Roland Olbricht wrote:
> This makes clear that neither the file name extension "osm" is 
> jeoparday. Or you do not want to discourage people from using 
> "osmium", "osmosis" or a range of other software.

I see your point there, but conversely I am really uncomfortable with the
OsmAnd situation.

It's evident (from IRC,, other non-OSM forums etc.) that a lot
of people assume OsmAnd is the official OpenStreetMap Android app. This is
already a problem in terms of support burden. It could potentially become a
problem for others building apps on OSM data (if users say "oh, no, I'd
rather use the official app") or by effectively encouraging mapping for this
official-sounding renderer. In brief, I don't believe we should have
permitted OsmAnd to use that name, though by now the ship has almost
certainly sailed.

How you formulate a policy that permits osmosis and osmium but not OsmAnd,
though, I have no idea.


View this message in context:
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at

talk mailing list

Reply via email to