Foundation/AGM2024/Election to Board/Answers and manifestos/Q14 Perspective on Overture Maps
Perspective on Overture Maps
The Overture Maps Foundation has been a topic of discussion within the OSM community. What is your position on this initiative and how does it impact the project?
Craig Allan - Q14 Perspective on Overture Maps
I understand what Overture is trying to do. The partners need reliable, up to date spatial data for their commercial uses. They cannot get fit-for-purpose quality data from OpenStreetMap so they decided to invest in a commercial add-on to OSM data that would meet their needs. Whether they will actually succeed is an open question.
For OSMF and OSM broadly, I’d like to learn from Overture and address the problems of reliable and up to date data for the benefit of our data consumers. OSM is not just a data collection exercise – the mission says ‘make it available to all’. It is our duty to make available the best quality data that we can achieve. We must encourage and entice, but not force, our mappers to review old data, confirm current data and generally improve accuracy – perhaps by creating great tools to help them do that.
We may have to tighten tag coding for data consumers without compromising the core principle of ‘any tags you like’ We might choose to do that ourselves by pre-processing the tags or we can leave it to third party companies to publish cleaned-up versions of OSM data.
Brazil Singh - Q14 Perspective on Overture Maps
The Overture Maps Foundation, supported by major businesses, has sparked debate within the OSM community. While Overture aims to enhance map data, OSM’s strength lies in its grassroots, open-source contributions. Overture can be seen as complementary, offering potential opportunities for collaboration and innovation, but it’s crucial for OSM to stay true to its values of openness, community involvement, and independence. Careful attention should be given to ensuring that commercial influence doesn’t compromise OSM’s ethos or lead to vendor lock-in, while remaining open to synergies that may benefit both initiatives.
Courtney Cook Williamson - Q14 Perspective on Overture Maps
I don't have enough expertise about Overture Maps to comment on how it does or will impact OSM. I am capable of learning the answers, however, should this be an important thing for my volunteerism on the board.
Maurizio Napolitano - Q14 Perspective on Overture Maps
I see Overture Maps as a positive initiative that, due to its strong symbiosis with OSM, cannot be ignored. However, there’s a risk that OSM could be sidelined if tools like Overture dominate the market, potentially reducing visibility for OSM contributors and communities. OSM’s strength lies in its community-driven approach, and it’s crucial that the OSMF ensures Overture complements rather than competes with OSM. One key concern is that companies involved in Overture Maps previously contributed financially to OSM, and this support might shift toward Overture. It’s essential for OSMF to maintain a proactive dialogue where Overture reports back to OSMF, rather than OSMF having to chase these initiatives. A general challenge for OSMF is the need to keep up with third-party initiatives. OSM’s strong sense to create a super inclusive community can slow down decision-making, so it’s important to develop strategies where companies building on OSM acknowledge its value and give back in more tangible ways, such as improving data quality, contributing new technologies, and supporting infrastructure development.
Can Ünen - Q14 Perspective on Overture Maps
My take on things is that both OSM and Overture have bits the other don’t have, grounds the other don’t/can’t cover. So I’m leaning towards building institutional communications to understand each other better and seek ways to cooperate and coexist via meaningful and mutual collaboration. OSM does not grant entities exclusive control over specific feature sets in terms of data management so I understand that OSM as is might not be a viable product or a service when looking from the perspectives of commercial entities (and also government agencies). What I see so far is that Overture Maps have a solid structure to provide geospatial services more feasibly. But what OSM excels at is its vast community presence which is honestly very hard to accomplish by any other platform at the moment. And that’s why most of the Overture member organizations are still very active and are highly supportive of OSM and the community and OSM is a major source for the Overture Maps. Given its license compatibility with OSM, I think mechanisms can be designed and put in place to incorporate datasets of non-OSM entities of Overture Foundation into OSM as well within organized editing and import compliance and not having a unidirectional connection as OSM being just a source and a working ground for Overture-tied organized editing.
