Re: [OSM-talk] What the license change is going to do to the map
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: http://www.sharedmap.org/bna.html http://www.sharedmap.org/before.PNG http://www.sharedmap.org/after.PNG I enjoy a thread that is well on its way to a flame war as much as the next guy, but do you mind telling us the methodology used to achieve this result? Last time it was discussed, there was a lot of debate on how to properly tag a node, way, or relation as license compatible or not because this is a multi-user system. I am curious: how did you reach your conclusions? ___ 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] Cloudmade Ambassador Program
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 1:35 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: Is that why Dell launched it's Streak mobile 'phone in the UK first? . Also consider the fact that the Cloudmade and MapQuest ambassador programs What's an 'ambassador' program? Out of curiosity, does Cloudmade even have this outreach program anymore? I was under the impression that Thea Clay was the last ambassador/outreach coordinator Cloudmade had *before* she went to Mapquest very recently.[0] Can anyone from Cloudmade comment? [0] http://www.mail-archive.com/talk@openstreetmap.org/msg34074.html ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Highway Tagging Consensus to Improve OSM (and address some of 41 latitude's concerns)
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 2:19 AM, Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com wrote: AJ, I'm not disposing of IRC, frankly I use it myself. I'm just saying that there are downsides/upsides to both phone calls/email/IRC/IM/etc. My real point is that new people probably don't want to argue about tags in the first place. Many people come to mapping parties and say what do you want me to map? Or I've also heard 'I don't care to map anything in-particular, but I want to help out. If people really want to discuss tagging badly enough they will figure out whatever the form of communication is and deal with it. Key is coming out of that communication is a guide that others can use. -Kate I was playing devil's advocate to an extent. :-) Personally, I am of the opinion that if you want to talk about tagging bad enough, you will use whatever medium it takes to get the job done. I know I will. I welcome all calls/IRC chats, and will try to participate in whatever is set up, since I am one of the more novice people that desperately needs to better understand the tags. On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Al Haraka alhar...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 11:20 PM, Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com wrote: There are some people where IRC is a higher barrier to entry than a phone call. All that aside though I think key is just to have some level of consensus and then have the information available in a clear place. New people don't care about arguing about tags, they just want to know how to map. By making that easier and having standards documented in a clear way they will. -Kate Kate, I understand where you are going with this, but I think the wiki is pretty clear on how low the barrier to entry can be if there is a web-based IRC-client. http://irc.openstreetmap.org/ I personally dislike the idea of disposing of one avenue of communication because of barrier to entry. I would say in this case it means the people in the channel or on the call care enough to put in an effort. Either way, it costs time or money, regardless of the choice. I personally prefer IRC only for the reason that it is easy to document everything that is said and done with minimal effort. Someone has to take notes on a phone call, and sometimes those notes can be inadequate or inaccurate. That is my only reservation. Of course, IRC has its own downsides. Whatever is decided, I welcome the idea of organizing. I too am very concerned about knowing how to map, and I see this as a positive development. Thanks to everyone for getting motivated about this. On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: Surely we're missing plenty of people by only having a discussion on the mailing list? SoTM.US proved to me that there are orders of magnitude more people interested in OSM in the US than are signed up for talk-us. The difference is that the people who care enough to talk about it and form a consensus between those on talk-us and maybe even a phone call or two are the ones that will actually make the changes to the wiki and renderers. It's not that there's one consensus it's whoever gets a consensus faster and (most importantly) implements it. You're getting a consensus of those who can get past the higher barrier to entry. It's relatively easy to join a mailing list. It's also relatively easy to use IRC, though you have to be free at the proper time. It's a bit harder to participate in a phone conversation - again you can't have anything else scheduled then, and you need either a microphone or a willingness to pay for a long-distance call, plus the ability to understand various accents (or half the meeting will be can you please repeat that? can you speak more clearly?). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Code of Conduct: civil discussion, lists etc.
