[Talk-transit] Open Data Trip Planner
I've been knocking about the whole idea of route planning in places where there is next to no online information currently available, e.g. bus operators, both public and certainly private, for just about anywhere you might need a visa for. Part of what I was thinking about is probably done herehttp://www.everytrail.com/ though that's highly commercial and while they've got a lot of data (mostly in US and western europe), I'm still curious as to what is happening with the humongous amounts of GPX data on OSM, other than the obvious purpose of tracing. Is there any external repository of descriptive/qualitative info on these trails ?. Of course few people are going to GPS their bus route anyway. They'll just be able to tell us I got a bus from here to there, it started at X oclock and took Y hours and cost Z sheckles. So not very useful for OSM, but there's currently nowhere for people to put this data other than their blog. Transiki.org was an attempt to start a discussion on this. The motivation was more to do with patching incorrect stuff that's already online, but it's as good as the same idea. I've talked a little with the OTP (OpenTripPlanner) gang, and played about a bit with their cool stuff. The missing link right now is something to manage these GTFS fles. There are plans afoot at OTP to produce something cool for that, but right now my only option is to hack the google TransitDataFeed stuff into some kind of instance with wiki-ness just to get something to stand up, and I'll worry about the consequences later. Is anyone else interested in this, or knows any people or projects that are ? ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
[Talk-hr] Imena ulica
Pozdrav maperi, primjetio sam da kod upisivanja naziva ulica imamo trend izbacivati ulica iz naziva. Jasno mi je da ih je tako lakše izgovarati, ali imena ulica i dalje nisu samo Gundulićeva nego Ulica Ivana Gundulića. U isto vrijeme se ne izbacuje cesta, odvojak, trg, avenija, zavoj, aleja i slični. Samo ulica. Ako se to radi zbog renderera, onda znamo koji je zaključak :) Ne mapirati za renderer. Eto, volio bih da se složimo oko ovoga, i da se polagano počnu vraćati ulice. Ako bude izgledalo prenatrpano kad se izrenderira, budemo molili da automatski izbace kod renderiranja. Ali ako britancima ne smetaju street i road, njemcima ne smeta straße, a francuzima rue, onda ne znam zašto nama smeta ulica. Janko ___ Talk-hr mailing list Talk-hr@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-hr
Re: [Talk-hr] Imena ulica
Sanela je napisala, greškom samo meni: 2011/7/7 sanela spvuji...@gmail.com I mene je to zbunjivalo dok nisam vidjela sluzbene karte sa lokalnim nazivima a la Kaciceva, Jukiceva i sl. A ja odgovorio: 2011/7/7 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com Gledaj na te karte kao na rendere, a na našu kartu kao na bazu točnih informacija. Oni su napisali Klaićeva i Kačićeva zato što im je tako ljepše izgledalo. Možda i izgleda ljepše, ali to ne znači da je točno. ___ Talk-hr mailing list Talk-hr@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-hr
Re: [Talk-hr] Imena ulica
On 07/07/2011 10:01 PM, Janko Mihelić wrote: 2011/7/7 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com Gledaj na te karte kao na rendere, a na našu kartu kao na bazu točnih informacija. Oni su napisali Klaićeva i Kačićeva zato što im je tako ljepše izgledalo. Možda i izgleda ljepše, ali to ne znači da je točno. Mislim da nisu tako napisali jer izgleda ljepse, vec zato sto se u govoru koristi cesce od sluzbenog naziva. Time su povecali vjerojatnost kod pretrazivanja jer ljudi vecinu ulica znaju iz kolokvijalnog govora. aj, -- Ivo Ugrina ___ Talk-hr mailing list Talk-hr@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-hr
Re: [Talk-hr] Imena ulica
Možda, ali za to postoji tag loc_namehttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Name. 2011/7/7 Ivo Ugrina i...@iugrina.com On 07/07/2011 10:01 PM, Janko Mihelić wrote: 2011/7/7 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com Gledaj na te karte kao na rendere, a na našu kartu kao na bazu točnih informacija. Oni su napisali Klaićeva i Kačićeva zato što im je tako ljepše izgledalo. Možda i izgleda ljepše, ali to ne znači da je točno. Mislim da nisu tako napisali jer izgleda ljepse, vec zato sto se u govoru koristi cesce od sluzbenog naziva. Time su povecali vjerojatnost kod pretrazivanja jer ljudi vecinu ulica znaju iz kolokvijalnog govora. aj, -- Ivo Ugrina ___ Talk-hr mailing list Talk-hr@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-hr ___ Talk-hr mailing list Talk-hr@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-hr
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
On 2011-07-06 23:31, John Smith wrote: On 7 July 2011 07:25, Andreas Perstingerandreas.perstin...@gmx.net wrote: No, I just wanted to show you that you can't really tell if someone retraces a removed way by looking at an aerial imagery, by looking at the current OSM map or by just moving randomly some nodes.The same goes for IMHO that's a very weak protection for a cc-by-sa map. How will the ODBL help here any better? As I think I mentioned already before I don't think that ODBL will help. That's why I prefer PD because I believe there is no protection and so why bother about licenses at all? This is an issue for all maps and this is why map companies put in trap streets. That's only an issue if you copy blindly from any map, which I would never do. I prefer mapping in my local surroundings. So you are planning to copy from google maps then? No (see above). But I think it's more a question of morality and adhering to community guidelines. Legally I don't see any problems using informations from any map (or aerial imagery). Bye, Andreas ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
On 7 July 2011 16:16, Andreas Perstinger andreas.perstin...@gmx.net wrote: That's why I prefer PD because I believe there is no protection and so why bother about licenses at all? Wouldn't it be great if we could all wish away inconvenient laws like that, however morality often drives laws and they tend seem to think map content is protected under copyright. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-legal-talk] OT: artists and copyright (was Re: license change effect on un-tagged nodes)
Probably OT: On 2011-07-07 02:25, John Smith wrote: How many painters die poor? What about famous composers? Economics became an issue much later. So artists have a human right to be rich? There are many reasons why painters or composers die poor (people don't like their work and don't buy it; they just can't afford their lifestyle; they signed the wrong contracts, ...). Do you know this recent study about writers earnings in the UK and Germany[1]? What about this study from German historian Eckhard Hoeffner that shows that there was an explosion of publishing and knowledge in Germany in the 19th century because of lack of copyright laws?[2] Bye, Andreas 1 http://www.cippm.org.uk/alcs_study.html 2 http://blog.mises.org/14939/copyright-and-structure-of-authors%E2%80%99-earnings/ ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
On 2011-07-07 08:24, John Smith wrote: On 7 July 2011 16:16, Andreas Perstingerandreas.perstin...@gmx.net wrote: That's why I prefer PD because I believe there is no protection and so why bother about licenses at all? Wouldn't it be great if we could all wish away inconvenient laws like that, however morality often drives laws and they tend seem to think map content is protected under copyright. But I've just showed you that there are countries where this is clearly not the case. Don't you have any case rulings in Australia about copyright in maps? I've found several in Austria and Germany so it would be surprising if these countries where the only ones. Can't you show me a case ruling where Australian judges said that map content is protected under copyright? Bye, Andreas ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OT: artists and copyright (was Re: license change effect on un-tagged nodes)
On 7 July 2011 16:40, Andreas Perstinger andreas.perstin...@gmx.net wrote: So artists have a human right to be rich? Glad you took my point so far out of context, someone claimed that copyright existed for economic reasons. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
Simon, Andreas, all, when discussing these things with the person who goes by the pseudonym of John Smith, keep in mind that he is spending a lot of time building/supporting an OpenStreetMap fork. The forkers, as I like to call them, are driven by all kinds of motivations, the most benign probably being a sincere worry about data loss - they believe that the license change is going to hurt OSM so much that they must do all they can do retain a live copy of the old OSM, or even dissuade OSMF from changing altogether. Now if it turned out that the license change went through like a breeze, with very limited data loss that is patched up within weeks, they would become a laughing stock - like the prophet without the doom. While they started out wishing OSM to suffer the least possible damage, their ego now forces them to demand the most rigid - even absurd - data deletion policies for the license change lest they look like idiots for starting a fork in the first place. Needless to say, this interesting psychological situation is not a good basis for a rational argument. Or, to say it with fewer words: don't waste your time. Bye Frederik ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
On 7 July 2011 16:58, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: While they started out wishing OSM to suffer the least possible damage, their ego now forces them to demand the most rigid - even absurd - data deletion policies for the license change lest they look like idiots for starting a fork in the first place. And what is it you wish by forcing bad terms into the CT just so OSM might be able to go PD in future, although some of those abilities have been lost in the process it would seem, you seem to be a firm believer in PD, why are you settling for second best all of a sudden? I guess the thought of excessive data loss was unpalatable after all. Needless to say, this interesting psychological situation is not a good basis for a rational argument. It seems the only one basing arguments on emotive language in this thread is yourself, glass houses and not throwing stones and all that. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
Frederik, I'm fully aware of JS motives and tactics and normally avoid getting sucked in to his endless threads. But it was 2 am and I was just finishing tax returns and associated book keeping. John Smith is a tiny bit more entertaining than that and I needed a short break :-) Simon Am 07.07.2011 08:58, schrieb Frederik Ramm: Simon, Andreas, all, when discussing these things with the person who goes by the pseudonym of John Smith, keep in mind that he is spending a lot of time building/supporting an OpenStreetMap fork. The forkers, as I like to call them, are driven by all kinds of motivations, the most benign probably being a sincere worry about data loss - they believe that the license change is going to hurt OSM so much that they must do all they can do retain a live copy of the old OSM, or even dissuade OSMF from changing altogether. Now if it turned out that the license change went through like a breeze, with very limited data loss that is patched up within weeks, they would become a laughing stock - like the prophet without the doom. While they started out wishing OSM to suffer the least possible damage, their ego now forces them to demand the most rigid - even absurd - data deletion policies for the license change lest they look like idiots for starting a fork in the first place. Needless to say, this interesting psychological situation is not a good basis for a rational argument. Or, to say it with fewer words: don't waste your time. Bye Frederik ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Simon, Andreas, all, when discussing these things with the person who goes by the pseudonym of John Smith, keep in mind that he is spending a lot of time building/supporting an OpenStreetMap fork. The forkers, as I like to call them, are driven by all kinds of motivations, the most benign probably being a sincere worry about data loss - they believe that the license change is going to hurt OSM so much that they must do all they can do retain a live copy of the old OSM, or even dissuade OSMF from changing altogether. Frederik, I'm sure you've been paying attention an know full well that the reason fosm.org exists is because we have grave concerns about the new license. The only thing we are forking is the license, we are not forking the tagging scheme or the community or even the objectives of OSM. Data loss is your problem not ours. I see people doing thought experiments about how they can get around the wishes of contributors who have, in good faith, provided their content under the CC license. Those people who have not agreed to the CT have not consented for their content to be used in any other way. You should respect that. A main objective of OSM was to create maps that were free enough to be used by everyone. Anything that steps across the line will taint OSM with the impurity that we strived for so long to avoid. There will forever be doubt about the provenance of OSM data. 80n ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
+1 Frederik has not shown much respect for any argument nor to anyone that disagrees with the future commercialisation of OSM. (with that I means making OSM optimally fit for commercial use; disregarding the open principles that OSM started with: leaving out the Share Alike principle) I think this discussion about copyright is really valuable, seen from the perspective of copyright laws around the world, and the ongoing legal differentiation between databases filled with facts and those filled with creative works, where the latter are supposed copyrightable and the earlier are not. Legal discusiions are going on everywhere in the world, and are supported by legal cases in several places around the world confirming the distinciton between factual databases (of which the content is not copyrightable) and creative databases (copyrightble). John thinks different about this then I, though we both support continuing the CC-BY-SA forks, that I believe will change into PD one day due to the above legal interpretations. FOSM will not have deleted the data the OSM will at that time. Frederik, I believe it is way below your professional level to respond like this. Anyone is free to spend its time discusiing this issues, and ignoring it will not make them diasappear. If international copyrigth laws will change as i expect, OSM be better prepared, and not be surprised. Simon, stop scratching frederiks back. no need to apologise. Gert cetest @ fosm.org Van: 80n [mailto:80n...@gmail.com] Verzonden: Thursday, July 07, 2011 9:36 AM Aan: Licensing and other legal discussions. Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Simon, Andreas, all, when discussing these things with the person who goes by the pseudonym of John Smith, keep in mind that he is spending a lot of time building/supporting an OpenStreetMap fork. The forkers, as I like to call them, are driven by all kinds of motivations, the most benign probably being a sincere worry about data loss - they believe that the license change is going to hurt OSM so much that they must do all they can do retain a live copy of the old OSM, or even dissuade OSMF from changing altogether. Frederik, I'm sure you've been paying attention an know full well that the reason fosm.org exists is because we have grave concerns about the new license. The only thing we are forking is the license, we are not forking the tagging scheme or the community or even the objectives of OSM. Data loss is your problem not ours. I see people doing thought experiments about how they can get around the wishes of contributors who have, in good faith, provided their content under the CC license. Those people who have not agreed to the CT have not consented for their content to be used in any other way. You should respect that. A main objective of OSM was to create maps that were free enough to be used by everyone. Anything that steps across the line will taint OSM with the impurity that we strived for so long to avoid. There will forever be doubt about the provenance of OSM data. 80n ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
On 2011-07-07 08:58, Frederik Ramm wrote: when discussing these things with the person who goes by the pseudonym of John Smith, keep in mind that he is spending a lot of time building/supporting an OpenStreetMap fork. I know who John Smith and his fellows are and I even read their mailing list once or twice a month out of curiosity :-). Or, to say it with fewer words: don't waste your time. I can assure you I have enough time. For example I will leave now for a three hours bike ride :-). Bye, Andreas ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
On 2011-07-07 08:39, Anthony wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:16 AM, Andreas Perstinger No (see above). But I think it's more a question of morality and adhering to community guidelines. Legally I don't see any problems using informations from any map (or aerial imagery). But using information isn't the same as copying. That's why I've written using information on purpose :-). For me copying would be using the same map style (colours, symbols,...). Some jurisdictions don't allow this, mine expects a certain individual creativity. Getting information out of an imagery or a map and entering it into OSM is not copying (in the sense of producing an object identical to a given object). Bye, Andreas ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
On 2011-07-07 09:35, 80n wrote: Data loss is your problem not ours. I see people doing thought experiments about how they can get around the wishes of contributors who have, in good faith, provided their content under the CC license. Those people who have not agreed to the CT have not consented for their content to be used in any other way. You should respect that. But that doesn't mean that their content won't show up in a future ODBL map. I've noticed that John Smith doesn't want to answer my question, but perhaps you would: How far away do I have to move a node or a way so that you don't consider it yours (assuming that I would trace it from a legal imagery source or based on GPS tracks)? 50cm, 1m, 2m? More, less? Bye, Andreas ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
On 2011-07-07 08:48, Anthony wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:45 AM, Andreas Perstinger andreas.perstin...@gmx.net wrote: On 2011-07-07 08:24, John Smith wrote: Wouldn't it be great if we could all wish away inconvenient laws like that, however morality often drives laws and they tend seem to think map content is protected under copyright. But I've just showed you that there are countries where this is clearly not the case. You've done nothing of the sort. I know it's not a good idea to post a German text on a English mailing list, but the link I've posted says that in Austria a map is not protected by copyright if it just reproduces geographical facts. This is the general view of the highest court in my country. Here is one example where this general rule was applied (sorry it's again in German): http://www.ris.bka.gv.at/Dokumente/Justiz/JJT_19920114_OGH0002_0040OB00125_910_000/JJT_19920114_OGH0002_0040OB00125_910_000.html Short summary: A map publishing company produced a map of the state Lower Austria (Oberösterreich) which showed all camping grounds within the state. The state itself was shown in another colour than the neighbouring states. Another organisation reduced the size of the map, desaturated it and published it without attribution. The plaintiff lost. Bye, Andreas ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Fwd: [OSM-dev] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
On 07/07/2011 07:41, Anthony wrote: Thanks Toby. I'm forwarding this to Dave Fox, who is the one who actually asked the question. It follows pretty naturally out of the database schema. Anything that modifies the ways, way_tags or way_nodes tables creates a new version of the way. Things that only affect the node tables such as moving the location of a node or changing tags on the node do not affect any of the way tables so no new version is created. The same thing happens with relations and their members. You can add a maxspeed= tag to a way and it doesn't affect the relation that way is a part of. That would actually make touching long route relations a conflict nightmare so I'm pretty glad this isn't the case. Thanks to Anthony for asking Toby for responding. However that just explains what happens but not why. I suggest that, to most users, if a node within a way is moved then that way is considered to have been modified should be recorded as such. Dave F. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
On 2011-07-07 19:55, John Smith wrote: On 7 July 2011 21:49, Andreas Perstingerandreas.perstin...@gmx.net wrote: But that doesn't mean that their content won't show up in a future ODBL map. I've noticed that John Smith doesn't want to answer my question, but perhaps you would: How far away do I have to move a node or a way so that you don't consider it yours (assuming that I would trace it from a legal imagery source or based on GPS tracks)? 50cm, 1m, 2m? More, less? How many words do I have to change in a short poem until the poem is no longer considered the original, but my own? Thanks for your answer. No more questions. Bye, Andreas ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
+1 Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: John Smith [mailto:deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com] Verzonden: donderdag 7 juli 2011 19:55 Aan: Licensing and other legal discussions. Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes On 7 July 2011 21:49, Andreas Perstinger andreas.perstin...@gmx.net wrote: But that doesn't mean that their content won't show up in a future ODBL map. I've noticed that John Smith doesn't want to answer my question, but perhaps you would: How far away do I have to move a node or a way so that you don't consider it yours (assuming that I would trace it from a legal imagery source or based on GPS tracks)? 50cm, 1m, 2m? More, less? How many words do I have to change in a short poem until the poem is no longer considered the original, but my own? ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
On 07/07/11 20:14, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: +1 /2 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] data derived from UK Ordnace Survey
On 16 June 2011 21:08, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: On 06/16/11 12:31, Dermot McNally wrote: Not quite, based on what Richard is saying. It would allow future relicensing but only if the new licence remained compatible with the terms seen to be required by the OS (currently attribution, if I've understood correctly). So after a few years we might have data in our database that was given to someone with the explicit restriction that it may only ever be distributed under OdbL. Sufficient for the person to contribute the data to OSM under the current CT. A future license change would then need a crystal ball to single out that data set (the contributor might not even be available for communication any longer) and determine that it has to be removed. More importantly, the current license is CC-BY-SA not ODbL. Does that mean someone who has agreed to the Contributor Terms is allowed to upload CC-BY-SA data which can't be re-licensed to ODbL? If so, how is the re-licensing problem only an issue for the future? Wouldn't it be an issue for changing from CC-BY-SA to ODbL, since we know which people have agreed to the CTs but not if their data can be re-licensed? As far as I can tell, the 1.2.4 CTs don't give OSMF any more permission to license data under ODbL than it gives them to license it under any other free and open licence as ODbL is not mentioned in any other place than in the list that includes the phrase other free and open licence. -- James ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] new zealand, australia
It is confusing, but I don't think that I'd call it correct, either. New Guinea can be considered part of the Australian continent, but New Zealand is not. It's Islands, and not on the continental shelf. It and NG are sometimes listed as part of Australasia (not Australia), and a bigger area still is called Oceania. Stephen On 7 July 2011 15:56, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: Looking at the details it seems like the Australia being referred to is the continent, not the country. The New Zealand node has a is_in:continent=Australia tag and there is a place=continent node that nominatim is associating it with. So I guess this is correct but perhaps a little confusing in how it is displayed. Perhaps you should rename your continent to avoid this confusion! New Zealand node: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/248120384 Continent node: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/249399679 Nominatim details page where you can see the place:continent association: http://open.mapquestapi.com/nominatim/v1/details.php?place_id=697148 Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] new zealand, australia
On 7 July 2011 17:56, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: Looking at the details it seems like the Australia being referred to is the continent, not the country. The New Zealand node has a is_in:continent=Australia tag and there is a place=continent node a-ha, thanks that nominatim is associating it with. So I guess this is correct but perhaps a little confusing in how it is displayed. Perhaps you should rename your continent to avoid this confusion! yes, we're in oceania now On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:42 PM, Robin Paulson the search result for 'new zealand', it zooms me in to zoom level 14 or something equally silly, so i am guessing it is tagged wrongly. any any suggestions for this? why does it zoom in so close? -- robin http://bumblepuppy.org/blog/?p=237 - government bill to remove basic human rights in NZ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] shortened names
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote: Yes, thats the consensus and has been for a long time. Some mappers always disagree, just ignore them. :-) +1 And in software, it is always easier to shorten a word than expanding an abbreviation. 'st' is for 'Saint' or for 'Street' ? Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] shortened names
On 7 July 2011 19:23, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote: Yes, thats the consensus and has been for a long time. Some mappers always disagree, just ignore them. :-) +1 And in software, it is always easier to shorten a word than expanding an abbreviation. 'st' is for 'Saint' or for 'Street' ? In some cases, the official name is with the abbreviation, eg St. George Bank in Australia and there is a town named St. George. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] adding multiple relations (bus routes) to one road
On 06/07/2011 03:54, Robin Paulson wrote: hi, I'm currently adding a lot of bus routes to roads in central Auckland. problem is, it's getting hard to manage. some road segments have 40+ routes on them, which gets complicated. here is an example of one which I've added 12 routes to; there will be lots more http://www.openbusmap.org/?zoom=17lat=-36.86508lon=174.74462layers=BT are there any suggestions for making it easier? You don't actually say what the problem is. If you mean cutting the ways into small segments then a possible answer could be to add a separate way over the top of the roads that is just tagged with the route relation. I've done this in areas where bicycle routes cross pedestrian areas. I'm not sure if this is a perfect solution I'd welcome comments. if you mean the number of labels that OBM displays, then that's more a problem for the renderer. I'm not sure every segments has to display the route number. Incidentally, does route 205 terminate at the end of Bond Street? Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] shortened names
Occasionally some one may wish to add a translation or find the street programmatically. For example using Maperitive and a local copy to search for the street. Having the full name helps enormously. End users don't like having to try high street, high St. etc until they find the right combination. Cheerio John ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] adding multiple relations (bus routes) to one road
On 06/07/2011 10:03, Jo wrote: There is this proposal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Route_Segments, which I like, but it seems it's not worked on anymore and it's not rendered, since it involves relations containing relations. I don't really mind having many relations on roads. It doesn't pose a problem in JOSM. It would be easier to manage changes though, if the information wasn't duplicated 40 times. I think that became super-relations: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route#Multiple_routes_share_the_same_path ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] adding multiple relations (bus routes) to one road
With P2 the easier way of working is to select a whole series of ways (ctrl-click to add a second way while maintaining selection of the first), then add all of the ways to a relation (or multiple relations) at the same time. You can select all members of an existing relation using the little triangle to the right on the relation list, then add them to another relation (or remove them all from another relation). ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] shortened names
On 7 July 2011 11:29, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 July 2011 19:23, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote: Yes, thats the consensus and has been for a long time. Some mappers always disagree, just ignore them. :-) +1 And in software, it is always easier to shorten a word than expanding an abbreviation. 'st' is for 'Saint' or for 'Street' ? In some cases, the official name is with the abbreviation, eg St. George Bank in Australia and there is a town named St. George. Still you say Saint George, not S.T. George. Cheers ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] shortened names
On 07/07/11 10:29, John Smith wrote: In some cases, the official name is with the abbreviation, eg St. George Bank in Australia and there is a town named St. George. Yes. I found one just today actually. Ordnance Survey (national mapping agency) record the name as Upper St Giles Street. The sign on the road actually says Upper St. Giles Street (note incorrect abbreviation, in British English, where the full stop is not used if the abbreviation contains the first and last letter of the expansion). Confusingly, there is also a Saint Giles Street. I went with Upper St Giles Street because I cannot be sure that Upper Saint Giles Street is the official name. -- Borbus. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
