Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Mapping is not a subjective topic, though. I'm saying that OSM data is objectively better for the rural parts of the world I've been to.



> I'm saying that OSM data is objectively better for the rural parts of the world I've been to.

Which is a subjective factor. "X is objectively better for the categories that I subjectively selected".

Mapping is a subjective topic, simply because there are endless ways to evaluate and compare maps, so attributing any type of weight to any factor is a subjective exercise based on your own personal preferences.


I'll agree that what layers a map ought to show is a subjective matter.

But if you have two maps and they both have a shared subset of layers, you can (for that subset) objectively evaluate which map more accurately represents the real world, eg: has more objects than the other map, and/or has objects marked more accurately.

And what I'm saying is that for the layers that they have in common, I think OSM wins hands down.


The place where you live and the places you happen to visit is a subjective factor. Other people (who visit other places) might have a different overall experience, even if you'd agree with them on any place you both visited.


What's your reason for thinking Google is the best then? Do you even use maps for anything except major highways?


It is a subjective topic. Each service provides different layers of data, with varying amounts of coverage for each layer. People have opinions on how important each layer is, and what's acceptable in terms of coverage for those layers.

Where I went to college, near Rochester NY, housing data is nearly non-existent in OSM, while Google Maps happily provides it and 3D models of them too. Where I am in Seattle, OSM has parking information while Google Maps does not.


An interesting benefit of Google Maps which (I don’t think?) is available in OSM: different maps for countries with boundary disputes.

Google is basically the de facto map, even as far as many governments are concerned, and so showing localized maps of disputed areas may actually be saving lives.


Osm tracks disputed borders. A vector tile based view could show differences based on location.

The tiles served from osm.org don't.


Yes, OSM.org shows one map for everyone. But you can take the OSM database, and make your own map to show whatever you want.

For example, the Indian OSM community have an OSM map, which shows the borders of India as per Indian law (w.r.t. Kashmir)

https://openstreetmap.in/#5/22.150/79.081 vs https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=5/22.167/79.102


Interesting, when I took Geography 101 the first thing they taught was “mapping is super subjective”.


>for the rural parts of the world

I'm sure that's true. Google Maps seems to be better or at least more consistent (and better at routing with real-time information obviously) for the things that Google cares about. Which doesn't include rural areas, hiking trails, etc.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: