On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 7:42 PM, John Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > 2009/12/23 Roy Wallace <[email protected]>: >> Interestingly, there is NO mention of mapping data. Amazing. How can >> they continue to omit this from the discussion? > > Actually thereg did a good run down on this: > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12/23/google_on_open/ > > It's not just data they aren't open about...
Interesting article. From it: "[H]is description of what should be open avoids all those areas where Google is preternaturally closed. In some cases, he rationalizes the omissions. In others, he seems completely oblivious to what's been left out." ... "Like any other money-driven outfit, Google is open when open suits its needs. And it's closed when closed suits." Still no mention of mapping data, though. Does being closed in that sense really suit Google's needs? I'm not so sure. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
