
tried to explain to each other how to reach something using
very inaccurate Google Map. We tried openstreetmap.org (they
didn't now it even exists) and we all were amazed by the level
of detail the city was described. Even all traffic lights and
bus stops were in place as they should.

//Saper


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-06-07 Thread Richard Symonds
Oddly, I checked a family home in Missouri the other day.

On Google maps, it's set about 1 mile from where it should be... and on the
wrong side of the Missouri river. It shows roads where there are none, and
is thoroughly unusable. UPS etc don't deliver to the house because it's not
on their navigation systems...

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=ensafe=offq=google+maps+336+rose+lee+lane,+MOie=UTF-8hq=hnear=0x87d9437774ae90b1:0xe097361aeae6e007,336+Rose+Lee+Ln,+Union,+MO+63084,+USAgl=ukei=C4rQT_bNH8TZ8APbgeHRDAoi=geocode_resultved=0CBUQ8gEwAA


Of course, OSM is more accurate than any others - compare the link above,
with this link, showing a more accurate - but incomplete - map:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.396220356226lon=-91.0328784584999zoom=18


Richard Symonds
Wikimedia UK
0207 065 0992
Disclaimer viewable at
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia:Email_disclaimer
Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk



On 7 June 2012 11:57, Marcin Cieslak sa...@saper.info wrote:

  Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru wrote:
  On Tue, 29 May 2012 13:23:25 +0100, Tom Morris wrote:
  On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
  The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world,
  whereas
  OSM, for the most part, is not.
 
  Yes, TomTom is dying.  But it's because of Google, not because of
  OSM.
 
 
  I'd say OSM is beginning to be pretty usable in the real world. It's
  usable for a lot of things where there's not so much commercial
  interest in the map data...
 
 
   From my personal experience: Twice per year I travel into middle-size
  towns of Russia, usually visiting several of then on a single trip.
  Google maps suck badly; Google's Russian counterpart, Yandex Maps, are
  better, but they suck as well; TomTom is nonexistent, and OSM had for
  all places I visited in 2010 (with one exception - for the record, this
  was the city of Tayga, Kemerovo Region in Siberia) reasonably good maps,
  often with reliable house numbering.

 I can confirm this too - even in a large city of Kiev my coworkers
 tried to explain to each other how to reach something using
 very inaccurate Google Map. We tried openstreetmap.org (they
 didn't now it even exists) and we all were amazed by the level
 of detail the city was described. Even all traffic lights and
 bus stops were in place as they should.

 //Saper


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-06-07 Thread Dan Rosenthal
OSM is great. Here in Addis Ababa, street names are not used except in a
handful of major thoroughfares; people navigate by landmark. OSM has far
more navigable map of the city than googlemaps does.  In some areas it
labels the street name in the local fashion (e.g. Road to Gerji Giorgis).
Yet it fails in other aspects -- the U.S. embassy is the most recognizable
landmark on Intoto street, and is not listed; neither are the French,
German, or British embassies. The EU Commission is not listed on Cape Verde
st. even though that street is commonly known as EU Road. Yet, the
Brazilian Ambassador's residence, not a particularly well known landmark,
is known.


Dan Rosenthal


On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Cristian Consonni
kikkocrist...@gmail.comwrote:

 2012/6/7 Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk:
  the house because it's not
  on their navigation systems...

 May I thank evebody participating in this discussion for the
 throughout update on navigation system?
 I am finding it very interesting, above all the comparising among
 different countries. =)

 Cristian

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-06-07 Thread David Gerard
On 7 June 2012 15:30, Dan Rosenthal swatjes...@gmail.com wrote:

  Yet it fails in other aspects -- the U.S. embassy is the most recognizable
 landmark on Intoto street, and is not listed; neither are the French,
 German, or British embassies. The EU Commission is not listed on Cape Verde
 st. even though that street is commonly known as EU Road. Yet, the
 Brazilian Ambassador's residence, not a particularly well known landmark,
 is known.


{{sofixit}}

;-)


- d.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-06-07 Thread Tom Morris
The more you play with OpenStreetMap, the more magical ways you start
discovering that you can use the data. Two that I've recently found...

1. Water fountains. Here in London, we used to have lots of water
fountains. Then modern capitalism found a much better way of
delivering water to people: put it in plastic bottles, drive it half
way around the country (or world) and sell it to people and a massive
profit, who then drink it and throw the plastic bottle away.  There
are a few water fountains in London though, and they are listed on
OpenStreetMap. Any movement to campaign for change requires actual
data to start with.

