Thank you for the link, I emailed them and waiting for their response; it is surprisingly difficult to find an actual programmer nowadays, AI brothers are everywhere though.
>I'm not sure what it means. It's a PDF reader? It's another format that is similar PDF but more screen reader friendly?
Yes, a PDF alternative optimized for screen readers. For some reason, PDFs have clunky functionality when it comes to working with my screen reader. PDF URLs are especially egregious—VoiceOver really struggles to read them. So, I started writing a new file format that allows screen reader compatibility from the start.
>The data is open, so it may be useful to build an easier to use client, so you don't have to collect all the info.
Yes, I know that website—I’ll use it if I need it. So far, I’ve been preoccupied with some other data that neither Open Maps nor Google provides. I’m about 30–35% done. I also have to think about whether to go open or closed source before using their data. Even though what they provide is mostly public domain, nonetheless, I want to stick to my own principles: credit/donate where it’s due, or go without.
>There is no obligation as a maintainer to merge all PR. But remember to be nice.
> I’ve been preoccupied with some other data that neither Open Maps nor Google provides.
As an avid OpenStreetMapper I honestly wonder what kind of data is missing in OpenStreetMap. Is that something sighted persons cannot grasp and thus not add to OSM?
Have you seen https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_for_the_blind ? Is something missing there?
> I also have to think about whether to go open or closed source before using their data.
>As an avid OpenStreetMapper I honestly wonder what kind of data is missing in OpenStreetMap. Is that something sighted persons cannot grasp and thus not add to OSM? Have you seen.
Thank you for providing that link — it was helpful. The information I want to display is text-based rather than graphic-based. My plan is to have two systems working in tandem: physical hardware placed in areas of interest like bus stops, intersections, etc., and a user interface that queries this data. The UI will be entirely text-based, with an absolute minimum of graphics.
In the future, if this project succeeds, I aim to launch my own GPS satellite to bypass Google’s predatory API calls.
Yes — but in Phase 1, the map will be text-only to ensure accessibility. What I envision is a sort of Wikipedia for my entire city, where every landmark and point of interest is cataloged and annotated in a rolling fashion, allowing others to edit, expand, and improve. Kind of like Google Reviews — except not owned by an advertising company.
This is actually a great question. For me, as an individual, the software I create to fulfill an important need for blind people would be worth it. But having said that, I shouldn't just look at it from one perspective—I need to consider it from other angles as well.
I have to anticipate how the code will be received once I open source it, and my question was a way to fill the gaps I might have about the consequences of releasing the code under a certain license.
I guess I could bypass all these inquiries, lazily upload my code to GitHub, have vultures like Google find it, copy it, and put it into Google Maps. They may or may not care about catering to blind people (the original intended audience), and then my little code would just fade away, as a more refined version would likely emerge elsewhere.
I am visually able, so I cannot relate much to the visually impaired cause. The best I can do is try to understand their fight. Maybe tell their story from time to time. Bring their goals to a wider audience.
Your intention in assisting technologies sounds noble. However, precisely because of that, I cannot stain your own path with my opinions regarding how to license it.
Yes, as I read HN and Reddit, I’m seeing all the big corporations acting like vultures. The problem is, as these corporations monopolize the market—either by buying out or rendering smaller independent companies and developers obsolete—and as most of the brilliant programmers end up working for the same 3–4 tech giants, I’d be forced to either:
Allow these vultures to steal my code, lock it behind a paywall, and then compete with me using my own work; or
Make my code GPLv3 to effectively block them and their subsidiaries from touching it.
In that case, I and other independent developers would retain control and be the ones improving the code—unless, of course, the AI-bros are allowed to steal with impunity, which would make this whole conversation pointless.
If you make the code publicly accessible you have no guarantees that people and corporations won't take that code. How about inviting the right people to work with you on the closed source code if they show any interest to help?
That’s exactly what I have in mind too. The only issue is avoiding the “freeloader problem” that most big corporations have embraced lately. For example, with my local navigation system, I don’t want Google scraping all my valuable data to feed into Google Maps—only for them to charge me $10,000 per API call when I try to query the same data they took.
If you’re a nonprofit or a small, local business, then by all means, use my maps—that’s who I built them for. But big corporations? No.
Open Maps is facing this exact problem right now. Every shady AI and LLM is scraping their data and making millions, yet contributing nothing back to the source.
I want to avoid all that by making it very clear: if you're a big corp and you want access to our data, you need to pay up. Otherwise, take a hike.
They’ll probably take the data anyway without permission, just because they can afford $500/hour lawyers—but at least I’ll have made the effort to stand my ground.
