TomTom press release: http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/
OpenStreetMap volunteer response: http://www.systemed.net/blog/index.php?post=23 Flags TomTom quote-mining.
- d.
Ha, makes for a good read. Thanks for sharing, David!
Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992 Disclaimer viewable at http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia:Email_disclaimer Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk
On 29 May 2012 12:28, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
TomTom press release: http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/
OpenStreetMap volunteer response: http://www.systemed.net/blog/index.php?post=23 Flags TomTom quote-mining.
- d.
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
I was skeptical with parent-like satnavs when they were first introduced back then; I still am skeptical today. What's inadequate about "Read map*, pay attention to the road, use brain"?
Deryck
*I'm a big fan of using the automatic route-planning features of map systems like Google Maps or even TomTom to help me plan routes. It's just that the assumption that a machine is correct about the real world is simply wrong.
On 29 May 2012 12:32, Richard Symonds richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Ha, makes for a good read. Thanks for sharing, David!
Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992 Disclaimer viewable at http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia:Email_disclaimer Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk
On 29 May 2012 12:28, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
TomTom press release: http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/
OpenStreetMap volunteer response: http://www.systemed.net/blog/index.php?post=23 Flags TomTom quote-mining.
- d.
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas OSM, for the most part, is not.
Yes, TomTom is dying. But it's because of Google, not because of OSM.
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 7:28 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
TomTom press release: http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/
OpenStreetMap volunteer response: http://www.systemed.net/blog/index.php?post=23 Flags TomTom quote-mining.
- d.
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas OSM, for the most part, is not.
Yes, TomTom is dying. But it's because of Google, not because of OSM.
I'd say OSM is beginning to be pretty usable in the real world. It's usable for a lot of things where there's not so much commercial interest in the map data...
Wheelchair accessible maps: the work done by wheelmap.org that takes OSM and lets you tag which businesses are wheelchair accessible.
Footpaths and cycle paths. There is a market for pedestrian and cycle navigation tools, but it's a small fraction compared to the motorist market. If you go out into rural Britain and want to know where the footpaths, bridleways or cycle paths are, Google won't tell you. You either have to pay Ordnance Survey for a map, or rely on OSM.
Even in cities, OSM is very, very useful for pedestrians. Here is Old Street roundabout on Google Maps and OpenStreetMap.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.525611&lon=-0.086892&zoom=18&am...
https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=Old+Street,+London&hl=en&ll=51.5257...
Note how OSM shows the location of underpasses, traffic lights, ATMs, petrol station and bike storage... that's what you get when you are creating maps with a bit of love, care and attention. ;-)
On Tue, 29 May 2012 13:23:25 +0100, Tom Morris wrote:
On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas OSM, for the most part, is not.
Yes, TomTom is dying. But it's because of Google, not because of OSM.
I'd say OSM is beginning to be pretty usable in the real world. It's usable for a lot of things where there's not so much commercial interest in the map data...
From my personal experience: Twice per year I travel into middle-size towns of Russia, usually visiting several of then on a single trip. Google maps suck badly; Google's Russian counterpart, Yandex Maps, are better, but they suck as well; TomTom is nonexistent, and OSM had for all places I visited in 2010 (with one exception - for the record, this was the city of Tayga, Kemerovo Region in Siberia) reasonably good maps, often with reliable house numbering.
Cheers Yaroslav
Tom: Is there a way to find out where OSM isn't very accurate/complete?
Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992 Disclaimer viewable at http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia:Email_disclaimer Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk
On 29 May 2012 13:29, Yaroslav M. Blanter putevod@mccme.ru wrote:
On Tue, 29 May 2012 13:23:25 +0100, Tom Morris wrote:
On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas OSM, for the most part, is not.
Yes, TomTom is dying. But it's because of Google, not because of OSM.
I'd say OSM is beginning to be pretty usable in the real world. It's usable for a lot of things where there's not so much commercial interest in the map data...