Awesome. Can you go run that project and leave us in peace then please? Steve On 7/7/2011 12:35 AM, 80n wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org mailto:frede...@remote.org wrote: Simon, Andreas, all, when discussing these things with the person who goes by the pseudonym of John Smith, keep in mind that he is spending a lot of time building/supporting an OpenStreetMap fork. The forkers, as I like to call them, are driven by all kinds of motivations, the most benign probably being a sincere worry about data loss - they believe that the license change is going to hurt OSM so much that they must do all they can do retain a live copy of the old OSM, or even dissuade OSMF from changing altogether. Frederik, I'm sure you've been paying attention an know full well that the reason fosm.org http://fosm.org exists is because we have grave concerns about the new license. The only thing we are forking is the license, we are not forking the tagging scheme or the community or even the objectives of OSM. Data loss is your problem not ours. I see people doing thought experiments about how they can get around the wishes of contributors who have, in good faith, provided their content under the CC license. Those people who have not agreed to the CT have not consented for their content to be used in any other way. You should respect that. A main objective of OSM was to create maps that were free enough to be used by everyone. Anything that steps across the line will taint OSM with the impurity that we strived for so long to avoid. There will forever be doubt about the provenance of OSM data. 80n ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-talk] Mailing list moderation
After careful consideration, effective immediately Mikel Maron, Andy Robinson and Mike Collinson have access to the moderation system across the main OSM mailing lists. They will use their best judgment according to the a href=http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Etiquette#Mailing_Lists; moderation guidelines/a and they enjoy the full support of the OSMF Board. http://blog.osmfoundation.org/2011/07/07/mailing-list-moderation/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] shortened names
On 7 July 2011 23:33, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote: In some cases, the official name is with the abbreviation, eg St. George Bank in Australia and there is a town named St. George. Still you say Saint George, not S.T. George. Well you can ring up the bank/local government and tell them they're doing things wrong :) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
On 7 July 2011 21:49, Andreas Perstinger andreas.perstin...@gmx.net wrote: But that doesn't mean that their content won't show up in a future ODBL map. I've noticed that John Smith doesn't want to answer my question, but perhaps you would: How far away do I have to move a node or a way so that you don't consider it yours (assuming that I would trace it from a legal imagery source or based on GPS tracks)? 50cm, 1m, 2m? More, less? How many words do I have to change in a short poem until the poem is no longer considered the original, but my own? ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:55 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 July 2011 21:49, Andreas Perstinger andreas.perstin...@gmx.net wrote: But that doesn't mean that their content won't show up in a future ODBL map. I've noticed that John Smith doesn't want to answer my question, but perhaps you would: How far away do I have to move a node or a way so that you don't consider it yours (assuming that I would trace it from a legal imagery source or based on GPS tracks)? 50cm, 1m, 2m? More, less? How many words do I have to change in a short poem until the poem is no longer considered the original, but my own? More to the point, does moving a single point by a hands breadth earn any rights to the editor? Here is the post office in Dubin, Ohio, imported from GNIS, then moved a few centimeters a few months later. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/357526575/history ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] adding multiple relations (bus routes) to one road
On 7 July 2011 23:02, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: You don't actually say what the problem is. err, what? the problem is managing the ways inside the editor (potlatch 2). it gets very messy and is hard to keep track of. i find at later dates i have made several mistakes that need correcting If you mean cutting the ways into small segments then a possible answer could be to add a separate way over the top of the roads that is just tagged with the route relation. I've done this in areas where bicycle routes cross pedestrian areas. I'm not sure if this is a perfect solution I'd welcome comments. that sounds very clumsy. if the routes (bus and other traffic) share the way, drawing another way is (a) wrong (b) difficult to edit, and (c) confusing if you mean the number of labels that OBM displays, then that's more a problem for the renderer. I'm not sure every segments has to display the route number. no. i sent that link as it shows the complexity/number of relations without hitting edit Incidentally, does route 205 terminate at the end of Bond Street? well spotted. no, it turns east. i think that demonstrates my point actually. i didn't realise i hadn't tagged great north road with that route -- robin http://bumblepuppy.org/blog/?p=237 - government bill to remove basic human rights in NZ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] adding multiple relations (bus routes) to one road
On 7 July 2011 23:59, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com wrote: With P2 the easier way of working is to select a whole series of ways (ctrl-click to add a second way while maintaining selection of the first), then add all of the ways to a relation (or multiple relations) at the same time. You can select all members of an existing relation using the little triangle to the right on the relation list, then add them to another relation (or remove them all from another relation). ah, that makes things easier still not quite what i'm after though -- robin http://bumblepuppy.org/blog/?p=237 - government bill to remove basic human rights in NZ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] adding multiple relations (bus routes) to one road
On 07/07/2011 21:52, Robin Paulson wrote: On 7 July 2011 23:02, Dave F.dave...@madasafish.com wrote: You don't actually say what the problem is. err, what? the problem is managing the ways inside the editor (potlatch 2). You made no mention of that in your original post. Maybe you should have posted this specifically to the potlatch dev forum been a tad clearer. If you mean cutting the ways into small segments then a possible answer could be to add a separate way over the top of the roads that is just tagged with the route relation. I've done this in areas where bicycle routes cross pedestrian areas. I'm not sure if this is a perfect solution I'd welcome comments. that sounds very clumsy. if the routes (bus and other traffic) share the way, drawing another way is (a) wrong (b) difficult to edit, and (c) confusing I wouldn't say it's wrong, but yes, difficult to edit. if you mean the number of labels that OBM displays, then that's more a problem for the renderer. I'm not sure every segments has to display the route number. no. i sent that link as it shows the complexity/number of relations without hitting edit Incidentally, does route 205 terminate at the end of Bond Street? well spotted. no, it turns east. i think that demonstrates my point actually. i didn't realise i hadn't tagged great north road with that route ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Mailing list moderation
I, for one, welcome our new moderator overlords. Seriously, I'm very glad this decision has been taken, and I hope we can use it to lift the level of discussion. Steve On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 1:37 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: After careful consideration, effective immediately Mikel Maron, Andy Robinson and Mike Collinson have access to the moderation system across the main OSM mailing lists. They will use their best judgment according to the a href=http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Etiquette#Mailing_Lists; moderation guidelines/a and they enjoy the full support of the OSMF Board. http://blog.osmfoundation.org/2011/07/07/mailing-list-moderation/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] house numbers, new zealand style
i'm currently adding house numbers to some properties in my locality (and using this to prepare for an import). the problem is this: some blocks of houses have both a street address and a unit number. so we might have the situation of 12/8 mount eden road, auckland which means: property number 12 unit 8 mount eden road this will be attached to unit 1, unit 2, unit, ..., 7, unit 9, etc. i checked out the numbering schemes on the wiki and can't see anything which covers this. any suggestions? my idea was to label the building as number 12, mount eden road and then add points in the centre of each unit, with their full address, i.e. including the unit number. what do you think? -- robin http://bumblepuppy.org/blog/?p=237 - government bill to remove basic human rights in NZ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] house numbers, new zealand style
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Robin Paulson robin.paul...@gmail.com wrote: i'm currently adding house numbers to some properties in my locality (and using this to prepare for an import). the problem is this: some blocks of houses have both a street address and a unit number. so we might have the situation of 12/8 mount eden road, auckland which means: property number 12 unit 8 mount eden road this will be attached to unit 1, unit 2, unit, ..., 7, unit 9, etc. i checked out the numbering schemes on the wiki and can't see anything which covers this. any suggestions? my idea was to label the building as number 12, mount eden road and then add points in the centre of each unit, with their full address, i.e. including the unit number. what do you think? Perhaps on a building entrance node, on the building outline, rather than in the center? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Project of the Week: Vienna, and future PotW
h2This week/h2 We're on the way to Vienna for a href=http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/State_Of_The_Map_Europe_2011;State of the Map-EU/a, so the Project of the Week is to map those things that will help you get to Vienna. a href=http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Project_of_the_week/2011/Jul_06;So map your trains, planes and auto service stations on the way from home to Vienna/a, or the cobbler shop who repaired your shoes. h2Next week/h2 While we're at SotM-EU next week, a href=http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Project_of_the_week/2011/Jul_13;PotW will be on Hiatus/a. If you aren't with us in Vienna, consider browsing through previous Projects to find one to inspire your mapping this week. h2Project of the Week of the future!/h2 Project of the Week was created by Steve Coast in 2010 and has been maintained by Steve, and then Richard for more than a year. It is time for more voices to be heard in the Project of the Week. Volunteer to be the next PotW maintainer, or nominate a candidate that you think will be great at maintaining PotW. The project of the week for 20 July 2011 is to a href=http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Project_of_the_week/2011/Jul_20;find the next maintainer for Project of the Week/a. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] shortened names
I find there are a lot more abbreviations if you look at addr:street= rather than the name= . I suspect that with mobile entry of POI's we are going to see more and more abbreviations being entered, just because mobile keyboards are slow. I would applaud a bot that asked me if I meant the nearby Main Street when I entered Main St.. I would also applaud a bot that converted loose addresses like this into better structured relations like: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/House_numbers/Karlsruhe_Schema#Using_relations_to_associate_house_and_street_.28optional.29 John i was under the impression consensus was to type the full word, then renderers would shorten where necessary? apparently some mappers disagree though ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] shortened names
On 7 July 2011 19:50, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 July 2011 23:33, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote: In some cases, the official name is with the abbreviation, eg St. George Bank in Australia and there is a town named St. George. Still you say Saint George, not S.T. George. Well you can ring up the bank/local government and tell them they're doing things wrong :) They're not, they're using a shorthand in writing because it's.. shorter. :) Cheers ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] shortened names
On 8 July 2011 13:59, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 July 2011 19:50, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 July 2011 23:33, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote: In some cases, the official name is with the abbreviation, eg St. George Bank in Australia and there is a town named St. George. Still you say Saint George, not S.T. George. Well you can ring up the bank/local government and tell them they're doing things wrong :) They're not, they're using a shorthand in writing because it's.. shorter. :) And the signs they've had printed up etc? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Obvious turn restrictions
I've come across a fair number of what I call obvious turn restrictions. Here's an example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1566983 The only thing being prevented by this is turning right onto Shelbyville Road from the motorway_link. But there's a cutoff to the southeast that you obviously take if you want to turn right. So what's the point? Any halfway-decent router will take the obvious route. Even if a router doesn't do that, it should be clear to someone following directions that to turn right they need to take the island-separated right-turn lane(s). The downside is that these relations lead to clutter, both in the number of times a way is split and the number of relations on a way. To give full restrictions at a simple intersection of two undivided roads with four island-separated right-turn lanes, one would need to split each road into at least four ways and create twelve relations. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Mailing list moderation
Hi, Steve Bennett wrote: I, for one, welcome our new moderator overlords. Seriously, I'm very glad this decision has been taken, and I hope we can use it to lift the level of discussion. I can practically feel things getting better already! Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] Commentaar bij een wijziging; verschillende sets aanmaken.
