Re: [Talk-GB] Pigging potlach ...
On 11 Jan 2012 22:08, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: Lester Caine wrote: I know what areas of data I am working on. OK Just crashed it again ... but having done at least a couple of hours work and saved MOST of it. So to log current state ... Flash area just went grey Bottom line has Transfering data from ecn.t0.tiles.virtualearth.net... Processors are quiet RAM at 35% Swap 0% Trying to close tab get This page is asking you to confirm that you want to leave - data you have entered may not be saved and this leaves a track in the grey area. Do you have multiple browser tabs open? There's a horrible flash bug on at least 64 bit Linux that will happily freeze any and all flash instances within your browser. The culprit is usually some stupid video advert in a tab you're not even using. It seems to get more likely the more flash is running. Symptoms are all your flash areas going grey and unresponsive. Only mitigation I found is use a separate browser for editing. If your normal browser is Firefox, just fire up chrome for potlatch only to stop the interference. I was actually using this in a non-potlatch context: trying to watch f1 practice on iPlayer at the same time as surfing news sites. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Suggestion for an Unconference
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 03:13:27 -0800 (PST) Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: [follow-ups to legal-talk please] David Murn wrote: I have no interest in the legal detail of the licence, only interested in talking about the ramifications of the licence on our map data, no matter how many times people try to derail this important issue to a legal mailing list. It is nothing to do with derailing. The tagging@ list is there for discussions of how tagging impacts on our map data. No-one is saying that tagging isn't important: it's just a big subject that some people have chosen not to be interested in. The legal-talk@ list is there for discussions of how legal matters impact on our map data. No-one is saying that legal matters aren't important: they're just a big subject that some people have chosen not to be interested in. Please have some respect for your fellow mappers, and let _them_ choose what they're interested in by subscribing to the right list; don't try and tell them what they should be interested in by posting everything to talk@ regardless. cheers Richard You forgot to say that talk is for matters that mappers wish to discuss with the whole community. Perhaps you could respect this and stop hiding stuff which is important on legal-talk where there are fewer subscribers than on talk. Does anyone know the recipe for Nando's peri-peri sauce? I was walking past Nando's earlier and it smelled awesome. But it's like £10 or something so I was wondering if it's possible to make the sauce at home and grill a normal chicken? Thanks! ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] NaPTAN station codes
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 12:32 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: On 26/10/2010 10:04, Dave Stubbs wrote: On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Andy Mabbetta...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: On 25 October 2010 12:47, Ed Avise...@waniasset.com wrote: Shaun McDonaldsh...@... writes: I have been adding the three letter short code as the ref tag when I have been editing around stations. e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/9779990 OK so 'ref' is the de facto convention for this three-letter code. Wouldn't it be better to have a unique key? If not, why not? (Genuine question; I'm relatively new to this.) The contents of the ref tag is generally the publicly used reference code for an object. For roads that'd be M1 or A303 etc. For stations it'd be the three letter code that's in all the timetables and gets printed on online booking receipts etc. There's no harm in using ref for this as it doesn't really conflict with anything else and it's what the key is for. To do a special key would be a lot like doing a special key for station_name -- there's little point and it just makes it harder for everyone to remember what the keys are :-) I disagree. It should be 'station_code' which is de facto, as used on Wikipedia even on National Rail Enquiries. Using that unique descriptive key clarifies what it is your trying to describe makes it *easier* for everyone to remember.. Sorry, yes, I should have been more precise about why it's easier to remember. Obviously there's nothing hard to remember about the tag station_code, I was more thinking of the sheer number of tags that get created if we were to follow this method. Instead we tend much more towards key reuse which lowers the total number of keys for ancillary data and hopefully makes the learning process more tractable. The meta discussion over whether reusing ref or using station_code is more memorable, is, I'm sure you'll agree, a rather pointless discussion :-) Given the number of editors these days supporting presets, most users will hopefully be insulated from this. The field can even be aliased Three Letter Station Code if we make localised presets files for Potlatch2/JOSM. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] NaPTAN station codes
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: On 25 October 2010 12:47, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: Shaun McDonald sh...@... writes: I have been adding the three letter short code as the ref tag when I have been editing around stations. e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/9779990 OK so 'ref' is the de facto convention for this three-letter code. Wouldn't it be better to have a unique key? If not, why not? (Genuine question; I'm relatively new to this.) The contents of the ref tag is generally the publicly used reference code for an object. For roads that'd be M1 or A303 etc. For stations it'd be the three letter code that's in all the timetables and gets printed on online booking receipts etc. There's no harm in using ref for this as it doesn't really conflict with anything else and it's what the key is for. To do a special key would be a lot like doing a special key for station_name -- there's little point and it just makes it harder for everyone to remember what the keys are :-) The main reason you would do a special key is if there where two distinct references of equal prominence and it wasn't appropriate to use loc_ref (local), int_ref (international) etc. In this case the naptan code should use it's own key because nobody (in the general public at least) actually uses them, leaving the ref key open for the common 3 letter code. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Code of Conduct: civil discussion, lists etc.
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 4:02 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 17 October 2010 00:58, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: I wish i had a pony. This is why things end up in a endless debate, people pose serious questions and you either can't be bothered, or won't respond properly so the debate can move forward. I, and probably a lot of others, would rather a whole lot of people stopped posting to these lists. If someone posts a question or discussion point to the list we don't want to see a dozen trolls and a flame war attached. It happens. Without fail. Every single post. The people trolling, you know who you are. The people getting personal, you know who you are. Please, please stop it while there are still one or two people worth talking to left subscribed to the list. Oh, and ending this pointless little back and forth would be a good start. So +1 to Code of Conduct, although I think it's too late because too many people have already made the easiest filter configuration possible and unsubscribed. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How does one get the default cyclemap rendering amended?
Hi, You can put in requests or bug reports through trac. Details are on the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenCycleMap I don't believe anything is done, or planned to be done, with bicycle=designated at the moment. Dave On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 1:58 PM, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote: If I look at the default map displayed on the web site then select base layer cycle map I get nice blue lines on roads with cycle lanes, and cycle paths which is perfect. However in Ontario we have paved shoulders which are tagged shoulder:access:bicycle=yes, together with shoulder:surface=paved as per the wiki. It would be nice if these could be rendered on the default cycle map in some way perhaps a dotted blue line? I'm not certain if roads that are signed bicycle=designated are rendered in a special way or not. I have a couple locally but sometimes it takes a bit of time before the rendered tiles reflect the map. Thoughts please. Many thanks Cheerio John ___ 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] Waze using OSM Data
This is a direct consequence of OSM not being PD ! From our Homepage: The project (OSM) was started because most maps you think of as free actually have legal or technical restrictions on their use, holding back people from using them in creative, productive, or unexpected ways. This is typically a situation where be bite our own tail. A new innovative, creative and unexpected application is forced to withdraw much more data because our license forced them too. because we put “legal restrictions on their use” Do you really expect that a new License (regardless it's type) will create no more clashes like this ? Shouldn’t we remove this pretentious headline from our homepage as long as we do restrict other users ? OSM: go to shame ourselves. Yes, to short-cut this can you please go Google BSD GPL, then go read the infinite number of talk, legal-talk, legal-general etc threads on the merits/problems of PD vs Share-Alike before starting yet another. And follow ups on this topic (which I'll assume is OSM should be PD) to legal-general please. Thanks, Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] iPad app
On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Nick Black nickbla...@gmail.com wrote: I would love to have an iPad app to map with. I've actually just come back from a Mapzen POI Collector mapping trip around a town that could have really used an iPad to add some roads and other features. But from CloudMade (or Mapquest's) perspective its tough to justify the cost of developing an iPad app. Mapzen POI Collector only has 7k downloads and a few hundred users each month - so the market size for iPhone apps like this is limited. Sure, make the UX 10x better and there could be thousands of users a month, but its still a limited number of contributos for the effort put in. Compare that to the 2.5M Foursquare users or the 60M Farmville (10% of the total number of Facebook users) users and the number is tiny. Then consider that there are something like 11M iPhones and only 3M iPads in the US with even lower iPad penetration in other places, and the market is even more limited. A possible answer is HTML5 apps - that's what we're looking into at CloudMade at the moment. An HTML5 POI collector, for example would let users on iPhone, Android and iPad and other tablets join in the party. (There are now 8M android phones in the US) It could even be packaged into an app on app stores to make it discoverable. The apps should be focused on doing one or two things well. Does the world need another fully featured editor? IMO, no. It needs a suite of tools that each make it deadly simple to do a couple of things. So the feature set is going to get even more limited ;-) The next problem though is the terrible conversion rates that we see from download to active mapper (see http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2010-August/052476.html). This is caused partially by some poor design decision on our part at CloudMade, but primarily by the constraints of the current OAuth system as discussed in the thread I referenced. Unless we fix the problems with the OAuth sign-in / sign-up process the number of new mappers and tools like this could attract will be severely limited. Like I said last time - I'm keen to find a solution to this problem :-) My suggestion to this problem is fairly simple: stop trying to make map editors :-) I've tried mapping on my Android phone, and it sucks. This isn't a fault of the editor as such, the screen is small, I can't easily get stuff precise, it's far too easy to break existing stuff, and it's really slow compared to using a mouse and a decent sized screen. On the other hand my phone has a GPS, a camera, an audio recorder, a video recorder, a way to sketch diagrams, and a way to enter text it's all my mapping tools in one handy gadget. Maybe what the millions of people contributing to foursquare are after is a way to just take a few photos, stick them roughly on a map, and stick on a note that the road is oneway in the other direction to what we have it. ie: they probably don't want to learn how to map, or figure out why the street happens to be in 3 pieces and that reversing the oneway means altering the cycle route in the opposite direction -- all of which an editor could make easier, but all of which would make me give up if I was just having a play. Such an app wouldn't need a user account, OAuth, or any other barriers. A nice website to allow downloading the contribution for adding to OSM and integration with an editor or two might encourage some of those people to join us properly. I think we'd be much better off with a bunch of tools designed purely to collect data. Or at least, I'd like this for my phone if anyone gets round to writing it please! None of which is talking about the iPad (sorry Steve), which as it has a bigger screen might make for a fairly nice clipboard replacement. I doubt I'd go mapping with one though because it's still quite heavy. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] RFC: what are empty nodes and how should we use them?