From my personal experience: Twice per year I travel into middle-size towns of Russia, usually visiting several of then on a single trip. Google maps suck badly; Google's Russian counterpart, Yandex Maps, are better, but they suck as well; TomTom is nonexistent, and OSM had for all places I visited in 2010 (with one exception - for the record, this was the city of Tayga, Kemerovo Region in Siberia) reasonably good maps, often with reliable house numbering.
Cheers Yaroslav
______________________________**_________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-lhttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Richard Symonds richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Tom: Is there a way to find out where OSM isn't very accurate/complete?
Sure, but they all require comparison to something (a data source, memory, the real world) which is accurate/complete.
On 29 May 2012 13:38, Richard Symonds richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Tom: Is there a way to find out where OSM isn't very accurate/complete?
Well, there's OSM "bugs". Basically, there is a way you can file a bug on the map, sort of like how you might leave a note on a talk page (only there is some actual bug semantics) or whack a big warning template on the top of an article. If you are editing in Potlatch, it'll show the bugs as little red ladybugs! ;-)
Of course, the only way to really know is to compare OpenStreetMap to reality or to another map or to a data source. Comparing to reality is time-consuming, and is basically what OSMers do every time they go out and trace new paths. Comparing to another map is hard because of copyright issues and getting the data from that map in a usable form. Comparing to a data source is a very limited way of measuring completeness. One way that would be fairly good for the United Kingdom, for instance, would be to get hold of some dataset from the government of every institution of a similar type (hospitals and doctor's surgery information is available from the NHS, for instance, and I believe school data might be available also) and then write a script to see if there is something with a very similar name in the vicinity on OSM.
Personally, I find that whenever I look something up about somewhere I know, work or live, OSM is pretty good. There are issues: occasionally I'll find a street name that's wrong. But when using Google Maps, I find all sorts of inaccuracies, mostly derived from SEOers spamming Google Maps. I saw an SEO consultant who managed to get their business listing bang in the centre of the Houses of Parliament once.
Yaroslav M. Blanter putevod@mccme.ru wrote:
On Tue, 29 May 2012 13:23:25 +0100, Tom Morris wrote:
On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas OSM, for the most part, is not.
Yes, TomTom is dying. But it's because of Google, not because of OSM.
I'd say OSM is beginning to be pretty usable in the real world. It's usable for a lot of things where there's not so much commercial interest in the map data...
From my personal experience: Twice per year I travel into middle-size towns of Russia, usually visiting several of then on a single trip. Google maps suck badly; Google's Russian counterpart, Yandex Maps, are better, but they suck as well; TomTom is nonexistent, and OSM had for all places I visited in 2010 (with one exception - for the record, this was the city of Tayga, Kemerovo Region in Siberia) reasonably good maps, often with reliable house numbering.
I can confirm this too - even in a large city of Kiev my coworkers tried to explain to each other how to reach something using very inaccurate Google Map. We tried openstreetmap.org (they didn't now it even exists) and we all were amazed by the level of detail the city was described. Even all traffic lights and bus stops were in place as they should.
//Saper
Oddly, I checked a family home in Missouri the other day.
On Google maps, it's set about 1 mile from where it should be... and on the wrong side of the Missouri river. It shows roads where there are none, and is thoroughly unusable. UPS etc don't deliver to the house because it's not on their navigation systems...
https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&safe=off&q=google+maps+336+rose...
Of course, OSM is more accurate than any others - compare the link above, with this link, showing a more accurate - but incomplete - map:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.396220356226&lon=-91.0328784584999&...
Richard Symonds Wikimedia UK 0207 065 0992 Disclaimer viewable at http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia:Email_disclaimer Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk
On 7 June 2012 11:57, Marcin Cieslak saper@saper.info wrote:
Yaroslav M. Blanter putevod@mccme.ru wrote:
On Tue, 29 May 2012 13:23:25 +0100, Tom Morris wrote:
On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas OSM, for the most part, is not.
Yes, TomTom is dying. But it's because of Google, not because of OSM.
I'd say OSM is beginning to be pretty usable in the real world. It's usable for a lot of things where there's not so much commercial interest in the map data...
