On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Stephen Gower
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 08:48:18PM +1200, Robin Paulson wrote:
if we are going to have an 'attribution' page on the wiki[1], with the
fine print regarding sources of various chunks of data, would a link
to it be
Up to now there has not been any official guidance on how to comply with the
attribution clause of our CC-BY-SA license. This means that people either
try to do something that they hope is acceptable or they do nothing. Some
of OSM's own outputs fall into the latter category (for example, the
On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 01:19:15PM +0100, 80n wrote:
If you publish OpenStreetMap data you can satisfy the attribution
requirement of the license by linking to or referencing
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Attribution;
Discuss.
+1.
cu bart
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Up to now there has not been any official guidance on how to comply with the
attribution clause of our CC-BY-SA license. This means that people either
try to do something that they hope is acceptable or they do nothing. Some
of
Hallo,
I'd like to propose that we make the following statement:
If you publish OpenStreetMap data you can satisfy the attribution
requirement of the license by linking to or referencing
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Attribution;
But you are aware of the fact that it
Quoting Michael Collinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I echo Tom's sentiment that www.openstreetmap.org/Attribution would be
a cleaner public link to present if possible.
You can request under BY-SA 2.0 that a URL be presented with the work.
See BY-SA 2.0 section 4.c:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Tom Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would certainly prefer that people using our data provide a link
to www.openstreetmap.org or the top level wiki index page as that
would do a better job of
Michael Collinson wrote:
Other than that, well, I think we both share the same opinion that
the current license is just unworkable full stop! :-)
There's probably not a lot of point making a big song and dance about
attribution at present. In a month or two's time, when we're ready to
vote
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hallo,
I'd like to propose that we make the following statement:
If you publish OpenStreetMap data you can satisfy the attribution
requirement of the license by linking to or referencing
quote who=80n
I would prefer a url like attribution.openstreetmap.org or
www.openstreetmap.org/attribution but it should still, IMHO, point to the
same wiki page.
I agree with www.openstreetma.org/attribution ; however, I don't think
that wikifying the attribution would be a good idea.
Hi All,
On the wiki for out of copyright maps, it states:
Maps published by the Ordnance Survey are Crown Copyright as
stipulated in the terms of The Copyright, Designs and Patent Act 1998
(http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880048_en_1.htm).
Therein, Chapter X. Section 163,
Tim Sheerman-Chase wrote:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Out_of_copyright
Is that interpretation about the FIRST year of publication definitely
correct? Or should it be the year of last update? Has this been
discussed before?
The FIRST is pretty meaningless. The 1954 revision of a
Michael Collinson wrote:
I echo Tom's sentiment that www.openstreetmap.org/Attribution
http://www.openstreetmap.org/Attribution would be a cleaner public
link to present if possible.
The shorter, the better (sometimes space is limited). So why not, with a
small DNS change:
Hello,
I've been involved in some ongoing dialogue with Natural Resources,
Government of Canada, who are keen for their National Road Network to
be used by OSM. There are a few particularities of the license that
need clarifying on OSM's party. Natural Resources are happy that OSM's
current
On 08/04/2008, 80n [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
if we are going to have an 'attribution' page on the wiki[1], with the
fine print regarding sources of various chunks of data, would a link
to it be possible, on the main map page? titled say 'data attribution'
or 'data sources'?
Have
Robin Paulson wrote:
have i missed something? i thought osm used Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 license not Creative Commons Share Alike
2.5 Licence
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/OpenStreetMap_License
I assume the name difference was just loose wording; all recent CC
On 08/04/2008, Nick Black [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I've been involved in some ongoing dialogue with Natural Resources,
Government of Canada, who are keen for their National Road Network to
be used by OSM. There are a few particularities of the license that
need clarifying on
Nick Black wrote:
Hello,
I've been involved in some ongoing dialogue with Natural Resources,
Government of Canada, who are keen for their National Road Network to
be used by OSM. There are a few particularities of the license that
need clarifying on OSM's party. Natural Resources are happy
Is anyone mapping the positioning of these devices in the UK? I don't yet have
a GPS :o|
Is there an easy guide on how to contribute?
For those outside the UK, the UK is currently the most surveiled society in
the world. ANPR is a network of automatic numberplate recognition cameras on
all
Hello everyone,
Have found evidence that a path I mapped yesterday has cycle rights:
http://www.planning-inspectorate.gov.uk/southdowns/documents/MicrosoftWord1147-13-1.pdf
(see section 6.7.1)
Presumably I could tag this as highway=cycleway without there being a
copyright issue? I would hope
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Sent: 07 April 2008 1:52 AM
To: Richard Fairhurst
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Relations not always brilliant
Hi,
If you simply use the ref tag to specify the road number, how would
you then use the API to access all ways making up B4027?
