Ik probeer stadsbus nr 8 in een relatie te gieten. Met backward en forward
geeft de relatiechecker allemaal kleine stukjes. Is het mogelijk om bepaalde
vakken zowel forward als backward te noemen en toch de relatie consistent te
houden?
Ik heb nu 1 richting volledig (forward) gemaakt voor het
OK, can we put this in the conventions wiki pages?
Proposal:
Use two different relations, one for the forward direction, one for the
backward direction.
Example :
relation xx busnumber zzz Brussels - Antwerp
relation yy busnumber zzz Antwerp - Brussels
Op 10 augustus 2010 10:22 schreef
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:41:38 +0200, Renaud MICHEL
r.h.michel+...@gmail.com wrote:
Le mardi 10 août 2010 à 10:22, Tim Francois a écrit :
+1. Yup, this is what is currently happening in most of the UK - a
separate relation for the 'up' and 'down' bus routes, so that
forwards/backwards (which is
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:56:28 +0200, Ivo De Broeck
ivo.debro...@gmail.com wrote:
What i propose is keeping the existing relation for the normal
direction.
There is no normal direction with buses.
Example stadsbus nr 8 go from Bertem - Leuven - Bierbeek (check the
relation with the relation
2010/8/10 Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:56:28 +0200, Ivo De Broeck
ivo.debro...@gmail.com wrote:
What i propose is keeping the existing relation for the normal
direction.
There is no normal direction with buses.
Yes the normal name for the route is 8 Bertem- Leuven
Maarten Deen wrote:
Een oplossing zou natuurlijk kunnen bestaan uit het maken van 2
relaties :
relatie x 8 Bertem - Bierbeek
relatie y 8 Bierbeek - Bertem
Dat is wat op veel plaatsen toch al gedaan wordt. En dan geen forward
of backward er in. Ik zou zeggen: de eerste node/way in de
Le mardi 10 août 2010 à 12:41, Ben Laenen a écrit :
Yes, please put the bus stop nodes next to the way, not on the way.
OK, that seems more logical anyway.
btw, the page talks about an *extra* node on the way, used together with
the bus stop node next to the way.
Is it useful?
If I split the
2010/8/10 Renaud MICHEL r.h.michel+...@gmail.comr.h.michel%2b...@gmail.com
Le mardi 10 août 2010 à 10:22, Tim Francois a écrit :
+1. Yup, this is what is currently happening in most of the UK - a
separate relation for the 'up' and 'down' bus routes, so that
forwards/backwards (which is
2010/8/10 Renaud MICHEL r.h.michel+...@gmail.comr.h.michel%2b...@gmail.com
Le mardi 10 août 2010 à 10:22, Tim Francois a écrit :
+1. Yup, this is what is currently happening in most of the UK - a
separate relation for the 'up' and 'down' bus routes, so that
forwards/backwards (which is
Ivo De Broeck wrote:
see
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Bus_and_
tram_lines#Tagging(to discuss)
Watch out when editing the wiki: you've replaced the paragraph about tagging
belbussen. Furthermore, when starting a discussion on the wiki, this should
go on
Maarten Deen wrote:
Have a look at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/VRS , for a lot of
relations, there are two routes. Often also tagged with a from and to in
the relation, although I don't know if that really helps in a program.
a lot of relations: I count 12 on that page with two
Bernhard R. Fischer wrote:
Don't you think that we shouldn't put the lighthouse also on that page?
Everything is there: light vessel, float, major, minor lights. I think we could
put the lighthouse also there.
You are right. I have now done it.
Ok, the chilean and the brazilian imports differ in the base license, giving
the brazilian imports a head start ahead of chilean in the race for the new
license.
AFAICT all the brazilian imports are PD, and conditions have been very
simple, as giving a way of pointing to sorce data (i.e. source=
I see I got a snowball running here, great guys. Continue on that. I can
help out with some language makeup and corrections on the English language
pages (Nautical Professional) but have little time to offer at the moment. I
will also look into translating the important bits of it into Portuguese
Does anyone have a spare / unused OSM account that was created before the
new Contributor Terms were introduced?
