On 2018-06-09 10:51, Christoph Hormann wrote:
> On Saturday 09 June 2018, Colin Smale wrote: This analogy also means that
> competition is essential for progress
> in OSM.
How do we define "progress"? How do we conclude if OSM today is
"better" than in the past? Are our processes becoming more mature? Is
our data quality improving? Do we have more "customers" than before?
What defined "goals" have we achieved?
I have not defined progress and don't need to for the argument i made.
It applies for any definition of progress you might have. Or in other
words: Here it just means the opposite of stagnation.
Stagnation is exactly where we are heading, isn't it?
Phrases like "best map in/of the world" are fine in corporate mission
statements but it's hardly SMART[1].
Colin
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMART_criteria
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