Op 05-07-11 15:33, Willem Sonke schreef: On 05-07-11 02:13, Andre Engels wrote: 2011/7/5 drek d...@drek.nl mailto:d...@drek.nl Weet iemand misschien een antwoord op mijn vraag? Ik wil graag commentaar bij een gedane wijziging wijzigen. Is dit mogelijk? Nee, voorzover ik weet kan dat niet in Potlatch, heb zelf ook wel eens het probleem gehad. De enige oplossing die ik weet, is opslaan, en daarna op 'edit' klikken. Je krijgt dan hetzelfde beeld als voorheen, maar je wijzigingen vallen onder een nieuwe set. -- André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com mailto:andreeng...@gmail.com In Potlatch 2 kun je op C drukken om de huidige changeset af te sluiten, en daarna kun je opnieuw op Opslaan klikken en een nieuw commentaar toevoegen. Is dat wat je bedoelt? Zie http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Potlatch_2/Shortcuts Met vriendelijke groeten, Willem Sonke Ik ga het proberen na mijn vakantie. Dank je wel. Groeten, André ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote: Wow, you infer a lot from my four word sentence. Do you have any evidence to back any of it up? You mean other than the message you affirmed pretty strongly? Maybe it's a difference between Australian English and British English, but I'd think those four words in the context that you uttered them carry exactly the same meaning as the message you affirmed. Said message was dismissive of project forks, the reasons for them, the people who start them, and the importance of licences that people choose to make contributions available under. It was specifically dismissive of people with agendas which has become a commonly used passive-aggressive label (especially on this list) for those who voice concerns. So I don't think I inferred much at all, I think instead you were quite explicit. -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Thanks for the responses. So it seems there will be some fragmentation. Some are moving to fosm, some are moving elsewhere, some are staying with OSM, some have stopped actively contributing and are on hold... I wrote this mail for two reasons, to get a sense of where local contributors stand, but also to raise some awareness for anyone with their head still in the sand who may have been ignoring the issue or holding out for everything to magically fix itself. For those whom will be staying with OSM, I still value your contributions; fosm tries to merge your changes in. In the future as the branches become feather apart it may prove more difficulty (i.e. more duplicated work), but I guess we'll have to deal with that as it comes. On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:35 PM, Chris Barham cbar...@pobox.com wrote: and the multiple forks of OSM may have ignored the advice to only fork When you have exhausted all other options. I believe we have exhausted all other options. there have been multitudes of debate to try to resolve the issue mostly going nowhere. Forks are not a guaranteed success. They may have good reasons, ideals and differing opinions, but the parent project has a brand, and for OSM it's a powerful one. As an example everyone has heard of MySQL, but what about Maria? Mysql - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysql#Forks_of_MySQL I don't see this as a problem. OSM is much more than just the database (it's the schema, the reputation, the software and tools, the API/data format), and we are just replacing the database contents. The more mainstream, well known and used OSM as a whole project becomes, the better off and OSM database forks will be because the shared parts will improve for both of us. Personally I don't care about the licence. I feel that the forks and this resulting dilution of effort will become a drain on all the projects (united we stand/divided etc etc), and have become a shouting match where the 'political' goals of the forked projects are trumpeted over the stated reason for the thing being there - an open map. Cries of We're more open don't help when you can't rustle up the hosting fees or development volunteers. So a fork must become popular. More popular than other forks or the parent project. Was this the real reason for your post with mention of FOSM (and no other OSM spin-offs), and seeding fear uncertainty and doubt regarding *possible* data deletion.. you were recruiting? I mention fosm because it is the only CC-BY-SA fork I am aware of. A CC-BY-SA fork is a defensive action, preserving the current state. Any other forks are pro-actively changing the status quo. Such forks can happen any time and are independent of the current change of terms of OSM. I'd like to think all this rather dull licence bickering will play out and OSM will continue and strengthen. It's sad that people with agendas are talking up the 'possible' deletion of data, and rushing off to fork. That energy could have been used towards working on ways of keeping or replacing the data in OSM. A satisfactory local example where things turned out well is where Nearmap made it's generous offer to allow pre-existing data to remain under the new licence. However on this list there was little rejoicing, there was a lot of picking over the actual wording of their offer; looking at the legal-eze, hairsplitting terminology or imagined loopholes in order to justify the fork projects existence. On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 8:06 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote: On 7 July 2011 07:54, Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au wrote: How could I add CC-BY-SA derived data if I use GPS traces, audio recordings of names, or imagery like Yahoo or Bing? The only way I could see this happening would be if I was to deliberately go out of my way to add a Actually it's potentially trivial to use CC-by-SA data, since anyone that supplied contributions under cc-by-sa are still in the database and you only have to modify previous data to then have data derived from cc-by-sa Yes, if you modified or built upon any data already in OSM. The data is CC-BY-SA, hence your modifications must be CC-BY-SA also, unless of course you know the data to be public domain, or have obtained it under a different license elsewhere. On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 9:10 AM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: 3) Ive made a couple of edits, but really am feeling like theres so much duplicated work now that its almost just not worth bothering The more who contribute directly to fosm rather than OSM, the less the work there will be for fosmers dealing with duplicated data resulting from merges. If it becomes a big problem, I think we should be able to do manual merges of OSM data into fosm, assuming we have the volunteers. Otherwise we can just leave OSM data behind if no one is longer to merge it into fosm. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.comwrote: The more who contribute directly to fosm rather than OSM, the less the work there will be for fosmers dealing with duplicated data resulting from merges. If it becomes a big problem, I think we should be able to do manual merges of OSM data into fosm, assuming we have the volunteers. Otherwise we can just leave OSM data behind if no one is longer to merge it into fosm. The probability of collisions is quite small in practice. We are able to automatically sync all OSM updates into fosm.org in near real time. Consequenly fosm.org already has more content than OSM and the gap will continue to widen. It will become a massive gulf if OSM ever has the courage to mass delete all non-ODbL licensed content, but I can't see that happening any time soon. The worst case for a collision is an edit in OSM that conflicts with an earlier edit made to the same element in the fosm database. In this case we place the OSM edit in a conflict log and preserve the fosm edit. Other kinds of conflict include the same feature being added to both OSM and fosm independently. This will result in the feature being duplicated in fosm, but it's easy to manually delete such artifacts when they are noticed, retaining whichever is the best one. My largest concern is with piecemeal replacement of non-ODbL licensed content in OSM with inferior quality tracing. This will appear as legitimate edits to the fosm sync process and will result in fosm being degraded needlessly. We've talked about mechanisms for watching areas where this might happen and for users who might be doing this. We can revert such edits in fosm and get the good stuff back providing we notice that it has happened. 80n ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
FOSMs not going anywhere for some simple reasons. The people running it are ineffective, the data will be incompatible when OSM switches, fosm doesn't have any of the agreements to derive data from aerial imagery. I could go on, but those are the big ticket items. Everyone should be aware of the theater show that 80n is running merely to disrupt the community, and it's very sad that so far he's been successful. Steve On 7/7/2011 7:01 AM, 80n wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com mailto:andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: The more who contribute directly to fosm rather than OSM, the less the work there will be for fosmers dealing with duplicated data resulting from merges. If it becomes a big problem, I think we should be able to do manual merges of OSM data into fosm, assuming we have the volunteers. Otherwise we can just leave OSM data behind if no one is longer to merge it into fosm. The probability of collisions is quite small in practice. We are able to automatically sync all OSM updates into fosm.org http://fosm.org in near real time. Consequenly fosm.org http://fosm.org already has more content than OSM and the gap will continue to widen. It will become a massive gulf if OSM ever has the courage to mass delete all non-ODbL licensed content, but I can't see that happening any time soon. The worst case for a collision is an edit in OSM that conflicts with an earlier edit made to the same element in the fosm database. In this case we place the OSM edit in a conflict log and preserve the fosm edit. Other kinds of conflict include the same feature being added to both OSM and fosm independently. This will result in the feature being duplicated in fosm, but it's easy to manually delete such artifacts when they are noticed, retaining whichever is the best one. My largest concern is with piecemeal replacement of non-ODbL licensed content in OSM with inferior quality tracing. This will appear as legitimate edits to the fosm sync process and will result in fosm being degraded needlessly. We've talked about mechanisms for watching areas where this might happen and for users who might be doing this. We can revert such edits in fosm and get the good stuff back providing we notice that it has happened. 80n ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote: FOSMs not going anywhere for some simple reasons. The people running it are ineffective, the data will be incompatible when OSM switches, fosm doesn't have any of the agreements to derive data from aerial imagery. I could go on, but those are the big ticket items. Everyone should be aware of the theater show that 80n is running merely to disrupt the community, and it's very sad that so far he's been successful. You seem worried, Steve. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 7/7/2011 7:15 AM, 80n wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com mailto:st...@asklater.com wrote: FOSMs not going anywhere for some simple reasons. The people running it are ineffective, the data will be incompatible when OSM switches, fosm doesn't have any of the agreements to derive data from aerial imagery. I could go on, but those are the big ticket items. Everyone should be aware of the theater show that 80n is running merely to disrupt the community, and it's very sad that so far he's been successful. You seem worried, Steve. You've been very successful at perverting certain sections of the community, Australia being a good example as the checks and balances of normal community communication are harder because of the timezone differences and costs of flying. Essentially, people in Australia don't get to hear from the rest of us on the phone or in the pub and we let you spam the lists for a long time. So to an outsider it can look like you're this rational guy who used to be on the board and so on. I've heard about the various conspiracy theories you've been peddling personally off-list too. It's hard to fix that, however I am resourceful. The first step is to meet your clownmails message-for-message so you don't automatically have the loudest voice. By pointing out the simple facts and having you talk past them and get to the real issues (you want to rile people like me up, make us fret and worry) it is now clear to a rational observer what the intentions are. I think your nightmare scenario is that I fly to Australia and sit in the pub and discuss the real reasons you're so upset. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 4:25 PM, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote: You've been very successful at perverting certain sections of the community, Australia being a good example ... Steve, please don't underestimate the ability of Australia to filter bullshit. I just want to: 1) be able to contribute with the confidence that my data will never be deleted. 2) continue using nearmap, which is insanely awesome. Give me that, and you'll have me back. :-) P.S. Don't feed the trolls. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 7/7/2011 7:40 AM, waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 4:25 PM, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com mailto:st...