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com wrote: In the long run they tend to do more harm than good. Hi, can you give an example of this? I'm at a loss to understand how asking people to follow simple rules like be collaborative and be considerate could end up being harmful? I think this is a very good point. If such a policy exists, it should be specific about what is disruptive, and how disruptions will be dealt with *transparently*. I think identifying positive behavior like this is not very productive and can be limiting. I would like to see something that says: This is what we do not tolerate (just like a lot of web forums), and this is how we will deal with it. Other than, do exactly what you want and have a good time while you're at it. I will not lie. I have not seen the Ubuntu Code of Conduct or similar initiatives mentioned before. However, I think we should keep it plain and simple and remove some caustic behavior that seems to be returning to the list after a hiatus. Collaboration and consideration is going on without the code, and will probably continue, even improve, by isolating bad behaviors. I'm very much in favour of adopting such a policy. At the very least, we can then stop debating whether or not we need such policies, and whether or not people's behaviour is harmful - we can simply discuss whether they are in line with the policy or not. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Code of Conduct: civil discussion, lists etc.
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 12:13 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 October 2010 19:08, Al Haraka alhar...@gmail.com wrote: initiatives mentioned before. However, I think we should keep it plain and simple and remove some caustic behavior that seems to be returning to the list after a hiatus. Collaboration and consideration Most of the caustic behaviour I've seen lately is from SteveC... I did not single out anyone on purpose, because this is not going to be productive OR solve the current issue. Whether it is SteveC or any other OSM user, setting transparent guidelines regarding behavior we do not tolerate will go a long way. I respect SteveC, and he has given up increasing control OSM from its inception to now for the benefit of the community. I think if he were instructed by the community, I hope he would behave like any other user: respect the rules and accept a ban if deserved. To make it clear, this is not an invitation for comments on how SteveC would theoretically behave. Personally, I do not want to discuss it. If you do John, feel free to start such a discussion with a new thread. But like other topics, I think this is an important issue that will be quickly derailed if we start singling people out instead of discussing the relevant details of implementation. Please excuse me if this sounds blunt. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote: Elizabeth wrote: No, I cannot create the nice map. I do not want to be so blunt, but I do not know any other way: then stop complaining about the map. Or anything an OSM user can complain about at OSM, for that matter. This is an open data project, so I have been told. Like many open source projects that it relies upon, specifically the tools used to render and manipulate OSM data, the ecosystem upon which it relies is meritocracy. The people you have take issue with do have the power because they have the knowledge and skills to create these tools or refine them. If you do not like the current tool set, and you are not part of a significant plurality of users and developers who can enforce such a change, you have to learn to make your own. I am sorry, but that was, is, and always will be the way open source works, at least in my mind. I have my own opinions on OSM quality, but then again I am not yet a component OSM contributor, web developer, or system administrator. It is not my place to judge until I understand the tools well enough to critique them accurately on a technical level (nice is not really specific enough for me), and then modify them or make new ones in the event a significant number of people in the community disagree with me. The point of the community is to leverage your skills with the skills of others. That way, we have a high competency level in multiple dimensions. If you do not like one component and cannot fix it yourself, it is bizarre for me, personally, to insist others conform to your wishes. I have believed that open source and open data projects specifically let go of that thinking so that skilled, inspired people can focus on what they want without organizational problems where unknowledgeable people higher in a hierarchy get in their way. Hence OSM and many other groups try to keep the hierarchy very flat (some do, anyway). I do not mean to be rude about this, but it is obvious to me. I am not sure if needs to be spelled out. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Highway Tagging Consensus to Improve OSM (and address some of 41 latitude's concerns)
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 11:20 PM, Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com wrote: There are some people where IRC is a higher barrier to entry than a phone call. All that aside though I think key is just to have some level of consensus and then have the information available in a clear place. New people don't care about arguing about tags, they just want to know how to map. By making that easier and having standards documented in a clear way they will. -Kate Kate, I understand where you are going with this, but I think the wiki is pretty clear on how low the barrier to entry can be if there is a web-based IRC-client. http://irc.openstreetmap.org/ I personally dislike the idea of disposing of one avenue of communication because of barrier to entry. I would say in this case it means the people in the channel or on the call care enough to put in an effort. Either way, it costs time or money, regardless of the choice. I personally prefer IRC only for the reason that it is easy to document everything that is said and done with minimal effort. Someone has to take notes on a phone call, and sometimes those notes can be inadequate or inaccurate. That is my only reservation. Of course, IRC has its own downsides. Whatever is decided, I welcome the idea of organizing. I too am very concerned about knowing how to map, and I see this as a positive development. Thanks to everyone for getting motivated about this. On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: Surely we're missing plenty of people by only having a