I'm planning an import of some micro-mapping that's been done for my local
area. The import guidelines[1] recommend that I create a new account for
this to keep it separate from my
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 00:06:00 +0100, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
Why don't you try this. Import some Ordnance Survey Street View data
into
OSM, then render it as a Produced Work with the ODbL required
attribution:
Contains information from OpenStreetMap, which is made available here
Hey friends,
I have just started learning about OSM then had an idea to improve OSM in
Turkey. As you might now, OSM is not good enough improved.
Now, I had an idea which is making a vehicle tracking system and encouraging
companies to use it and through this adding tracks in to OSM.
Now a days,
Anthony wrote:
What about a tracing of a photograph of a flower? [...]
What about a tracing of a photograph of a lake, as viewed from
an aircraft?
Bauman v Fussell may be relevant here.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
80n,
80n wrote:
For obvious reasons I'm not going to use an account that forces me to
commit to the new contributor terms. So now I'm looking for anyone who
might have an old OSM account (created before May 12th 2010) that they
are not using and would be happy to give away to me.
Maybe
80n wrote:
Why don't you try this. Import some Ordnance Survey Street View data
into OSM, then render it as a Produced Work with the ODbL required
attribution
I've written fairly extensively on this in talk-gb, but to reiterate a
posting from May:
To comply with ODbL for data obtained
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Maybe instead of playing these kinds of games you could just help those
people who want to set up a fork, and then import to that fork. Because for
us, your plannet import along with your steadfast refusal of the new license,
only causes more work and
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 10:16:14AM +0200, ozgur akyar wrote:
Now, I had an idea which is making a vehicle tracking system and encouraging
companies to use it and through this adding tracks in to OSM.
As far I know there is not an open source fleet tracking software
right now.
I imagine a
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Niccolo Rigacci o...@rigacci.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 10:16:14AM +0200, ozgur akyar wrote:
Now, I had an idea which is making a vehicle tracking system and
encouraging
companies to use it and through this adding tracks in to OSM.
As far I
Now, I had an idea which is making a vehicle tracking system and encouraging
companies to use it and through this adding tracks in to OSM.
I've had same idea and done some trials. I have a blackbox in my car
for a year or so, and it stores GPS traces to a tracking system over
GPRS. These look
80n wrote:
This is quite a good place to start:
http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Copyright_protection_of_databases
It's good to see licence sceptics starting to look at the case law too.
There are of course a million things you could say about rights pertaining
to factual compilations in the US.
2010/8/10 Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com:
Now, I had an idea which is making a vehicle tracking system and encouraging
companies to use it and through this adding tracks in to OSM.
I've had same idea and done some trials. I have a blackbox in my car
for a year or so, and it stores GPS
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:23:16PM +0300, Ciprian Talaba wrote:
You mean like OpenGTS: http://opengts.sourceforge.net/ ? :)
It seems that the web interface improved greatly since the last
time I checkd that project!
Neverthless, if I'm right, the project started around the
low-level
On 10 August 2010 18:14, David Ellams osmli...@dellams.fastmail.fm wrote:
I'm not the first to say this, but is the problem not (whichever BY-SA
licence we use) that we are suggesting to people that attributing the
project is enough (rather than, say, giving the most major contributors
to the
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
On 10 August 2010 18:36, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Maybe instead of playing these kinds of games you could just help those
people who want to set up a fork, and then import to that fork. Because for
us, your plannet import along with your steadfast refusal of the new
license,
On 10 August 2010 20:28, Jukka Rahkonen jukka.rahko...@latuviitta.fi wrote:
How strict are we going to be with these cases? If we are going to be strict,
how can we sort them out?
I think this is why some people are advocating that ODBL be a fork and
start with 'clean' data, it's going to be
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
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 6:41 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 August 2010 20:28, Jukka Rahkonen jukka.rahko...@latuviitta.fi wrote:
How strict are we going to be with these cases? If we are going to be strict,
how can we sort them out?
I think this is why some people are
On 10 August 2010 20:52, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
The only people who are advocating clean data (ie no data at all)
It's slightly annoying to be told time after time after time to only
use clean data for OSM, but now that some people want a change it's
ok to have slightly less
2010/8/10 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org
John Smith wrote:
I'm not being petty in the least, I want a compromise, but others
have outright refused to even consider any kind of a compromise
that will save years of work without resorting to shady legal tactics.
Hey, now that's not fair.