Michael Montani - Q14 Perspective on Overture Maps
Overture Maps Foundation is probably one of the biggest incognita OSM encountered over its path. On certain aspects, it is so secret that not even people working for the tech companies within Overture Maps know much about it at all, except for the small team working on it directly and senior management.
It is undeniable that big corporations have an interest on whatever business involves citizens voluntarily providing services or data on their own, for free. Most of the Internet applications nowadays involve citizens providing information or services in exchange of bigger platform visibility (AirBnb, Uber, food delivery platforms, all social media, etc), either for free (you are the product for marketing) or having the user paying for such visibility. Simply put, unpaid people ingesting free data is infinite Return On Investment.
I can see Overture Maps being an additional attempt of tech companies to compete with Google Maps and defeat its first-mover advantage in the field of navigation. It is my assumption that Overture Maps is still currently framed as a "pilot project", rather than being a definitive solution to a problem. It is not uncommon for big corporations to test out things and run (possibly overlapping) parallel lines of business in an attempt to see what works best, especially on a framework where you are partnering with potential competitors. So we can see those companies both supporting OSM by funding SotMs, the Foundation and providing corporate editing, while at the same time exploring what is best for them.
I feel we are still in an era in which big tech companies are exploring what is the best way to interact with communities outsourcing data and services. We can see companies either contributing data and money to a project as well as trying to interface directly, in a clash between very vertical (companies, organizations) and extremely horizontal (communities) social structures. Sentences pronounced at conferences by senior managers like "we care about the community" or "keep up the good work" may seem strange to the average OSM nerd but not that strange to a paid editor, acquainted with corporate / political speaking.
From the point of view of the OSM community, certainly Overture Maps is framed as a threat for several reasons:
- It is the evolution of Facebook's Daylight Distribution, which proved to be a way for tech companies of using OSM data while avoiding tedious community aspects and modifying the data model.
- It is backed by the Linux Foundation instead of the OSMF
- It potentially "steals" business partners and brings up questions like: "why should I as a company fund OSMF if I can get same or better data from Overture Maps Foundation?". The latest case on Niantic switching from OSM to Overture Maps is self-explanatory. I think in this case it must be carefully evaluated what is the monetary impact on OSM infrastructure to have partners joining Overture Maps rather than funding the OSMF, or at least acknowledging that this increases the dependency of the OSMF from Overture Maps companies.
- Some of these companies developed OSM editors which could be reframed to edit data to Overture Maps only. I do not think it will be the case, but it is a possible risk.
- In an ever-evolving field like technology, it is often difficult to interpret licences, especially in a case where big tech trains artificial intelligence models on non "public domain" data. This field is still uncharted and I guess institutions are moving to put regulations on what artificial intelligence is allowed or not allowed to do, but I think it is imperative for the OSMF to ensure ODbL-compliance at any cost.
I also do not like extreme views, and have a tendency to diplomacy. I do not think Overture Maps Foundation, for how much threatening it could be to OSM, is necessarily going to be an "OSM-killer" sort of thing. I can see a future in which OSM and Overture Maps co-exist, in a mixed fashion.
- OSM's main point of strength is the easiness of contributing and sharing data. We surely have a big community, huge database and cool applications, but the core point is that data is easy to contribute and to access, for free, even summing up community guidelines, rules and conversations. I see it as an undefeatable advantage (and true definition of open data), especially where on the other side there is competitive commercial framework where nothing is for free. I am not confident there will ever be a future where people actively contribute data to a semi-open data projects in which the user is not the final owner of the data they provide.
- Overture Maps Foundation main goal is to compete with Google Maps while offering a revised version of open data "according to industry standards". Possible clients may be companies willing to use an enhanced set of data (validation on specific features? Data that does not make it to OSM e.g. traffic data?) for quick business operations without the need to, or having the technical capacity of, contributing data back to OSM. It does not automatically mean those companies will stop contributing data and money to OSM or use it. It is instead a good opportunity for OSM to take a wider breath and differentiate towards more institutional adoption (national cartographic agencies, NGOs, IGOs, across both Western and Eastern worlds), which may be interested in having a non-corporate (or not-only-corporate) alternative.