@asklater.com wrote: You've been very successful at perverting certain sections of the community, Australia being a good example ... Steve, please don't underestimate the ability of Australia to filter bullshit. I just want to: 1) be able to contribute with the confidence that my data will never be deleted. We've gone to insanely long lengths to make that the case, including getting clarifications from Ordnance Survey, Nearmap and many others. As far as I'm aware there are no remaining issues as to why you can't click 'accept'. 2) continue using nearmap, which is insanely awesome. Not being a shareholder I can't influence them directly. As far as I'm aware, their issue is that they don't like the fact that we can change license later even though it's restricted to a free and open license. For all practical purposes I doubt we will ever change again unless and until CC release 4.0 which is mooted that it will contain provisions for data licensing. It's a simple balance between making sure the data remains open but also not going through this horrific license process again in the future if, for example, CC is suddenly better in 3-5 years time. We could have drawn that line a bit more to one side and defined the license or we could have drawn it a bit the other way and said that every single contributor has to accept again. Either way there will be detractors. The LWG is a bunch of volunteers and they spent a ton of time making that judgement and whatever they chose it would be imperfect. I prefer the LWG making a careful decision to the opposite extreme of do whatever nearmap says (not that they ever made demands to my knowledge) as it would be short sighted to deflect the project for one company. If you look at Bing on the other hand, I believe we're entirely happy giving imagery derivation rights under the future direction outlined above. So, I believe we should spend energy enlightening aerial providers (or wait for them to catch up) given Bing's enlightened example rather than bowing to their short-term goals. Even Ordnance Survey have been great to work with through these issues. Even OS! So while no doubt nearmap is a great resource and it's a shame they no longer want to be involved, it's clear that the majority do - even large sclerotic government institutions are being agile and helpful about this. The door, as ever, is open should nearmap every change their minds. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote: ...I believe we should spend energy enlightening aerial providers (or wait for them to catch up) Yup, I'm waiting... (I just wanted to point out why I have stopped contributing - it's not in protest, and not because I've been perverted by 80n. Thanks for your responses anyway.) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 7 July 2011 15:09, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote: FOSMs not going anywhere for some simple reasons. The people running it are ineffective, the data will be incompatible when OSM switches, fosm doesn't have any of the agreements to derive data from aerial imagery. I could go on, but those are the big ticket items. Everyone should be aware of the theater show that 80n is running merely to disrupt the community, and it's very sad that so far he's been successful. Some background... 80n was an original founding member of the OSM Foundation (OSMF). 80n failed to be re-elected to the OSMF board in 2009 [1]. 80n and SteveC fell out awhile back... FOSM is hosted on server resources provided for running OpenStreetMap XAPI [2], all code is written by 80n (or his employees) in GT.M / MUMPS Massachusetts General Hospital Utility Multi-Programming System (not a fork of the OSM.org codebase as has been claimed). The source code is not (yet) available. After approaching 1 year of operation FOSM has had ~153 account signups. [3] 1: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/AGM09 2: UC San Diego hosted server provided by Telascience.org and OSGeo. 3: http://groups.google.com/group/osm-fork/msg/730068be892ea034 Regards Grant ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Why did you stop then? Is there no aerial imagery where you are other than nearmap? On 7/7/2011 8:03 AM, waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com mailto:st...@asklater.com wrote: ...I believe we should spend energy enlightening aerial providers (or wait for them to catch up) Yup, I'm waiting... (I just wanted to point out why I have stopped contributing - it's not in protest, and not because I've been perverted by 80n. Thanks for your responses anyway.) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 8 July 2011 00:55, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote: We've gone to insanely long lengths to make that the case, including getting clarifications from Ordnance Survey, Nearmap and many others. As far as I'm aware there are no remaining issues as to why you can't click 'accept'. He said he wanted to keep using Nearmap, Nearmap have said you can't... What clarification did you get from OS? I've not see anything definite posted... Not being a shareholder I can't influence them directly. As far as I'm aware, their issue is that they don't like the fact that we can change license later even though it's restricted to a free and open license. For What does free mean? What does open mean? all practical purposes I doubt we will ever change again unless and until CC release 4.0 which is mooted that it will contain provisions for data licensing. It's a simple balance between making sure the data remains open but also not going through this horrific license process again in the future if, for example, CC is suddenly better in 3-5 years time. What specifically does CC need to change in their current licenses to be more useful? It's my understanding that ODBL doesn't require produced work be attributed which makes all CC licenses (except CC0) incompatible as you would be breaking the chain of attribution. We could have drawn that line a bit more to one side and defined the license or we could have drawn it a bit the other way and said that every single contributor has to accept again. Either way there will be detractors. The LWG is a bunch of volunteers and they spent a ton of time making that judgement and whatever they chose it would be imperfect. The problem isn't just the new license or the CTs for that matter, it's how this were carried out, how our concerns were dismissed out of hand. I prefer the LWG making a careful decision to the opposite extreme of do whatever nearmap says (not that they ever made demands to my knowledge) as it would be short sighted to deflect the project for one company. Nearmap was merely a sign of bigger issues and problems that the LWG or anyone else pushing for change didn't deal with properly and still haven't otherwise you wouldn't be trying to claim to be the victim here. If you look at Bing on the other hand, I believe we're entirely happy giving imagery derivation rights under the future direction outlined above. So, I Some doubt your claims since Bing hasn't official published anything on one of their websites, others are worried the use of Bing imagery will cause grief for OSM-F later. believe we should spend energy enlightening aerial providers (or wait for them to catch up) given Bing's enlightened example rather than bowing to their short-term goals. Even Ordnance Survey have been great to work with through these issues. Even OS! So things are great as long as you get your way? So while no doubt nearmap is a great resource and it's a shame they no longer want to be involved, it's clear that the majority do - even large sclerotic government institutions are being agile and helpful about this. The door, as ever, is open should nearmap every change their minds. They didn't decide to change things, you did so at least man up and take responsibility for your actions instead of trying to blame others. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 08/07/11 00:01, 80n wrote: The probability of collisions is quite small in practice. We are able to automatically sync all OSM updates into fosm.org http://fosm.org in near real time. Consequenly fosm.org http://fosm.org already has more content than OSM and the gap will continue to widen. It will become a massive gulf if OSM ever has the courage to mass delete all non-ODbL licensed content, but I can't see that happening any time soon. I opened a new OSM account (for new contributions) when it became clear that the data I'd already entered was in danger of being deleted. As it transpired, I was able to accept the new conditions for my earlier data thanks to Nearmap's resolution of the sticking point. What particularly turns me off fosm.org is that I am unable to see a map when I go to the site. Using Firefox on Linux, I click on Maps and get redirected to http://fosm.org/poly/tah.html#2.00/34.4/-5.9 which is a blank screen for me. My other two Linux browsers (Arora and Konqueror) come up with a completely blank home page at http://fosm.org/ When I boot into Windows XP, neither Explorer nor Firefox fare any better. What do I have to do to see an fosm map? John H ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 8 July 2011 06:46, John Henderson snow...@gmx.com wrote: What particularly turns me off fosm.org is that I am unable to see a map when I go to the site. Using Firefox on Linux, I click on Maps and get FOSM based tiles are being uploaded to archive.org: http://www.archive.org/download/SharedMap2 Although I'm still working to get expired tiles re-rendered in near real time. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 08:11 -0700, Steve Coast wrote: Why did you stop then? Is there no aerial imagery where you are other than nearmap? Theres this thing in Australia called loyalty. You seem to understand very little about Australian culture. Its almost the height of rudeness after someone sets up a business to donate goods to your project, to then turn around and say 'unless you change your business model, we dont want anything to do with you anymore'. With the amount of effort that has been gone to to secure the data used in Australia to be suitable for OSM, only to have some UK mob make changes to spit in the face of all our donors, its very little wonder why the masses here have little respect for those who cause trouble after we'd gone to such lengths to ask everyone to be compatible with OSM. David On 7/7/2011 8:03 AM, waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote: ...I believe we should spend energy enlightening aerial providers (or wait for them to catch up) Yup, I'm waiting... (I just wanted to point out why I have stopped contributing - it's not in protest, and not because I've been perverted by 80n. Thanks for your responses anyway.) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Hi John, At low zoom I see lots of broken tiles. I was looking at Hobart. Any Ideas? Neal - Original Message - From: John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com To: John Henderson snow...@gmx.com Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Friday, 8 July, 2011 6:53:00 AM Subject: Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes On 8 July 2011 06:46, John Henderson snow...@gmx.com wrote: What particularly turns me off fosm.org is that I am unable to see a map when I go to the site. Using Firefox on Linux, I click on Maps and get FOSM based tiles are being uploaded to archive.org: http://www.archive.org/download/SharedMap2 Although I'm still working to get expired tiles re-rendered in near real time. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
I wonder if people would mind keeping their unconstructive comments for some other medium than this list. On Jul 8, 2011 9:24 AM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: Theres this thing in Australia called loyalty. You seem to understand very little about Australian culture. Its almost the height of rudeness after someone sets up a business to donate goods to your project, to then turn around and say 'unless you change your business model, we dont want anything to do with you anymore'. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:29 PM, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: Since the ban on all contributors who didn't sign the CTs, and ban on all new contributors from using NearMap and other CC-BY/CC-BY-SA sources, I'm no longer actively contributing to the OSM database. Instead I am now actively contributing to the fosm database. I am interested to hear what other active Australian OSM contributors will be doing now. I'm pretty much contributing to OSM as I always have. I don't have much interest in a fringe fork populated mainly by the disgruntled. It reminds me a bit of Citizendium - the fork of Wikipedia you've probably never heard of. Of course, my continuing with OSM is not a vote of confidence in the licence chance process - I really resent many parts of the way it's been handled, particularly Frederik Ramm's dismissive attitude. I really wish OSM had someone of Jimmy Wales' calibre as a community leader. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 7 July 2011 22:55, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote: On 7/7/2011 7:40 AM, waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 4:25 PM, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote: You've been very successful at perverting certain sections of the community, Australia being a good example ... Steve, please don't underestimate the ability of Australia to filter bullshit. I just want to: 1) be able to contribute with the confidence that my data will never be deleted. We've gone to insanely long lengths to make that the case, including getting clarifications from Ordnance Survey, Nearmap and many others. As far as I'm aware there are no remaining issues as to why you can't click 'accept'. As I said in an email to you, I disagree with the concept of a database right, or using contract law to emulate it, which has no precedent in Australia. Also, I dislike contributor agreements in free software projects, and the CTs are a similar concept. They restrict the use of data from governments and other third parties. Now, there is an argument over whether that data should be kept separate as layers, but I haven't seen that discussed at all. Finally, as I read it the Nearmap grant doesn't let me relicense my existing CC-BY-SA contributions as ODbL as I hadn't signed the CT when I made them. 2) continue using nearmap, which is insanely awesome. Not being a shareholder I can't influence them directly. As far as I'm aware, their issue is that they don't like the fact that we can change license later even though it's restricted to a free and open license. For all practical purposes I doubt we will ever change again unless and until CC release 4.0 which is mooted that it will contain provisions for data licensing. It's a simple balance between making sure the data remains open but also not going through this horrific license process again in the future if, for example, CC is suddenly better in 3-5 years time. Disclosure: I am a shareholder; I bought shares partly because they used OSM for their maps. So while no doubt nearmap is a great resource and it's a shame they no longer want to be involved, it's clear that the majority do - even large sclerotic government institutions are being agile and helpful about this. The door, as ever, is open should nearmap every change their minds. However, due to the CT governments have to contribute their data directly rather than letting even more agile citizens do it for them. James Andrewartha ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 6 July 2011 21:29, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: and also people who ticked the CTs who have used CC-BY/CC-BY-SA sources in the past who may want to keep this data and continue using these sources in the future. Indeed. Number 9 on the list is QldProtectedAreashttp://www.openstreetmap.org/user/QldProtectedAreas, which I'd assume is an account created specifically to upload CC-BY data, is marked as having accepted the CTs. So, active Australian OSM contributors, are you staying with the OSM db? If so how are you going to do edits going forward, because any CC-BY-SA derived data you add may be removed if OSM abandons CC-BY-SA at some point in the future (or may even be conflicting with your agreed CTs now...). Are you moving to the fosm db? If so, great! Less problems with trying to merge your data into fosm, and we can all get back to mapping. Do you have any concerns over the switch? Are you going to stop contributing data altogether? Or are you putting you efforts on hold at the moment. I've not been mapping very much recently, mostly waiting to see how the whole things plays out (apart from a few posts here and on legal-talk). -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
This reads like you disagree with taxation or death. I do too, but there's not much I can do about it. The vast majority of people are happy with where we are at and now it's down to people holding out because of a comma in the wrong place or a moral objection to various aspects of intellectual property law. While I agree that it's not perfect, I don't see how it's reasonable to throw everything away for one guy who doesn't like his countries laws. Unless you have a reasonable solution or I have misunderstood? Steve stevecoast.com On Jul 7, 2011, at 19:10, James Andrewartha tr...@student.uwa.edu.au wrote: On 7 July 2011 22:55, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote: On 7/7/2011 7:40 AM, waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 4:25 PM, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote: You've been very successful at perverting certain sections of the community, Australia being a good example ... Steve, please don't underestimate the ability of Australia to filter bullshit. I just want to: 1) be able to contribute with the confidence that my data will never be deleted. We've gone to insanely long lengths to make that the case, including getting clarifications from Ordnance Survey, Nearmap and many others. As far as I'm aware there are no remaining issues as to why you can't click 'accept'. As I said in an email to you, I disagree with the concept of a database right, or using contract law to emulate it, which has no precedent in Australia. Also, I dislike contributor agreements in free software projects, and the CTs are a similar concept. They restrict the use of data from governments and other third parties. Now, there is an argument over whether that data should be kept separate as layers, but I haven't seen that discussed at all. Finally, as I read it the Nearmap grant doesn't let me relicense my existing CC-BY-SA contributions as ODbL as I hadn't signed the CT when I made them. 2) continue using nearmap, which is insanely awesome. Not being a shareholder I can't influence them directly. As far as I'm aware, their issue is that they don't like the fact that we can change license later even though it's restricted to a free and open license. For all practical purposes I doubt we will ever change again unless and until CC release 4.0 which is mooted that it will contain provisions for data licensing. It's a simple balance between making sure the data remains open but also not going through this horrific license process again in the future if, for example, CC is suddenly better in 3-5 years time. Disclosure: I am a shareholder; I bought shares partly because they used OSM for their maps. So while no doubt nearmap is a great resource and it's a shame they no longer want to be involved, it's clear that the majority do - even large sclerotic government institutions are being agile and helpful about this. The door, as ever, is open should nearmap every change their minds. However, due to the CT governments have to contribute their data directly rather than letting even more agile citizens do it for them. James Andrewartha ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 8 July 2011 13:26, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: The vast majority of people are happy with where we are at What about the 50 odd percent of people that haven't responded? I don't see how it's reasonable to throw everything away for one guy who doesn't like his countries laws. So you're planning to hold onto as much data as possible regardless of copyright laws and respecting content authors wishes? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 11:26 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: I don't see how it's reasonable to throw everything away for one guy who doesn't like his countries laws. There are more countries without sui generis database rights laws than with it. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 8 July 2011 13:26, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: The vast majority of people are happy with where we are at From what I've read on ML posts, and from what was reported about the last SotM meeting (I wasn't there), the vast majority of people don't care and would be happy with the status quo, would be happy with CTs+OdBL, and quite a decent fraction would be happy with PD too. I'm not saying that the anti-ODbL group is larger than the pro-ODbL one, but that most people are neutral and will go with whatever happens. and now it's down to people holding out because of a comma in the wrong place or a moral objection to various aspects of intellectual property law. I don't really see how a group of people complaining about things in the CTs or ODbL (some of which are moral objections, some are technical objection) is really that different from a group of people complaining that CC-BY-SA isn't suitable. I think about all we can say is that not everyone agrees, and people also have different opinions on how many people are in each camp. -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
I would phrase it that the vast majority aren't lawyers and don't want to become one, therefore don't know the implications of the problems with cc. That is all this is predicated upon, lawyers say that cc doesn't work for data. If they didn't say that then we would never have gone down this road. I guess for your second paragraph - there are objections to the CTs but we are at a point where I believe there would be objections to however the CTs turned out. They're as reasonable a balance as we can make, I think. The next step is to switch, and then if and when CC 4 comes out and is applicable to data then it's a simple process to change to that. Of course, in theory its a simple to change to switch from our current cc to the future one, but then we have this big gap where it doesn't apply. Steve stevecoast.com On Jul 7, 2011, at 20:41, James Livingston li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote: On 8 July 2011 13:26, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: The vast majority of people are happy with where we are at From what I've read on ML posts, and from what was reported about the last SotM meeting (I wasn't there), the vast majority of people don't care and would be happy with the status quo, would be happy with CTs+OdBL, and quite a decent fraction would be happy with PD too. I'm not saying that the anti-ODbL group is larger than the pro-ODbL one, but that most people are neutral and will go with whatever happens. and now it's down to people holding out because of a comma in the wrong place or a moral objection to various aspects of intellectual property law. I don't really see how a group of people complaining about things in the CTs or ODbL (some of which are moral objections, some are technical objection) is really that different from a group of people complaining that CC-BY-SA isn't suitable. I think about all we can say is that not everyone agrees, and people also have different opinions on how many people are in each camp. -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
What you say mike is mostly reasonable apart from the control bit. It's a democratically elected nonprofit, so it's hard to cast that as a dictatorship. Steve stevecoast.com On Jul 7, 2011, at 20:47, Mike Dupont jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Chris Barham cbar...@pobox.com wrote: Personally I don't care about the licence. I feel that the forks and this resulting dilution of effort will become a drain on all the projects (united we stand/divided etc etc), and have become a shouting match where the 'political' goals of the forked projects are trumpeted over the stated reason for the thing being there - an open map. Cries of We're more open don't help when you can't rustle up the hosting fees or development volunteers. So a fork must become popular. More popular than other forks or the parent project. Was this the real reason for your post with mention of FOSM (and no other OSM spin-offs), and seeding fear uncertainty and doubt regarding *possible* data deletion.. you were recruiting? My reasons for helping out are simple, because there are more chances to develop software if there is a not a monolithic database. There are more possibilities for OSM if everything is not in the control of a few people. The only way to be able to negotiate is to be in a position to negotiate, so being able to fork is an important part in not having to fork. Already we have developed new and innovative solutions and more. I am also willing to work with osm as much as possible. A fork does not have to be anything bad, and to be honest I see the new license as a fork, a forced one. what we are doing is just setting up the tools and resources for people to continue, and these tools and technologies are needed by everyone and everyone will benefit. mike ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 8 July 2011 13:54, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: I would phrase it that the vast majority aren't lawyers and don't want to become one, therefore don't know the implications of the problems with cc. It's a false assumption, the only way it would be geo factual data is if you copied 1:1 from raster imagery, making maps is a creative enterprise, regardless if it's stored in a database or not, just like wikipedia content is copyrightable even though it's stored in a database. I believe CC has since changed their stance, possibly due to all the discussion over it. The next step is to switch, and then if and when CC 4 comes out and is applicable to data then it's a simple process to change to that. Of course, in theory its a simple to change to switch from our current cc to the future one, but then we have this big gap where it doesn't apply. AFAIK all you have to do is use a european ported license to cover database rights and there is no issue with upgrades since all CC licenses I've read include an upgrade clause. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 11:54 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: I would phrase it that the vast majority aren't lawyers and don't want to become one, therefore don't know the implications of the problems with cc. That is all this is predicated upon, lawyers say that cc doesn't work for data. Lawyers also say that cc does work for data. You can generally find a lawyer who will say just about anything. The next step is to switch, and then if and when CC 4 comes out and is applicable to data then it's a simple process to change to that. CC 2 and CC 3 are already applicable to data. If what you mean is that you're hoping that CC 4 is going to try to override the laws of jurisdictions which says that facts can't be owned, well, that ain't gonna happen. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Actually, the license process has been known about for a long, long time so it's not this new turnaround you cast it as. In addition, everyone else (bing, ordnance survey...) has worked with us very reasonably. In fact it's hard to say near map have been unreasonable, just that they were not quite as happy as all our other contributors of similar data. As for this 'uk mob' thing, that too is unreasonable. As a democratically elected board, we have members from many countries and you are invited to get involved or run for election. Its certainly difficult to integrate the eu, us and au communities when the timezones are so hard to overlap. I am all ears on how we could fix that. It would be wonderful if someone from au could make it to SOTM. In fact they are running a video competition to pay for the costs of someone to attend. Lastly, I'll say that I fell out with the last person to ask for my loyalty rather than my integrity or honesty. There is a big distinction. Steve stevecoast.com On Jul 7, 2011, at 16:24, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 08:11 -0700, Steve Coast wrote: Why did you stop then? Is there no aerial imagery where you are other than nearmap? Theres this thing in Australia called loyalty. You seem to understand very little about Australian culture. Its almost the height of rudeness after someone sets up a business to donate goods to your project, to then turn around and say 'unless you change your business model, we dont want anything to do with you anymore'. With the amount of effort that has been gone to to secure the data used in Australia to be suitable for OSM, only to have some UK mob make changes to spit in the face of all our donors, its very little wonder why the masses here have little respect for those who cause trouble after we'd gone to such lengths to ask everyone to be compatible with OSM. David On 7/7/2011 8:03 AM, waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote: ...I believe we should spend energy enlightening aerial providers (or wait for them to catch up) Yup, I'm waiting... (I just wanted to point out why I have stopped contributing - it's not in protest, and not because I've been perverted by 80n. Thanks for your responses anyway.) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
