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, help.osm.org, 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. Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Draft-Trademark-Policy-tp5900227p5900330.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