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 7:48 AM, Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl wrote: On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 08:19:42 +0200, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Hi, Jonas Stein wrote: In the IRC channel i was told, that there are users who paint empty nodes in the map to mark things like road is not mapped, but continues here I do this occasionally, and I'm sure I haven't made this up but got the practice from someone/somewhere else - when a way is drawn and you know it goes on but haven't mapped it, you put three dots, just as you do in written language: --- . . . I'm not religious about it but I think it is pretty elegant because it does not require language to explain it - or at least that's what I thought until I heard from several people that they delete empty nodes on sight without further thought. It's the first that I heard of this strategy and I'm not sure if I would recognize it. I certainly haven't in the past. It does raise a question: why not just map a way over it and tag it with some FIXME? If I map a new area and make photo's and see that there is a road somewhere that I didn't go, I map the road as far as I can see it and. I've no idea where I first came across it, but I have also used it as far back as 2006. We didn't have any aerial imagery to trace, so if nobody had walked down that way with a GPS you had no idea where it was going, but you might have a name or something from the end, so you put in a small stub road and dot dot dot. There also wasn't much of a map viewer, or styled editing, so three dots was a lot more obvious when editing than a tag. In the world of validators, slippy maps, JOSM post mappaint, aerial imagery and masses of POI/addresses it makes less sense, and is less visually obvious. But I still like it :-) Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] CC-BY-SA derived ODbL data
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Jukka Rahkonen jukka.rahko...@latuviitta.fi wrote: Richard gave me an idea for mixing the stew. Let's say that a user who stays with CC-BY-SA has drawn crossing streets and buildings around the corner. Then another user who is willing to go with ODbL locates some POIs by looking at the ready OSM map. Sooner or later the streets and buildings will disappear from the OSM-ODbL but what will happen to the POIs? I suppose there are folks who say that also these POIs should be deleted from (or not transferred to) the OSM-ODbL database because they are derived from the CC-BY-SA only data. How strict are we going to be with these cases? If we are going to be strict, how can we sort them out? Not that strict. If we were that strict you'd have to figure out how close something had to be before it became derived... 2m, 10m, 50m, 500m? I don't know. Anyway from [1]: OSMF counsel does not believe that CC-BY-SA data within the database is viral in this regard. The original data will have to be removed, plus any later versions of the same element, but it is not necessary to remove nearby or adjoining elements. Any follow ups to legal-talk please as that is the place for this kind of discussion. Thanks, Dave [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Closed_Issues#Features_touched_by_multiple_contributors.2C_not_all_of_whom_sign_up_to_new_terms ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] CC-BY-SA derived ODbL data
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Jukka Rahkonen jukka.rahko...@latuviitta.fi wrote: Richard gave me an idea for mixing the stew. Let's say that a user who stays with CC-BY-SA has drawn crossing streets and buildings around the corner. Then another user who is willing to go with ODbL locates some POIs by looking at the ready OSM map. Sooner or later the streets and buildings will disappear from the OSM-ODbL but what will happen to the POIs? I suppose there are folks who say that also these POIs should be deleted from (or not transferred to) the OSM-ODbL database because they are derived from the CC-BY-SA only data. How strict are we going to be with these cases? If we are going to be strict, how can we sort them out? Not that strict. If we were that strict you'd have to figure out how close something had to be before it became derived... 2m, 10m, 50m, 500m? I don't know. Anyway from [1]: OSMF counsel does not believe that CC-BY-SA data within the database is viral in this regard. The original data will have to be removed, plus any later versions of the same element, but it is not necessary to remove nearby or adjoining elements. Any follow ups to legal-talk please as that is the place for this kind of discussion. Thanks, Dave [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Closed_Issues#Features_touched_by_multiple_contributors.2C_not_all_of_whom_sign_up_to_new_terms ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Change - moving forward
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:24 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 10 August 2010 23:04, Mike Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote: If you support the share-alike concept, I urge you to accept the new Contributor Terms which provides for a coherent Attribution, Share-Alike license written especially for databases. I support BY-SA (and probably ODBL) but I don't support the contributor terms, can I agree to the ODBL without agreeing to the new CTs? From reading that e-mail the answer is no, at at this time. I suggest you fit into the wait and see category above. Thanks, Dave ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wanted - spare CC-BY-SA account
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:49 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 10 August 2010 23:44, Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de wrote: In case i dont care and like PD more than CC-BY-SA or even worse the ODbl i would be more than happy to continue with CC-BY-SA and accept it to fail in court, basically putting the OSM Data into PD ... I never really got that, pro-PD people are pro-ODBL because copyright may not be enough to cover the database... ... and aren't immoral arseholes who like to trample over other's intent and damn well know the project is highly unlikely to ever end up PD so would rather be on a level playing field by having a license that works for everybody, arseholes or not. Hope that makes it clearer :-) Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Enough is enough: disinfecting OSM from poisonous people
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: SteveC-2 wrote: One quote from the talk in particular comes to mind: it's a technique that poisonous people can use to derail a consensus-based community from actually achieving consensus. You have this noisy minority make a lot of noise and people look and say 'oh wow there is no agreement on this' and if you look carefull the 'no agreement' comes from one person while seven or eight people actually agree While others are afraid to contribute to the discussion because of the heat. I think the Australians have a good point about the contributor terms and loss of data, but I'm not going to get involved and risk being labeled a poisonous person for agreeing with them. It's pretty clear that anyone who won't agree to the new license/contributor terms is poisonous in at least one sense: their refusal is poisoning the data and making it necessary to cut out anything they've touched. Or perhaps they simply have weak immune systems, and the license change process is the poison that kills their contributions. Personally I think this idea of labeling people as poisonous is itself poisonous, and anyone who agrees with it is at least slightly poisonous. That makes you at least partially slightly poisonous as I'm sure you're aware :-) Seriously though, there are limits here. There's not just people having disagreements, there's vast amounts of deliberate trolling, insane quantities of thread hijacking to make points that have been made 200 times before, and a good dollop of pissing off just about anybody who is silly enough to subscribe to osm-talk these days. Most of us have just left it to rot, which is also a shame because that's no good for new people. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Suggestion to add SA clause to CT section 3, describing free and open license
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 10:05 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 20 July 2010 18:59, Peteris Krisjanis pec...@gmail.com wrote: Frederik, again you mix it all up. I said i'm fine with ODBL (and so far everyone who rants about CT says nothing bad about ODBL). I truely respect huge work putted into it. What I don't like is that CT section 3 practically strips all this good work away, with having vague definition of new and open license. If this can be clarified with SA and Attribution clauses, then everything is very very ok. I'm starting to wonder if this is intentional misdirection to keep confusing the issue of a relicensing with whole sale update of contributor terms. I'm starting to wonder if this whole mailing list is part of an extraterrestrial plan to take over the world. If you think about it carefully the only reason anyone would go over the same exact point 280 times a day is if they were under some form of mind control. Of course I may be getting the wrong end of the stick. It's entirely possible to aliens have put a bunch of people under mind control, and those people in a desperate bid to free themselves have gone into overdrive mode in an attempt to overload the alien probes. In which case, given the advanced state of ET technology, it's quite possible this thread, and others like it, will need to go on forever. At least it's giving the rest of us fair warning of the coming apocalypse though. And at least I'm not sharing batty ideas with the entire planet for no apparent constructive reason. Oh... shit. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Postcodes to Shapefile
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 1:24 PM, Kev js1982 o...@kevswindells.eu wrote: On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Kev js1982 o...@kevswindells.eu wrote: I am currently trying to create a series of shapefiles from postcodes (using OS Open Geo Data) using the code from Random Junk (http://random.dev.openstreetmap.org/postcodes/#) running on Ubuntu 9.10 but I can't get it working. lots of blah blah about what I did... And now to work out why I'm getting Traceback (most recent call last): File makeShapeColoured.py, line 349, in module result = voronoi.computeVoronoiDiagram(pts) File /home/kev/osm/voronoi.py, line 746, in computeVoronoiDiagram voronoi(siteList,context) File /home/kev/osm/voronoi.py, line 206, in voronoi edge = Edge.bisect(bot,newsite) File /home/kev/osm/voronoi.py, line 404, in bisect newedge.a = dx/dy ZeroDivisionError: float division These are caused by more than one postcode for the same point -- you'll need to preprocess the input files to remove any duplicates coordinates. There's quite a lot of apparent PO boxes and other odd postcodes in the OS data which result in duplicate points. Also note that it'll use about 6GBs of RAM to run for the complete OS dataset of 1.6 million points. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OS StreetView accuracy: caution!
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Kevin Peat ke...@kevinpeat.com wrote: On 9 April 2010 18:40, Robert Scott li...@humanleg.org.uk wrote: Hasn't one of OSM's (many) mantras been doesn't matter if it's approximate: someone can always improve it later or rough is better than nothing? Sure, some of the OS data is rough, but it is better than nothing, and quite good for a first pass. +1 on this. It seems odd to me that we are encouraging people to contribute using often pretty rubbish mobile phone gps receivers but complaining that the OS data is not sub-metre accurate. I think the point is not to assume that where OSSV and OSM disagree, that OSSV is necessarily the correct one. It might generally be, but if you can't go out and check, be very careful what you do. If it's just how curvy it is I generally find checking the OSM GPS traces is a good idea, because you often find the GPS trace just hasn't been followed very well. Maybe some people will be put off if the empty areas are filled in with OS data so they don't have a blank canvas but I bet there are just as many people out there not knowing where to start who would add street names and POIs and clean-up any OS errors. That's a very good summary. By far the most important thing is not to leave a mess. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] building shapes from OS Street View
It's worth noting that the Yahoo aerial photography is also out of date; in some cases [1] people have traced streets from the photo which bear no relation to what's on the ground. Yet nobody suggests we should stop tracing from it. Yes they do. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2007-September/017830.html I've slightly changed my mind since then, but anyway. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:17 PM, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) ajrli...@googlemail.com wrote: I'm in line with this view too. We cannot assume that the OS mapping is correct, it may or may not be current or accurate, so it's useful as a guide in the absence of any other verification source. Streetview as a product is still a long way short of the level of detail we are routinely creating ourselves. The VetorMap District product that is being released next month won't add that much either, yes we can map landuse areas a bit better if there is no other source. We also noted that residential streets are not named in VMD so like Y! imagery there is little point in importing for unmapped areas unless someone is prepared to add the street names from ground survey, or (second best) from OS Streetview, which may or may not be accurate in terms of what is on the ground. Please don't be fooled, the OS may be a great organisation and produces great mapping that we have in the past relied upon for so many uses, but our map is a pretty damn good product too and once verified in an particular area is probably always going to be up to date and richer than any OS OpenData product. Yeah, it's not the accuracy of the OS data that I'm particularly worried about -- it's the accuracy of the tracing that gets done from it. From the looks of it the best data available will be the streetview rasters, and they're missing all kinds of stuff such as one ways, connectivity (mostly over connected), some smaller roads (they probably get classed as driveways), a lot of names, and of course footpaths, POIs, routes etc. But, if you're familiar with an area then I don't see a problem. In that case it's no worse than doing an initial street only survey. Creating a broken map is a very bad idea, but a merely incomplete one is just a fact of life we have to deal with. Or put another way: the data is freely there, it will get traced whether we like it or not, we might as well encourage it to be done in the right way. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] building shapes from OS Street View
On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 5:26 PM, TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote: Andy Allan wrote: On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 12:46 PM, TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote: If we use only manual surveying, we can only achieve coverage of about 1%. I don't think that is satisfactory. Imports are therefore very much appropriate for buildings. You're missing the point on several levels. For buildings it's quite possible to trace the outlines from aerial imagery, where we have it. And in some parts of the country, we have better imagery than the building outlines shown on Street View - yahoo, and soon the Surrey imagery, for starters. So it's not a case of Street View or nothing. I hope you have seen the vast tracts of London that have building outlines in OSM already - all of much higher detail than Street View? It's not vast, it doesn't even get to the edge of the underground zone 1. And the detail is comparable to my eye, except for many omissions in OSM. I am not sure how you are quantifying quality. I suspect that the OSM data is more up to date (even if Yahoo is a few years out of date), but OSM still very incomplete even in this supposedly well mapped area. I suspect with the few OSM contributors doing tracing the various sources and given their limited coverage, we are still looking like converging on poor overall coverage given years of effort, so my original point still stands. I say we can compliment our other sources with automatic tracing (be that by importing or editor tools). I guess the question is how much progress can we make on building outlines over different time scales, given different approaches? If you are not talking about bulk imports then please don't call your ideas imports, otherwise you confuse people as to your intentions. I am discussing automatic tracing which applies to both editor tools and imports. There is no rule that I have to discuss one option exclusively. But I was leaning towards more the import paradigm, while the majority seems to be for editor tools. Andy, from my perspective, you have not given a single justified reason against doing imports, so I can't really rebut your position (although other people have made valid points). I suggest you get a bit more constructive and outline your vision for the way ahead on this issue? Continue, as is, with Yahoo and so on? The thing we're looking to not have is automatic imports. London has a lot of buildings, but only in certain areas. What I don't want to have to do is wake up one morning to discover someone has helpfully imported auto-detected rectangles over the top, meaning I have to spend the next three days/years cleaning up the data. If all you want to do is load some buildings into an area (however that's implemented), fix it up to avoid duplicates and conflicts with existing data such as roads, and upload that, then fine. If you want to spend the time comparing against other sources too then even better. If you want to dump buildings into the entire country and hope that everybody gets around to fixing all the problems in their area afterwards, then please don't. Basically: please don't break the map :-) Other than that, tracing OS street view is by far the best source of building outlines we will have in much of the UK at the moment. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] building shapes from OS Street View
On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Henry Gomersall h...@cantab.net wrote: On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 18:07 +0100, Dave Stubbs wrote: Basically: please don't break the map :-) perhaps a stupid question... Is there no version control? I couldn't find anything on the wiki about it. Sure. But if you go and import everything, and I go and unimport everything, that's not much fun for either of us. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Post code map updated with a Code-Point Open layer
Hi, The Ordnance Survey OpenData released today contains a dataset called Code-Point Open giving the coordinates of about 1.5 million postcodes. I've added a layer onto the postcode area map to show this data in the same way it's been showing NPE, OSM and FreeThePostcode data for some time. Go see it here: http://random.dev.openstreetmap.org/postcodes/?layers=000F0F0FBT There's still a few bugs to be worked out: - only 25% of the original dataset is actually used (generation process uses too much RAM on my 32bit machine to do the whole thing) - not yet clipped to coastline - sub-codes ie: SW18 1 only show where the prefix is 3 chars So nothing too serious :-) Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] JOSM will move to Java6
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Hi, Richard Fairhurst wrote: The world doesn't require Potlatch 2 wondrousness. The world would already sigh with relief if Potlatch could be made to not break relation ordering when a way is split ;-) Has the world lodged a trac ticket? I'm not sure; my guess is that the world is silently waiting for Potlatch 2 to be released and will *then* complain about everything that *still* doesn't work. (My info comes from several mentions on, you guessed it, talk-de.) I hereby present figure 1: Drag and drop relation reordering in Potlatch 2. http://random.dev.openstreetmap.org/relation%20edit.png :-) Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Serious consideration of Newbie Editor
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Randy rwtnospam-new...@yahoo.com wrote: Dave Stubbs wrote: On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:29 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 26 February 2010 19:44, Dave Stubbs osm.l...@randomjunk.co.uk wrote: There are two big advantages of a simple mode to an existing full editor: - you don't have to write the OSM handling parts again, even a simple editor needs to cope with some quite complex things - you provide an easy choice for the user who wishes to progress onto something less basic There are some downsides, bloated code base, which in turns makes things harder for new coders to edit or fix small issues, and higher memory and other resource usage, although javascript may be higher still, but I haven't needed to compare flash to javscript before. Bigger code base sure -- and lots of code that might not get used for some config -- if the code is written nicely that's largely to one side and people don't notice it. It's mostly UI stuff anyway -- as I said you actually end up needing most of the same back end processing if you're doing anything that involves not just POIs (and for various OSM reasons that's increasingly not so useful). This is more about good design than an inherent property. Higher memory and resource usage is about how you program it, and how the simple mode switch works, and isn't necessarily true at all. Flash vs Javascript is not really relevant to the points made, unless you mean that there isn't currently a javascript editor to cut down, which is of course true. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk Dave, Do you have any way to estimate the resource requirements for Potlatch 2, and what they would be if a simple switch were added. Potlatch 2 currently runs on my netbook, and seeing as how I develop it on my netbook it should continue to do so :-) My netbook is an Atom 1.6GHz 1GB RAM BTW. The SWF size is about 550KB at the moment, most of which will be the flex gui framework and associated bits and pieces, so will be present in any flex based flash app. If you do a break down of where the code is at the moment: - about 20 classes for tag editing (the simple user stuff) - about 10 classes for vector editing - about 20 classes for handling OSM objects, and talking to the API 0.6 - about 25 classes for rendering data (halcyon) Simple mode basically takes out the vector editing stuff. You can obviously make something a lot lighter if you weren't using flex. Well, startup bandwidth lighter at least. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Serious consideration of Newbie Editor
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:29 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 26 February 2010 19:44, Dave Stubbs osm.l...@randomjunk.co.uk wrote: There are two big advantages of a simple mode to an existing full editor: - you don't have to write the OSM handling parts again, even a simple editor needs to cope with some quite complex things - you provide an easy choice for the user who wishes to progress onto something less basic There are some downsides, bloated code base, which in turns makes things harder for new coders to edit or fix small issues, and higher memory and other resource usage, although javascript may be higher still, but I haven't needed to compare flash to javscript before. Bigger code base sure -- and lots of code that might not get used for some config -- if the code is written nicely that's largely to one side and people don't notice it. It's mostly UI stuff anyway -- as I said you actually end up needing most of the same back end processing if you're doing anything that involves not just POIs (and for various OSM reasons that's increasingly not so useful). This is more about good design than an inherent property. Higher memory and resource usage is about how you program it, and how the simple mode switch works, and isn't necessarily true at all. Flash vs Javascript is not really relevant to the points made, unless you mean that there isn't currently a javascript editor to cut down, which is of course true. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Thoughts on OSM design, and looking forward and back
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:07 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: ...or figuring out how to attract more flash coders. Speaking for myself, I didn't know there were opportunities to work on PL2. A few more obvious mentions around the place that developers are required, with a short list of interesting tasks to work on, would be a start. There have been a number of posts to dev on the subject, sorry you missed them. If you want to get involved then that's great. You can see the code here and check it out of SVN: http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/applications/editors/potlatch2/ The readme should help you get set up and the TODO file has a bunch of things that need doing in it. There's also a potlatch-dev list if you want to sign up to that to get any help or discuss directions. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Contributing to PL2 (was: Re: Thoughts on OSM design, and looking forward and back)
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 1:18 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:05 AM, Dave Stubbs osm.l...@randomjunk.co.uk wrote: There have been a number of posts to dev on the subject, sorry you missed them. If you want to get involved then that's great. You can see the code here and check it out of SVN: http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/applications/editors/potlatch2/ The readme should help you get set up and the TODO file has a bunch of things that need doing in it. There's also a potlatch-dev list if you want to sign up to that to get any help or discuss directions. Sure, but I think you missed my point a bit. *If* I had already known that help was wanted, and *if* I had already signed up to the dev list (which I didn't realise existed until now), then I guess I would have seen those posts. But the issue is how to attract new developers, isn't it? Posts were made to the normal dev list too. And yes, that's exactly the issue. So if you have any ideas on promoting that then please feel free to give them a go :-) Btw, the potlatch-dev list is extremely quiet. No posts for February so far. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/potlatch-dev/ Which is mostly because there's only 3 people developing on potlatch 2 so far, we all know each other, and most of the discussions for either potlatch or potlatch 2 have been on IRC or face to face. The mailing list is one of those chicken and egg things. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response
Free release of the raster products would also harm public perceptions of Ordnance Survey. The perception of OS is that they're data hoarders (which the tax payer payed for) in the belief that 'knowledge is power' Umm, no. The public perception of the OS is that they make pretty maps of the country side so that you can tell where you are when you go walking. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Why doesn't OSM implement a simple measure to protect it's users and passwords?