discussion on the mailing list? SoTM.US proved to me that there are orders of magnitude more people interested in OSM in the US than are signed up for talk-us. The difference is that the people who care enough to talk about it and form a consensus between those on talk-us and maybe even a phone call or two are the ones that will actually make the changes to the wiki and renderers. It's not that there's one consensus it's whoever gets a consensus faster and (most importantly) implements it. You're getting a consensus of those who can get past the higher barrier to entry. It's relatively easy to join a mailing list. It's also relatively easy to use IRC, though you have to be free at the proper time. It's a bit harder to participate in a phone conversation - again you can't have anything else scheduled then, and you need either a microphone or a willingness to pay for a long-distance call, plus the ability to understand various accents (or half the meeting will be can you please repeat that? can you speak more clearly?). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Highway Tagging Consensus to Improve OSM (and address some of 41 latitude's concerns)
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote: * Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com [2010-10-15 14:55 -0500]: Surely we're missing plenty of people by only having a discussion on the mailing list? I had planned on mentioning this on talk@ and the US forums to try to get more people contributing. I haven't done that yet because I've mostly been busy working, and I don't want to seem to spammy. If you want to mention among other places frequented by US mappers, feel free, but I'd like to get most contributions coming back to this list. On a kind of related note, can anyone report how effective the Project of the Week initiative is? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Project_of_the_week I can find the wiki page, obviously, but a quick search does not indicate if anyone in the community has anecdotes or data following how many users get involved on a project and what is accomplished. I ask because it would be cool to know how easy it will be to harness the real US enthusiasts and see what their dedication is over time. That way, I guess we could find a base of people in the US to capture with this project. If I missed a good page with the data I inquire about, please accept apologies for my ignorance. I'm interested in getting as broad a consensus on this issues as possible, so I'd prefer not to have a single person dominating the discussion. Ditto. -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- This sentence no verb. --- -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Project of the Week / Month
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 12:03 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Al Haraka alhar...@gmail.com wrote: On a kind of related note, can anyone report how effective the Project of the Week initiative is? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Project_of_the_week Funny you should ask. Trackability isn't the main goal for PotW, but is a point of interest for Project of the Month. The first PotM is in progress now. We'll have graphs showing contributions. For example: http://weait.com/osmwaterpt-month.png http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Project_of_the_week/2010/Sep_29 First off, thanks for appropriately changing the thread subject line. This is very cool, and I am glad you responded, Richard! The current Project of the Week (Use Potlatch2 and give feedback) has ancedotal indications of success; The Potlatch2 developers say they are getting more feedback. \o/ Yay! I would hope so. I just tried it myself just because of that. I will try to get more involved in both weekly and monthly projects from now on. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Project_of_the_week/2010/Oct_13 I think I'm pretty stern on judging the success of PotW and PotM. For improvement, I'd like to see more participation on all levels; - I'd like to see more folks submitting complete projects ready for publishing. - I'd like to see more folks adding PotW/M to their regular editing. - I'd like to see more discussion and suggestions on the proposals page. But I know that I can't always have everything that I'd like. ;-) I think these are all great ideas. For the benefit of the list, what do you see as a complete project? I will try to add proposals if I can think of some, and work on the obvious points like participating. Haha. As the Stones said, if you try sometimes . . . Things I like about PotW/M: - I think it is fantastic that some PotW/M get translated into other languages. - It's great that suggestions from the community lead to Project of the Month. And it's nice that you are asking. Thanks. :-) ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Anonymous edits on OpenStreetMap through Tor
But hiding your real IP from the server is only one part of tor. The other is encrypting and obscuring the destination of all traffic so that your ISP/government/etc can't listen in. This is what makes it useful for people in places like Iran and China. They don't care about hiding their IP from twitter. They care about getting around the censorship and surveillance put in place by the government. It is sad how often people get this wrong. Tor only encrypts traffic between endpoints *within* the network created. As soon as it leaves the endpoint, which it inevitably does, it is just like normal traffic. Tor used to be much louder about their we do not encrypt, only obfuscate IP address vibe a while back, but now the footnotes seem much more muted.[1] It is well-known that people operate exit nodes for less than altruistic reasons, for research and otherwise. [2] I do not have a link on me right now, but there has been a lot of paranoia regarding intel agencies of different nations running exit nodes for snooping on traffic. I will be honest and call it that because I have never seen any evidence. I think this is important distinction to make, and Tor developers have always been honest that Tor is a false sense of security *when trusted unto itself as your only tool*. Please read the links and be informed. Since this list has lots of subscribers, some might not read the fine print of such assertions. If I am wrong, please feel free to correct me. Best, _AJS [1] http://www.torproject.org/download.html.en#Warning [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_(anonymity_network)#Weaknesses ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] If you've missed this ...