The reason I suggested to LWG that they drop
On 10 August 2010 21:17, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
The reason I suggested to LWG that they drop the relicensing option from the
Contributor Terms, and limit future options to CC-BY-SA or ODbL[1], was
precisely that: a spirit of compromise.
And I liked that proposal, I even
Now that we have identifiable changesets, the advice to create a separate user
account is no longer as essential as it once was. I would suggest using your
existing user account and doing the upload as one or more clearly marked
changesets.
--
Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com
Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org writes:
Because for us, your plannet import along with your steadfast refusal of the
new
license, only causes more work and more problems.
That is true. But then for those who would prefer to continue with CC-BY-SA,
the pushing of the new contributor terms
Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org writes:
Any license that tries to use this patchy copyright protection of data
is bound to be unfair at the very least, and more likely a pain the
behind of anybody who wants to use it. The legality of OSM use cases
would depend on whether you execute a
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 7:16 AM, Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com wrote:
Map is a hand-written 2D picture of the world. It is definitely more a
kind of art than a digital photo in flickr, there is more subjectivity
and intelligence etc needed to make it.
How can photos be copyrighted?
You mean like OpenGTS: http://opengts.sourceforge.net/ ? :)
It seems that the web interface improved greatly since the last
time I checkd that project!
Neverthless, if I'm right, the project started around the
low-level software, concerning vehicle data acquisition, not
around the web
2010/8/10 Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com:
Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org writes:
Any license that tries to use this patchy copyright protection of data
is bound to be unfair at the very least, and more likely a pain the
behind of anybody who wants to use it. The legality of OSM use cases
would
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 6:54 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 7:16 AM, Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com
wrote:
Map is a hand-written 2D picture of the world. It is definitely more a
kind of art than a digital photo in flickr, there is more subjectivity
and
Jaak Laineste jaak.laineste at gmail.com writes:
I don't really see how someone can even have the idea (or argument)
that map is just a database of facts.
I'd suggest a simple technical test for is X an art or fact.
1. ask two persons to create the X.
2. store it to a digital file, and
On 10 August 2010 22:09, Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd like this approach too: each country should be able to decide
license terms. Communities are different, population/contributor
densities are very different, laws are different. Would it be really
practical, and how it
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 8:09 AM, Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/8/10 Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com:
Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org writes:
Any license that tries to use this patchy copyright protection of data
is bound to be unfair at the very least, and more likely a pain
Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
I like this test because it will make things easy. No fuzzy shades of grey
like some Richard is suggesting.
I'm not suggesting, I'm reporting. You might like things to be easy but that
isn't the way the law works... or we wouldn't have been having this
discussion for the
Richard Fairhurst richard at systemed.net writes:
Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
I like this test because it will make things easy. No fuzzy shades of grey
like some Richard is suggesting.
I'm not suggesting, I'm reporting. You might like things to be easy but that
isn't the way the law works...
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 20:20 +1000, John Smith
deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
I've only seen it suggested in the past about how crediting every
single contributor would be pages long, your suggestion is a good
idea, however I'm left wondering if this would make things open to
abuse, how many
On 10 August 2010 22:52, David Ellams osmli...@dellams.fastmail.fm wrote:
I can't take credit for the suggestion, as I think this was Richard F's
idea (I knew I'd seen it somewhere: is this fair attribution? grin).
Maybe, for an online map (such as osm.org), a more prominent link to
OSM's
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010, David Ellams wrote:
I can't take credit for the suggestion, as I think this was Richard F's
idea (I knew I'd seen it somewhere: is this fair attribution? grin).
Maybe, for an online map (such as osm.org), a more prominent link to
OSM's contributors page would be sufficient
What ifs, what ifs. The key is clearly to reduce these. So, in summary, we'll
proceed with a voluntary program of sign-up for the new OpenStreetMap
Contributor Terms [1]. Those that simply want to get on and accept that we
won't doing anything daft can sign up.Those that are worried about
John Smith wrote:
No idea about printed maps, but several sites recently only linked
to an attribute page on their site, rather than displaying it on top
of the map, so maybe having a small lookup table of major
contributors that can be linked to would be suitable?
We do. :)
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:36 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Anthony wrote:
What about a tracing of a photograph of a flower? [...]
What about a tracing of a photograph of a lake, as viewed from
an aircraft?