Concluding, I personally do not like Overture Maps but I am also not favorable to cut conversations. It would be interesting for the OSMF to understand what drives Overture Maps and how it evolves, but I believe it is important focusing on OSM's real strengths (data accessibility and social drive), not necessarily with the fear of being outcompeted or die. I think it would be better if companies keep contributing directly to OSM, by following community guidelines and rules, and I hope Overture Maps will go in that direction. I also think artificial intelligence not to be necessarily a threat but surely too expensive at the moment for any company in terms of ROI to fully replace humans in complete and reliable map production in the short term.
Andrés Gómez Casanova - Q14 Perspective on Overture Maps
OvertureMaps reflects the need for corporations to create maps according to their interests based on the collaborative work of community maps; it is somewhat equivalent to paid Linux distributions.
This is an opportunity to invite OvertureMaps members to support the community. Many of these members already have groups of contributors supporting the map, but integration with local communities needs to be done. They could improve the OSM data they get from other sources (which may be outdated) and thus create projects where OSM and OvertureMaps members win, and finally, we all win.
Laura Mugeha - Q14 Perspective on Overture Maps
While there is resonance in both OSMF's and the Overture Maps Foundation's missions on creating high-quality, open map data, it's important to recognize the difference in our community and data models, which creates a space for us to co-exist and potentially collaborate in the near future. When this time comes, it would need to be approached carefully to ensure alignment with OSM's core values and license.
However, I hope Overture Maps motivates us to proactively address long-standing challenges, such as data quality and defining our long-term strategy for engaging corporate entities.
Héctor Ochoa Ortiz - Q14 Perspective on Overture Maps
Overture Maps is a response from tech corporations to the difficulties of using and contributing to OSM. On the using side, the lack of stable identifiers, the broad and sometimes ambiguous and heterogeneous tagging schema, and quality and coverage issues make using data difficult for developers. On the contribution side, the Organised Editing Guidelines, the Import Guidelines, and the lack of tooling to easily merge a dataset into OSM create barriers to data contribution from corporations. Overture Maps creates a dataset that is easy to use for developers (who may not be familiar with OSM) and where automated and semi-automated data pipelines from corporations can be integrated into and released in the open. Overture Maps still uses mostly data from OpenStreetMap; therefore, it is also considered a downstream dataset from it. OpenStreetMap has been built over the years with a different focus in mind, and I feel that this is something to remember. OSM is for the community, by the community, and its main goal is not to be used by developers, even if that is one of the ways it can be, and is, used.
The first issue to be addressed is to have a stable communication channel between the Overture Maps Foundation, the OSMF, and the OSM community. This is useful for identifying common problems that would benefit the projects and being aware of upcoming advances in Overture Maps. The second issue is to realize what OSM can learn from Overture Maps. Have we fallen behind? Are changes needed to the tagging schema (standardization, machine readability)? The third step is to make companies realize that contributing to OSM also improves their private value and helps Overture Maps. Community is key and what makes OSM and its data so rich, and therefore, Overture Maps as a downstream of OSM. It is in the corporations’ best interest to keep the support (in data, community-building, and especially financially) to OSM. OSM is a project that stands as long as everyone uses and contributes. We may fall into the Tragedy of the Commons whenever some users use too much without contributing as much. An opportunity appears for companies willing to contribute to Overture Maps that had not considered OSM before to be approached by the OSMF to help OSM financially.
I believe that the OSM community should move from being afraid of Overture Maps to embracing it, learning from it, and coming back stronger.
