The dependency on MobileFrontend is only for the "view" isn't it? If its just a popup that shows up on clicking an icon and display a list (and hopefully a map) I could work towards making it independent. I'd prefer it being a single independent extension as it becomes easier to maintain. This is obviously open to discussion and I'll like to hear more why it makes sense to put it with the Geodata extension. Jon & Yuvi, if you both are at Zurich could you please discuss (call me on a Hangout too) the situation with using OSM and if we have any other alternatives. https://trello.com/c/3mkaZ4L2/80-nearby-v2 —prtksxna

That's a constraint from your end. From the OSM end, the tile server is only supposed to be used for mappers. OSM isn't a map, it's a dataset. If you want a map, use the dataset to make your own map. So yes, OSM is in perfect agreement with your policy. On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Max Semenik <maxsem.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:

I just read the whole Nearby card. Why is "OSM privacy situation is a bit of a mess?" OSM only knows that you're taking a copy of their database. No secret there, no PII problem, nothing. You're going to be writing your own tile set and serving them off your own servers using your own privacy policy. So I'm confused as to why this question of "OSM privacy" is even coming up. I'm also confused about why you would even consider Google Maps. You're not going to be hosting their tiles, their tiles will be fetched directly from Google by users and they'll be subject to Google's privacy policy. Simply a non-starter. On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 2:33 PM, Prateek Saxena <psaxena(a)wikimedia.org>wrote;wrote:

On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Prateek Saxena <psaxena(a)wikimedia.org>wrote;wrote: Specifically, they have no privacy policy for the OSM tileserver and geocoding server, and they have no legal resources to improve things at this time. Real improvements to the level we expect would probably also require engineering resources, which are also scarce resources at this point. Under normal circumstances we'd engage with them to improve their terms- we're required to negotiate with third-party providers by our new privacy policy! But given the short timeline on our side and the scarce resources on their side, and given that this is just a limited-deployment beta which will run off our own servers when it is deployed at scale, it probably just makes more sense to inform beta testers of the problem. Hope that clarifies- Luis -- Luis Villa Deputy General Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 415.839.6885 ext. 6810 NOTICE: *This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity.*