# Local Chapters Congress During State of the Map 2019, the Local Chapters Congress was on the official schedule for the first time. We had a very high participation: there were people from 22 different countries, with people from 6+1 official Local Chapters. The informal organisation, combined with so many people, made for a somewhat chaotic meeting. Some of the notes we took during the meeting are below ## Why Local Chapters? These are things participants said about the value of having a Local Chapter: * make sure there are no local hi-jackers of the brand * broaden the visibility of OSM(F) * Give a counter weight on the OSMF [advisory board](https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board) to corporate members * Local point of contact for Organisations/Governments in reference to open data. Organisations prefer to talk to organisations. * Communicate what is happening in the OSM universe to the local mappers * Be the organiser of meetups, seminars and country SOTMs * Be a contact point/coordination point for bulk uploads ~~* Profit V not-for-profit~~ (note: scratched out because I don't know what it means) ## Criteria for LC The Board started a conversation about the minimum criteria for Local Chapters not long before SotM. We chatted about this too. * We made it clear that it does not have to be limited by international or ethnic boundaries * The organization should be bigger than its people. This means that we should expect Local Chapters to be more permanent than the people running them at this time. * But the current high threshold makes for a percieved need to have some status for "User Groups" - whether or not those would need to have Board approval is an open question ## Mutual help / common issues Local Chapters operate in a diversity of national legal frameworks and cultural contexts. Still there are recurring issues, which means we can learn from each other. This is part of the reason for the re-launch of the LCWG as the Local Chapters and Communities Working Group ([LCCWG](https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Local_Chapters_Working_Group)). There are of course other ways too, to keep the communication channels open. Sepcific topics were: * finding a fitting structure for the chapter * Guidance on subgroups reporting to the LC * complying with trademark regulations * Child protection policy, or policy guideline from OSMF (since each chapter will have different national laws) ## Raw notes below # Present * Wikimedia Italia (LC) * OSM-US * OSM-Japan * OSM-UK (LC) * OSM Belgium (LC) * Brasil * FLOSS Kosovo * OSM DRC * OSM Spain * OSM Ireland (applied to LC) * Turkey * OSGEO Oceania * FOSSGIS (LC) * OSM Uganda / OSM Africa * Philippines * OSM Mali * OSM France (LC) * Croatia * OSM Indonesia * China * Swiss OpenStreetMap Association (LC) * Canada 22! ## What is new since last year? * renewed interest * relaunch of LCWG as Local chapters & Communities Working Group * Local Chapters Congress in the official SotM program ## Why Local Chapters? * make sure there are no local hi-jackers of the brand * Broaden the visibility of OSM(F) * Give a counter weight on the OSMF advisory board to corporate members * Local point of contact for Organisations/Governments in reference to open data * Communicate what is happening in the OSM universe * Be the organiser of meetups, seminars and country SOTMs * Be a contact point/coordination point for bulk uploads * Profit V not-for-profit ## Pending applications * Ireland * ## Role of LC in the OSMF? ## Criteria for LC * Does not have to be limited by international or ethnic boundaries, clearer idea of a community being diverse * The organization should be bigger than its people * but maybe we need a LC-light status? * New status "User Group" * Board approval? ## Mutual help / common issues * keep communication channels open * finding a fitting structure for the chapter * Guidance on subgroups reporting to the LC * complying with trademark regulations * Child protection policy, or policy guideline from OSMF (since each chapter will have different national laws)
Last changed by  
 
Joost
308

Read more

EPB

Eindresultaat type aantal geen statsec 54 statsec via gebouwenregister 65833

5/19/2021
Vragenuurtje

Ideeen voor vervolg behoefte aan instant help > chatkanaal https://tawk.to/pinc privacy: https://help.tawk.to/article/enabling-and-managing-your-consent-form en https://www.tawk.to/data-protection/ - cookies worden pas geplaatst NA akkoord als je het zo regelt promotie op website zelf > datum vastleggen ergen in mei ook opleidingsaanbod centraal aanbieden vier inschrijvingen op 46 klikkers in nieuwsbrief

3/30/2021
OECD - policy making

Slides: https://slides.com/joostschouppe/road-completion-sotm-towards-a-quality-checked-and-complete-open-road-network-for-belgium-osm INTRO SLIDE 1 OpenStreetMap: it only works in practice. In theory, it can never work. An extremely open project, where in theory one person could destroy a huge amount of things. But data does not degrade, quite the contrary! It seems we're doing something right! Key data scope SLIDE 2

12/9/2020
Kadasterverwerking

Todo Joost meenemen file "niet gekoppelde inwoners" aanpassing onderwerpnamen n.a.v. suggesties Hilde vragen voor Ilse: veld met eigenaar ID vragen in de tabel eigenaars (vooral om te kunnen verrijken met wijzigingen in classificatie van eigenaars) . Idealiter ook een unieke sleutel voor personen. Liefst dezelfde als gebruikt in rijksregister Todo Rudy

3/27/2020
Read more from Joost
Published on HackMD