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 2:59 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: http://opengeodata.org/osm-founder-steve-coast-leaves-cloudmade I am not convinced it is real until Fake Steve C. says so. All jokes aside, best of luck to him. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Can US OSM help with license upgrade? (was: Re: License Upgrade - Stage Two Begins)
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:27 AM, Dave Hansen d...@sr71.net wrote: On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 10:23 -0400, Nakor wrote: My only issue is the first paragraph of the Contributor Terms. I do not have **explicit** permission from the various US government entities and do not feel comfortable accepting those terms. One of the mission of the US OSM could be to get explicit permission from those federal/state/local government entities that we derived data from. Or get a lawyer to tell you whether or not the license terms under which the various entities provided the data impact the relicensing. Is it particularly clear that OSMF, if I correctly understand it to be the umbrella organization, actually has their own attorneys? I am under the impression they volunteer in a very limited basis, and it in unclear if they see themselves as OSM counsel, and not just working on the ODBL (I imagine the latter). These are things that need clearing up, and will dictate what kind of resources we have and what we would need in the future. -- Dave ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Can US OSM help with license upgrade? (was: Re: License Upgrade - Stage Two Begins)
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Apollinaris Schoell ascho...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 7:23 AM, Nakor nakor@gmail.com wrote: Most of my contributions even though based on my GPS tracks are derived work of some US governement data (USGS and NAIP imageries) and in a lesser extent Ohio through OSIP. I also imported some NHS, NPS and TIGER datasets. I truly do not want all that work to be lost and I trust the LWG when they say that ODBL is going to be more protective than CC-BY-SA for the project. My only issue is the first paragraph of the Contributor Terms. I do not have **explicit** permission from the various US government entities and do not feel comfortable accepting those terms. US government data is public domain. you can do whatever you like to do with it. All big ones from Garmin, Google ... you name it use this data. there is absolute no need to get explicit permission for individuals. It is the law and what can be more explicit than that. As an example county of Santa Clara even lost the law suit a couple of years ago when they tried to protect and sell their data for more than redistribution costs. I do not know if you are a lawyer, or even one with sitting on the bar in any jurisdiction in the United States. That being said, neither am I. The Santa Clara case, the similar one in Schenectady, NY, and dozens of others are good examples of what you mean. But still, blanket generalizations from people without legal credentials, *me* included, will not prevent us from getting sued or into legal trouble or building something that holds water so we can prevent others from screwing us/abusing all the hard work we do. Also, notice the few attorneys involved with OSM (SteveC mentioned them) have the scruples to not discuss it with lots of us, as it will not help and people construing their emails on these lists as bona fide legal advice gets them in trouble. Hence, they have been very silent the entire time despite people demanding answers on licensing as of late. That is not an accident. This is why I asked about their capacity as attorneys earlier. I do not mean to be rude or start a flame, but what legal resources are necessary whether or not we like to think all USG data is PD, and we can do whatever we want with it. One of the mission of the US OSM could be to get explicit permission from those federal/state/local government entities that we derived data from. Thanks in advance, N. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- Alexander J. Stein Cell: (201) 412-9479 Email: alhar...@gmail.com Skype: alexander.j.stein AIM: elduderino6886 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] BDFL Moderation
Steve, On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 2:26 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: I plan only to moderate people (for 24 hours) after taking a poll of key people including Andy Allan, Matt Amos, Katie Filbert, Tom Hughes, Emilie Laffray, Frederik Ramm, Ivan Sanchez, Grant Slater and Richard Weait. If you think more than these would be good then let me know. Any moderation will be announced to those people I just mentioned, and not publicly. Why not publicly? On balance, it seems better to not call out individuals publicly which might only make things worse and make them feel more upset, which is not the purpose of a 'cooling off' period. Any one of those people I announce it to could announce it publicly if they want to. I am happy to listen to a different panel, if one constitutes itself. If I have full confidence in said panel, I'll consider handing over the power and stepping back. A question in the interest of transparency: will you be publicly *documenting* when a person is locked out for a period? I completely understand not calling the person out publicly on the list, but will you keep a record on the wiki or something (I am not so picky on the actual form of documentation) of who in this group voted on locking out a particular user and the specific reason? I know, I know, that is more s*** people need to do, and really do not want to. I ask because I see a need to keep this very transparent to not feed into a user's impression that they are being bounced for thinking differently, not misbehaving (whether or not I agree, I would like to know why). That is all. Regards, _AJS ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-dev] GSoC'10