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Florian Lohoff f...@rfc822.org wrote: On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 02:30:38PM +, Tom Hughes wrote: On 22/12/09 14:11, John Smith wrote: When does anyone plan to use SSL to protect passwords and users on OSM? It's on my to do list to create a CSR and give to it to Grant. There are some issues to work out with regard to what we protect though as we don't really want to be using SSL for all the API requests though so we would prefer to encourage clients to move to using OAuth so we can then just protect the initial exchange when the application is authorised. My guess is that the API server is fully I/O bound and has massive spare CPU. So encrypting all API calls shouldnt be much of a problem - There is not that much data transferred anyway, just a lot of connected with little data in them. Can we please stop guessing / explaining how easy it is, and believe that the sysadmin team aren't mindless idiots and actually know what they're doing? Please? It would make this list a heck of a lot easier to read if every other e-mail wasn't utter rubbish. Thanks, Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Announce] OSMF license change vote has started
Have you seen this? http://www.osmfoundation.org/images/3/3c/License_Proposal.pdf Under the section 'So what should I do?' 'Refuse', it says: Your contributions will not be deleted Yet if you click on the link to the backup plan http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Backup_Plan on the first line it says As part of the move to the Open Data License http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License it will be necessary to remove or hide those edits which have not been re-licensed. Could you explain the apparent contradiction please? No contradiction, it just depends what you mean by delete vs remove. OSM would continue on an ODbL only footing without your contributions -- they would be effectively removed from the main OSM database. However, your contributions would be available in the full history dump that would be published as part of the migration procedure and made available under the current CC BY-SA license, so they don't just disappear -- they are not deleted. Anybody and everybody would be free to make use of them just as they are now, just from a different source (it's possible somebody could organise a proper fork from this dump). Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Licence vote
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 11:23 PM, Jason Cunningham jamicu...@googlemail.com wrote: Can I also be sorry for being pedantic and point out an issue with the license. The OSMF decided to base themselves in the UK and is A company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales. Company Registration Number: 05912761 The Articles of Association [http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Articles_of_Association] details the role / function of the organisation in detail, and offers definitions of words used. What is clear is that the decision to base themselves in the UK as a British Company means the 'legal language' of the OSMF is British English. Now for the pedantic part The proposed licence appears to be in American English, but doesn't state that. I think it is important that the 'core' or 'main copy' uses the language of the country in which this company has based themselves, and the same language as the 'The Articles of Association' At the very least its 'bad practice' to have your 'Articles of Association' in one language and your licence in second. It's a small issue to have someone suitably qualified read through the American license and translate it into British 'legalese', but something that should be done. Suppose you could move the foundation to the USA. It would also be worth looking at what Creative Common do, and provide the licence in several different languages. See the discussion on porting of the license: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2009-May/002464.html Please also note that this isn't an OSMF license. The license has obviously been developed with a lot of input from OSM based people and the OSMF, but it is meant to be general purpose open data license. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Licence vote
On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 9:19 PM, David Groom revi...@pacific-rim.net wrote: Sorry to be pedantic but the wording of the OSMF member vote is: Do you approve the process of moving OpenStreetMap to the ODbL? Yes, I approve. No, I do not approve. Unfortunately this sentence on which we are asked to vote has at least two meanings 1) Do you approve of the process? [as in the procedural method used] 2) Do you approve of the change. I presume the intention is it to mean (2), but the wording is much closer to (1). I'm actually fairly sure it means (1) (2). The LWG have put forward a proposal of how OSM to move on wrt licensing, it's that proposal we're voting on. That proposal includes what is to change (CC BY-SA - ODbL + Contrib Terms), as well as timetable and mechanism, including basic wording of the question contributors will be required to agree to. Ironically simply by definition of the poor wording it is unlikely I could agree to the process, irrespective of my actual views on CC-BY-SA v ODbL. They are intimately linked. Saying we want ODbL without how we intend to get there isn't so useful, and a lot of people wouldn't agree to changing unless they knew how that change was to be implemented. What it is about the process you don't want to agree to? Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSMF: The people you are going to hand over your OSM data ...
as far as i can see the contributor terms definition says the same thing, except ... ...except the context is different. With CC BY-SA you are giving everyone the same rights. With the Contributor Terms the only one to have those rights is the OSMF. But only with the condition that they give everyone else those rights when publishing the data (via cc-by-sa or odbl). There's a slight change to attribution in that redirection which is just a formalisation of the current practice of attribution to OSM, and a wiki page for large contributors. The only extra right you give OSMF here, over and above everyone else, is the license change part -- and that can only be initiated by OSMF, the rest has to go to a vote of the OSM contributors. With cc-by-sa you currently give this right to Creative Commons, who think we should be using CC0 for data anyway. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Illegal activity
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 7:50 AM, Valent Turkovic valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 19:29:37 -0500, Ian Dees wrote: Although it may/may not be illegal, it is definitely a breach of contract. Sorry for misleading title, but I still don't understand how this can be permitted. It isn't permitted. Don't let the posts here arguing the details of whether it should be permitted confuse anything. OSM has one simple rule: if in doubt, don't. A lot of people think it's probably OK, but but Google aren't exactly unambiguous on the issue and there are certainly enough people around claiming rights that it leaves reasonable doubt unless the provider tells you explicitly that it's OK. Or in brief: don't use Google for OSM. Is there anybody in OSM community that goes to OSM users that do this sorts of things and warns not to do it? You can do it yourself if you come across it. If the user is not giving a good response (leave enough time for them to do so) then you can contact the OSMF Data Working Group: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_working_group In this case there's no evidence of data being uploaded to OSM, but if you have an account to post there already it may be worth replying to the forum post to make it clear that they shouldn't. The problem is that somebody starts tracing via illegal means (google satellite images and other sources) and other people come after him and add bunch of data (new streets and POI-s, addition street tags) that all their data would probably have to be deleted as they are derived from source that is tainted, right? If google or any other company comes after him then they would probably have to delete all data that has also been derived from his work, or no? If it comes to that then work of much more people is wasted :( Is there anything that OSM does officially regarding these kind of people of they are just ignored until somebody starts asking questions? The Data Working Group responds to notifications from the community. Where we find significant potential copyright infringement we can ban the user responsible and remove all their data -- we don't wait for the copyright holder to complain before doing this. This has happened on several occasions including a case in lithuania where a large percentage of data had to be removed -- with all the problems you point out. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Gervase Markham gerv-gm...@gerv.net wrote: On 05/10/09 11:04, Dave Stubbs wrote: As the person whose first came up with a no-names map for London (well, actually it was a named map of London, turned into a nonames map on SteveC's suggestion), I have an *official leadership announcement* to make: There shall be no tagging of unnamed roads. It is not important. They show up on the no-names map -- big deal -- its a mapping aid not a holy grail of there shall be no highlighted roads. Just deal with it. So why did you make the noname map in the first place, if it's not important? Have you changed your mind about its usefulness? As a mapping aid, to find large chunks of unnamed roads from traced aerial imagery etc. Single roads were never really the intended target, not for me anyway. I originally thought a noname like tag would be useful and should be implemented, but I was convinced otherwise by some very persuasive arguments and now think it's completely not worth doing and not at all important. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:10 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: Dave Stubbs writes: I was convinced otherwise by some very persuasive arguments and now think it's completely not worth doing and not at all important. I'm not convinced. Could you share them? a) what are you actually marking? - no name in OSM -- we know that already - the mapper didn't find a name -- so we shouldn't check again? - the road definitely hasn't got a name -- it definitely hasn't got a swimming pool in the middle of it either, but I'm not putting swimming_pool=no - you don't want validators checking this b) what are you actually trying to achieve? - mappers don't go looking for unnamed streets that definitely have no name -- well, whatever, they can put the post boxes and address data in while they're there. If a street has a post box, addresses, all the shops, amenities and power cables then I'm sure eventually the next mapper will realise what's going on. plus you can add a note tag if you want. - a nice orange free map -- go look at the normal layer then - an error free map -- well, despite what the validator tells you, road without name is not actually an error, just potentially unlikely in western europe at least. c) what does it actually tell you if not present? - the road has a name, but we don't know what it is - we don't know if the road has a name or not - the user who mapped it doesn't care for no names tags - hasn't been mapped d) does it help the original point of the no names map? - no, not really -- the no names map was primarily invented to act as a metric of mappedness for areas that had been thoroughly traced from Yahoo imagery. Blocks of orange still stand out, and as most streets in London are named, that's not distracting from the task. That might not be true everywhere, but I'm guessing it's true most places that no names maps are useful metrics at all. So in summary, the arguments against are that you don't know what you're trying to mark, you don't really have a good reason, and it doesn't tell you very much. YMMV obviously and there are other opinions out there. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Gervase Markham gerv-gm...@gerv.net wrote: On 06/10/09 15:18, Dave Stubbs wrote: a) what are you actually marking? - no name in OSM -- we know that already - the mapper didn't find a name -- so we shouldn't check again? Probably not, no. Just as when a mapper adds a postbox, someone else doesn't think he's added a postbox. I should go and check that there's actually a postbox there. I agree that in this case you are noting a negative, not a positive, and that's more unusual. But I think the same principle applies. You trust other mappers to map sanely unless there's evidence to the contrary. - the road definitely hasn't got a name -- it definitely hasn't got a swimming pool in the middle of it either, but I'm not putting swimming_pool=no Right. But most roads have names, and names are useful for navigation. Names being missing when they shouldn't be is therefore bad. Right, that's why we highlight them at all. It doesn't then follow that names being missing when they should be is also bad, which is the point here. The swimming pool point is a slippery slope argument, but in fact the slope isn't at all slippery. Names are different to swimming pools. AFAIK, no-one has genuinely suggested swimming_pool=no, or in fact any other =no type thing apart from names. I agree, simming_pool=yes, incline=yes would definitely be a slippery slope. But actually yes, they have suggested other tags for no. Examples include the language variants so noname:es=yes, refs, to entirely generic systems of tagging designed to specify any tag you like as deliberately not put on. In general we do not tag negatives, you regard name as somehow special in this regard which is of course up to you, but I don't. - mappers don't go looking for unnamed streets that definitely have no name -- well, whatever, they can put the post boxes and address data in while they're there. Except that many people like to map with a method that gets the map to a base level of usefulness (say, all roads present and correctly named) across an area first, and then add details later. Sure, but if you're chasing a single unnamed road then you've already hit that level of completion anyway. Obviously if you don't want to map that extra level of detail you don't have to, but hey, what else you going to do :-) [snip] What I don't get is why people opposed to marking noname roads as noname actually mind. What offends you about tags you don't care about? Personally, nothing. As I said YMMV, there are different opinions, tag how you want. Russ asked for a decision to be made. I made it. He asked for an explanation, I gave it. And I'm almost certain he doesn't agree, but then that's what happens when you ask for someone else's advice :-) Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 4:24 AM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: Matt Amos writes: forcing all mappers, editors and renderers to support it? Why do people keep saying that I want to use force? From where do they get this idea? Have I ever suggested the use of force? Gun, knife, sword, empty hand? Rejection of ill-formed tags at the API? Please, quote me on it if you think I have. if mappers tag the way they feel is best and the tool authors (i.e: nonames layer) consume the tags in the way they feel is best then the two will converge, Let me propose an alternative course of events which is less desirable: Anyone who asks how to mark a road as having no name is told that there is no consensus. They might get sent to the Wiki page on it. That page gives no advice or too much advice. The mapper takes no action. The database has no tags, the tool authors don't implement any of them because the data isn't there, and the issue doesn't converge. I point to the +1 year age of the Noname proposal and recent inactivity and suggest that convergance isn't happening. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Noname I suggest instead that in cases such as these, SteveC should bless one of them with his Holy Water of Antioch (and the number of the tags shall be 3, no more and no less). His blessing will tip the stable disconvergance in one direction. As the person whose first came up with a no-names map for London (well, actually it was a named map of London, turned into a nonames map on SteveC's suggestion), I have an *official leadership announcement* to make: There shall be no tagging of unnamed roads. It is not important. They show up on the no-names map -- big deal -- its a mapping aid not a holy grail of there shall be no highlighted roads. Just deal with it. Right. Done. Now anyone respecting my authority can happily continue with life. I'll leave someone else to document the wiki with my decision. Thanks, Dave PS. I have no idea who does/doesn't agree with me and I've no idea what SteveC thinks about it. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Flickr Now Supports OSM Tags