From my personal experience: Twice per year I travel into middle-size towns of Russia, usually visiting several of then on a single trip. Google maps suck badly; Google's Russian counterpart, Yandex Maps, are better, but they suck as well; TomTom is nonexistent, and OSM had for all places I visited in 2010 (with one exception - for the record, this was the city of Tayga, Kemerovo Region in Siberia) reasonably good maps, often with reliable house numbering.
I can confirm this too - even in a large city of Kiev my coworkers tried to explain to each other how to reach something using very inaccurate Google Map. We tried openstreetmap.org (they didn't now it even exists) and we all were amazed by the level of detail the city was described. Even all traffic lights and bus stops were in place as they should.
//Saper
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
2012/6/7 Richard Symonds richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk:
the house because it's not on their navigation systems...
May I thank evebody participating in this discussion for the throughout update on navigation system? I am finding it very interesting, above all the comparising among different countries. =)
Cristian
OSM is great. Here in Addis Ababa, street names are not used except in a handful of major thoroughfares; people navigate by landmark. OSM has far more navigable map of the city than googlemaps does. In some areas it labels the street name in the local fashion (e.g. "Road to Gerji Giorgis). Yet it fails in other aspects -- the U.S. embassy is the most recognizable landmark on Intoto street, and is not listed; neither are the French, German, or British embassies. The EU Commission is not listed on Cape Verde st. even though that street is commonly known as "EU Road". Yet, the Brazilian Ambassador's residence, not a particularly well known landmark, is known.
Dan Rosenthal
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Cristian Consonni kikkocristian@gmail.comwrote:
2012/6/7 Richard Symonds richard.symonds@wikimedia.org.uk:
the house because it's not on their navigation systems...
May I thank evebody participating in this discussion for the throughout update on navigation system? I am finding it very interesting, above all the comparising among different countries. =)
Cristian
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
On 7 June 2012 15:30, Dan Rosenthal swatjester@gmail.com wrote:
Yet it fails in other aspects -- the U.S. embassy is the most recognizable landmark on Intoto street, and is not listed; neither are the French, German, or British embassies. The EU Commission is not listed on Cape Verde st. even though that street is commonly known as "EU Road". Yet, the Brazilian Ambassador's residence, not a particularly well known landmark, is known.
{{sofixit}}
;-)
- d.
The more you play with OpenStreetMap, the more magical ways you start discovering that you can use the data. Two that I've recently found...
1. Water fountains. Here in London, we used to have lots of water fountains. Then modern capitalism found a much better way of delivering water to people: put it in plastic bottles, drive it half way around the country (or world) and sell it to people and a massive profit, who then drink it and throw the plastic bottle away. There are a few water fountains in London though, and they are listed on OpenStreetMap. Any movement to campaign for change requires actual data to start with.
2. Stopped clocks. There are hundreds of beautiful, historical clocks on public buildings across the country. It's possible to mark clocks on OSM, and I've just been discussing on the wiki how we can mark disused clocks. Having the data lets us campaign to have these clocks restarted.
I'm also finding that in the process of doing OpenStreetMapping, I take a lot of photos which are also usable on Commons. Quite a lot of them aren't (for copyright reasons or scope reasons or just because they are pretty crappy photographs), but a lot of the time you can find uses for them on Commons. (Just need to go through and write descriptions, categorise and upload.)
I heartily recommend any Wikimedians grab themselves the relevant tools for OSMing (which don't necessarily mean a standalone GPS device: things like iPhones and Android smartphones can be used, and you can even go low-tech and print out walking maps), go out and do it. If there's an OSM community in your area, go hang out with them.
The systemic bias issues that Wikipedia face also exist on OSM: here in London, the city is richly documented and the OSMers are mostly just tweaking, fixing and maintaining (most of my edits in London are just metadata improvement rather than actually adding any new shape information). But if you go and look at many non-Western countries, you'll find whole towns which just aren't covered at all.
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Tom Morris tom@tommorris.org wrote:
The more you play with OpenStreetMap, the more magical ways you start discovering that you can use the data. Two that I've recently found...