Tom, Sounding impressive is not a valid reason to consider something a good idea... Basically he's suggesting replacing our current freeform tagging with some complicated system of rules and ontologies. But being rude and oversimplifying is valid? As already mentioned, it does not have to be hierarchical and rigid, or even what you are worried about: mandatory. It's completely not the osm way and isn't going to fly. I have not been working on OSM long, but I am sick of hearing this already from people. What you mean is below. It's completely not the osm way *as I interpret it* and isn't going to fly *as long as I am around*. There, fixed it for you. The beauty of OSM and similar open data projects, as I interpret it, is that there is wonderfully large dataset that allows people to do almost whatever they want. Not to mention that we are only talking about organizing the documenting of it, and learn about the inherent ontological structure. Some people might find that as valuable, if not more, than the maps. Does that mean you should just kick us out right now unless we agree to the mysteriously vague [my|OSM] way? Should we all agree to certain OSM non-principles that we will not enforce or consider as members of the group? I am just curious what this sentence is going to mean in the future, because isn't going to fly sounds slightly dictatorial in my mind. I could be wrong. I know this sounds like an opening to a flamewar. If I have gone too far, I am sorry. This is not a personal attack, but I think such talk is not in the spirit of the OSM way people like to toss around and defend. I think a little more consideration than we have never done it that way before, so we won't be in the future is warranted. Best, _AJS ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-ht] PAHO Medical Facilities
Kate, I am not sure if I am following properly, but I think the issue here will be proper rendering (again, depending on what server and how selective the renderer; there are many Haiti specific side projects pulling from OSM as I understand and rendering in different ways to highlight different, I hate to say, POI's). I understood Jean-Guilhem's concern to be that the data will be uploaded, but not readily visible. Am I mistaken here? Best, _AJS On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com wrote: Jean-Guilhem, I'm not sure which makes more sense to people. The amenity= sounds weird to me but I'm up for suggestions. I was just thinking that maybe there are health facilities that don't fit with the amenity tag so it would make more sense to do something else. Anyone else have any thoughts? Kate On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Jean-Guilhem Cailton j...@arkemie.com wrote: Kate, thanks. But there is no amenity=... anymore ? Only health_facility_type=dispensary ? (I thought it would be amenity=dispensary.) Best regards, Jean-Guilhem Kate Chapman a écrit : Karl: Your suggestions make sense. I changed to health_facility:organisation and source:health_facility. Jean-Guilhem: you are right I made a dispensary tag instead. Thank you. I apologize for not putting this in the bulk import area of the wiki it did not occur to me it was a bulk import because the data really needs to be gone through by hand. Though since it technically is an import it should be noted somewhere. Thanks everyone for your suggestions, if anyone wants edit capability for the github repo let me know and I can do that. -Kate On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 6:05 AM, Karl Guggisberg karl.guggisb...@guggis.ch wrote: Hi, two questions regarding tagging in the current OSM files (http://github.com/wonderchook/PAHO_to_OSM): * could we replace the currently used organisation tag with operator? Quote from the OSM Map Features list: The operator tag can be used to name a company or corporation who's responsible for a certain object or who operates it. Alternatively, could we replace organisation with health_facility:organisation * could we replace source with source:health_facility? OSM objects in Haiti now are based on different sources. We have tmaintain attributions for image sources, public maps, and other datasets (Sahana). Regards Karl Am 03.02.2010 08:07, schrieb Kate Chapman: Hi All, I converted the PAHO medical facilities data into OSM format. http://github.com/wonderchook/PAHO_to_OSM. I also included the rules file. If anyone needs files in another format or anything let me know. I chunked it up into 26 files so people could work on it. The tags associated with each facility are ones that are important to WHO/PAHO. We want to make sure we include data that is going to be important to these organizations. They are willing to contribute data back to us from the ground, but we need to include information that relates to humanitarian efforts. In my experience working with this data there have been many circumstances where the OSM positional accuracy is better, something to keep in mind when resolving the discrepancies between the two datasets. The most important information is the health_facility:paho_id that is the universal ID for medical facilities in Haiti and will allow OSM data to interact more easily with other systems. This is our first attempt at using the Humanitarian OSM tags in the wild: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Tags We made every attempt to continue to use already existing tags. The wiki might need to be cleaned up a bit to match what is in the .osm files. To summarize: 1. We want OSM to be the source of this type of data 2. In order to be the source we need to include info of importance to NGOs 3. Yes the Humanitarian Tags are a draft but we need to start somewhere. 