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: Dave Stubbs wrote: On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:58 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: Richard Fairhurst wrote: Elizabeth Dodd wrote: For starters if the maintainers of JOSM Potlatch and Merkaartor encouraged the use of yes/no it would be a way forward. Potlatch does indeed have 'yes' (rather than 'true' or '1') in its presets and autocomplete. cheers Richard Will v2.0 disallow user input altogether be completely based on 'click to select' presets? Not a chance in hell. Click Advanced at the bottom of the tags section. Oh yes, raw tag entry FTW! for when you damn well know the editor is wrong. Plus the presets (they're not really presets now, but property editors) are completely configurable[1], and (once I put the pref box in) swappable at run time. Oh, and the oneway preset i currently have happily recognises 1=true=yes/0=false=no/reverse=-1. It's only when you set it that it will standardise to yes/no/-1. Dave [1] http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/applications/editors/potlatch2/resources/map_features.xml Hi 1. Would putting a flag on the raw tag be useful, allowing them to be easily verified so they conform to the wiki set of tags? No 2. When it's rolled out will there be an XML file per editor, which is stored on their computer or one for everybody? XML is loaded at runtime. The default will be up to the editor deployer (the editor authorises with OAuth so it does not need to be hosted on OSM itself -- we could for instance host a cycle feature orientated version on opencyclemap.org). It would also be pretty easy to add a user preference to use different XML hosted on any website anywhere, though I would not expect most users to take advantage of this. 3. Could you explain what a property editor is compared to a preset? Preset kind of implies input only to me. ie: a Make this a post box button. A post box has certain other properties and the editor has a dialog box for you to put them in. So you end up with a Post Box Panel that the user has to invoke to create or edit post boxes. This is a secondary system to facilitate entering tags. The difference here is that we're trying to make tags the back end stuff that nobody really cares about. Post boxes have certain properties which the XML tells the editor about -- the editor then provides input boxes to the user for these properties. The XML also tells the editor how to recognise a post box so the user never has to do anything special. The user can then view/edit the encoded tags if they want in the same way firefox has a View Source option. So from a technical point of view there's very little difference really -- it's just presentation and UI focus. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Flickr Now Supports OSM Tags
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:58 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: Richard Fairhurst wrote: Elizabeth Dodd wrote: For starters if the maintainers of JOSM Potlatch and Merkaartor encouraged the use of yes/no it would be a way forward. Potlatch does indeed have 'yes' (rather than 'true' or '1') in its presets and autocomplete. cheers Richard Will v2.0 disallow user input altogether be completely based on 'click to select' presets? Not a chance in hell. Click Advanced at the bottom of the tags section. Oh yes, raw tag entry FTW! for when you damn well know the editor is wrong. Plus the presets (they're not really presets now, but property editors) are completely configurable[1], and (once I put the pref box in) swappable at run time. Oh, and the oneway preset i currently have happily recognises 1=true=yes/0=false=no/reverse=-1. It's only when you set it that it will standardise to yes/no/-1. Dave [1] http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/applications/editors/potlatch2/resources/map_features.xml ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Flickr Now Supports OSM Tags
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Apollinaris Schoell ascho...@gmail.com wrote: On 30 Sep 2009, at 20:46 , Russ Nelson wrote: No, he is a leader because we respect him. THAT is how leaders in an anarchic state arise. yes he is a leader and as such deserves respect. he should lead some useful and intelligent projects and don't loose a word about this childish 1/0/yes/no/true/false discussions. a consumer of the data has to do a bit more work but this is a small fee for free access to an amazing database. The discussion is only childish if the tone of the discussion is childish. But if people discuss this issue in a good manner, then it isn't childish. If we can remove that small fee, why not do it? What's so hard about standardizing on the boolean values given appropriate changes to editor presets, good wiki documentation, and a deprecation period for other boolean values? what's so hard? The hard part is figuring out what the hell any of this actually has to do with the thread topic. Amazingly tag-standardisation is not even /relevant/ to the original problem pointed out. Oh well... wouldn't be the internet if someone wasn't wrong on it. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Flickr Now Supports OSM Tags
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: Dave Stubbs wrote: On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Apollinaris Schoell ascho...@gmail.com wrote: On 30 Sep 2009, at 20:46 , Russ Nelson wrote: No, he is a leader because we respect him. THAT is how leaders in an anarchic state arise. yes he is a leader and as such deserves respect. he should lead some useful and intelligent projects and don't loose a word about this childish 1/0/yes/no/true/false discussions. a consumer of the data has to do a bit more work but this is a small fee for free access to an amazing database. The discussion is only childish if the tone of the discussion is childish. But if people discuss this issue in a good manner, then it isn't childish. If we can remove that small fee, why not do it? What's so hard about standardizing on the boolean values given appropriate changes to editor presets, good wiki documentation, and a deprecation period for other boolean values? what's so hard? The hard part is figuring out what the hell any of this actually has to do with the thread topic. Amazingly tag-standardisation is not even /relevant/ to the original problem pointed out. Oh well... wouldn't be the internet if someone wasn't wrong on it. Did you not read Kyle's post - 29th 15:25 Yes. The original problem pointed out that I was referring to was: It works for building=yes, but not building=true. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide
I'm tired of this silly true/false 1/0 yes/no up/down left/right in/out fore/aft port/starboard debate/debacle. It's trivial, it's stupid, we could just as easily toss a coin as engage in any rational debate about how binary values should be expressed. When it prevents flickr etc from displaying properly then I don't see it as trivial It isn't stopping flickr doing anything. They don't even look at any binary tags according to their blog post. This is just wrong. If SteveC says that mountain=green means that first there is a mountain, and that mountain=blue means there is no mountain, then damnit, we should do it that way. Oh my Lord, you've completely missed the point. In relation to the boolean problem OSM is saying that blue green are the *same* thing. no, just blue/#ff/rgb(0f,0f,1f) are the same thing Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Flickr Now Supports OSM Tags
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 10:42 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: Frankie Roberto wrote: 2009/9/29 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com It works for building=yes, but not building=true. Well, Flickr says This is a feature in OpenStreetMap instead of $name is a building in OpenStreetMap. Did I miss a vital clue where yes and true are not interchangable? I thought yes was just a synonym for true, but I could be wrong. Is there a guidance page on this difference? for building all values are correct, as building=* (or user defined) is defined. (this doesn't mean that for other keys it would not be correct to use user defined-values of course). Indeed. As to yes/no vs true/false vs 1/0 though, I think there was a discussion about this ages ago, and the conclusion seemed to be (from memory) that yes/no was the preferred/most common approach. (Guess renderers should probably accept all three forms though). This appears like a good example of the laxity of tagging rules within OSM is causing problems with the implementation of it. They also got motorway and cycle path tagging wrong (at least in the blog). I wouldn't read too much into it, especially as they said, we’ve almost certainly got at least some of it wrong but hopefully we got part of it right and can correct the rest as we go Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Flickr Now Supports OSM Tags
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: Dave Stubbs wrote: I wouldn't read too much into it, especially as they said, we’ve almost certainly got at least some of it wrong but hopefully we got part of it right and can correct the rest as we go Dave You see, this is the problem. I don't think, in this instance, they've done anything wrong. This is an OSM cock-up. I think it's quite selfish to expect others to pick up the pieces of, what I see, as lazy implementation. Who, within OSM in their right sense of mind, would object to being forced to use just Yes/No. I mean it's just an on/off switch! This is more about making it easier to edit than anything else. Currently users have to type stuff in or use some preset entry mechanism which doesn't really present the data to the user afterwards and allow them to edit it. Historically users had no option but to type values, and so you get this variation. In the future I'm imagining users are going to be using much more friendly interfaces to edit the common tags, and these interfaces will tend to normalise the values a little. See the developing potlatch 2 for the kind of thing I mean: http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~random/potlatch2/potlatch2.html (click on ways to see the tag editing interfaces) But anyway, yes, there's some variation that data users will have to deal with, but that's just the way it is. Dave PS. anyone notice the Potlatch 2 plug?! Any AS3/Flex developers around who want to help out? Code is in svn at: http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/applications/editors/potlatch2 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] trunk_link ref=*
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Lennard l...@xs4all.nl wrote: Dave F. wrote: Personally, I don't think these should be rendered on the main maps, osmarender:renderRef is a tag to prevent rendering. I said 'maps', plural. One renderer's trick of not showing certain features is certainly the wrong approach to this. and they should not be made up by us if there is no real ref on the ground. Would they not be essential for routing software? Why would you think that made up refs would be? Why would you even think that refs would be essential at all for routing? The only thing they are good for in the router is to give the driver better instructions. Take the next exit, and follow the A29 Now, if I'm on currently not on the A29, and I get this instruction, what is unclear about that? I see an exit coming up, probably even reinforced with signs pointing out that that is the direction to take for the A29. Clear and to the point. Take the next exit, follow the slip road A58-A29*, then follow the A29. Exactly how would this be better? A58-A29 won't be on signs, and it tells me non-essential information that could confuse me. Plus it's actually wrong. You'd hope, as Richard said, that the router had more local knowledge than that and could happily work out how a slip road between blahX and blahY should be referred to if it doesn't have a ref. If it does have a ref then the router is likely to assume you knew better (ie: as was also mentioned earlier the slip roads have specific refs), and if you didn't know better then it's just pointless bad data ruining a perfectly good router. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 10:56 AM, Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org wrote: 2009/9/18 David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com: ***PLEASE*** PULL THE PLUG ON HIM! Is it a good idea to remove the Live Change Feature in Potlatch for everyone. I'm thinking this is the cause for a lot of our problems. I can't see why anyone would want it any more anyway. Its a dangerous feature without a purpose. This case has bugger all to do with Potlatch's live edit mode. Please don't look for scapegoats -- it doesn't help anyone. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:26 AM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: On 18/09/2009 10:53, Tom Hughes wrote: On 18/09/09 10:33, David Earl wrote: Tom - this is persistent continuous abuse. I really think we have to block his IP address until such time as we can work out how to deal with the edits. They are just so pervasive and destructive. We've discussed suspending his account and the chances of him switching to a new one. An IP block is not foolproof either, but it is better than nothing, which is what we've got at the moment. Well (a) we don't know and can't easily find out what IP address he is using and (b) in all probability it changes fairly often. The first step will be to block his account, not his IP address. ***PLEASE*** PULL THE PLUG ON HIM! I have repeatedly stated that I am not prepared to block people on my own. Get the DWG to order him blocked and I will happily do so. How? How does the clamour that's been made over three months actually get turned into action? When we last discussed it it was decided it was better to keep track of him than ban him and not know where he was. We may well re-evaluate that. Is there a general email address for the members (who I can see on the wiki, and that you are one of), or do I have to get the email addresses for each member individually - it doesn't say on the wiki how to make contact, though obviously I recognise all the names. d...@osmfoundation.org But this has been going for three months and he has poisoned large parts of Kent. How long and how much damage do we have to sustain before action is taken? He's spent the last two days doggedly undermining people's work, and far from Andy's previous assertion that he'll get bored, he hasn't. Indeed I have wondered whether there is more to this than just idiocy(*). You seem to think his edits are irreversible -- they are not. They are not hard to find, and they are not particularly hard to fix -- the problem is we lack the necessary tools to do it efficiently (so that one of us actually has enough time to do it before he starts again). If someone somewhere actually develops those tools then we can come back and make sure there's no lasting damage. Re IP addresses, it depends on how he is connected - mine for example never changes so long as I am using the same Mac address to connect. It is cited on the DWG page as one course of action, and I think it would be more effective than banning the account, as we'll likely lose track of him. Except that that's not how most ISPs work -- much of the UK is on a dynamic IP, and you might find yourself banning an entire exchange to stop one user. We can do that, but it really is an extreme measure. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:19 PM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: I agree. I think it would be even more useful to be able to quarantine particular users changesets for manual review so the could be let through in the end - though there's all the problems of conflicting changes building up that that entails (or blocking further changes to those objects until the changeset is decided one way or the other), so I'm not under any illusion that this is easy. David I'd suggest locking everything a changeset touches for xx hours, with xx variable by user. In the quarantine period the changeset can be reverted, but no other changes are allowed. If it's not reverted in the quarantine period, everything gets unlocked. So the user sees their edit get rendered, but anyone can follow them round hitting the undo button. Revert === Edit which makes it quite hard to make an edit, and would also block people from reverting reverts, or something. Plus it makes DOS attacks really really effective because new users have the biggest lock impact. The problem needs fixing with better tools for sorting out mess, not more weird and wonderful metrics for getting in people's way. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:40 PM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: On 17/09/2009 14:38, David Earl wrote: On 17/09/2009 14:35, David Earl wrote: Another one at 13:56, also failed to revert http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2511524 changeset upload failed: 412 Precondition Failed Actually, on his page it says still editing. Perhaps that's why and I can have another go as soon as it terminates. Now he has a second open changeset, while the first is still open: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2511982 That's just because Potlatch doesn't close the changeset unless you manually close it. The server will shut down open changesets after 1 hour in inactivity. If you shut down Potlatch, then reopen it it'll start a new changeset. The 412 can happen any time you try to revert something which has been edited since... if he was still editing it's more than likely -- you might need to consider both changesets together to do a proper revert (assuming Frederick's tool lets you do that.. not sure it does). Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Postcodes map moribund?