Bauman v Fussell may be relevant here.
Not particularly. The
Am 10.08.2010 13:38, schrieb Ed Avis:
Frederik Rammfrederikat remote.org writes:
Because for us, your plannet import along with your steadfast refusal of the new
license, only causes more work and more problems.
That is true. But then for those who would prefer to continue with CC-BY-SA,
I like this test because it will make things easy. No fuzzy shades of grey
like
some Richard is suggesting. Can you give an example of a thing that is done
by a
human being and that is not art by this definition?
Humans create many non-art things. For example databases it
human-created
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Peter Körner osm-li...@mazdermind.de wrote:
[...] CC-BY-SA can't be used for databases.
That's certainly trivially incorrect.
The database that holds Wikipedia is a database, for instance.
___
talk mailing list
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
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010, Peter K?rner wrote:
Didn't you read? There is no way in continuing with CC-BY-SA as CC-BY-SA
can't be used for databases. It is just not possible, damn!
Anyone tested this is any court? Which CC-BY-SA project was 'killed'
because of this?
Let the guys from the LWG do
On 10 August 2010 23:05, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
This also gives the advice, consistent with our current licence and with
ODbL, that where data from a national mapping agency or other major source
has been included in OpenStreetMap, it may be reasonable to credit them by
On 10 August 2010 23:32, Stefan de Konink ste...@konink.de wrote:
Why is this again a statement of making OSM more restrictive, while the hole
transition was invented to be less restrictive on the OSM data ;) Paradox?
The transition is from more free for contributors to less free for
On 8/10/10, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Peter Körner osm-li...@mazdermind.de
wrote:
[...] CC-BY-SA can't be used for databases.
That's certainly trivially incorrect.
The database that holds Wikipedia is a database, for instance.
And it's not under
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
The question I'm asking (which you chopped out of the quote) is
whether or not the tracing is copyrightable.
Automatic tracing is not copyrightable by the tracer, according to the
test. What was copyrightable is the aerial image, and automatic
tracing is just a way of making a specific copy of
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 03:13:02PM +0200, Peter Körner wrote:
Am 10.08.2010 13:38, schrieb Ed Avis:
Frederik Rammfrederikat remote.org writes:
Because for us, your plannet import along with your steadfast refusal of
the new
license, only causes more work and more problems.
That is true.
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com wrote:
I like this test because it will make things easy. No fuzzy shades of grey
like
some Richard is suggesting. Can you give an example of a thing that is done
by a
human being and that is not art by this definition?
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
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,
On 10 August 2010 14:49, 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,
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:49:18PM +1000, John Smith 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
On 10 August 2010 23:54, Dave Stubbs osm.l...@randomjunk.co.uk wrote:
... 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
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:49 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
I never really got that, pro-PD people are pro-ODBL because copyright
may not be enough to cover the database...
Not sure what that means. I'd prefer OSM to stay CC-BY-SA. Barring
that, I'd prefer CC0 (or PDDL, or
On 10 August 2010 23:51, Mike Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote:
Thanks for the support on the ODbL but as Dave says, no, the acceptance is
for the Contributor Terms.
As I've said before, I can't legally agree to the CTs due to clause 1
at the very least, I don't have the right to relicense all
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Elena of Valhalla
elena.valha...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/10/10, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Peter Körner osm-li...@mazdermind.de
wrote:
[...] CC-BY-SA can't be used for databases.
That's certainly trivially incorrect.
The
2010/8/10 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Elena of Valhalla
elena.valha...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/10/10, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Peter Körner osm-li...@mazdermind.de
wrote:
[...] CC-BY-SA can't be used for databases.
That's
Anthony schrieb:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Matt Amoszerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Anthonyo...@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Matt Amoszerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
the ODbL is the only example i know of.
That's certainly a reason to be
On 11 August 2010 01:55, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
It would probably be pretty embarrassing for anybody who made that
sort of error in judgment or declaration of ignorance, so they might
be a little prickly about the subject or try to make it seem like
someone else's fault rather
Given that you can't (legitimately) sign up to the CT if you have used
data which you are not the copyright owner how will we deal with the
situation where someone who HAS imported external data signs up to the
Contributor Terms?