By using
2008/4/3 Robert Vollmert [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I may be missing something, but why would we need to introduce a read-
only attribution tag if we already have it? It's the source tag of the
first version of an object, in
http://api.openstreetmap.org/api/0.5/objtype/id/history
fantastic. like
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 8:15 AM, Greg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is anyone mapping the positioning of these devices in the UK? I don't yet have
a GPS :o|
Is there an easy guide on how to contribute?
For those outside the UK, the UK is currently the most surveiled society in
the world. ANPR
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
In the UK, road numbers are unique (apart from about three cases
where local councils have cocked up, e.g. the B4027)
This isn't entirely true - take, for example, the A31, which goes from
Guildford to Winchester and then vanishes as it joins the
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Which will omit anything tagged ref=B4027;B4028 or some such. Ok you
said there shouldn't be any of those in the UK anyway so I guess
you're fine...
Then the API needs to be improved - we shouldn't be adding unnecessary
data to work around
Hi,
stumbled across a quote by David D Clark (of Internet
architecture fame) today. He said:
We reject: kings, presidents and voting. We believe in: rough
consensus and running code.
Not that I'm into gurus and such but it's nice to see that I am not
the only sane person on earth who
2008/4/7 Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
stumbled across a quote by David D Clark (of Internet
architecture fame) today. He said:
We reject: kings, presidents and voting. We believe in: rough
consensus and running code.
maybe someone should tell the government? apparently we're all
Hi,
But this is kind of the point - if you are able to automatically
create the relations (and presumably automatically fix them if
someone makes the way tags inconsistent with the relation tags)
with very little effort, is there a good reason to create them in
the first place rather
This probably doesn't apply to Nicks question if he was out in the country,
but I take the view that if I find a path that has 2m wide paved surface and
it doesn't have a no cycling sign then I will generally give it a cycleway
tag on the basis that clearly in practice it can be used as one.
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, David Earl wrote:
And to take the A11/A14 example again, if the A11 in effect disappears
where it is coincident with the A14, the A11 is discontinuous.
I'm not sure why we need to treat the whole discontinuous A11 as a single
road.
In this example, as far as I can tell we
On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 08:48:18PM +1200, Robin Paulson wrote:
if we are going to have an 'attribution' page on the wiki[1], with the
fine print regarding sources of various chunks of data, would a link
to it be possible, on the main map page? titled say 'data attribution'
or 'data sources'?
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Frederik Ramm wrote:
If it's done consistently, one can still create relations automatically later
if desired.
But this is kind of the point - if you are able to automatically create
the relations (and presumably automatically fix them if someone makes the
way tags
Greg wrote:
Is anyone mapping the positioning of these devices in the UK? I don't yet
have
a GPS :o|
Is there an easy guide on how to contribute?
For those outside the UK, the UK is currently the most surveiled society in
the world. ANPR is a network of automatic numberplate
I would view this as a citeable reference, as opposed to a copyright violation.
Cheers,
Andy
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 8:48 AM, Nick Whitelegg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello everyone,
Have found evidence that a path I mapped yesterday has cycle rights:
On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 11:46:10AM +0100, Steve Hill wrote:
In this example, as far as I can tell we have 2 roads called the A11 and
a road joining them called the A14 - route planners can deal with this
just the same as they can deal with A11 - A14 - A134.
Route planners shouldn't be
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Frederik Ramm wrote:
I assume it will usually be easier to check a machine-readable relation than
to compare tags.
Possibly. There may be cause for having machine generated relations which
are kept up to date by the server when data is committed so the people
editing
Hi,
I am concerned that it adds complexity (which means there is more
chance of human error). Complexity in some cases is unavoidable,
but in this case I can't see a significant advantage over just
tagging the ways and improving the API to allow searching for
single values in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
| Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:
|
| If that is the case, then the relationship is essential to convey the
| route of the A11 information. If the road just has 2 numbers, then it
| isn't - just a semi-colon in the ref would do.
|
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Stephen Gower wrote:
Suppose I wanted to walk the whole of the A34 while I was 34 as a
charity gig?
Ok, either:
1. You have lots of ways tagged with ref=A34
2. You have lots of relations tagged with ref=A34, one for each
discontinuous section of the road (which may be
On 7 Apr 2008, at 12:24, Robin Paulson wrote:
2008/4/7 Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
stumbled across a quote by David D Clark (of Internet
architecture fame) today. He said:
We reject: kings, presidents and voting. We believe in: rough
consensus and running code.
maybe someone
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Stephen Gower
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 08:48:18PM +1200, Robin Paulson wrote:
if we are going to have an 'attribution' page on the wiki[1], with the
fine print regarding sources of various chunks of data, would a link
to it be
...or as Ken Livingstone said: If voting changed anything they'd abolish it.