Español
Overture Maps es una respuesta de las corporaciones tecnológicas a las dificultades de usar y contribuir a OSM. En el lado del uso, la falta de identificadores estables, el esquema de etiquetado amplio y a veces ambiguo y heterogéneo, y los problemas de calidad y cobertura hacen que usar los datos sea difícil para los desarrolladores. En el lado de la contribución, las Directrices de Edición Organizada (Organised Editing Guidelines), las Directrices de Importación (Importing Guidelines) y la falta de herramientas para fusionar fácilmente un conjunto de datos en OSM crean barreras para la contribución de datos por parte de las empresas. Overture Maps crea un conjunto de datos que es fácil de usar para los desarrolladores (que pueden no estar familiarizados con OSM) y donde se pueden integrar y liberar en abierto flujos de datos automatizados y semi-automatizados de las empresas. Overture Maps todavía usa principalmente datos de OpenStreetMap; por lo tanto, también se considera un conjunto de datos descendente de este. OpenStreetMap se ha construido a lo largo de los años con un enfoque diferente en mente, y siento que esto es algo a recordar. OSM es para la comunidad, por la comunidad, y su objetivo principal no es ser usado por desarrolladores, aunque esa sea una de las formas en que puede ser, y es, usado.
El primer problema a abordar es tener un canal de comunicación estable entre la Fundación Overture Maps, la OSMF y la comunidad de OSM. Esto es útil para identificar problemas comunes que beneficiarían a los dos proyectos y estar al tanto de los avances próximos en Overture Maps. El segundo problema es darse cuenta de lo que OSM puede aprender de Overture Maps. ¿Nos hemos quedado atrás? ¿Se necesitan cambios en el esquema de etiquetado (estandarización, legibilidad por máquina)? El tercer paso es hacer que las empresas se den cuenta de que contribuir a OSM también mejora su valor privado y ayuda a Overture Maps. La comunidad es clave y lo que hace que OSM y sus datos sean tan ricos, y por lo tanto, Overture Maps como un descendiente de OSM. Es en el mejor interés de las corporaciones mantener el apoyo (en datos, construcción de comunidad y especialmente financieramente) a OSM. OSM es un proyecto que se mantiene mientras todos lo usen y contribuyan. Podemos caer en la Tragedia de los Comunes siempre que algunos usuarios usen demasiado sin contribuir tanto. Aparece una oportunidad para que las empresas que desean contribuir a Overture Maps y que no habían considerado OSM antes sean contactadas por la OSMF para ayudar a OSM financieramente.
Creo que la comunidad de OSM debería pasar de tener miedo a Overture Maps a aceptarlo, aprender de él y volver más fuerte.
Arun Ganesh - Q14 Perspective on Overture Maps
Overture is an important product of the OSM project, and in that sense only helps establish the value of OSM as a project. Overture focuses on certain enterprise data requirements that would always be out of the scope of the core OSM project. Every corporate entity knows it's just way too expensive to maintain your own map and it is in everyone's best interests to keep OSM growing with higher quality data at lower costs.
Overture is a giant leap forward in making OSM data accessible to data consumers. The delivery mechanism of geoparquet looks promising and we should likely consider making OSM planet dumps available in this format for easier consumption. My belief is there is an opportunity here for the core OSM project to understand the needs of enterprise data consumers better with Overture and evaluate if we would like to focus on serving any of those needs directly.
OSM Foundation's board election 2024: official questions
Q01 Motivation and Objectives
| Q02 Conflict of Interest Management
| Q03 Transparency and Accountability
| Q04 Strategic Vision and Sustainability
| Q05 Decision-Making and Collaboration
| Q06 Fundraising and Resource Development
| Q07 Handling Legal and Political Challenges
| Q08 State of the Map
| Q09 Your Community Contributions
| Q10 Promoting Community and Attracting Volunteers
| Q11 Technology and Innovation
| Q12 Data Quality and Protection
| Q13 Perspective on Open Source
| Q14 Perspective on Overture Maps
All board candidates' manifestos
2024 OpenStreetMap Foundation's: Board election - Voting information and instructions - Annual General Meeting
| ||||||