- Water fountains. Here in London, we used to have lots of water
fountains. Then modern capitalism found a much better way of delivering water to people: put it in plastic bottles, drive it half way around the country (or world) and sell it to people and a massive profit, who then drink it and throw the plastic bottle away. There are a few water fountains in London though, and they are listed on OpenStreetMap. Any movement to campaign for change requires actual data to start with.
This only works if you verify that all the water fountains in London are in OSM (which is pretty much tantamount to mapping them yourself).
On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas OSM, for the most part, is not. Yes, TomTom is dying. But it's because of Google, not because of OSM.
I'd actually flag smartphones as the culprit. They're the good-enough cheap alternative that's disrupting the satnav business. TomTom's article is actually about an Android app that uses OSM data.
Heck, my Blackberry doesn't have a GPS, but I can navigate usably with the Vodafone app that just triangulates off the cell towers. Resolution is terrible (on the order of 100-200 metres), but it turns out to be mostly sufficient.
- d.
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:27 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas OSM, for the most part, is not. Yes, TomTom is dying. But it's because of Google, not because of OSM.
I'd actually flag smartphones as the culprit. They're the good-enough cheap alternative that's disrupting the satnav business. TomTom's article is actually about an Android app that uses OSM data.
Well, yeah. Smartphones were what allowed Google to create its free satnav app. And it's hard to compete with free.
And yeah, there are apps that use OSM data. And there will probably be more now that OSM has abandoned copyleft for data. But most of them won't be free, let alone libre, so it's hard to consider them part of OSM. If there's a usable free satnav app based on OSM data, I'd certainly like to see it.
Heck, my Blackberry doesn't have a GPS, but I can navigate usably with the Vodafone app that just triangulates off the cell towers. Resolution is terrible (on the order of 100-200 metres), but it turns out to be mostly sufficient.
I guess we have a different notion of "usable" :).
And yes, I'm talking about for driving navigation, which is TomTom's main market. Although, while OSM shines in some places in terms of walking navigation, it is woefully inadequate in others.
2012/5/29 David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com:
On 29 May 2012 13:08, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
Yes, TomTom is dying. But it's because of Google, not because of OSM.
I'd actually flag smartphones as the culprit.
Well, the empire strikes back: http://www.engadget.com/2012/06/11/apple-tomtom-ios-6-maps/ :) Another "usable" app for Romania.
2012/5/29 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas OSM, for the most part, is not.
I see it the other way around: OSM, for the most part, IS usable in the real world. One can easily navigate using OSM data on the main roads in a country, and even on major boulevards within the cities. The problems appear "in the last kilometer".
And that's just the tip of the iceberg (i.e. the rendered data). Invisible data, for instance road quality, can lead to impressive mashups, such as http://openmap.ro/auto/ (click on one of the top buttons to see the "comfort speeds", which is basically how messed up a road is). I never go for a long drive around Romania without consulting this. While some of the data is old, more often than not you can tell if you'll wreck your car on a road or not.
2012/5/29 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
And yeah, there are apps that use OSM data. And there will probably be more now that OSM has abandoned copyleft for data.
Why do you say that? ODbL is still a copyleft license, although a much weaker copyleft.
Strainu
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Strainu strainu10@gmail.com wrote:
2012/5/29 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas OSM, for the most part, is not.
I see it the other way around: OSM, for the most part, IS usable in the real world. One can easily navigate using OSM data on the main roads in a country, and even on major boulevards within the cities. The problems appear "in the last kilometer".
I just tried osmand. I can't even figure out how to put in an address. I then tried navfree usa. I eventually put in an address (why I can't just type in, or better yet speak, the address, i don't know). But the route it gave me included tolls. When I told it to avoid tolls, it failed to do so. (Either the app is broken, or the information about what roads have tolls is broken.)
There's probably some other app I just don't know about. But so far I find it impossible to use OSM data to get the route that I follow every day to work (which Google's navigation app finds readily, and even updates on the fly due to changing traffic conditions).
2012/5/29 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
And yeah, there are apps that use OSM data. And there will probably be more now that OSM has abandoned copyleft for data.
Why do you say that? ODbL is still a copyleft license, although a much weaker copyleft.
Rather than nitpick over details, I'll go with "much weaker copyleft".
