Slashdot Mirror


Towards an Open Geolocation Database

theodp writes "With the location land rush in full swing, TechCrunch's Erick Schonfeld declares it's time for an open database of places and calls on the Big Dogs of location — Twitter, Google, Foursquare, Gowalla, SimpleGeo, Loopt, Citysearch, et al. — to make it so. An open database that maps latitude and longitude coordinates to businesses, points of interest, and even people's homes should just be part of the basic fabric of the mobile Web. Foursquare CEO Dennis Crowley was enthusiastic about the idea (in a standing-up-at-a-cocktail-party sort of way), says Schonfeld, while Twitter founder Jack Dorsey was a little bit more lukewarm and cautious. Time for Larry and Sergey to invite the Families to a sit-down at 37.423021,-122.083739?"

17 of 74 comments (clear)

  1. What's in it for Google? by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For all intents and purposes, Google can implement this themselves and do whatever they want without the help of anyone else in the named list.

    When people start saying "for the good of all", they typically mean they want someone else to foot the bill. Of all the weirdo ideas I've heard, Foursquare has got to take the cake. It's really no wonder the CEO is enthusiastic about sharing this info; he stands to gain a huge database and backend for no cost. I suppose when you're bleeding money and you're known as the second coming of Gary Kildall, it might be to your advantage to act enthusiastic about everything and anything that might make your company look better than the crappy Web 2.0 service it really is.

    1. Re:What's in it for Google? by ultrabot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For all intents and purposes, Google can implement this themselves and do whatever they want without the help of anyone else in the named list.

      I don't think they can. Google doesn't own the map data, they just license it.

      --
      Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
  2. Big guys? by areusche · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've never heard of Foursquare and Gowalla until reading this. As of now, I'm pretty sure Google has the ball for running and maintaining a central and heavily used mapping database in the United States. I see Google Maps being used all over the place on websites for various things.

    Heck Live/Bing Maps is being used for Weather.com's radar maps. So instead of some central authority, the De Facto services seem to be doing just fine.

    1. Re:Big guys? by tomtomtom777 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've never heard of Foursquare and Gowalla until reading this.

      Foursquare as over 2 million unique visitors per month. That is twice as much as /. So yes, it's a big guy. Never having heard of it before is kinda your problem here.

  3. Its called openstreetmap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Openstreetmap already contains plenty of points of interest and businesses (not sure about homes yet), its editable by anyone. Lets use it as a framework for adding to this data.

    1. Re:Its called openstreetmap by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Openstreetmap already contains plenty of points of interest and businesses (not sure about homes yet), its editable by anyone. Lets use it as a framework for adding to this data.

      There are other projects such as Geonames and Gisgraphy. Between the three of them you have a good starting point.

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
  4. OSM by Mordac+the+Preventer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In what way does OpenStreetMap not fit the criteria already?

    --
    SteveB.
    1. Re:OSM by forand · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It hasn't been filled with all the useful information within the above mentioned companies databases.

    2. Re:OSM by solevita · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It hasn't been filled with all the useful information within the above mentioned companies databases.

      If only there was some why they could add it to the database...

      I think the main reason that many businesses may not get behind the idea of adding their data to OpenStreetMap (although that is what they should be doing) is that if they do they will lose the ability to control the commercial monopoly on the data. If you really want an open database with all this stuff in (as the summary suggests), OSM is the best way forward.

    3. Re:OSM by rmcd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Openstreet map is terrific. What we need, however, is for municipalities to understand that it's in their interest to keep it up to date. If a city could update with information about construction, new developments, etc, it would make OSM at the least an important adjunct to the commercial mappers. Not a lot of work for any one city and a great benefit to all.

      I don't see why businesses wouldn't want their location in all available databases, but that's for them to decide.

    4. Re:OSM by chdig · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It is terrific, however some cities (ahem Toronto, Vancouver, and others.) are releasing their municipal border data under a different licence than OSM (openstreetmaps), which is possibly even worse than not keeping them up to date properly. If this continues, a developer will need to navigate dozens or hundreds of unique licences in order to display data legally. A serious problem, that needs to be nipped in the bud ASAP.

  5. Government data by Anspen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A good start would be the free release of postal code and mapping data by governments. After all this is information collected with public money, so it should be available to all citizens. The UK has or will release mapping and postcode data. But most countries still only allow the data to be sold for hefty prices. The most ridiculous part is that in some countries the postal code date is the property of privatized former monopolies.