2. Stopped clocks. There are hundreds of beautiful, historical clocks
on public buildings across the country. It's possible to mark clocks
on OSM, and I've just been discussing on the wiki how we can mark
disused clocks. Having the data lets us campaign to have these clocks
restarted.

I'm also finding that in the process of doing OpenStreetMapping, I
take a lot of photos which are also usable on Commons. Quite a lot of
them aren't (for copyright reasons or scope reasons or just because
they are pretty crappy photographs), but a lot of the time you can
find uses for them on Commons. (Just need to go through and write
descriptions, categorise and upload.)

I heartily recommend any Wikimedians grab themselves the relevant
tools for OSMing (which don't necessarily mean a standalone GPS
device: things like iPhones and Android smartphones can be used, and
you can even go low-tech and print out walking maps), go out and do
it. If there's an OSM community in your area, go hang out with them.

The systemic bias issues that Wikipedia face also exist on OSM: here
in London, the city is richly documented and the OSMers are mostly
just tweaking, fixing and maintaining (most of my edits in London are
just metadata improvement rather than actually adding any new shape
information). But if you go and look at many non-Western countries,
you'll find whole towns which just aren't covered at all.

-- 
Tom Morris
http://tommorris.org/

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-06-06 Thread David Richfield
I've never used a professional GPS, but I've found Navit and Gosmore
to be quite useful on Android.  Interstingly, they have complementary
levels of fail.  Navit has good voice instructions, but horrible
search, while Gosmore has semi-lame voice instructions but very good
search.

Both of them seem to route just fine for my purposes in South Africa,
but I haven't tested toll roads.

-- 
David Richfield
[[:en:User:Slashme]]
+27718539985

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-06-02 Thread Kim Bruning
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 09:29:19AM -0400, Anthony wrote:
 I just tried osmand.  I can't even figure out how to put in an
 address.  

WFM (Works For Me)? Also routing is not mapping. It looks like the
android coders could still improve their routing algorithms a bit. As
long as you take that into account, it's quite usable. (I always Use
Brain(tm) in combination satnav anyway, so I've hardly noticed, myself)

Note that OSMAndroid supports multiple online routing providers as well as
its own local-CPU algorithm. YMMV (literally! ;)

sincerely,
Kim Bruning

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


[Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-05-29 Thread David Gerard
TomTom press release:
http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/

OpenStreetMap volunteer response:
http://www.systemed.net/blog/index.php?post=23 Flags TomTom
quote-mining.


- d.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-05-29 Thread Deryck Chan
I was skeptical with parent-like satnavs when they were first
introduced back then; I still am skeptical today. What's inadequate
about Read map*, pay attention to the road, use brain?

Deryck

*I'm a big fan of using the automatic route-planning features of map
systems like Google Maps or even TomTom to help me plan routes. It's
just that the assumption that a machine is correct about the real
world is simply wrong.

On 29 May 2012 12:32, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
 Ha, makes for a good read. Thanks for sharing, David!

 Richard Symonds
 Wikimedia UK
 0207 065 0992
 Disclaimer viewable at
 http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia:Email_disclaimer
 Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk



 On 29 May 2012 12:28, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:

 TomTom press release:
 http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/

 OpenStreetMap volunteer response:
 http://www.systemed.net/blog/index.php?post=23 Flags TomTom
 quote-mining.


 - d.

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-05-29 Thread Tom Morris
On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
 The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas
 OSM, for the most part, is not.

 Yes, TomTom is dying.  But it's because of Google, not because of OSM.


I'd say OSM is beginning to be pretty usable in the real world. It's
usable for a lot of things where there's not so much commercial
interest in the map data...

Wheelchair accessible maps: the work done by wheelmap.org that takes
OSM and lets you tag which businesses are wheelchair accessible.

Footpaths and cycle paths. There is a market for pedestrian and cycle
navigation tools, but it's a small fraction compared to the motorist
market. If you go out into rural Britain and want to know where the
footpaths, bridleways or cycle paths are, Google won't tell you. You
either have to pay Ordnance Survey for a map, or rely on OSM.