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 4:57 AM, SteveC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7 Apr 2008, at 12:24, Robin Paulson wrote:
2008/4/7 Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
stumbled across a quote by David D Clark (of Internet
Martin Dodge is a researcher that about 5 years ago did some work on
mapping CCTV in Bloomsbury London. I dont know exactly what did come
from that, as I was only briefly involved in the data collection
process. Might be worth having a chat with him. And no, we didnt get
arrested or harrassed
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Steve Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Frederik Ramm wrote:
In the end, moving *all* tags into relations might be the best thing to
do, but I think the editors need a lot of work before that is a viable
option. At the moment we have a
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 12:37 PM, Robert (Jamie) Munro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
| Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:
|
| If that is the case, then the relationship is essential to convey the
| route of the A11
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:
It might not be the A11 from the point of view of who is in charge of
maintaining it, but it is the A11 from the point of view of someone
following the route of the A11 to get somewhere. Therefore it should be
in a relationship as part of the
Hello Talk
I hope I am not making a fool of myself here, but.
I have been attempting to do audio syncing in JOSM. That is where an audio
recording will match up (in time) to a point within a trace.
Try as I might I cannot get this to work. I have a series 60 smartphone and
according to
At 02:55 PM 4/7/2008, Michael Collinson wrote:
At 02:19 PM 4/7/2008, 80n wrote:
Up to now there has not been any official guidance on how to comply
with the attribution clause of our CC-BY-SA license. This means
that people either try to do something that they hope is acceptable
or they do
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Stefan Baebler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
excuse I wouldn't count on it to avoid a lot of inconvenience. I know
someone who had 5 police officers erase his camera for taking pictures
of cc-tv around the south bank of the thames... which is technically
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dave Stubbs wrote:
| On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 12:37 PM, Robert (Jamie) Munro
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
| Hash: SHA1
|
| Richard Fairhurst wrote:
|
| | Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:
| |
| | If that is the case, then
David,
Have you read the Help at
http://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Help/HowTo/AudioMapping ?
The syncing isn't automatic - you have to indicate one point where in
your audio corresponds to where in your gps track. The clocks on the two
systems will rarely be precisely in sync - and in any
Daviud,
Have you read the Help at
http://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Help/HowTo/AudioMapping ?
The syncing isn't automatic - you have to indicate one point where in
your audio corresponds to where in your gps track. The clocks on the two
systems will rarely be precisely in sync - and in any
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 2:45 PM, Tom Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Tom Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would certainly prefer that people using our data provide a link
to
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Robert (Jamie) Munro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's not subjective, it is officially signed - the signs say A14
(A11). This happens all over the place in the UK A roads network.
I can see why this is confusing. But the identification number A11 is
shown in that case
On 07/04/2008 15:22, David Earl wrote:
If so, given that many GPS enabled smartphones etc. have recording
capabilities, and therefore share the same clock, would it be possible
to make this a feature request?
I didn't reply to this bit, sorry.
Yes, this would be possible.
I think you'll
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:
It's not subjective, it is officially signed - the signs say A14
(A11). This happens all over the place in the UK A roads network.
Don't road numbers in brackets generally mean leads to rather than part
of?
I can't see how you can argue that
Ah, now I see.
I do think that sync via creation date would be a good idea, and in my case
where I make multiple recordings it would be marvellous.
But like you said, even with a smartphone, they *could* be using different
clocks, but a feature still worth implementing.
Once a user is aware
Steve Hill wrote:
Don't road numbers in brackets generally mean leads to rather
than part
of?
[...]
I'm not sure anyone is saying it is wrong, merely unnecessary and
prone to
causing confusion/errors.
+1.
Relations are for doing things that can't otherwise be done, or done
well. But
On 07/04/2008 15:49, David Janda wrote:
Ah, now I see.
I do think that sync via creation date would be a good idea, and in my case
where I make multiple recordings it would be marvellous.
If you're making multiple recordings you might want to look at option 3
on the help page in more
Does your device let you have a one-button operation to add a waypoint
and a simultaneous voice note?
Alas not. It's a Nokia N95. But it does allow for easy audio recording.
I wonder whether the following might also be useful: if you selected a
folder at the import audio stage, to have JOSM
If you're making multiple recordings you might want to look at option 3
on the help page in more detail. I refer to additional software to
merge the audio links into the GPX file, but in practice this is
probably just a text editing job - locating the GPX point nearest your
audio time stamp,
I'm firmly with Richard so far on this discussion.
On one of the issues, Robert, your understanding of
what A14 (A11) means seems very different to mine.
If I understand you correctly, you're arguing the road
should be tagged A11 because it has signs saying (A11)
on it, meaning that it's part of
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
It's only Potlatch that prohibits such edits. JOSM and the main API
permit them.