In some ways it is their own problem, they have warranted that
On 11 August 2010 02:13, Brian Quinion
openstreet...@brian.quinion.co.uk wrote:
There also needs to be a process for people who have signed the
contributor terms in error to un-sign or some way for them to be
assisted in removing their 'tainted' data so they are no longer in
breach.
This
OSM is mostly a consensus-based community, or a do-ocracy. It was never a
benevolent dictatorship, and I have given up (as far as I know, anyway) all
power I have in OSM. I used to write the code, own the domain names, run the
mailing list(s), run the servers, evangelize, talk to the press and
On 10 August 2010 17:19, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
OSM is mostly a consensus-based community, or a do-ocracy. It was never a
benevolent dictatorship, and I have given up (as far as I know, anyway) all
power I have in OSM. I used to write the code, own the domain names, run the
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:36 PM, steve brown st...@evolvedlight.co.uk wrote:
[ ... ]
I fully support what you have said. From the ubuntu community, their
code of conduct works well http://www.ubuntu.com/community/conduct as
it provides guidelines that can be adhered to, or conversely used to
I suggested a Code of Conduct, and have been working with OSM US for
us to adopt one. We've written a draft and were waiting for the annual
meeting and the next board to take it up
I'd like to see the OSMF adopt something similar.
A moderation policy without a code of conduct is too potentially
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
As Matt noted, there's a growing legal opinion that our current data is in
fact in the PD, as the CC-BY-SA can't be legally applied to it. Is that the
state you want to have in the future?
Better than it being under ODbL.
Hey
So while I am by no means! an expert in the workings of the ubuntu
community, I can summarise as follows from
http://www.ubuntu.com/project/about-ubuntu/governance:
The Community Council is responsible for the creation of sub-groups
and teams (such as the local chapters and development
El día Tuesday 10 August 2010 18:19:30, SteveC dijo:
So we are at a point now in OSM, I believe, where a few poisonous people
are wrecking the time, focus and goodwill of the majority of contributors,
I, for one, agree. These flame wars only waste our time. Our as in all of
us. It leads
At 05:16 PM 10/08/2010, Brian Quinion wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:04 PM, 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
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
Hi all,
I know this first hand. Many (if not most or all) of the key people
in OSM are feeling drained, distracted and upset. Some are talking of
hiatus or resign. These are the key people who write code, build
things, maintain things and run our working groups.
I'm not sure if I (still)
On 10/08/2010 17:59, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Personally I think this idea of labeling people as poisonous is itself
poisonous, and anyone who agrees with it is at least slightly poisonous.
I agree.
Personally I think Steve C is one of the rudest, most vitriolic voices
on the forums. Most of
Hi,
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.
There is a big
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
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 5:19 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
What are your ideas? How should we block people? For how long? What process
should it be? What are the best practices from other projects you're involved
in?
I think this is a great topic, and its nice to see it properly
On 11 August 2010 03:26, Patrick Kilian o...@petschge.de wrote:
There is a big difference between pointing out the current form of the
contributor terms means that we will loose 80% of the data in Australia.
Do you really want to proceed? and jumping into every thread and
spreading FUD that
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
Personally I think [name redacted] is one of the rudest, most vitriolic
voices on
the forums. Most of his posts are based on the idea of I don't like you
because you don't agree with me. This thread being a prime example.
Hi,
There is a big difference between pointing out the current form of the
contributor terms means that we will loose 80% of the data in Australia.
Do you really want to proceed? and jumping into every thread and
spreading FUD that has been dissected and disproved several times by
different
On 11 August 2010 03:42, Patrick Kilian o...@petschge.de wrote:
No matter if the claim is 10% or 100% it should be made and it should be
heard.
Without more details about contributor intent we are left to speculate...
But there has been the claim CC-BY-SA works perfectly well. If it
actually
Peteris,
I agree with you. I do not see anything wrong with ODbL this far. But
The third condition of the Contributor Terms is unacceptable to me.
Mappers from Germany or Southern England are probably one next to the
other at this point of OSMs history, so bulk imports sound like
absolutely
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:42 PM, Patrick Kilian o...@petschge.de wrote:
Hi,
There is a big difference between pointing out the current form of the
contributor terms means that we will loose 80% of the data in Australia.
Do you really want to proceed? and jumping into every thread and
1 - 100 of 298 matches
Mail list logo