The control seems to be good, but I have no personal say in it. The new license maybe good, but I dont want to accept it if I dont understand it 100%. With the new distributed system we are building I can : 1. Host my own maps without begging or asking for permissions. 2. Commit my own code to my own repositories 3. Own my own edits without having them deleted by someone for some reason 4. Develop new tools that work with osm that everyone can use and benefit from. The more forks there are, the more possibilities are there for software developers. Kinda like arms dealers. So as long as there is war and conflict, you will need weapons (and maps). As long as there is conflict in the OSM, you will need more software developers, At least my work seems to be more appreciated in the forks. Also I am still working on my new kestrel distributed rendering system, and when that has enough cpus we will be able to do alot more than osm has ever done, because we will have a flexible and reusable decentralized processing system. That is the biggest problem with mindset of the people who are controlling osm, the mindset monolithic and too over controlled. We need to change the mindset to distributed and federated. mike On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 5:56 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: What you say mike is mostly reasonable apart from the control bit. It's a democratically elected nonprofit, so it's hard to cast that as a dictatorship. Steve stevecoast.com On Jul 7, 2011, at 20:47, Mike Dupont jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Chris Barham cbar...@pobox.com cbar...@pobox.com wrote: Personally I don't care about the licence. I feel that the forks and this resulting dilution of effort will become a drain on all the projects (united we stand/divided etc etc), and have become a shouting match where the 'political' goals of the forked projects are trumpeted over the stated reason for the thing being there - an open map. Cries of We're more open don't help when you can't rustle up the hosting fees or development volunteers. So a fork must become popular. More popular than other forks or the parent project. Was this the real reason for your post with mention of FOSM (and no other OSM spin-offs), and seeding fear uncertainty and doubt regarding *possible* data deletion.. you were recruiting? My reasons for helping out are simple, because there are more chances to develop software if there is a not a monolithic database. There are more possibilities for OSM if everything is not in the control of a few people. The only way to be able to negotiate is to be in a position to negotiate, so being able to fork is an important part in not having to fork. Already we have developed new and innovative solutions and more. I am also willing to work with osm as much as possible. A fork does not have to be anything bad, and to be honest I see the new license as a fork, a forced one. what we are doing is just setting up the tools and resources for people to continue, and these tools and technologies are needed by everyone and everyone will benefit. mike ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au -- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 8 July 2011 14:06, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: Actually, the license process has been known about for a long, long time so it's not this new turnaround you cast it as. In addition, everyone else (bing, ordnance survey...) has worked with us very reasonably. In fact it's hard to say near map have been unreasonable, just that they were not quite as happy as all our other contributors of similar data. Was the OS given all pertinent facts about ODBL and how it doesn't require a minimum level of attribution on produced works? AFAIK OS requires attribution and ODBL doesn't require it down stream. This is a big show stopped for most government agencies I've heard about in Australia. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 8 July 2011 14:06, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: As for this 'uk mob' thing, that too is unreasonable. As a democratically elected board, we have members from many countries and you are invited to get involved or run for election. Is it true that you had to do a lot of rule fiddling so you didn't have to retire to give others a chance on the board? Its certainly difficult to integrate the eu, us and au communities when the timezones are so hard to overlap. I am all ears on how we could fix that. It would be wonderful if someone from au could make it to SOTM. In fact they are running a video competition to pay for the costs of someone to attend. Especially so when you don't bother to listen to any feed back. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
Nathan I've been mapping farm fences etc in the Yass, NSW area, where the Bing resolution is high enough to do so Hi Nathan, Do you live near Yass? If so can you throw any light on the two or three streets that don't have street signs on them? I've tried many times to find names for the road next to the showground (Google has it as O'Connell Road). Also the roads near the river (maybe Warrambalulah and Riley)? Oh - and to Andrew - I intend to stay with the OSM project and will be mapping madly again in Australia just as soon as all our data is compliant. Till then I'm practicing my arm-chair mapping techniques overseas. Hey - it's fun also, Cheers Nick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 8 July 2011 11:26, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: This reads like you disagree with taxation or death. I do too, but there's not much I can do about it. The vast majority of people are happy with where we are at and now it's down to people holding out because of a comma in the wrong place or a moral objection to various aspects of intellectual property law. While I agree that it's not perfect, I don't see how it's reasonable to throw everything away for one guy who doesn't like his countries laws. Unless you have a reasonable solution or I have misunderstood? I am quite happy with my country's laws, which don't include database right, and don't want to promote such a concept. What do you mean by throw everything away? Who is throwing what away? James Andrewartha ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 12:37 AM, James Andrewartha tr...@student.uwa.edu.au wrote: On 8 July 2011 11:26, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: This reads like you disagree with taxation or death. I do too, but there's not much I can do about it. The vast majority of people are happy with where we are at and now it's down to people holding out because of a comma in the wrong place or a moral objection to various aspects of intellectual property law. While I agree that it's not perfect, I don't see how it's reasonable to throw everything away for one guy who doesn't like his countries laws. Unless you have a reasonable solution or I have misunderstood? I am quite happy with my country's laws, which don't include database right, and don't want to promote such a concept. What do you mean by throw everything away? Who is throwing what away? OSMF is throwing away the data of people who don't relicense under ODbL. They're doing this because they don't like the laws of countries like Australia and the US. That must be what he means :). ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [Talk-br] OpenStreetMap no Android
Obrigado por responder !!! Eu gostaria de baixar somente o Rio de Janeiro, mas o Brasil não faz mal. Eu gostaria de entender melhor como baixar os mapas, quais arquivos baixar de onde e etc. Agora aplicação para IOS eu não sei, não tenho iphone e se tivesse um, poderia tentar te ajudar a desenvolver. On 06-07-2011 12:27, Diogo W wrote: Você pode baixar os mapas daqui: http://download.geofabrik.de/osm/south-america/ (baixe o PBF, o OsmAnd reconhece). A atualização é semanal, se não me engano. O OsmAnd permite atualizar nomes de vias e sentido ? O iOS tem alguma aplicação que permita isso ? Se não tiver, alguém quer me ajudar a desenvolver ? Um abraço, Diogo 2011/7/4 Leonardo Gomes leogol...@yahoo.com.br mailto:leogol...@yahoo.com.br Obrigado por responder. Estou querendo ajudar nomeando ruas e em alguns casos identificando o sentido (mão) a rua tem. O OsmAnd é bastante interessante !!! Agora como vocês fazem para baixarem o mapa da Cidade do Rio de Janeiro completo ??? Eu ainda não entendi bem essa parte de download de mapas, estou baixando aos pedaços pelo OsmAndMapCreator. Se alguém souber como baixar a cidade toda, ou se existe um mapa já pronto para baixar, que seja atualizado constantemente. Qual é o tempo de atualização dos mapas openstreet ??? Como faço para checar as versões para saber se já foi atualizado. Pois sabendo da atualização, posso checar minhas contribuições para ver se há necessidade de corrigir. On 04-07-2011 02:04, Arlindo Pereira wrote: Olá Leonardo, saudações cariocas! :) Legal ver que tem mais alguém do Rio por aqui. Para usar os mapas no celular, existem vários aplicativos disponíveis. Um dos que eu mais gosto é o OsmAnd. https://market.android.com/details?id=net.osmand Para capturar trilhas e contribuir com o projeto, também há algumas opções disponíveis; uma das melhores é o Osmtracker. https://market.android.com/details?id=me.guillaumin.android.osmtracker De qualquer maneira, você pode contribuir com o projeto de outras maneiras que só capturando trilhas, como utilizando o editor direto no site (Potlatch) ou editando com o JOSM. []s 2011/7/3 Leonardo Gomesleogol...@yahoo.com.br mailto:leogol...@yahoo.com.br: Prezados, Alguém usa os mapas do OpenStreetMap em celulares android ? Poderia dar umas dicas de como usar ? Acho que falta algumas informações sobre utilizar e baixar os mapas, consegui algo, baixar o osm usando o JOSM, GPSMid e o OsmGpsMid, mas nada funcional. Sou usuário linux e moro na maravilhosa cidade. Pesquisei no Google, mas acredito que não devo ter perguntado direito, pois suas respostas não foram satisfatórias. Quem sabe conseguindo um tutorial de como usar no celular, gravar uns logs e de como contribuir para o projeto, eu consiga contribuir quem sabe um pouco. Grato. ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
[Talk-de] OSM Daten im 50km Radius ermitteln
Hi Liste, Ich benötige OSM Daten die in einem 50km Radius um meinen Wohnort liegen. Über die API schaffe ich es nicht, die meint das Gebiet (bbox) ist zu groß. Zur Zeit nutze ich die Daten von Rheinland-Pfalz die die Geofabrik zur Verfügung stellt. Mit meinem 50km Radius erwische ich aber zusätzlich Teile von Baden-Württemberg, Hessen und dem Elsass. Mehrere OSM Dateien zu einer zusammenfassen sollte kein Problem sein osmosis --rx 1.osm --rx 2.osm --rx 3.osm --merge --merge --wx merged.osm Ausschneiden eines Kreises sollte mit --bounding-polygon funktionieren. Wie erstelle ich aber dieses Polygonfile? Viel einfacher wäre natürlich ein Dienst der mir das macht ;-) Also wer kennt einen Dienst, mit dem ich OSM Daten in einem 50km Radius um einen bestimmten Punkt laden kann? Tschuess Michael ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] OSM Daten im 50km Radius ermitteln
Hallo, On 07/07/11 08:35, Michael Buchberger wrote: Mehrere OSM Dateien zu einer zusammenfassen sollte kein Problem sein osmosis --rx 1.osm --rx 2.osm --rx 3.osm --merge --merge --wx merged.osm Besser das Europa-File runterladen, sonst hast Du komische Effekte an den Schnittstellen. Ausschneiden eines Kreises sollte mit --bounding-polygon funktionieren. In gewisser Weise ist jeder Kreis ein Vieleck, bloss mit seehr vielen Ecken ;) Wie erstelle ich aber dieses Polygonfile? Starte JOSM, blende die OSM-Karte als Hintergrund ein, achte auf Mercatorprojektion. Markiere drei Orte in unterschiedlichen Richtungen, die 50km von Deinem Wohnort weg sind, dan Shift-O, ggf. noch von Hand verfeindern, abspeichern; perl osm2poly.pl meinedatei.osm meinpolygon.poly, fertig. osm2poly ist in svn: applications/utils/osm-extract/polygons Also wer kennt einen Dienst, mit dem ich OSM Daten in einem 50km Radius um einen bestimmten Punkt laden kann? Ich nicht. Am naechsten kommt da vermutlich TRAPI ran, da kannst Du einzelne z12-Tiles abfragen, aber das gibt dann einen ziemlich eckigen Kreis. Bye Frederik ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Redundanz?
