On 13 June 2015 15:37:22 GMT+01:00, Frederik Ramm <[email protected]> wrote: >http://groundtruth.in/2015/06/05/osm-mapping-power-to-the-people/
I really liked that article, but to me it doesn't argues *against remote mapping* as much as it argues *for local mapping*. I think everybody already agreed that local trumps remote, and the article is enlightening about how important that is and even how to define "local". But that doesn't mean that remote mapping is a bad thing. To me, remote and local are two necessary tools in the box. OSM wouldn't be hafl as good as it is today without that combinaison of multiple mapper profiles who contribute to a given area. If remote mapping slows local community growth (I have my doubts), or if a New Yorker newbie makes a mess of african highway classification, the way to treat this is to get more contributors, locals spread everywhere, real strong diversity, better tools and documentation. etc. The "solution" of holding off remote editing, letting the map linger in a not-very-usable state for a potentially very long time, does not sound very sensible to me. > [email protected] Starting a thread arguing against remote mapping from an "@remote.org" email address ? Love it :p _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