Even in cities, OSM is very, very useful for pedestrians. Here is Old
Street roundabout on Google Maps and OpenStreetMap.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.525611lon=-0.086892zoom=18layers=M

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=Old+Street,+Londonhl=enll=51.525724,-0.08722spn=0.001799,0.005284sll=51.022157,0.280645sspn=0.003638,0.014656oq=Old+Street,+hnear=Old+St,+London,+United+Kingdomt=mz=18

Note how OSM shows the location of underpasses, traffic lights, ATMs,
petrol station and bike storage... that's what you get when you are
creating maps with a bit of love, care and attention. ;-)

-- 
Tom Morris
http://tommorris.org/

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-05-29 Thread David Gerard
On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:

 The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas
 OSM, for the most part, is not.
 Yes, TomTom is dying.  But it's because of Google, not because of OSM.


I'd actually flag smartphones as the culprit. They're the good-enough
cheap alternative that's disrupting the satnav business. TomTom's
article is actually about an Android app that uses OSM data.

Heck, my Blackberry doesn't have a GPS, but I can navigate usably with
the Vodafone app that just triangulates off the cell towers.
Resolution is terrible (on the order of 100-200 metres), but it turns
out to be mostly sufficient.


- d.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-05-29 Thread Yaroslav M. Blanter

On Tue, 29 May 2012 13:23:25 +0100, Tom Morris wrote:

On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, 
whereas

OSM, for the most part, is not.

Yes, TomTom is dying.  But it's because of Google, not because of 
OSM.




I'd say OSM is beginning to be pretty usable in the real world. It's
usable for a lot of things where there's not so much commercial
interest in the map data...



From my personal experience: Twice per year I travel into middle-size 
towns of Russia, usually visiting several of then on a single trip. 
Google maps suck badly; Google's Russian counterpart, Yandex Maps, are 
better, but they suck as well; TomTom is nonexistent, and OSM had for 
all places I visited in 2010 (with one exception - for the record, this 
was the city of Tayga, Kemerovo Region in Siberia) reasonably good maps, 
often with reliable house numbering.


Cheers
Yaroslav

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-05-29 Thread Richard Symonds
Tom: Is there a way to find out where OSM isn't very accurate/complete?

Richard Symonds
Wikimedia UK
0207 065 0992
Disclaimer viewable at
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia:Email_disclaimer
Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk



On 29 May 2012 13:29, Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru wrote:

 On Tue, 29 May 2012 13:23:25 +0100, Tom Morris wrote:

 On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:

 The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas
 OSM, for the most part, is not.

 Yes, TomTom is dying.  But it's because of Google, not because of OSM.


 I'd say OSM is beginning to be pretty usable in the real world. It's
 usable for a lot of things where there's not so much commercial
 interest in the map data...


 From my personal experience: Twice per year I travel into middle-size
 towns of Russia, usually visiting several of then on a single trip. Google
 maps suck badly; Google's Russian counterpart, Yandex Maps, are better, but
 they suck as well; TomTom is nonexistent, and OSM had for all places I
 visited in 2010 (with one exception - for the record, this was the city of
 Tayga, Kemerovo Region in Siberia) reasonably good maps, often with
 reliable house numbering.

 Cheers
 Yaroslav


 __**_
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: 
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-lhttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-05-29 Thread Anthony
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Richard Symonds
richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
 Tom: Is there a way to find out where OSM isn't very accurate/complete?

Sure, but they all require comparison to something (a data source,
memory, the real world) which is accurate/complete.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-05-29 Thread Tom Morris
On 29 May 2012 13:38, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
 Tom: Is there a way to find out where OSM isn't very accurate/complete?


Well, there's OSM bugs. Basically, there is a way you can file a bug
on the map, sort of like how you might leave a note on a talk page
(only there is some actual bug semantics) or whack a big warning
template on the top of an article. If you are editing in Potlatch,
it'll show the bugs as little red ladybugs! ;-)

Of course, the only way to really know is to compare OpenStreetMap to
reality or to another map or to a data source. Comparing to reality is
time-consuming, and is basically what OSMers do every time they go out
and trace new paths. Comparing to another map is hard because of
copyright issues and getting the data from that map in a usable form.
Comparing to a data source is a very limited way of measuring
completeness. One way that would be fairly good for the United
Kingdom, for instance, would be to get hold of some dataset from the
government of every institution of a similar type (hospitals and
doctor's surgery information is available from the NHS, for instance,
and I believe school data might be available also) and then write a
script to see if there is something with a very similar name in the
vicinity on OSM.

Personally, I find that whenever I look something up about somewhere I
know, work or live, OSM is pretty good. There are issues: occasionally
I'll find a street name that's wrong. But when using Google Maps, I
find all sorts of inaccuracies, mostly derived from SEOers spamming
Google Maps. I saw an SEO consultant who managed to get their business
listing bang in the centre of the Houses of Parliament once.