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Tom Chance t...@acrewoods.net wrote: Hi, I set about correcting a few dozen post code entries in NPE for south east London, but the postcodes map doesn't seem to be updating: http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~random/postcodes/?zoom=13lat=51.48557lon=-0.07888layers=B00T0F0F Have the hopefully weekly updates stopped? Any plans to restart them? Tom OK, back up and running now. Was updated lunch time today with the latest available geofabrik great_britain extract. It's now processing: postal_code on nodes/ways addr:postcode on nodes/ways first part of ref on amenity=post_box nodes Should hopefully continue to update now every Monday by about 14:30. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Postcodes map moribund?
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Dan Karran d...@karran.net wrote: 2009/9/14 Dave Stubbs osm.l...@randomjunk.co.uk: OK, back up and running now. Thanks for getting that up and running again Dave. Would it be possible for you to include labels for the postal sectors on there as well, so that we can see which sector the polygons refer to? There's actually more than a few bugs with those sectors because of the number of partial postcodes. They mostly just make a mess at the moment if you turn them on. I am planning on improving the algorithm at some point so I might turn them on then. They'd probably currently work for the IoM and NPE, but London on OSM would be a disaster thanks to all the street sign partial postcodes that have been entered. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Brainstorming: Simple Revert-Tools
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 8:11 PM, MPsingular...@gmail.com wrote: On 02/09/2009, Peter Körner osm-li...@mazdermind.de wrote: I'm against voting. Voting is a way to take responsibility away from the individual. I think that in most cases we should strive to have individuals responsible for everything (just like with mapping - you don't suggest something which the community then votes upon, you just map). But this could lead to reverting as a extended form of vandalism (which is much more effective!) They you can use the tool again and just revert the revert. Currently, messing things up things is easy, even without any revert tool, reverting them (without asking someone with DB access to do the dirty job) is not so easy. Can I just point out that there are so special permissions, no special DB access, or any other special stuff used to do anything with reverting. There was a tool for API 0.5 (written by me) that required DB access which was used to revert changes made by users involved with copyright infringement. This tool has become completely redundant since API 0.6 as the information it was using (finding every edit of a user) has become easily and publicly accessible through the changeset API. Even that tool just resulted in an osc file uploaded by bulk_upload.pl. The only reason you need DB access now is if you're trying to find information on a user with non-public edits, but as there aren't any new ones of those I think that's a limited problem. As far as I know most of the tools used for reverting currently are also public -- the problem being, they're dangerous to use if you don't know what you're doing, not at all user friendly, deliberately hard to use to make sure you do know what you're doing, and not remotely capable of dealing with conflicts. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Brainstorming: Simple Revert-Tools
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Peter Körnerosm-li...@mazdermind.de wrote: I'd like to do a Brainstorming about how a Revert-Tool could look like, that is more open to the Community, can be used without programming knowledge and is able to to reverts fast. I'm thinking of a process like this: - Identify the Changeset you'd like to be reverted. - Go to tool and throw in the Changeset-ID - tool downloads the Changeset and the current state of all members - tool shows you a list of all members of the Changeset - highlight conflicting changes (tag- or position-mismatch) - highlight conflicts that could be reverted automatically (e.g. in the malicious changeset highway=secondary was changed to highway=track and on the current node it's highway=secondary again, or the node/way added in the malicious changeset was deleted already) - propose actions on nodes/ways that must be edited by hand (like jsom does when connecting two ways with conflicting tags) - when all conflicts are resolved tool generates a voting-url - post this url to the appropriate mailing-list (global and local) and let the community vote for your revert-proposal - we'll need some kind of authentication here - when 100 (20?, 50?, 1000?) people said yes to your proposal, the tool applies your revert - if this produces further conflicts the author should be able to correct them (and only them!) without another vote. - there should be a history when who reverted what - each revert should have an explanation with a minimal length (e.g. 30 words) Assuming you're looking for a tool to actually do reverts, then I'd suggest a plugin to an editor -- most meaningful reverts are going to result in a conflict that has to be edited -- you might have to rebuild unconnected bits of the map by hand if you're reverting a delete and someone has added something new in the meantime. After that a revert is just another normal map edit, there's no need for voting or other such structures. There's no need for limiting access or anything else. If we have edit wars we deal with the people involved. The tools can help by adding changeset tags like reverted_changeset=12345 as well as the normal comment=xyz and created_by=xyz. This will serve to easily flag up reverts. Don't try to force a comment of a certain length -- reverting vandalism is fine -- if you want 30 words i'll just give you reverting vandalism blah blah blah blah. And I'd recommend not overcomplicating -- if you're intending to write this, start with the simplest thing that will possibly work, and add features as you go :-) Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Brainstorming: Simple Revert-Tools
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Pierenpier...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Dave Stubbsosm.l...@randomjunk.co.uk wrote: As far as I know most of the tools used for reverting currently are also public -- the problem being, they're dangerous to use if you don't know what you're doing, not at all user friendly, deliberately hard to use to make sure you do know what you're doing, and not remotely capable of dealing with conflicts. Dave That's where I disagree. We should stop considering 'revert' as 'dangerous to use if you don't know what you're doing'. It is not more dangerous as any other edits, it's just a different way to select elements and modify them. The only difference is that you refere to a particular state of the dataset (changeset) which might be obsolete (in which case the 'easy revert' should be aborted) in the same way as when two contributors work in parallel in the same area. We cannot say in one side let the crowd create, modify or delete elements as easy as possible and in the other side make revert hard to use. That's not what I meant at all. Reverting isn't dangerous, it's the tool that's dangerous. You can create a very big mess if you don't know what you're doing and you force it through. As many casual users of bulk uploading tools can testify -- it really is a good idea to know what you're doing occasionally. If the tools are easy to use and make it easy to spot you're about to do something really stupid then there's no problem. I'm all for easy revert tools, they just don't exist as yet. I'm still in favour of having an easy revert as a first attempt on the main site and only provide more complexe tools into editors in case of conflicts. When someone writes it I'm sure it'll be great. But you will have to explaine how you deal with the 145 changesets of RR8 if you have to enter manually each number in your editor. Manually typing numbers sounds like a crappy interface to me, did someone suggest it? Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Brainstorming: Simple Revert-Tools
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Peter Körnerosm-li...@mazdermind.de wrote: You could check the tool on the edits made over the previous two months by Liam123, some of which have still not been reverted for lack of a suitable tool to achieve it. Are you talking about http://openstreetmap.org/user/liam123 ? Are we sure that this is really vandalism? For now I won't commit anything to the api but just show the calls I would have made (dry run) and I'll test it with some of my own changes to avoid messing things up for others, but as time goes by it would be good to have some examples to do practical testing. You might want to investigate setting up some test scripts to import, edit and then revert data. But do any testing against a test database and not the real thing :-) Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Brainstorming: Simple Revert-Tools
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Lized...@billiau.net wrote: On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, Peter Miller wrote: Only 'established users' can upload images to Wikipedia and I would suggest that the revert option is only available to established OSM users. It would need to take many edits to get 'established' but it means that there are some controls on 'drive-by vandals' who register and then cause mischief. I guess one can loose one's 'established user' credentials by partaking in vandalism. I'd think that when we hit by vandalism in AU we would be talking on the local list and making a decision on reverting changes. I would think that a higher status mapper would be actually permitted to make the changes rather than anyone. Complex access metrics for an as yet non-existent tool, that can actually do less damage than most existing editors, seems just a little like either a) overkill b) a complete waste of time c) fundamentally missing the point At the end of the day it's just another editor, you'll need an OSM account to edit with it. Save the rest till it matters. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle Map - without the cycleway?
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:57 PM, WessexMariowessexmario-...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: I'd like to use the OSM Cycle Map rendering at different zoom levels as the base layer for a project I'm doing, but I want to overlay something else, and the emphasised cycleways in large red lines are both obliterating some of the detail I need. and would distract from my own overlay. If it wasn't for the cycleways the map would be perfect for what I need. Is it possible (and if so how?) to get a map rendered like the Cycle Map, but without the cycleways? I don't think there's anyone offering a tile download service for just contours and hillshading, so you'll probably need to render your own. For contours, the info you need is here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contours Also useful info at: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/HikingBikingMaps Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Fwd: [OSM-talk] copyright problemwith datacopiedfrom a map
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Peter Millerpeter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote: On 18 Aug 2009, at 10:30, Tom Hughes wrote: On 18/08/09 09:27, Peter Miller wrote: Andy mentions that copyright violation needs to go to the Data Working Group. Why? Sure the foundation needs a log of action of copyright violations, but I don't see why the requested reverts, or 'plastering over the cracks' can't be put onto a public list by a concerned member of the public and is then acted on by a suitably confident member of the community. The foundation then steps back and only gets directly involved in the bigger more problematic cases. The Data Working Group can do things, like sending email direct to the user from somebody official (ie the foundation) that ordinary users are not able to do. Hopefully people will be more likely to respond to such communication to explain what they are doing which can help determine whether there is in fact a problem with the data. But surely that is no reason not to set up community structures to deal with local vandalism at a local level where that can be achieved and to only escalate the most serious instances to the working group. Sure, and that's the explicit requirement before forwarding vandalism cases. Most of the people in this conversation were talking about the OP which was not vandalism -- it was copyright infringement. These are not the same things. Dave ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Postcodes map moribund?