Can we please agree to stop doing that, and then turn off the
capability? It's just storing up trouble for later, when and if we want
to make licence-related changes...
Gerv
Hi,
Can we please agree to stop doing that, and then turn off the
capability? It's just storing up trouble for later, when and if we want
to make licence-related changes...
No it's not. The information on who did what is in the database, and
always has been. It's just that unless you're
On 08/04/2008, 80n [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
if we are going to have an 'attribution' page on the wiki[1], with the
fine print regarding sources of various chunks of data, would a link
to it be possible, on the main map page? titled say 'data attribution'
or 'data sources'?
Have
Hello,
Does anyone know if it is possible in Mapnik to place a PointSymbolizer
at some offset from the point instead of centering the image above the
point.
Thanks,
Steven
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 8:32 PM, Robin Paulson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 08/04/2008, 80n [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
if we are going to have an 'attribution' page on the wiki[1], with the
fine print regarding sources of various chunks of data, would a link
to it be possible, on the
2008/4/3 David Ebling [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
True, I acknowledge that, but requiring two seperate
attributions for OSM data is going to be confusing to
people who use the data. So far we have managed to get
by on just one attribution.
..
It changes the attribution which all
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andy Robinson (blackadder) wrote:
| Frederik Ramm wrote:
| Sent: 07 April 2008 1:52 AM
| To: Richard Fairhurst
| Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
| Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Relations not always brilliant
|
| Hi,
|
| If you simply use the ref tag to specify the
Frederik Ramm schrieb:
Hi,
stumbled across a quote by David D Clark (of Internet
architecture fame) today. He said:
We reject: kings, presidents and voting. We believe in: rough
consensus and running code.
Not that I'm into gurus and such but it's nice to see that I am not
the
Christoph Eckert wrote:
Hallo
ist doch schonmal fein. Man könnte noch ein note= oder comment=
dranhängen.
Ich kenne keine Möglichkeit, dass graphisch die notes hervorgehoben
werden (Karte, JOSM). Wenn es sowas gibt, wäre das natürlich sinnvoll zu
verwenden. OK. Es gibt immer noch grep.
Am Montag, 7. April 2008 07:11 schrieb Christoph Eckert:
Moin,
Das habe ich schon verstanden. Ich würde hingegen bevorzugen:
* Proposal
* Sofern vorhanden, passenstes auswählen und im name kommentieren.
Also im konkreten Fall:
shop-supermarket - name Getränkemarkt ExampleDrink
ich tagge punkte generell nach dem gpsdrive-schema, fuege aber oft noch ein
zusaetzliches osm-bekanntes tag ein (auch wenns nicht ganz passend ist),
damit's in osm zumindest angezeigt wird...
Das klingt sinnvoll; gibt es irgendwo eine Übersicht über das gpsdrive-Schema?
Grüßle, Berni
--
Sven Geggus wrote:
Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Die neue Lizenz soll Dich in diesem Fall dazu bringen, die
verbesserten Daten freizugeben, waehrend Du mit dem Shirt machen
kannst, was Du willst - das nuetzt dem Projekt mehr.
Nur ob ich es richtig verstanden habe. Die neue Lizenz
Bzgl. Reisekosten vermute ich ehr nicht-die Veranstaltung an sich ist ja
kostenlos(ausschliesslich Verpflegung und Übernachtung sofern erforderlich) Zu
der Veranstaltung bilden sich Erfahrungsgemäss viele Fahrgemeinschaften aus
ganz Deutschland und dem benachbarten Ausland. Vielleicht kommt das
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hallo René,
Rene Hertzfeldt schrieb:
| Dabei bin ich auf ein Problem gestossen. Ich finde kein Zeichen (Tag)
| fuer Freibad oder Spassbad.
| Es gibt zwar ein Schwimmbad, allerdings moechte ich keine Baeder als
| Schwimmbad taggen, die nicht die
Hallo,
(hoechstens um die Zeit der Software-Entwicklers).
Erstmal nicht. Die wird erst benötigt, wenn man zu der Entscheidung
kommt, dass die Implementierung eines Konzepts Vorteile bringen
würde. Solange kostet es nur den Teilnehmern hier in der Liste
ihre wertvolle Zeit.
Grüsse Hubert, der
2008/4/6 Marc Quinton [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2008/4/5 Marc Quinton [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
comme promis, voici un premier jet de la lettre aux collectivités
locales.
voici l'adresse du document ; quand il sera prêt, il faudra le lier sur le
Wiki.
I've done this before by:
For two split roads intersecting, I make all 4 ways intersect with nodes.
For one split road intersecting with one non-split road, I make 2 nodes for
the intersection.
Does that make sense?
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 7:12 PM, Alan Millar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
so I
79 matches
Mail list logo