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 12:05:13AM +0200, Stephan Wolff wrote: Moin! Am 06.07.2011 14:19, schrieb Florian Lohoff: On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 12:27:29PM +0200, Sven Sommerkamp wrote: Die Frage ist doch immer wieviel ist ausreichend und macht Sinn? Nein - es gibt kein ausreichend. Jeder darf so viel und so detailreich mappen wie er will solange er nicht dadurch den anderen die nutzung kaputt macht. Aber woran erkennt ein Mapper, ob nicht irgendeine Nutzung kaputt geht oder schwerwiegende Nachteile hat? Es faengt mal da an wo du Objekte entfernst und gegen irgendwas anderes ersetzt. Um bei meinem Beispiel zu bleiben - Straße als Linie oder als Flaeche? Wenn ich die Linie einfach drin lasse ZUSAETZLICH zur Flaeche mache ich nichts kaputt. Wenn ich die Flaeche ANSTATT der Linie drin habe bricht dort das ganze Routing ins essen. Einzelne hinzugefügte POIs sind meist unproblematisch. Sobald man ein bestehendes Objekt in mehrere Einzelteile zerlegt, gibt es meist auch Nachteile. Hast du ein Beispiel? Wie könnte man z.B. bei einer Bushaltestelle mit Bank und Unterstand die Lage der drei Einzelobjekte (Haltestellenmast am Fahrbahnrand, Bank hinter dem Fußweg, Unterstand 5 m in Fahrtrichtung) abbilden ohne eine bestehende Auswertung zu schädigen? Was wird denn da heute ausgewertet? Der bus_stop - Aber den kann ich doch auch dem Masten abbilden oder? Den Unterstand als building und die bench da drin moeglicherweise. Soll man eine Straßeneinmündung mit drei kleinen Verkehrsinseln mit allen Details erfassen, wenn dadurch zehn zusätzliche Wegstücke und fünf zusätzliche Abbiegerelationen nötig werden? Wie kann der Mapper erkennen, ob es dann Probleme bei der TMC-Auswertung gibt? Wenn da eine signifikante Verkehrsinsel ist trenne ich die einmuendenden Wege immer auf. Das hat fuer mich den Grund das sich ein moegliches Bitte wenden eines routing moeglicherweise aendert. Und ja - dann sind das halt mehrere Wegstuecke und das TMC muss mit weit komplexeren dingern klarkommen - Siehe Autobahnkreuz. Wenn hier einige die Straßen als Flaechen mappen wollen - bitte sehr - solange halt fuer die routingalgorhythmen die mittellinie da bleibt. Selbst wenn keine bestehenden Daten geändert werden müssen, erschweren drei eng benachbarte Linien anderen Mappern die Arbeit und provozieren falsch verbundene Wege. Das Zerstoert aber keine Nutzung - Und etwas nur nicht zu machen weil es Arbeit bedeutet ist ja eben der grund warum das OpenStreetMap ist. Es gibt genuegend leute - zumindest auf einer langen Zeitachse um auch Komplexe dinge zu stemmen. Und das mit dem verbundene Linien ist ja auch ein Softwareproblem. Josm/Potlatch koennten da durchaus mal meckern wenn Flaechen und Linien (Highway mit Landuse) verbunden werden. Was ist daran nicht durchschaubar wenn ich eine flaeche highway=pedestrian area=yes habe und darauf viele nodes mit amenity=bench? Dieses Beispiel ist leicht verständlich. Andere Konstrukte, insbesondere mit mehreren beteiligten Relationen, können Mapper abschrecken oder fehlerträchtig in Erfassung und Auswertung sein. Fast jede Detailerfassung hat Vor- und Nachteile. Oft müssen wir mit den Nachteilen leben. Aber ich finde es legitim, auch Entscheidungen gegen Detailerfassung zu Gunsten eines einfacheren, generalisierten Datenmodells zu treffen. Also Relationen sehe ich noch nicht so als das Problem. Ich sehe eher das Problem das Relationen mittlerweile als alle moeglichen arten von Ich sammle mal Objekte in einer Relation missbraucht werden. Dafuer sind die aber gar nicht da. Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de „Für eine ausgewogene Energiepolitik über das Jahr 2020 hinaus ist die Nutzung von Atomenergie eine Brückentechnologie und unverzichtbar. Ein Ausstieg in zehn Jahren, wie noch unter der rot-grünen Regierung beschlossen, kommt für die nationale Energieversorgung zu abrupt.“ Angela Merkel CDU 30.8.2009 signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Redundanz?
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 12:20:08AM +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote: Ja, das stimmt. Das sind zum Beispiel auch die ueblichen Argumente gegen Luftraum- oder Historien-Mapping. Aber darueber kann man ja sprechen und einen Konsens finden. Selbst (oder gerade?) einem Anfaengermapper wuerde vermutlich auffallen, wenn er ein ultrakomplizietes Konstrukt baut, das er selber nachher nicht mehr aendern kann ;) Ist mir auch so gegangen - Mal eine 10 Einwohnerstadt mit einem landuser=residential gemapped. Im nachhinein keine gute Idee :) Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de „Für eine ausgewogene Energiepolitik über das Jahr 2020 hinaus ist die Nutzung von Atomenergie eine Brückentechnologie und unverzichtbar. Ein Ausstieg in zehn Jahren, wie noch unter der rot-grünen Regierung beschlossen, kommt für die nationale Energieversorgung zu abrupt.“ Angela Merkel CDU 30.8.2009 signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Europakarte auf Vista HCX
Ja. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Stammtische im Wiki-Terminkalender reduzieren?
Hallo! Also zu http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Current_Events an sich: Die Liste ist chonologisch und mit den Symbolen schön übersichtlich. Ich finde es gut, dass es /einen/ Ort gibt, wo man /alles/ finden kann. Wenn es einen iCalalendar Export gäbe, dann würde ich mir dort eine regionale Einschränkung wünschen (also nur meine Region plus alle internationalen Treffen), einfach weil ich nicht alle Stammtische dieser Welt in meinem Kalender haben wollte. Aber dass es eine Website zum Nachsehen gibt, finde ich gut. Eine andere Frage ist, was davon auf der Main_Page stehen sollte. Da fände ich es ok, wenn dort nur internationale Events stehen und es einen Link local events zu Current_Events gibt. Servus, Andreas ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Erfassen von Wanderwegen
Nach einer Streckenwanderung im Raum Bad Kreuznach - Bad Dürkheim bin ich gerade dabei, die dabei entdeckten Wanderwege zu erfassen. Auf eine Anfrage beim Trägerverein Naturpark Soonwald-Nahe e.V. Geschäftsstelle Bad Kreuznach haben wir die Erlaubnis die von Ihnen betreuten Wanderwege in OSM einzupflegen. Deren Wege findet man unter http://www.outdooractive.com/de/quelle/traegerverein-naturpark-soonwald-nahe-e-v/2687116775237173418/. Da ich zur Zeit sehr mit anderen Dingen beschäftigt bin, könnte ich dabei Hilfe gebrauchen. Weiterhin habe ich teilweise schon die Rundwanderwege KHx rund um Bad Kreuznach eingepflegt. Allerdings sind manche Pfade noch nicht in OSM. Wenn jemand in dieser Gegend trackingmäßig tätig ist, bitte ich ihn, die Routen zu vervollständigen. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Redundanz?
Hallo Florian, (an die Anderen: sorry, aber meine direkten Mails an Florian blieben bisher unbeantwortet) bitte gehe mal auf meinen direkten Mailanfragen (von ostr...@diesei.de) an Deine auch hier verwendete Mailadresse ein bzgl. Bereitstellung der bei Dir früher gespeicherten Straßenlisten. Ich bin relativ weit in der Programmierung einer neuen Straßenlistenauswertung und bräuchte die in Deinem System gespeicherten Straßenlisten. Auch eine vorübergehende Mail, daß Du das in Kürze mal anpackst, würde mir schon was bringen. Danke und Grüße und sorry für das Off-Topic, Dietmar aka okilimu -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Florian Lohoff [mailto:f...@zz.de] Gesendet am: Donnerstag, 7. Juli 2011 09:47 An: Frederik Ramm Cc: Openstreetmap allgemeines in Deutsch Betreff: Re: [Talk-de] Redundanz? On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 12:20:08AM +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote: Ja, das stimmt. Das sind zum Beispiel auch die ueblichen Argumente gegen Luftraum- oder Historien-Mapping. Aber darueber kann man ja sprechen und einen Konsens finden. Selbst (oder gerade?) einem Anfaengermapper wuerde vermutlich auffallen, wenn er ein ultrakomplizietes Konstrukt baut, das er selber nachher nicht mehr aendern kann ;) Ist mir auch so gegangen - Mal eine 10 Einwohnerstadt mit einem landuser=residential gemapped. Im nachhinein keine gute Idee :) Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de „Für eine ausgewogene Energiepolitik über das Jahr 2020 hinaus ist die Nutzung von Atomenergie eine Brückentechnologie und unverzichtbar. Ein Ausstieg in zehn Jahren, wie noch unter der rot-grünen Regierung beschlossen, kommt für die nationale Energieversorgung zu abrupt.“ Angela Merkel CDU 30.8.2009 ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Redundanz?
Florian Lohoff f at zz.de writes: Ist mir auch so gegangen - Mal eine 10 Einwohnerstadt mit einem landuser=residential gemapped. Im nachhinein keine gute Idee :) Vermutlich deshalb unschön, weil du jetzt alles darin in ein Multipolygon packen darfst? Ist immer etwas schwierig, abzuwägen, was der richtige Weg ist. Einige Zeit habe ich z.B. auch Gebiete, die nebeneinander liegen, die Punkte sharen lassen. Mittlerweile habe ich das in meinem ganzen Gebiet rückgebaut, da es einfach nur unglaublich fummelig ist, in diesem Fall nochmal z.B. ein Gebiet dazwischen zu bauen, wenn man weiter detaillieren will und zwischen landuse=residential und landuse=farmland eben doch noch ein landuse=grass rein soll... Gruß Manuel ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] OSM kompatible Navi
Das Gerät könnte interessant sein. http://www.pocketnavigation.de/news/view_2792__medion-zeigt-erstes-eigenes-outdoor-navi-auf-der-ifa/1.1.88.html Mal sehen, ob man auch selbst erstellte Karte installieren kann. Jacques ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Erfassen von Wanderwegen
Am 07.07.2011 11:35, schrieb hike39: Nach einer Streckenwanderung im Raum Bad Kreuznach - Bad Dürkheim bin ich gerade dabei, die dabei entdeckten Wanderwege zu erfassen. Auf eine Anfrage beim Trägerverein Naturpark Soonwald-Nahe e.V. Geschäftsstelle Bad Kreuznach haben wir die Erlaubnis die von Ihnen betreuten Wanderwege in OSM einzupflegen. Deren Wege findet man unter http://www.outdooractive.com/de/quelle/traegerverein-naturpark-soonwald-nahe-e-v/2687116775237173418/. Hast Du das schriftlich und kannst Du das bitte im wiki veröffentlichen ! Vielen Dank. Da ich zur Zeit sehr mit anderen Dingen beschäftigt bin, könnte ich dabei Hilfe gebrauchen. Wenn das rechtlich gesichert ist, ist eine Wikiseite zur Organisation wohl angebracht. Weiterhin habe ich teilweise schon die Rundwanderwege KHx rund um Bad Kreuznach eingepflegt. Allerdings sind manche Pfade noch nicht in OSM. Wenn jemand in dieser Gegend trackingmäßig tätig ist, bitte ich ihn, die Routen zu vervollständigen. Ein highway=road mit entspechenden note- und source-Tags ist auch möglich. Grüße fly ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Redundanz?
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 12:24:05PM +0200, Dietmar wrote: Hallo Florian, (an die Anderen: sorry, aber meine direkten Mails an Florian blieben bisher unbeantwortet) bitte gehe mal auf meinen direkten Mailanfragen (von ostr...@diesei.de) an Deine auch hier verwendete Mailadresse ein bzgl. Bereitstellung der bei Dir früher gespeicherten Straßenlisten. Ich bin relativ weit in der Programmierung einer neuen Straßenlistenauswertung und bräuchte die in Deinem System gespeicherten Straßenlisten. Auch eine vorübergehende Mail, daß Du das in Kürze mal anpackst, würde mir schon was bringen. Ich habe die kisten mittlerweile wieder stehen so das die Strom und Netz haben so das ich die raussuchen kann. Das ganze ist ein git tree und pro liste eine file. Sobald ich mal eine minute habe suche ich das raus. Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de „Für eine ausgewogene Energiepolitik über das Jahr 2020 hinaus ist die Nutzung von Atomenergie eine Brückentechnologie und unverzichtbar. Ein Ausstieg in zehn Jahren, wie noch unter der rot-grünen Regierung beschlossen, kommt für die nationale Energieversorgung zu abrupt.“ Angela Merkel CDU 30.8.2009 signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
