You can see my beautiful city.
http://maps.google.com.au/?ie=UTF8ll=-33.911633,151.24054spn=0.03298,0.065918z=15layer=ccbll=-33.9172,151.226114panoid=SF1CU5fcTX8XqlKyXRxwogcbp=1,123.60785767574839,,0,6.094238783200709
Good for filling in all the missing street names.
-J
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 9:38 PM, Rory McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joseph Gentle wrote:
You can see my beautiful city.
http://maps.google.com.au/?ie=UTF8ll=-33.911633,151.24054spn=0.03298,0.065918z=15layer=ccbll=-33.9172,151.226114panoid=SF1CU5fcTX8XqlKyXRxwogcbp=1,123.60785767574839
Hi!
I want to make a set of tiles for mobile devices. Its easier for a
mobile device if you use 64x64 pixel tiles rather than 256x256. To do
this, I need to edit generate_tiles.py.
The file is pretty poorly documented. Does anyone have any tips on
where to start? Do I need to change the
None of them (not even the OSM webpage!) attribute the OSM
contributors properly. The CC-By-SA license requires all contributors
are listed. Yes; all ~60 000 of us.
We imply that some legal conditions on map use should be enforced
while others should not. Our wiki's legal faq does a bad job of
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 1:44 AM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My thinking as well, just needs careful consideration of viral
effects, i.e. if you want to be totally safe then you can only ever
collect data before it is assimilated into the OSM pool, and after
that it is completely
Hi!
I've been taking a look at the software stack and (especially with the
intermediate XML formats) I can't help but feel that we could
represent the map data in a much more efficient format - eg a
quadtree. With the right data structures, it should be possible to
render maps on client side in
(Now with added reply-all)
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 3:18 AM, Andy Allan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
'Better' is dependent on what you're trying to achieve, but there are
certainly many 'different' representations in use in different
projects.
I want to represent the data such that a user can pan
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 2:02 AM, Tom Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is this PD thing actually OSM though, or something outside of/parallel
to OSM? I don't quite understand at the moment how to whole thing is
intended to work to be honest.
We're still talking about it; hence the request for a
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 12:34 AM, Richard Fairhurst
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
bvh wrote:
Note that there is no pd-violations.org
/me blinks in astonishment
/me decides there really is nothing more he can bring to this party
Gustav was right. Let's talk OSM.
cheers
Richard
But but...
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 1:03 AM, Richard Fairhurst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
bvh wrote:
My ideal license would force them to divulge their private GIS data
on signal strength
Oh right. I just want to make a map.
:D
-J
cheers
Richard
___
Whats important to you? Please answer this ~20 second poll:
http://sineltor.selfip.org/osm.php
Thanks!
Joseph
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
license))
c) This requires more than 20 seconds thought, please let me review the
history of BSD vs. GPL and consult some IP lawyers
On 2 Nov 2008, at 23:17, Joseph Gentle wrote:
Whats important to you? Please answer this ~20 second poll:
http://sineltor.selfip.org/osm.php
Thanks!
Joseph
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 6:39 PM, SteveC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, this is not the place for that argument. That argument's
place is the legal-talk mailing list.
Which makes me wonder why you posted the poll here then?
It was your idea - as you said, only asking the legal-talk mailing
I like the idea.
The english term for clothing requirements is a Dress Code. I'm not
sure how this can best fit in - dress_code_min=formal,
dress_code_max=naked ?
-J
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 7:14 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
please have a look and discuss my proposal about clothing that
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 8:43 PM, Iván Sánchez Ortega
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
El Lunes, 3 de Noviembre de 2008, Gustav Foseid escribió:
I am really worried, when I see the chairman of the OSM Foundation making
these kind of oversimplified statements regardig a complex issue like the
OSM
2008/11/3 Iván Sánchez Ortega [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Could we stop making PD-vs-SA flamewars that will lead nowhere, please?
Thanks,
I'm sorry for reigniting the flamewar. My intention was merely to get
some data. However, I'd rather have some argument here than Steve's
inflammatory remarks
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:41 PM, John07 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joe Richards schrieb:
Anyone who has played with an iPhone will have seen the Google maps
application, which provides much of the functionality of the Javascript web
app, while giving quite a good tactile feel It also
http://code.google.com/p/route-me/
... Though the focus is on the map view, not on making it a fully
fledged application for the store.
-J
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:07 PM, Joe Richards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyone who has played with an iPhone will have seen the Google maps
application,
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 9:19 AM, John McKerrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10 Nov 2008, at 14:14, Rory McCann wrote:
On 10/11/08 12:40, Joseph Gentle wrote:
http://code.google.com/p/route-me/
... Though the focus is on the map view, not on making it a fully
fledged application
You can suppress that, but the performance is pretty crappy.