4. If there is something drastically wrong let me know and we'll figure out how to fix it. I saw emails flying by regarding workflow I'm not sure the best way to figure out who is working on what. Thanks for all your assistance and hardwork. Kate Chapman User:wonderchook ___ Talk-ht mailing list Talk-ht@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ht ___ Talk-ht mailing list Talk-ht@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ht ___ Talk-ht mailing list Talk-ht@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ht ___ Talk-ht mailing list Talk-ht@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ht -- Alexander J. Stein Cell: (201) 412-9479 Email: alhar...@gmail.com Skype: alexander.j.stein AIM: elduderino6886
Re: [Talk-ht] PAHO Medical Facilities
Kate, I totally agree and understand about tagging dispensary, either means not rendering. I thought the implication here was that, in other cases, we consider fudging the data a little bit for rendering. I was wondering this when I found medical facilites called dispensaries prior with US Defense mapping data. I feel like an idiot for not having asked sooner, because I was curious where the balance was. Then again, I heavily agree with the outcry from the most hardcore developers and specialists on the list, that the data integrity is important, and specialty renderers can be developed and put online later if need be. Then again, I get the feeling I misunderstood a taxonomy discussion for a (more or less, not sure in this case) practical one. Best, _AJS On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com wrote: AJ, Ah I see your point. I think though that amenity=dispensary versus health_facility_type=dispensary neither would be rendered until someone put in support anyway. There isn't a symbol for amenity=dispensary right now either. Unless I'm misunderstanding the rendering process. -Kate On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:48 PM, Al Haraka alhar...@gmail.com wrote: Kate, I am not sure if I am following properly, but I think the issue here will be proper rendering (again, depending on what server and how selective the renderer; there are many Haiti specific side projects pulling from OSM as I understand and rendering in different ways to highlight different, I hate to say, POI's). I understood Jean-Guilhem's concern to be that the data will be uploaded, but not readily visible. Am I mistaken here? Best, _AJS -- Alexander J. Stein Cell: (201) 412-9479 Email: alhar...@gmail.com Skype: alexander.j.stein AIM: elduderino6886 ___ Talk-ht mailing list Talk-ht@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ht
[OSM-talk] Jacmel Haiti, DigitalGlobe Imagery, and Road Alignment
All, I understand we are all busy, but I have some Haiti questions. The area around Jacmel in the south appears to be very messy at the moment, and I am only focusing on roads and basic infrastructure. The roads seem very far off, and at times some do not even seem to point to an artifact I can see in the imagery. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.22381lon=-72.52094zoom=16layers=B000FTF I have tried cleaning it up using the DigitalGlobe imagery, which I have assumed to be the best. Am I wrong here? What are other people using and what are the current recommendations? Am I doing a bad job or wasting my time aligning the roads if they are this far off? I realize my use of DG may bias me, and I have not taken the time to compare. That being said, I heard it was the most recent and expansive. Sorry for the newbishness here. I just want to help, and I heard Jacmel and all points south will be needed soon. Regards, _AJS -- Alexander J. Stein Cell: (201) 412-9479 Email: alhar...@gmail.com Skype: alexander.j.stein AIM: elduderino6886 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Jacmel Haiti, DigitalGlobe Imagery, and Road Alignment
Jeffery, Thanks for your quick reply. I have been checking the wiki periodically for info on new imagery assets and also noticed some mention of it in the IRC forum mentioned there. Problem is that I assume new DG data will be updated with the same alias in the Potlatch editor (JOSM gives me a headache since I am so amateur and I just want to get stuff done right now). So, despite hearing it was/is being updated, I am not sure what I am looking at from DG (GeoEye is a good counterexample, where there is a distinction between imagery from before and after 13 January in the dropdown box where you can select overlays). So, with that in mind, I will hold off for a bit until more becomes clear. I heard that the ERDAS imagery may be up and running? I will check with that later. Again, thanks for the info. I wanted to work on street names based on data we got from other sources, but the roads are so convoluted I could not cross-reference as easily as I had hoped. Best, _AJS On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote: On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 1:24 PM, Al Haraka alhar...