Talk:History of OpenStreetMap
Discuss History of OpenStreetMap page here:
Milestones to add
I'll move these ideas here I think (used to be on the 'History' page itself). These are the types of milestones we should aim to add on the 'History' page. Feel free to edit these ideas -- Harry Wood 17:13, 27 Apr 2006 (UTC)
When did OSM begin?- Done
- When did the first map go online? - Done
- when were UK motorways completed? See here for an estimate --EdLoach (talk) 11:01, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
- when was the poster produced? 20 October 2005 kl.11.12 [The Poster history]
- when was the traces page added?
- the millionth user
Web map improvements
when did the slippy map go live?- Done
- when was Landsat added?
- when was the Processing applet added?
when was josm made?- Done
- what did the old applet look like
- when were tags added?
- when were ways added?
- when was ecourier data added?
mod_tile important enough?
Is mod_tile important enough to go on the history page? I personally think so. (Reference: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Mapnik-rendering-update-p15095060.html) --Colin Marquardt 12:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
- +1 Definitely. Firefishy 14:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
When was it confirmed from Yahoo that we where free to use their aerials? Same also with other good and much used sources, such as Landsat, NPE-maps, etc. Don't know if they are important milestones alone, but it shows a trend. --Skippern 14:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Renamed from 'History'
- This would not improve clarity at all in my opinion, all plausible misunderstandings of "History" could also happen with "OSM history". Something like "History of OpenStreetMap" might actually be improvement, though. --Tordanik 10:56, 13 June 2012 (BST)
- I sometimes move pages when they unnecessarily have "OpenStreetMap" or "OSM" as a prefix. It often doesn't add anything. Not sure in this case. I guess we're looking to avoid confusion with concepts of edit history, history dumps, and also mapping the historical past. Tordanik's right. One might still expect to find those things going to a page called "OSM history". Could call it "Project history" perhaps? -- Harry Wood 14:20, 13 June 2012 (BST)
- Personally I think 'History of OpenStreetMap' is probably best. says exactly what it is about. PeterIto 00:21, 19 June 2012 (BST)
- Suppose so. It might mean a history of all OpenStreetMap edits i.e. a page about the history dump... but no. Mostly you'd expect a history of the project on that page title I think. -- Harry Wood 09:57, 19 June 2012 (BST)
- "History of OpenStreetMap" fit with the way these kind of pages are named in Wikipedia, making it more right or understandable even when there are room for misunderstandings. (+1) --Skippern 17:29, 12 September 2012 (BST)
DONE. I've renamed it from 'History' to 'History of OpenStreetMap'. We should change some of the incoming links to link here directly (Special:WhatLinksHere/History) In future we can turn the 'History' title into a disambiguation page, but let's leave that for a while. -- Harry Wood 17:38, 12 September 2012 (BST)
Shouldn't the first availability of planet.osm be mentioned? - User:MasterX244 23:01, 1 August 2013
Current era? Are we already THE first choice?
(just dropping some ideas - maybe for discussion) Which era is currently? We have the last section "New User Interfaces and Continued Growth". I am tempted to add either to this title or as a new section: OSM data or OSM-based services is the default choice or among the first options if someone looks for geodata integration/use in programs/apps. Just came to my mind, that we are actually at that point, aren't we? :-) ... or is it just my impression due to a filter bubble effect? --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 21:30, 6 February 2017 (UTC)