- Original Message -
From: Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 4:47 AM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] An example of the complications inherent in
determining tainted ways
Yeah, a healthy chunk of the interstates in Kansas are
On 15/12/2011 12:40, David Groom wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 4:47 AM
User moonwashed created this way by splitting it from a TIGER way.
He made several more edits to it but the last 20 versions have been by
- Original Message -
From: Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] An example of the complications inherent in
determining tainted ways
On 15/12/2011 12:40, David Groom wrote:
- Original
On 15/12/2011 13:17, David Groom wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 11:59 AM
But what if the source changes ? When I use high-resolution imagery
to improve areas formerly mapped from
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org wrote:
On 15/12/2011 13:17, David Groom wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 11:59 AM
But what if the source changes ?
Please continue any detailed discussion of this topic to legal-talk ... that's
what it's for.
-Mikel Moderators
== Mikel Maron ==
+14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
From: 80n 80n...@gmail.com
To: Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Hi,
On 12/15/2011 02:11 PM, 80n wrote:
Joint ownership is an important principle to understand. If someone
edits a way then they are making a derivative of that way and inheriting
*all* of the joint copyright ownerships.
Provided that a way is a work - maybe it isn't; maybe the whole of OSM
On 12/15/2011 8:21 AM, Mikel Maron wrote:
Please continue any detailed discussion of this topic to legal-talk ...
that's what it's for.
The question is not what's legally true, but what conditions the OSMF
will require an object to satisfy to not be reverted. So it actually
belongs on
Hi,
On 12/15/2011 02:58 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
So what here will be reverted by the OSMF? Obviously node 250413743
needs to be replaced by another node in the same general location. But
other than that, is everything tainted because it was split from a
tainted way? Or is nothing else
On 12/14/2011 9:45 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
It has been explained already but I'll repeat it - OSMF/LWG has not yet
decided what they will do with regards to the finer points of complex
object relicensing. This means that none of your questions above has an
answer. And OSMF is not going to
Yeah, a healthy chunk of the interstates in Kansas are the same way. I
didn't go quite as deep as Nathan but this way is a relevant example:
http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=33576021
User moonwashed created this way by splitting it from a TIGER way.
He made several more edits to it but the
11 matches
Mail list logo