@gmail.com wrote: I understand we are all busy, but I have some Haiti questions. The area around Jacmel in the south appears to be very messy at the moment, and I am only focusing on roads and basic infrastructure. The roads seem very far off, and at times some do not even seem to point to an artifact I can see in the imagery. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=18.22381lon=-72.52094zoom=16layers=B000FTF I have tried cleaning it up using the DigitalGlobe imagery, which I have assumed to be the best. Am I wrong here? What are other people using and what are the current recommendations? Am I doing a bad job or wasting my time aligning the roads if they are this far off? I realize my use of DG may bias me, and I have not taken the time to compare. That being said, I heard it was the most recent and expansive. Right now there are two sets of images that cover Jacmel, the DigitalGlobe data from last week and the JAXA/ALOS satellite imagery. As far as I know, most of or all of the satellite imagery we have access to now isn't very well georeferenced so you may need to adjust the image to get a rough fit before doing any corrections and/or traces. You can see what we know about by checking out the following relation: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?relation=388801 and this Wiki page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Haiti/Imagery_and_data_sources There is some new data from both Digital Globe and GeoEye being imported so check the wiki page for updates. -- Jeff Ollie -- Alexander J. Stein Cell: (201) 412-9479 Email: alhar...@gmail.com Skype: alexander.j.stein AIM: elduderino6886 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] US Chapter Mission Statement
All, My first instinct (although it might not be the best one) is to follow previous practice from other chapters. So I just quickly looked it up on the wiki, leading me to the Australian chapter's draft mission statement. It appears they do not mention country of residency as a criterion (after a quick scan), and membership is handled on a case by case basis anyway. I think that means that necessary exceptions (if they do end up manifesting themselves) do not cause a bureaucratic hassle. 1. Membership qualifications - A person is qualified to be a member of the association if, but only if: 1. the person is a person referred to in section 15 16(1) (a), (b) or (c) of the Act and has not ceased to be a member of the association at any time after incorporation of the association under the Act, or 2. the person is a natural person: 1. who has been nominated for membership of the association as provided by rule 3 4, and 2. who has been approved for membership of the association by the committee of the association. 3. has complied with rule 3 and disclosed any conflicts of interest. 2. Conflict of Interest 3. You must make the association aware of any potential conflicts of interest by declaring if: 1. they are employed by, 2. contracted to, or 3. an immediate family member of a person employed or contracted with a commercial mapping organisation 4. If your, or your immediate family members, circumstance changes that it would conflict with (1) 5. Being employed or contracted to a mapping entity doesn't prevent a person from being a member or becoming a member but it must be disclosed to reduce or prevent conflict of interest problems. 6. Failure to disclose may lead to sanctions of your membership or expulsion as provided by rule 12 https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AZf0jIYShBc0ZGNicXR6OXZfMGdoOGsycGZipli=1 Sorry for the rough copy and paste job. Do any of the other members of the list have contacts with other local chapters elsewhere that may have encountered this issue? The only other drafts I found after a quick search were for Belgium and Japan. My language skills do not help me there. Best, _AJS On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com wrote: Frederik, That makes sense to me. I just wasn't sure if there were issues we had not though about. Americans abroad for example. Would we discourage them from becoming members of a U.S. chapter? Though I agree that those becoming members of multiple chapters could complicate internal processes. So maybe the answer is to state somewhere that an individual can only be a member of one chapter at a time. Thanks, Kate I have organisational knowledge of two other international non-profits with national chapters. Both do not encourage you to become a member of two national chapters at the same time; among other thigs this could double your theoretical weight in certain internal decision making processes. Having members from abroad is certainly always a bit of a challenge for an organisation (different address format; more expensive postage rates; other ways to make payments; other requirements for tax-exempt dontaions; etc.etc.). I think that things would be easier for everyone if people, generally, became a member of the OSM organisation in their respective country of residence, rather than becoming members in all OSM organisations in countries they want to map in! Just my 2¢ though. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- Alexander J. Stein Cell: (201) 412-9479 Email: alhar...@gmail.com Skype: alexander.j.stein AIM: elduderino6886 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