-J
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 9:46 PM, Joe Richards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can get python installed if your iphone is jailbroken via the Cydia
installer (apt-get Debian style but for the iPhone). I think you're
imagining a
Hi guys.
I don't know if its too late for this but:
If Microsoft / Mapquest / Google / whoever ever decide to join the
community, would our new open data license let them use any of our
data? What / how much would we require them to share back?
-J
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 5:29 AM, spaetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 11:51:36AM -0700, Sunburned Surveyor wrote:
What can't you do with OSM data under the Creative Commons license
that you couldn't do with data in the Public Domain? To me it seems
like the only two (2)
We have all argued incessantly about licensing issues. That does not help
the OSM project.
What will probably happen -
The OSM foundation will email our 50 000 contributors saying:
Hi everybody. Thanks for your contributions. We want to relicense your data
to this
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Nathan Vander Wilt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sep 3, 2008, at 12:25 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
All that being said, there are many people in OSM who would actually
prefer a non-viral license (including me). Hope is more or less lost
to
get the whole of OSM
I agree. Said sister project would have to ask Yahoo! for permission as
well. However, if they give access to OSM they should give access to a PD
version of OSM. Yahoo can do a lot more with the data a PD-OSM project
generates.
-J
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 2:29 AM, Kari Pihkala [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 5:02 AM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Even if a sister project would set up the same toolchain, the same
editors, databases etc. on a PD license, the sister project would miss
the Yahoo satellite images. What kind of agreement has been made with
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 5:06 AM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Sunburned Surveyor wrote:
I think it may
underestimate the potential for corporate abuse. There are a lot of
people out there willing to leech of a community like OSM without
making any positive contributions.
The license is changing
frustration is waning
we can all see
what the new license will be
Some terms need explaining
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 12:47 PM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
SteveC wrote:
Subject: License License License
Can we hear that as a limerick? ;-)
Bye
I was looking at the OSGeo data committee wondering where their data
was as they seem to have the same goals as us.
I don't think picking the right PD license will be a particularly
large hurdle. It is certainly less complicated than selecting a
share-alike license :) The wikipedia pd license
Sorry, I've been busy writing up research proposals and whatnot. I'm
starting a phd next year (woohoo!).
I don't like the standard creative commons PD license. Their CC-zero
license is ok, but not finished. Here's the wikipedia license from
earlier in the thread:
I, the copyright holder of this
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 11:24 AM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, I take back what I previously said to 80n about all PD advocates
being on the same page ;-)
We're very close, and we don't have to agree. Data published with free
non-viral licenses can coexist peacefully. We're really
We won't have all the data under one license though. Never will if
we're incorporating TIGER data and data from other governments.
I don't think its that big a deal - we could just say if you edit a
node, your edits are also under the same PD license as the node is
currently under or something.
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 10:55 AM, Simon Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 08:19:50PM +0100, Brian Quinion wrote:
Personally I'd be very happy to see the discussion of PD continue on
the talk list but a mailing list seems a very minor resource compared
to the time and effort
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 11:40 AM, Ian Sergeant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why can't we just be happen to produce maps and data people will want to
use?
Ian.
We already produce maps and data people want to use.
I also want the maps and data to be under a license which lets them be
used. (More.)
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 12:06 PM, 80n [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I like so view OSM as a cool DIY project, not a political trick we're
pulling.
The problem with PD is that it permits companies to take OSM data, add their
own data and benefit from result without giving anything back. Joseph's
I'm happy with that. Thankyou :)
-J
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Kari Pihkala [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I counted the votes for PD license so far. Sorry, if I have missed
anyone!!
Jordan S Hatcher: PDDL
Joseph Gentle: Wikipedia PD / PDDL
Nic Roets: Wikipedia PD
Sebastian Spaeth
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 8:57 AM, Philipp Klaus Krause [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To me the main problem with copyleft licenses is that there are so many
incompatible ones of them.
Here's the compatibility chart amongst creative-commons licenses:
and the PD people will be happy dreaming about
spaceships and their idea of freedom.
On 25 Oct 2008, at 19:20, Joseph Gentle wrote:
Steve: I'm confused. Please reconcile these two statements:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 5:50 PM, SteveC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guys OSM isn't going PD... can't you
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
lots of sensible and interesting discussion
Frederik
I agree with all of this. I don't want to confuse the issues; but I do
want more data about the opinions of average mappers than an argument
on the internet can
Thanks for your feedback.
-J
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 3:51 PM, Joseph Gentle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please fill out this poll:
http://sineltor.selfip.org/osm.php
Thanks!
Joseph
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
40 matches
Mail list logo