-- 
Tom Morris
http://tommorris.org/

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-05-29 Thread Anthony
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Strainu strain...@gmail.com wrote:
 2012/5/29 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
 The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas
 OSM, for the most part, is not.

 I see it the other way around: OSM, for the most part, IS usable in
 the real world. One can easily navigate using OSM data on the main
 roads in a country, and even on major boulevards within the cities.
 The problems appear in the last kilometer.

I just tried osmand.  I can't even figure out how to put in an
address.  I then tried navfree usa.  I eventually put in an address
(why I can't just type in, or better yet speak, the address, i don't
know).  But the route it gave me included tolls.  When I told it to
avoid tolls, it failed to do so.  (Either the app is broken, or the
information about what roads have tolls is broken.)

There's probably some other app I just don't know about.  But so far I
find it impossible to use OSM data to get the route that I follow
every day to work (which Google's navigation app finds readily, and
even updates on the fly due to changing traffic conditions).

 2012/5/29 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
 And yeah, there are apps that use OSM data.  And there will probably
 be more now that OSM has abandoned copyleft for data.

 Why do you say that? ODbL is still a copyleft license, although a much
 weaker copyleft.

Rather than nitpick over details, I'll go with much weaker copyleft.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-05-29 Thread Anthony
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
  I then tried navfree usa.

Looking more closely at the directions it did give me, it is having me
get off the toll highway at basically every exit and then getting back
on it.  And the destination is off by 13 blocks (about a mile).

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-05-29 Thread Strainu
2012/5/29 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
 I just tried osmand.  I can't even figure out how to put in an
 address.  I then tried navfree usa.

You're limiting yourself to Android, which isn't very fair. Try to get
hold of a Garmin device with OSM maps and see if that makes a
difference. I suspect it will. (Garmin also has some GPS apps for
iPhone, but not for Android. I have no idea if you can load OSM maps
on those apps)

Strainu

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-05-29 Thread Anthony
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Strainu strain...@gmail.com wrote:
 2012/5/29 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
 I just tried osmand.  I can't even figure out how to put in an
 address.  I then tried navfree usa.

 You're limiting yourself to Android, which isn't very fair. Try to get
 hold of a Garmin device with OSM maps and see if that makes a
 difference. I suspect it will. (Garmin also has some GPS apps for
 iPhone, but not for Android. I have no idea if you can load OSM maps
 on those apps)

I'm not doubting that someone can take OSM data and make it into
something usable.  I'm not even doubting that someone *has* taken OSM
data and made it into something usable.

But I think the analogy between being able to take OSM data, probably
add a lot of your own data (espectially for the geolocation
information, which is fantastic in some locations, and horrible in
others), and being able to go to en.wikipedia.org and just use it, is
a very weak analogy.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-05-29 Thread Strainu
2012/5/29 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
 ...if you wanna go this way, I wonder if you go to en.wikipedia.org
 and just use it if you want to plant tomatoes in your garden. I know
 I wouldn't.

 I wouldn't use Britannica either.  The context of the article is GPS
 navigation for automobiles.

I'm sorry, I don't quite get it. When you said that Wikipedia was
usable in the real world, I assumed you meant that you can use
Wikipedia as an encyclopedia for reference in different aspects of
daily life. Now you're saying that you can somehow use Wikipedia for
GPS navigation for automobiles?


 One thing I do have to admit is that my experience with OSM has mostly
 been in the United States, which I hear is a place that OSM has been
 especially poor, and a place where Google (which is what I do use) is
 especially good.

That appears to be the case. In Romania, as well as most Eastern
European countries and some Asian countries, the Google development
model is _identical_ to the one used by OSM: crowdsourcing.

Before Google Mapper, the number of roads in Romania on Google maps
was a staggering... 3. Now the number of paved roads is indeed better
than OSM (due mainly to better satellite imagery), but the level of
details doesn't even come close, and geolocation is at street level
for both.

Strainu

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] TomTom does a Britannica

2012-05-29 Thread Tom Morris
On 29 May 2012 15:28, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
 And I don't foresee OSM ever being able to catch up.  Google is very
 much a moving target.  While OSM is working on catching up on
 geolocation (address to lat/lon) information, Google is micromapping
 to the level of detail needed to program a self-driving auto.


OpenStreetMap is working on whatever the contributors want. ;-)

For some of us, that's footpaths, for some of us it's business
metadata, for some it's mapping out baseball fields, or adding post
boxes or any number of other things.

-- 
Tom Morris
http://tommorris.org/

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l