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Tom Chancet...@acrewoods.net wrote: Hi, I set about correcting a few dozen post code entries in NPE for south east London, but the postcodes map doesn't seem to be updating: http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~random/postcodes/?zoom=13lat=51.48557lon=-0.07888layers=B00T0F0F Have the hopefully weekly updates stopped? Any plans to restart them? Yes, the hopefulness wasn't enough :-( Currently got an issue compiling mapnik on my dev box that generates them.. some conflict with latest ubuntu... probably easy to fix just haven't got round to it. I do /plan/ to fix it... I just don't know when it'll happen :-) Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] A process for rethinking map features
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Tobias Knerro...@tobias-knerr.de wrote: Tom Chance wrote: - Tags are proposed on the wiki, no change to current practice - If the proposal throws into question existing, accepted tags, defer the proposal to small working groups - These working groups study the wider questions and formulate a complete proposal for new tags, deprecation, etc. People can do this already, and I'm sure that a good proposal created by a working group would easily be accepted in a wiki vote. - At SOTM present and discuss their proposals and vote Aka the people who have time and money to get to SOTM decide approach? I still prefer the people who care about the issue decide approach. - If proposals are accepted, a combination of carrot (rendering stylesheets, Potlatch presets, etc.) and sticks (error checking, auto-correcting bots) to implement the accepted proposals On the one hand, you still cannot force software/stylesheet developers to use your proposal. On the other hand, we could try the same thing right now. The path proposal could have been successful long ago if applications were pushing it instead of refusing to use it (see CycleMap). It's on the todo list. It screws up the stylesheets in horrible ways due to the hundreds of tag combinations that end up meaning cycle path as far as the cycle map is concerned, so we're investigating more sane ways to handle it. On the potlatch side of things, potlatch2 will load map feature presets from an XML description file which will be supplied to the editor as a user parameter -- this can be used by whoever to add whatever. The renderer for potlatch 2 is halcyon for which Richard is currently working out stylesheet files -- again these are user selectable. Potlatch 2 demo at: http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~random/potlatch2/potlatch2.html (obviously at a very early stage, and presets file is hard-coded -- it won't be) Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Proliferation of path vs. footway
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Tom Chancet...@acrewoods.net wrote: On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 12:13:39 +0200, Martin Simon wrote: Path was and is intended to provide an alternative tagging scheme for things tagged with footway/bridleway/cycleway before that is not biased mode-of-transport-wise. With path, you can distinguish between e.g. officially designated footways and those that have no designation at all. Furthermore, it is possible to tag combined cycle/foot/whateverways without discriminating one of the modes of transport. (like with highway=cycleway, foot=yes before) If this is the proper conclusion of the voting then the tag is a complete, hopeless mess! Since the vote very clearly opposed deprecating footway, cycleway, and bridleway we must now have two parallel tagging schemas that are marking exactly the same features with more or less the same information in a different way. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Approved_features/Path Germans use highway=path for paths of any description fields and forests, Italians for paths in the countryside, English-speaking mappers either for miscellaneous little footpaths or as a wholesale replacement of footway/cycleway/bridleway, and in a few places people seem to just be making random distinctions (like footpaths in cemeteries). The result is a totally unclear fudge which leaves us either with needlessly complicated maps, or stylesheets with a long string of this or that or that or that definitions to describe near-identical features that should be rendered in the same way. It just makes me despair about the anarchic approach we have towards tagging. It's almost as bad as the utterly pointless (and still unresolved) distinctions around wood/forest. It's absolutely fine to create a new tag for a new feature, do what you want! But it's crazy that we let random unaccountable groups of wiki users change the rules for basic features like footpaths without having any sufficient processes and tools to make sure this then gets full agreement, clear documentation and proper enforcement. Anarchy in tagging died a bit back when some guys on the wiki decided ochlocracy was the way to go. Tagging used to be occasionally a confused mess. Now it's an organised, and approved confused mess where anyone with a clue automatically withdraws from discussions to keep their sanity intact (and to give them some more time to go and actually map something), knowing full well that not being there won't make much difference to the eventual stupid decision. Gah... must... be... more... positive... Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Stefan de Koninkste...@konink.de wrote: On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Stefan de Konink wrote: And then you realise that the alignment of Yahoo Imagery is wrong on most places, and you have killed good vector material. Great job :) Good vector material? Tell me, have you ever _seen_ TIGER? Yes, and I have also _seen_ Yahoo been wrong on more places than it was right. So I am still skeptical people tracing Yahoo and claiming they are better than [insert source here] mainly because except that source they have 0 ground reference. Seriously, you're kidding me. Yahoo may be out-of-alignment here and there but by and large if the street looks straight in Yahoo, it is straight. And US city streets generally are. TIGER streets are bonkers mad wavy. Most likely this is true because the TIGER dataset was actually traced from/for a much lower precision map, hence wavy because you are plotting it on a far higher resolution then it was created for. With respect to TIGER you might say: TIGER is *so* bad, Yahoo will always be better. My point is, unless Yahoo is actualy validated where you are tracing it gives poor output too, no matter how bad you think TIGER is. Um, no. It'll be potentially misaligned, potentially outdated, and potentially misinterpreted. So potentially poor, but it's entirely possible (and actually quite likely) that it's fine and you get pretty good data out. And it's definitely better than most tiger data I've ever seen. So choosing between potentially poor, and very horrible isn't really so hard is it. Hopefully someone on the ground will eventually verify it -- they can fix it if it's still broken. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Jeffrey Martindogs...@gmail.com wrote: Maybe we want different policies for different areas and different kinds of data. For example once all the roads are mapped we freeze the roads, but we allow free changing of street names until they reach a freeze point. Here in Korea I just want data and the more the better. In downtown London I would assume all the roads can be frozen except for major construction. That would be a very bad assumption, as every single one of our continuing London mapping parties shows. I'm constantly moving and renaming roads as the data we get becomes more precise. Nevermind the more technical issues such as adding and connecting roads to existing roads, or foot paths, or cyclepaths, or any of the other stuff which might not be considered mapping the roads but still requires editing them. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ODbL: Where do we stand regarding collective/derivative databases
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 2:54 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Hi, Matt Amos wrote: LWG cannot entirely resolve these questions, as they need open discussion and community consensus (which we obviously can't provide on our own). even then, final interpretation is up to the courts. Of course. Thanks for your comments, I especially liked the a(b(X)@c(Y)) part which is a nice structure to think about this. But about my Navteq+OSM example, you said that my reading would be that the deletions from the OSM data are a derivative database of both the OSM data and the navteq data and that the combination of navteq + (OSM - derivative) constitutes a public use of that derivative database, requiring the release of the navteq data. Now if I loaded my Navteq database into postgis and created a buffer around every object, generating one giant buffer area multipolygon for the whole world, then I could use that to subtract data from my OSM data base and would then only have to publish the giant multipolygon under ODbL (because that was mixed with OSM data) and not the original Navteq data. So this means I'd have to get permission from Navteq to release the giant buffer multipolygon under ODbL but if that is granted, I could continue with my OSM-enhanced Navteq tiles plan, and OSM would gain precious little from having access to the Navteq buffer multipolygon. Right? Do you even have to go that far? The Navteq multipolygon isn't actually part of the resulting derivative database, it's just part of the algorithm to get there. Assuming the result is just a shrunk version of the OSM DB I'd have thought the only thing you had to release in this case was the alterations made to the OSM DB -- ie: a list of the bits you deleted. We'd be within our rights to try and reconstruct the multipolygon from those deletions, but you wouldn't have to actually release it? or put another way: if I do o...@navteq = DD (where @ is some function that combines the datasets), there's no circumstance in which I have to release Navteq. My obligation is to release DD under ODbL (I can hand out the DD-OSM diff). This happens to entitle anybody else to attempt to reconstruct as much of Navteq as possible. The ODbL says I have to release changes, it doesn't say I have to tell you why I'm making them. Is that remotely the right reading? Dave ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Karlsruhe schema with address ranges
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote: On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 08:19:25AM +, Joe Richards wrote: I am tagging some buildings which contain multiple addresses in them, but not interpolated http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.49994lon=-2.61296zoom=16layers=B000FTF Since the listing of these numbers is long and sloppy, is it possible to use the sub-proposal for ranges (e.g. 37-45) given here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/House_numbers/Karlsruhe_Schema#Sub-proposal:_ranges_of_numbers_for_individual_nodes I don't know about those building, but in many cases there are different entrances for each house number in one large building. In that case I would suggest you map those entrances as single nodes (all on the way making up the building outline), each with its house number. This solves the above problem and as bonus gives better routing to the actual entrance. Frequently not. I've done a lot of addr:housenumber=10-23 Sometimes I've added a node for each entrance. I've even done some funky stuff with writing (even)/(odd) in there, but that's probably not such a good idea. I was just following the principal of recording the information to figure out what works later. Take a browse round putney for some of the obscure combinations I've messed with. http://osm.org/go/euum1sxuh-- Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Reverting all Liam123's edits
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 9:16 AM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.comwrote: For the record: I agree with Peter that we need to undo this user's changes, however it is done, and that it could cause large parts of East Anglia to be wiped out if data that happened to have his name on were to be removed because of the license process. We need a way to deal with this. You're exaggerating in this case. But if you're going down that road then liam123 is the least of your worries. Anyway, that's a legal question for a license switch, and the moment he (or anybody else for that matter) touches a node/way/relation it doesn't matter how we revert, we'll still have the problem. The bonus of exact reverts is that they should be pretty easy to detect and discard, but radical changes moved roughly back might not be that hard. He keeps coming back, day after day, making nonsense edits, but not in a random way. It's not just scribbling. Frederick put the revert scripts in svn a while back if you want to take a look. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Species names (was: Potted plants vs. garden beds)
2009/7/7 Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com:
Ed Avis eda at waniasset.com writes:
Rather than plant_type=orange_tree or similar, I think it would make more
sense
to tag plants and trees with the scientific (Latin) name of their species or
hybrid. These are already standardized and the local language translations
('citrus x sinensis' = 'en:orange', 'es:naranja') are also standard, and can
be
looked up by the map renderer rather than duplicated for every orange tree on
the map.
I don't expect individual plants will be tagged very often (even the Germans
have not added the 'unter den' linden trees) but for managed forests and
perhaps
farmland it might be useful.
I thought of mentioning zoo animals but I thought it too silly. But look:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.50826lon=13.33929zoom=17layers=B000FTF
I think this would be better tagged with scientific names for the animals
rather
than 'name' holding the local-language names. Then the mapnik rendering rules
can be extended with little icons for penguins, polar bears and so on. We
could
even have little fish swimming in the oceans like the maps in olden days.
on the ground rule applies... name should be the local language.
If you want to add a species_taxonomy (or similar) tag then feel free. :-)
Dave
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Amenity Editing
2009/7/4 Jack Stringer jack.ix...@googlemail.com: No need for relations. Just tag each address with addr:postcode or postal_code and all is sorted. Tag it with addr:postcode as that seems to be the system for now. And in case you haven't seen it: http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~random/postcodes/?layers=000FBT0F this is taken from those two tags as applied to nodes or ways. Seen it, and you can see there are errors in the map due to mistyped names or incorrect cords. We need to bring both the postcodes under one name then to a mass edit/check to see which are in incorrect areas. i.e. there is a EC in the Exeter area (EX). Well, we need to fix the errors... whether there's one tag or two isn't really an issue here in any way. This really doesn't work. Postcodes are applied to addresses, not streets. Just tag the address if you know it. It's still quite useful to tag streets with the known prefix though -- I've done that a lot in London where the SW15 part is printed on most street signs. I agree that postcodes are to the house not the the road. If you relate a house to a road it does allow for a navigation device to see where it needs to take you to get to the house. For now though I think having nodes for a building and putting in the addr info is the best way. This means that if in the future someone wants to do the houses to the schema suggested they can get all the information from the nodes, and then delete the extra data then. I know it making more work in the very long run but atm the idea of spending 2 weeks putting all the houses in correctly could put people off from entering the data. I think I someone needs to draw up a proposal to convert the postcode tag to the addr:postcode as duplication causes confusion for now. postal_code was around for donkey's years before anybody really even thought of addressing data. It's not doing any harm. Just leave it be. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Amenity Editing
2009/7/4 Jack Stringer jack.ix...@googlemail.com: The reson for removing it would help in clarifying which one is to be used. Which one is that then? :-) Also for the programmers it saves on having to call 2 tags. Meh.. took me ten seconds for that map. If we take the atitude you suggest we would have 5 or more tags to describe a postcode. No. Because I didn't suggest adding 3 more variations did I? If we merge the data wile there is only 10k of nodes using it, then it saves up the headache when it get to 1.5million. Because before I read the wiki I was under the illusion that postcode was to way to lable them not to use addr. 10k, 1.5m, makes remarkably little difference. My postcode map will still continue to work for instance, and same goes for any post processing/transformation script. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] AAAA openstreetmap still doesn't use ipv6
2009/7/3 SteveC st...@asklater.com: On 2 Jul 2009, at 08:57, Tom Hughes wrote: Thomas Schäfer wrote: sorry the theme is for the most of the people off topic. They use the application osm via internet. But the fundament of the internet (its protocol) is changing. We (the admins) are all well aware of this. I personally have had IPv6 on my home network for some years now. Please, when will OSM support IP over pigeon? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_over_Avian_Carriers Presumably you can add it as an extension to your new OSM API? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Steve/WalkingPapers Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] CanVec:CODE vs. CanVec:UUID -relevancy
2009/6/26 Sam Vekemans acrosscanadatra...@gmail.com:
Hi all,
Im sending it out to everyone, as its of international significance when
dealing with bulk data.
The 4 general tags
attribution=Natural Resources Canada
- tells the users what agency it came from (public/private)
created_by=canvec2osm
- tell the user what program was used to create it. ... ie. blame me if the
script doesnt work or is wrong.
source=CanVec_Import_2009
-tells the user what import project session it is ... ie. next year we might
do an import again for the updates.
canvec:UUID=11CF43756692E5F4E0409C8467120387
- is the 'lot number / series and actual product identifier, more detailed
than the bar code (' which tells the user the identity of each node/way/area
they are looking at.
The 5th, which is currently being debated
canvec:CODE=1200020
- This is the feature identifier, the SKU (Stock keeping unit) or the BIB
(Library catelogue number). This tells the user which
Library/floor/section/shelf/book/page number that they are looking at. When
the UUID identifies each character on the page.
Not having this CODE, would be like going to the library and asking if they
have a word in a book of 11CF43756692E5F4E0409C8467120387, when the CODE is
human-readable. The 0 at the end means its a NODE a 1 - means a way and a 2
means an area. The 120 at the begining means it's part of the 129 series
of features. and the '2' means it's the 2nd feature type in the set.
Like identifing 2 identical books, 'Times Atlas' where they has different
UUID's, but the same Catelogue code.
So does anyone have objections to the logic and usefullness behind me
keeping canvec:CODE? Or any arguments for/against what i wrote above?..
And at the same time im recommending for all imports that this gets added
(it its available).
Where are these tags going?
Some definitely belong on changesets (there's no way
source=CanVec_Import_2009 needs to be on every object when it's the
same for everything you upload), whereas the UUID looks like it should
be on the objects themselves.
Also I'm a bit confused about what this CODE is. Is it about finding
the feature, or about telling you what the feature is? If it's just
what the feature is then it's possibly redundant. If it's about
finding it, then is it likely to be the same for all elements of an
upload? -- in which case it can also go on the changset.
Dave
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Move the Map
2009/6/18 Russ Nelson r...@cloudmade.com: On Jun 18, 2009, at 3:07 AM, Joe Richards wrote: Maybe http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=0lon=-0zoom=2 would be more diplomatic, but then we should be using a map that did not make the Uk, India, Brazil and New Zealand all the same size. snip Maybe we should be using a projection whose critical data-preserving quality is the number of OSM contributors in the area. Don't like the look of the map?? Edit it and mark your home! You just end up with a very big map of germany :-) Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wanted feature for API 0.7 ??