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
I then tried navfree usa.
Looking more closely at the directions it did give me, it is having me get off the toll highway at basically every exit and then getting back on it. And the destination is off by 13 blocks (about a mile).
2012/5/29 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
I just tried osmand. I can't even figure out how to put in an address. I then tried navfree usa.
You're limiting yourself to Android, which isn't very fair. Try to get hold of a Garmin device with OSM maps and see if that makes a difference. I suspect it will. (Garmin also has some GPS apps for iPhone, but not for Android. I have no idea if you can load OSM maps on those apps)
Strainu
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Strainu strainu10@gmail.com wrote:
2012/5/29 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
I just tried osmand. I can't even figure out how to put in an address. I then tried navfree usa.
You're limiting yourself to Android, which isn't very fair. Try to get hold of a Garmin device with OSM maps and see if that makes a difference. I suspect it will. (Garmin also has some GPS apps for iPhone, but not for Android. I have no idea if you can load OSM maps on those apps)
I'm not doubting that someone can take OSM data and make it into something usable. I'm not even doubting that someone *has* taken OSM data and made it into something usable.
But I think the analogy between being able to take OSM data, probably add a lot of your own data (espectially for the geolocation information, which is fantastic in some locations, and horrible in others), and being able to go to en.wikipedia.org and just use it, is a very weak analogy.
2012/5/29 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
I'm not doubting that someone can take OSM data and make it into something usable. I'm not even doubting that someone *has* taken OSM data and made it into something usable.
You obviously have already made up you mind, so I doubt anything I'll say will change that, but...
But I think the analogy between being able to take OSM data, probably add a lot of your own data (espectially for the geolocation information, which is fantastic in some locations, and horrible in others), and being able to go to en.wikipedia.org and just use it, is a very weak analogy.
...if you wanna go this way, I wonder if you "go to en.wikipedia.org and just use it" if you want to plant tomatoes in your garden. I know I wouldn't.
Strainu
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Strainu strainu10@gmail.com wrote:
2012/5/29 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
I'm not doubting that someone can take OSM data and make it into something usable. I'm not even doubting that someone *has* taken OSM data and made it into something usable.
You obviously have already made up you mind, so I doubt anything I'll say will change that, but...
It's not so much what you say. Possibly you, or someone else, can point me to a free OSM-based android app which I can use in my daily driving. If so, I will change my opinion.
If you're going to refer me to commercial products which were based (in part) on OSM data, then that's not what I was talking about.
And if you're going to point to the places where OSM beats the commercial products, that was already acknowledged in the very tomtom article we're talking about:
"Open source mapping certainly has its benefits and can be extremely useful, particularly for pedestrians and in city or town centres. The way that the maps incorporate input from a wide community of contributors can result in impressive international coverage, whilst also driving down costs of production. However, when it comes to automotive-grade mapping, open source has some quite serious limitations, falling short on the levels of accuracy and reliability required for safe navigation."
...if you wanna go this way, I wonder if you "go to en.wikipedia.org and just use it" if you want to plant tomatoes in your garden. I know I wouldn't.
I wouldn't use Britannica either. The context of the article is GPS navigation for automobiles.
One thing I do have to admit is that my experience with OSM has mostly been in the United States, which I hear is a place that OSM has been especially poor, and a place where Google (which is what I do use) is especially good.
And I don't foresee OSM ever being able to catch up. Google is very much a moving target. While OSM is working on catching up on geolocation (address to lat/lon) information, Google is micromapping to the level of detail needed to program a self-driving auto.
2012/5/29 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
...if you wanna go this way, I wonder if you "go to en.wikipedia.org and just use it" if you want to plant tomatoes in your garden. I know I wouldn't.
I wouldn't use Britannica either. The context of the article is GPS navigation for automobiles.
I'm sorry, I don't quite get it. When you said that Wikipedia was usable in the real world, I assumed you meant that you can use Wikipedia as an encyclopedia for reference in different aspects of daily life. Now you're saying that you can somehow use Wikipedia for GPS navigation for automobiles?