    1. Re:Government data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As a GIS Tech for a county in Michigan I can probably provide a little insight on this. While quite a bit of information is available free of charge at the state level (http://www.mcgi.state.mi.us/mgdl/) county/city governments (where the high accuracy data tends to be) tend charge for data for one main reason. The actual "Data" tends to only be requested by out of city/county, and most often state agencies. The Maps/PDF's/In office/online means of accessing the data are utilized heavily by the Local Taxpayers/Companies, but in most cases there is no one local which has the capabilities/expertise to utilize the raw data. Meaning that the people actually paying for the datas creation aren't the main beneficiaries of the requestes for the raw data. Most of the data requests are from large data aggregate firms looking to generate mailing lists ("You're in a flood zone, buy [the company who paid us]'s flood insurance") & business feasibility studies (think new Walmart/Lowes). If a way could be agreed upon to filter who is local and who isn't and enough people wanted it (most likely expressed by them going to a commissioners meeting to get the ball rolling) I'm sure local individuals could get data free of charge.

      "postal code [data] is the property of privatized former monopolies"
      In michigan its the power companies (I think) for the most part that handle the postal assignments. But trust me, they don't want it. I've heard of them practically begging the counties/state to take it off their hands. If they do charge unreasonable fees for it, I believe its in the hope that some big firm (google, microsoft, ect) will come along and fill in for some of the money their loosing on the program.

  6. Dangerous meeeting place by swillden · · Score: 3, Funny

    Time for Larry and Sergey to invite the Families to a sit-down at 37.423021,-122.083739?"

    Seems like an awfully dangerous place to sit. I'd recommend moving that to 37.42194, -122.08412. Less traffic to dodge.

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  7. Open standards, not an open database by Grismar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I hardly think an open database is the solution. Having an open standard to access any databases with geodata is far more important. That way, developers wanting to combine geodata in their applications can pick whatever they need and either aggregate the information on the fly or draw any information that is available under the proper licenses into their own database for speedy access.

    I'm sure someone around here will be able to point out what standards for this purpose are already around and could be used for such a scheme. If not, then that's the first problem that requires solving. Otherwise, these companies will just enter an endless debate about who owns what and why it should or shouldn't be them controlling such a database.

    1. Re:Open standards, not an open database by jadavis · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This makes zero sense.

      1. There *are* open standards.
      2. There *is already* an open database, OpenStreetMap.
      3. As someone already pointed out, that open database uses open standards.
      4. It seems bizarre to value open standards so much more than an open database. An open database is likely to become an open standard, or be converted if another open standard takes hold. The reverse does not hold true though -- proprietary information is likely to remain proprietary regardless of the existence of open standards (for instance, google maps is a proprietary database).

      --
      Social scientists are inspired by theories; scientists are humbled by facts.
  8. Google/Twitter et. al. don't own the data by brtech · · Score: 3, Informative

    There are a limited number of sources for the data that is "what street address is at what latitude/longitude?" which is technically "reverse geocoding". They are:
    a) The government
    b) Private companies who spend lots of $$ gathering the data

    In the U.S, the government sources are:
    a) The TIGER database - this is not good enough for the task, but it's free
    b) Local city/township and county governments - this is the very best data when it exists, but it doesn't exist in lots of places, and it's hard to get in many places where it does exist
    c) The 9-1-1 system often has their own source of address data which is used to figure out where you are when you call from a mobile phone

    In the U.S. the private sources are:
    a) Navteq
    b) Tele Atlas

    All of the other places that seem to have data actually get it from the above sources one way or another. Sometimes, they have auxiliary data like satellite images or street level images, but the database that links street addresses to geocoordinates comes from one of the above sources. Note that Navteq and Tele Atlas try to get the local city/county data when they can. When they can't they "drive" streets with a GPS equipped vehicle, clicking on houses and other buildings as they go. The 9-1-1 system does the same. The city/county data is actual map data, with polygons for streets, parcels, etc. It's often hard to get address data from it without additional work because the city/county data is developed for land use planning and tax revenue and not reverse geocoding.

    The local data probably ought to be freely available, and it's the most accurate, although often somewhat incomplete source of data. Trying to get free access to TeleAtlas and Navteq data is not going to work, which means getting it from Google, Twitter, etc is not going to work.

    Other countries have different situations. As noted above, the U.K. mapping data is available, and is excellent quality.