2009/6/9 Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de: Hi! Dave Stubbs schrieb: Which just tells you those aren't the appropriate tags of which matt speaks. Careful selection of tags means that nothing existing needs to change, unless it's to make life easier for the user by adding filtering features. That is exactly the problem. When you add things that are not supposed to be visible by default, as they describe past or future objects, the items are there. And by no amount of tagging can you make them go away, that requires awareness of your tags and active filtering on part of all applications. Or can you please describe how an appropriate tag should look like e.g. for an object that will be torn down next year, so that it disappears from the map at the appropriate time without changing the renderers? Umm.. you can't. And why would you want to? It's a wiki. You can edit it. highway=motorway demolition_date=2009-09-01 then, on 1st September a mapper can come along, actually check the thing /was/ demolished (possibly prompted by some clever application) and replace with: highway=demolished_motorway demolition_date=2009-09-01 18:03:05+00 Anybody who wants to try to be clever can add knowledge of the demolition_date tag to their renderer/router. Anybody who doesn't will have the motorway disappear from their maps when they next update. Same goes for construction... highway=under_construction_motorway construction_complete_date=2009-10-12 to highway=motorway construction_complete_date=2011-08-05 The unaware renderer will see the motorway when it gets an update. The aware renderer will start displaying the motorway about 2 years too early, although you can expect the mapper to have updated the expected completion date by then as no doubt the political fallout of yet another multi-million pound government overrun gets splashed over the papers. None of this stops the ways appearing in the editor, but as has been mentioned, there's more than one reason why that could be a bad idea anyway. This kind of thing comes under unless it's to make life easier for the user by adding filtering features. Dave PS. I'm not actually advocating those particular tags names, or even saying they're a terrible idea, or that governments can't deliver big projects on time :-) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Freemap (OSM for walkers) - increased coverage
2009/6/9 Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com: On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Jonathan Bennettopenstreet...@jonno.cix.co.uk wrote: Ed Loach wrote: Have you a wiki page to say how to tag for things to render under each category? Tag... Render... BURN HIM! BURN! :-) Gah, the common misconception rears up again. Repeat after me: It is perfectly OK to tag for the renderer It's not on to tag incorrectly for the renderer Or if you like: OK = Hey Andy I see you render NCN mileposts. What tags make them get rendered since I want to put mileposts in and get them to show up. BAD = Hey Andy I like the pink industrial areas and want my flowerbed to show up pink too. What tags do you render for industrial areas? Spoilsport. I was just getting my bbq ribs and marshmallows ready. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Cathedral or chapel
2009/6/8 Stephen Gower socks-openstreetmap@earth.li: On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 11:12:13AM +0100, Dave Stubbs wrote: You could have done church_type=cathedral, church_type=church, and church_type=chapel (arbitrary tag name choice... probably not a good one) and let the renderer figure out that for itself. [Digression into an edge-case, probably best just to ignore me :-)] The chapel of one of Oxford University's colleges, Christ Church, is also a cathedral. A rather unimpressive cathedral, but a cathedral nevertheless. /me looks up what makes a cathedral a cathedral on wikipedia and then continues sounding highly knowledgeable... Yes, entirely possible. After all, a cathedral is just a church with a special chair and possibly some big guns. Dave http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathedral http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_(priest) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wanted feature for API 0.7 ??
2009/6/8 Peter Dörrie peter.doer...@googlemail.com: as frederik says, it doesn't need to be implemented in the API - all of it can already be done client-side using the appropriate tags*. Well several Users made the point that this would break all applications that exist today, as they would be useless in their current state. The current JOSM for example would not be able to make out the difference between planned , constructed, live, disused and historic objects, leading to a cluttering of the interface and inflation of the data-amounts. The current renderes wouldn't be able to handle it either and forcing 50+ applications to change would be unappropriate. Which just tells you those aren't the appropriate tags of which matt speaks. Careful selection of tags means that nothing existing needs to change, unless it's to make life easier for the user by adding filtering features. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Sustrans National Cycle Network Mileposts and Art
2009/6/8 Jonathan Bennett openstreet...@jonno.cix.co.uk: Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: Sustrans do not have accurate locations for their mileposts and art so are interested in data gathered by OSM contributors. I'll try to get all the ones on the northern half of NCN 7 the weekend after next. Do we have an existing tagging scheme for these? ncn_milepost = rowe / mccoll / mills / dudgen like: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/53497544 They appear on the cycle map with icons according to the type. There's already quite a lot in there, but not with sustrans refs (I don't even know if these can be found on the mileposts themselves). There's now one or two that have had sustrans_ref added :-) You can see several here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.484lon=-0.6242zoom=14layers=00B0FTF Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] How do we specify relative importance of features across all types of features?
2009/6/4 Stephan Plepelits sk...@xover.htu.tuwien.ac.at: Hi Folks! I'm the one who originally created the proposal. On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 10:52:33PM +0800, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: Hmmm... I guess the main problem that people have is that a tag like importance (or its synonyms) is inherently subjective and a subjective tag is Yeah, I see that point, but many things in the OSM are quite subjective (as you say yourself, the level of a road, or is it a halt or a station? is this a touristic spot or not?) At the moment renderers have the problem, that the information in OSM is very huge, and maps look cluttered. The importance-key (which is more or less derived from features on the ground) could help. Maybe we should give more examples what you can use the key for: Place of Worships: Cathedral amenity=place_of_worship importance=regional/national Church amenity=place_of_worship importance=urban Chapel amenity=place_of_worship importance=suburban You could have done church_type=cathedral, church_type=church, and church_type=chapel (arbitrary tag name choice... probably not a good one) and let the renderer figure out that for itself. Then my local chapel of huge international historic architectural significance (but zero religious significance) won't get promoted over the cathedral down the road which everyone else happens to be more interested in but is only of national religious significance. (scenario made up of course :-)) It's not so much about the subjectivity but about the lack of definition of what importance actually is about, even for objects of the same type. For what it's worth, I viewed the purpose of the importance tag in the context of a general-purpose map which OSM is by default (though it can and does support specialist maps like the Cycle Map). I guess such importance/ popularity/prominence data can conceivably be compiled as a separate database to be maintained by those who are interested in it instead of being included into OSM. Brrr ... seperate databases ... I don't see a reason why we would need a seperate database for this (I think this would be really hard to maintain and nobody would use it). Yeah, no need for separate databases, just need to be way more precise with the tags in the first place. A universal scale of importance just doesn't exist. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
2009/6/4 Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com: I have been looking at the coverage of maxspeed limit data for highways in the UK and we seem to have a right mix of styles. Here is the data for bug chunk of England while avoiding including anything from France or Ireland (which would include km/hour figure). We current have over 17,000 highway ways tagged with maxspeed and also 300 ways tagged as 'maxspeed:mph'. You will notice that for 30 miles per hour we have 30, You're assuming that's not a 20mph limit expressed in rounded down kph. 30mph, 30 mph, 48.2, 48.28, 48.280, 48.27808, 48.28032 and 48.28. Any suggestion on what we should recommend for the UK? I guess the USA should also be party to this discussion but they have far less population of the maxspeed field (only 70 uses in the Bay area) so possibly we should come to a view first. Our options seem to be:- maxspeed=30mph (the user should strip a trailing mph to find the value) maxspeed=30 (leaving it for the user to realise that it is in the UK and therefore imperial) maxspeed=30 mph (the user should strip the last word if it is mph including the space) maxspeed:mph=30 (Easy for the user) maxspeed=48.28 (with a defined precision) For metric use no work by the user, for imperial use a look-up table is required or a conversion and rounding Meh. 30mph == 48.28032 ~ 48.28 ~ 48 (and is what the highway code says). Any of those as tags will do for most purposes. The only one I'd complain about is specifying a mph value without the unit because it's impossible to determine what was intended. km/h is common enough to be used as the default. Whitespace is trivial to remove. FWIW highway code conversions are: 20mph = 32 30mph = 48 40mph = 64 50mph = 80 60mph = 96 70mph = 112 Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
2009/6/4 WessexMario wessexmario-...@yahoo.co.uk: I propose that we adopt a new key: maxspeed_mph It exists: maxspeed:mph Problems I'll do inline: It would be - simpler for UK, USA and other imperial countries to enter the speed. - less prone to error - users may not be used to kph speeds. - un-ambiguous. (what does '50' mean?) all can be fixed by supplying units mph. - maxspeed keeps consistently metric units (kph) - exact - being in the local units, no rounding necessary (no decimal places). you only need 5dp to get an exact mph-kph conversion anyway :-) - value will usually only be an integer in a multiple of 10 or 5. - easy to validate. except in windsor great park where the speed limit is 38mph. People have a tendency to round anyway, so it probably doesn't tell you much. - both maxspeed and maxspeed_mph keys could be entered - no ambiguity again except if they happen to be different speeds maxspeed:mph=30 maxspeed=96... what do I do? - applications can easily convert between maxspeed and maxspeed_mph where only one is entered as they can if there's a unit - in transition, having a separate key would make it simple for validators (people and computers) or a batch process, to convert existing maxspeed keys in the UK and USA from the various existing maxspeed variations to the expected multiples of 10 in maxspeed_mph we've already got a fricking bot doing that and it's pissing people off. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
2009/6/4 WessexMario wessexmario-...@yahoo.co.uk: Very helpful. And to be clear is says their should be a space between the number and the unit, ie '50 mph' not '50mph'. I wouldn't get too concerned about the space, computers can handle that well, so an optional whitespace should be allowable. So. are we reaching a point where we should do some clean-up work on the current tagging? Would that be appropriate? Should we add a space where required and convert the various km interpretations to either fit the proper km conversion from the table, or convert to mph. Definitely do a tidy up. It would be so much easier for all UK speeds to be in mph, both for data entry and validation. Let computers do the conversions to metric if they need to. Is this something that Potlatch can do reasonably efficiently? Apparently there's a bot doing something reasonably efficiently somewhere. Is it helping or hindering? being a pita. if a bot can do it then there's no reason the data consumers can't do it too without the bot. If you don't have a good reason to change something just leave it be. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] (no subject)
2009/6/2 Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk: Important to who? A good question. Perhaps prominence rather than important? I'm in two minds about the proposal. It feels like it is tagging for the renderer, but could be argued that it is providing information about how well known a place is to allow the renderers to make more useful judgments as to what to render in their rules. Yes, it's not tagging for the renderer. It's providing some subjective level of importance on an ill-defined scale, that renderers can choose to use if they so wish. Tagging for the renderer in the traditional sense (and where it's got such a bad reputation) would be tagging the park as a mountain peak to make it show up, or even better, just deleting the mountain because it's getting in the way of the park. Of course just not being tagging for the renderer doesn't make it a good idea :-) Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Zonal restrictions.
2009/5/13 Rory McCann r...@technomancy.org: On 30/04/09 13:17, Pieren wrote: On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Greg Troxel and you define the relation to say that all ways in some area of some type should be in the relation. You try to use relations to define a category but : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Relations_are_not_Categories The first thing I thought of when reading this is, to use a relation. 'Relations are not categories' applies to people making relations out of all hotels or All hotels in London, doesn't really apply here. type=zone name=Dublin Centre maxspeed=20kph parking=no Where zone is a known geographic area? A bounding way with tags like: zone = restriction maxspeed = 20kph parking = no seems like the best way to do it to me if you don't want to just replicate the tags on everything (and I can understand why you wouldn't want to do that). There's no software that'll pay attention to it atm, but then it's not long ago that everything ignored route relations too. I really wouldn't recommend relations for specifying what things are inside an area. It's a waste of two entire dimensions our dataset happens to have. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Rendering of footways with bicycle=yes
2009/4/30 Mike Harris mik...@googlemail.com: At the risk of reopening earlier very lengthy discussions - this suggestion seems to me to be an unnecessary misuse of the tag highway=cycleway which has an accepted and fairly well agreed meaning. It also seems to be a prima facie case of tagging for the renderers! Surely it is the rendering that needs to be adjusted - not the data! Risk?! Misuse how? Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] set up PostGIS with OSM data
2009/4/16 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: Hi, Torsten Mohr wrote: 2. relations-090408.osm.bz2 (what is this one for? I did not use it at all.) It is included in the planet file you have downloaded; the extra download is only for people who are not interested in the rest. Speicherzugriffsfehler # The line above is German, means memory access error. How much RAM do you have on that box? Importing a planet file without the -s option will probably require at least a 32 GB machine (I am guessing here, can somebody confirm?). Somewhere between 4-5GB is required at the moment -- it increases all the time though :-) My home system stopped working a couple of months back because it's only a 32bit system -- you need a 64bit system to manage the whole planet in non-slim mode. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] set up PostGIS with OSM data
2009/4/16 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: Hi, Dave Stubbs wrote: Somewhere between 4-5GB is required at the moment -- it increases all the time though :-) Oh, then I have seriously overestimated the memory usage... I was unable to do Europe on a 2 GB machine so I figured the planet must require something like 20... That's probably the way osm2pgsql uses RAM in non-slim mode. It stores nodes by maintaining a fixed array of pointers to dynamically allocated arrays of about 2^14 nodes with sequential IDs. So if you have ids sparsely distributed then it allocates a lot of memory for just a few nodes and there's a lot of wasted space. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cycle map: trunk-roads in mountains
2009/3/29 OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com: Can you spot it? http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=31.4122lon=-7.3859zoom=12layers=00B0FTF That's what you get for not building epic bridges, tunnels, and other contour defying structures :-P Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cycle map: trunk-roads in mountains
2009/3/29 Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es: El Domingo, 29 de Marzo de 2009, Dave Stubbs escribió: 2009/3/29 OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com: Can you spot it? http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=31.4122lon=-7.3859zoom=12layers=00B0 FTF That's what you get for not building epic bridges, tunnels, and other contour defying structures :-P No, that's what you get for colouring trunks green instead of red pedanticas it should be/pedantic. Ha! Trunk roads should be green. I have the stone tablets to prove it. :-) Here's the solution: get the local authority to add a cycle lane, tag the road as having a cycle lane. Then the road will be blindingly obvious. Anyway, having actually been down that road in a manically driven minibus I can honestly say I wouldn't recommend cycling down it... but then I wouldn't really want to cycle/drive in morroco at all. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Alternatives to wikipedia?
