On 21/02/13 15:57, Jason Remillard wrote:
It seems like the technical aspects are addressed by hosting them on
the us OSM servers. The "soft / arbitrary criteria" are judgment
questions about where the OSM community is at.
However, what I was really asking was given the context I described
combined with the process as currently defined, would any of these
layers have a chance of getting approved?
Well that's more or less impossible to say in advance... I didn't read
the list in detail but I didn't notice anything which sounded like it
would automatically fail to meet the criteria.
Some of the criteria - like whether it's so garish it makes our eyes
bleed when we look at it - are of course impossible to evaluate without
a concrete implementation.
There is of course the question of exactly how much choice we want to
offer - there is some sort of limit on how many options you can show to
a user without being completely overwhelming. So layers with a larger
target audience would obviously better than those which looked like they
would have a very niche audience.
It's also worth bearing in mind the general mantra that the site is not
intended as an end user destination - so this should be about show
casing what can be done with OSM data rather than providing a service to
a people engaged in a particular sport or whatever.
Much of this is of course just my own thoughts, and at the end of the
day it would be up to the whole of the operations group to decide.
Tom
--
Tom Hughes ([email protected])
http://compton.nu/
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
