<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>open source on Oxymoronical</title>
    <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/tag/open-source/</link>
    <description>Recent content in open source on Oxymoronical</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 07:43:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/tag/open-source/feed/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Managing changes is the key to a project&#39;s success</title>
      <link>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2012/05/Managing-changes-is-the-key-to-a-projects-success/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 07:43:15 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.oxymoronical.com/blog/2012/05/Managing-changes-is-the-key-to-a-projects-success/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;TomTom made an &lt;a href=&#34;http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/&#34;&gt;interesting claim recently&lt;/a&gt;. Their summary is “&lt;em&gt;when it comes to automotive-grade mapping, open source has some quite serious limitations, falling short on the levels of accuracy and reliability required for safe navigation&lt;/em&gt;”&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This is a bold claim and they talk about recent studies that back them up. Unfortunately none of them are referenced but it’s pretty clear from the text of the article that all they are doing is comparing the accuracy of TomTom maps with existing open source maps. So they’re just generalising, this doesn’t prove a limitation with the open source process itself of course, just perhaps of a particular instance of it.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