2009/3/18 Russ Nelson r...@cloudmade.com: On Mar 18, 2009, at 4:53 AM, Lester Caine wrote: While the effort being put into links WITH wikipedia are to be applauded, many of us are no longer contributing to wikipedia because of their propensity to kill of material that is not 'noteworthy'! On a number of occasions in the past I have linked to articles only later to find the 'censors' message at the end of a link :( and I know we have had this discussion in the past where other OSM contributors have found the same problem. This is a serious enough issue that it should be escalated to the OSMF. They should make an arrangement with Wikipedia saying: that an article linked from OSM to Wikipedia is by definition noteworthy, and that that justification cannot be used to delete an article from Wikipedia. There might be other reasons: for example that the locations linked between OSM and Wikipedia are in fact not related, or the *location* is not worth including in OSM. If we're going to cooperate with Wikipedia, then they need to cooperate with us by not allowing any dangling links. Wikipedia have their whole concept of notability. We have the concept that if it exists you can map it. This isn't really compatible. If I map my house (I have done, it's an address, OSM wants that data) and link it to a page about my house on wikipedia I'd fully expect the wikipedia article to get deleted on notability grounds. My house is not notable just because it exists, but it is worth mapping. It's not just us who might link to a wikipedia page that gets removed on such grounds. That's wikipedia's problem, not ours, and they seem quite happy with it. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Statistics and TIGER import question: What happened in August 2007?
2009/3/17 SteveC st...@asklater.com: On 16 Mar 2009, at 17:55, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, I'm looking at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Image:Osmdbstats2.png and I wonder why there is a sudden drop in the node count immediately before commencing the TIGER import. - It looks as if half our database was deleted immediately before we started importing but that surely wasn't the case...? the old tiger import, which was very broken, was deleted ha! you're all wrong The stats calculation changed -- previously it was counting deleted objects... http://trac.openstreetmap.org/changeset/3882 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] California bill to limit detail on online mapping tools
2009/3/13 Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net: Pieren Pieren wrote: May I suggest a new tag: landuse=blur Superb. I've been wanting a tag like that for a while. I have now used it for the first time, in a location not that far from where I live: http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=51.90063lon=-1.62397zoom=15way=32060656 (warning - very _cheesy_ joke that only some UK mappers will get) I found an error in your tagging. I've corrected it for you. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Reverse-Engineering Maps and Share-Alike Licences
2009/3/8 Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com: On 7 Mar 2009, at 23:56, OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com wrote: On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Gervase Markham gerv- gm...@gerv.net wrote: b) If people are reverse-engineering our stuff, they need a massive, sustained, continuous Mechanical Turk effort unless they create SVG files that just happen to contain the same data as OSM files and we add a loophole that says SVG files are a derived work instead of a database, thus allowing wtfyw license to be applied. My evil alter ego would be quite interested in developing a version of the cycle map that whilst looking a bit strange just so happened to be quite easy to run OMR over. Perhaps Dave's evil alter ego would find writing such an Optical Map Recogniser interesting... Yes. The OMR. Pass in a tile png with full path and the magic box reverse engineers it. Any network activity to openstreetmap.org is entirely coincidental. Hey, he is evil you know. I can assure you even my evil alter ego would refuse to do anything that possibly might involve a fourrier transform. Dave ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-legal-talk] License to kill
2009/3/6 graham gra...@theseamans.net: graham wrote: How do I find out if I'm a member in good standing? Just saw the relevant page: http://foundation.openstreetmap.org/membership/ which sounds as though if you don't pay annually, even if not reminded, you're probably dropped. Haven't seen an actual rule to say so though. That page was last updated in 2007 when there were 60 members eligible to vote. Anyone know how many there are now? I think someone said 200... but anyway. You should have been contacted if your membership was about to expire. If you think it might have been missed I'd suggest dropping an e-mail to members...@osmfoundation.org would be the best way to find out. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
2009/3/5 SteveC st...@asklater.com: On 27 Feb 2009, at 05:04, Ben Laenen wrote: It looks like we finally got some kind of License plan for the step towards the new license, so everyone check http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Implementation_Plan Let me start with the obvious questions first: * why don't you split between the votes whether you like license X and the question whether you're allowing the change of license on your data? After all, I want to have an idea *how much* of the data will still be there after the second vote. If it turns out that any data from someone who gave his approval would be deleted, then count me as no vote. so vote method is an interesting constraint... but I think we're being really hardcore in making sure that everyone who added data has to agree or we reset the process back to zero. * I still have no response to the question what would happen with my data if it's derived from someone who doesn't give it's approval for a license change. My view, personally, is that it should be dropped. But y'know I just don't think it will happen like that. If we build a positive process and bring people with us then we'll get the majority of the people along. We will lose small bits of data but thats ok, we have fantastic volunteer community to fix those edges, we'll be in shape in no time. And how are you going to check that anyway? You can do lots of things with CC-BY-SA data (copying, splitting, merging) where it's impossible to Well it's all in the database... every single edit (oh and the dump of the segments stuff). Because one day, about 4.5 years ago I knew it would be needed and designed it in. No need to thank me. No. Really. I think he's referring to the more complex derivatives (such as splitting a way) which are clearly logically derived but have no obvious connection in our data model (splitting creates a new way with no history, as well as leaving the original way in place but truncated). But this is only an issue if you're taking the literal unwind objects only approach and still regard such artefacts as in any way significant. Mostly nodes will get in the way anyway and force you to do some kind of cascade delete, but there are still more than a few ways these bits and bobs will leak through. My understanding is for example that if you split a way, there's not a single connection between the two parts of the way telling that one derived from the other. I can't comment on what potlatch does to my beautiful database. You can however comment on your crappy data model that doesn't allow forking an object to share a common history :-) Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM license change: A license to kill? - How to make a nightmare come true!
2009/3/5 Russ Nelson r...@cloudmade.com: On Mar 5, 2009, at 2:54 PM, Matt Amos wrote: us trying to read a complex license without comments is like lawyers trying to read complex code without comments. They're mostly hard to read because they're tedious in their detail. Legal writing isn't actually THAT impenetrable, if you can stay awake (no, seriously, I can only read 2-3 licenses at a time before I start to nod off. Takes me DAYS to read all the OSI-approved licenses). The whole code/comments analogy seems the wrong one. Most people are after the user manual -- I don't want a step by step description of how the license works, I want a nice manual telling me how to use it. And like most open source projects there currently isn't one (at least not an up-to-date one). And for pretty much the same reasons (lack of people who are not one of: busy coding, rubbish at writing manuals, don't understand the program). Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM license change: A license to kill? - How to make a nightmare come true!
2009/3/5 Dave Stubbs osm.l...@randomjunk.co.uk: 2009/3/5 Russ Nelson r...@cloudmade.com: On Mar 5, 2009, at 2:54 PM, Matt Amos wrote: us trying to read a complex license without comments is like lawyers trying to read complex code without comments. They're mostly hard to read because they're tedious in their detail. Legal writing isn't actually THAT impenetrable, if you can stay awake (no, seriously, I can only read 2-3 licenses at a time before I start to nod off. Takes me DAYS to read all the OSI-approved licenses). The whole code/comments analogy seems the wrong one. Most people are after the user manual -- I don't want a step by step description of how the license works, I want a nice manual telling me how to use it. And like most open source projects there currently isn't one (at least not an up-to-date one). And for pretty much the same reasons (lack of people who are not one of: busy coding, rubbish at writing manuals, don't understand the program). And I should have added don't understand the user to that list. But then I'm rubbish at writing manuals :-) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] There Is No Cabal
2009/3/4 Ulf Möller use...@ulfm.de: Frederik Ramm schrieb: then it emerges that this was an intentional change requested by the OSM Foundation. I haven't seen this emerging anywhere. (In fact, the OSM foundation, represented by their board of directors, seems to have been remarkably un-involved as we have heard from 80n who serves on the board.) True. Re-reading the message at http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/odc-discuss/2009-March/26.html, the change request is attributed to the Foundation's lawyer, not to the Foundation itself. However, it is described as an effort to simplify some of the licensing issues around being able to use a database to produce a work when using other sources, and not as an accident. But when you read the use cases on the wiki it's quite clear that the lawyer who answered those (when he answered those, whenever that was) believed that SA was in place. Which puts it back into the realms of unintended side-effect and cock-up. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan - what data would need deleting
2009/3/4 80n 80n...@gmail.com: On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: You have discussed some elaborate plans about what data from a non-relicensing contributor would have to be deleted and what would have to be kept. In the worst case, in the event of a dispute, do you really fancy trying to convince a court of law that the elaborate heuristics you applied are sufficient to make the map completely independent of the work of the users who said 'no'? The only sound rule that can be sure to stand up in court is to delete all data from the contributors who didn't give explicit permission, and all data that depends on it. Period. You may think this is unnecessarily paranoid. Indeed it is: but if the relicensing exercise doesn't put the project on a legally unassailable footing, it is not worth doing. At the moment we can say with certainty that 100% of the contributors have clicked 'yes' to an agreement to distribute their changes under CC-BY-SA. Any legal niceties tidied up by a move to a different licence are good to have, all other things being equal, but are hugely outweighed if the data becomes a questionable mishmash of contributions that have agreement, and those that don't have agreement but pass some odd set of rules we invented ourselves to convince ourselves that we didn't need to get permission. I believe this is a wise approach. OSM is traditionally very conservative about using any data not from a know clean source. On the grand scale its relatively easy to capture map data, the value of a clean database far outweighs the risks associated with infringing anyone's copyright. We should apply the same degree of conserativism to our CC-BY-SA licensed data as we would to any other copyrighted data. Perhaps we are thinking about this all wrong. If we considered the ODbL to be a license fork of the project (albeit a friendly from the inside fork) then it makes it much easier to think about how all this should happen. I think the problem here is the statement, delete all data from the contributors who didn't give explicit permission, and all data that depends on it. Period. If only it was that simple. There's two options: 1) Start again from the first point of time at which someone not agreeing to the switch contributed data. 2) Draw a pragmatic line somewhere to determine what constitutes a copyrightable derivation from CC-BY-SA data. Option 2 is what just about everybody is talking about. They're just putting the line in different places. So the question isn't ever really going to end in a Period. We're going to have to make a call, and that can be extremely conservative with large zones of reversion around every contaminated edit, or extremely aggressive with complex heuristics to determine significant edits, or any point in between. Most people seem to be aiming for middle ground with object based reversion only and extremely few heuristics (ie: a zero change edit doesn't count). Which makes some sense. But don't kid yourselves it's a simple A or B choice. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] licence plan - Question about supplying own data
2009/3/4 Jason Cunningham jamicu...@googlemail.com: Hi All I've read through a bundle of licence emails, and there is one aspect that worries me, which hopefully someone can clarify. From my understanding (and I dont speak legalese), under the CCBYSA license you can take OSM data, create a derived work and distribute it. But, you had to let people know you where using OSM data, you had make it clear that other people where allowed to use your derived work to make further derived work and the CCBYSA licence must apply to their work. But its turned out this license may not be enforcable. A new licence has been proposed that is enforcable, but adds a significant new obligation to people/groups creating derived works. Looking through advice regarding the new or proposed licence in the wiki I have come across the following which I am worried about and wish to clarify (which I quote below) 1. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License_FAQ requires those that combine our data with their own data will have to give the latter to OSM. This means we get more open data. 2. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_Licence/Use_Cases Section 4.3 also requires that the notice include information regarding where the user can obtain a copy of the Database or Derivative Database. So it appears under the new licence when I create a map using OSM and add my own data (derived work), I have to make my data available to OSM. This leads on to a couple of questions. Questions 1. The main question. Do I (any one else affected) have to actually send my data to OSM, or, make sure its available (via an emailed file (if requested) or as a download on a website), or, am I simply giving the right for OSM to to take the derived work and copy/extract all data. 2. I am not entirely happy about making people/groups supply their data to OSM if they wish to create derived work. I agree with the original principle within the CCBYSA, that the derived work had to be CCBYSA. But I feel demanding that individual/groups make the data available puts a burden on some people they can not meet, or will not be acceptable. eg (extreme example?) A group of 8 year old kids spend a day in a local park mapping out locations where they find butterflies. They map this information using an OSM map and stick a copy on their local parks noticeboard. Surely they shouldn't be made to make this data available to OSM? Its not worth the bother for them (or OSM) A wildlife group wishes to map the location of endangered species. Lacking money, OSM seems like a good resource, but they can not supply the data and therefore the location of protected species to OSM. So they can not use OSM and have to spend money on another map? I started supplying data to OSM in the belief I was creating map data that was free and could easily be used by everyone. This can not be achieved if the burden of using OSm data is greater than the benefit. IANAL this is just my interpretation yada yada yada... When you have to make the data available, it's not to OSM specifically. It's the same idea as CC-BY-SA and GPL but applied to data. Your 8 year old kids would be obliged to license their butterfly data under the ODbL [1] and attribute OSM. As 8 year old kids would most likely be sticking bits of paper on a bigger bit of paper with a map printed on it that's trivially done by the end product... somebody walking past the notice board would be entitled to take the data and put it into OSM if they wanted to. If an organisation uses a derived database wholly internally then they get to keep it internal... there's no requirement to publish. So the wildlife group presumably won't give out maps of endangered species... anybody they do give a map to can request the derived database -- but they've been given a map anyway so are presumably trustworthy. Dave [1] Ignoring potential bug in 0.9 draft ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