One thing I do have to admit is that my experience with OSM has mostly been in the United States, which I hear is a place that OSM has been especially poor, and a place where Google (which is what I do use) is especially good.
That appears to be the case. In Romania, as well as most Eastern European countries and some Asian countries, the Google development model is _identical_ to the one used by OSM: crowdsourcing.
Before Google Mapper, the number of roads in Romania on Google maps was a staggering... 3. Now the number of paved roads is indeed better than OSM (due mainly to better satellite imagery), but the level of details doesn't even come close, and geolocation is at street level for both.
Strainu
On 29 May 2012 15:28, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
And I don't foresee OSM ever being able to catch up. Google is very much a moving target. While OSM is working on catching up on geolocation (address to lat/lon) information, Google is micromapping to the level of detail needed to program a self-driving auto.
OpenStreetMap is working on whatever the contributors want. ;-)
For some of us, that's footpaths, for some of us it's business metadata, for some it's mapping out baseball fields, or adding post boxes or any number of other things.
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Tom Morris tom@tommorris.org wrote:
On 29 May 2012 15:28, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
And I don't foresee OSM ever being able to catch up. Google is very much a moving target. While OSM is working on catching up on geolocation (address to lat/lon) information, Google is micromapping to the level of detail needed to program a self-driving auto.
OpenStreetMap is working on whatever the contributors want. ;-)
Whereas Google is working on whatever the users want. :-)
That said, even this is somewhat problematic. There is somewhat of a tension in OSM between micromappers and non-micromappers. Not quite as bad as in Wikipedia between "inclusionists" and "deletionists" - for the most part OSM mappers aren't going to outright delete additional information. But there have been disputes over, for example, whether or not it is okay to include short turning lanes in the lane count.
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Strainu strainu10@gmail.com wrote:
2012/5/29 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
...if you wanna go this way, I wonder if you "go to en.wikipedia.org and just use it" if you want to plant tomatoes in your garden. I know I wouldn't.
I wouldn't use Britannica either. The context of the article is GPS navigation for automobiles.
I'm sorry, I don't quite get it. When you said that Wikipedia was usable in the real world, I assumed you meant that you can use Wikipedia as an encyclopedia for reference in different aspects of daily life. Now you're saying that you can somehow use Wikipedia for GPS navigation for automobiles?
Nope. I am challenging the following assertion (put in SAT jargon): OSM:tomtom::Wikipedia:Britannica (that is, "OSM is to tomtom as Wikipedia is to Britannica).
In the case of Wikipedia:Britannica, they are compared based on their usefulness as encyclopedia articles, not on their usefulness as how-to books.
In the case of OSM:tomtom, in the context of the tomtom article, they are being compared based on the their usefulness for GPS navigation for automobiles.
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 09:29:19AM -0400, Anthony wrote:
I just tried osmand. I can't even figure out how to put in an address.
WFM (Works For Me)? Also routing is not mapping. It looks like the android coders could still improve their routing algorithms a bit. As long as you take that into account, it's quite usable. (I always Use Brain(tm) in combination satnav anyway, so I've hardly noticed, myself)
Note that OSMAndroid supports multiple online routing providers as well as its own local-CPU algorithm. YMMV (literally! ;)
sincerely, Kim Bruning
I've never used a professional GPS, but I've found Navit and Gosmore to be quite useful on Android. Interstingly, they have complementary levels of fail. Navit has good voice instructions, but horrible search, while Gosmore has semi-lame voice instructions but very good search.
Both of them seem to route just fine for my purposes in South Africa, but I haven't tested toll roads.
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 08:08:21AM -0400, Anthony wrote:
The difference is that Wikipedia is usable in the real world, whereas OSM, for the most part, is not.
OSMAndroid is fully usable for satnav in the real world. It includes enough data on streets, buildings and POI's to find what you need. You can download maps so you don't need a network connection for maps; and recent upgrades also allow one to do routing on the local CPU, so you can use your android phone just like a tomtom, except with OSM map data ;-)
When eg. playing tourist in Italy, this worked perfectly for me.
I'm going to say that this myth is busted ;-)
sincerely, Kim Bruning
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org