On 2013-02-05 06:56, Simon Poole wrote:
participated it has always struck me how little alignment of goals
there
is in the community as a whole (I'm not saying it is surprising,
just
that is so). Outside the very generic mission that OSM "creates and
distributes free geographic data for the world" it is difficult to
find
common ground. So not only to we tend to disagree on how to get to
our
goal (the strategy) there are a number of different views on what
those
goals actually are (outside of hand wavy very generic statements).
The exercise towards the end of the SWG to define core values for the
project could be seen as an attempt to document some aspects of what
common ground there is, however it never matured (IMHO) to a level
that
the result could be published as a formal document and currently
molders
well hidden on the foundation web site at
ttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Core_Values
I'm fairly sure that prior to any strategic exercise we need to take
a
step back and have a look at what this project wants to achieve in
the end.
who is "we"? and why do you or anyone else get to declare what "we"
need to do? isn't that a personal decision? you're right, those who map
do have different aims, methods, approaches, understandings, etc. why
does that need to change? and how are you or anyone else going to form
those 30,000 into one? through what authority, through what power?
--
robin
http://universitywithoutconditions.ac.nz - Auckland's Free University
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
