Re: [Talk-transit] NaPTAN bus stop database import
In message def74e78d2f74302bdf48ad40609a...@redsol Roger Slevin ro...@slevin.plus.com wrote: Thomas You comment that York doesn't appear to be aware of the stoparea principle ... this is widespread. There are no downstream national applications that make use of stopareas - and no pressure, therefore, to create stoparea data. All the journey planners do use StopAreas in one form or another. Isn't it that some are completely implicit, though not necessarily requiring identical common names, or just don't publicise their StopAreas in NaPTAN (NE England). While Implicit is useful and better than badly constructed explicit, the explicit method gives more control and I hope that before too long we will have StopAreas in NaPTAN for all parts of the UK. 2009/3/1 Thomas Wood grand.edgemas...@gmail.com: 2009/2/28 Brian Prangle bpran...@googlemail.com: In other news, whilst on the train to (and from) York today, I wrote a sizable chunk of the StopArea code for the converter. It's in a mostly working state, the only issues I have to work out are StopArea hierarchies, particularly when a StopArea is defined in another region's dataset, the national rail one, for example. I'm either going to have to do a mass convert of the whole dataset at once (which I'm not looking forward to, since I suspect the memory use will skyrocket), or try and resolve the dependencies by parsing the national datasets to get a hash of all the StopAreas, and then append on the county level StopAreas as and when they're created, finally we can then upload the national StopArea points, as and when we get around to those types of data. (AIrports, NatRail, to name a few) Whilst in York, I was able to photograph some bus stops, I've done a quick comparison of the data, it seems to be the worst in terms of standards compliance so far, but seems to be quite self consistent, which is a small bonus. Why quote the above? Well, it seems that York is unaware of the existance of the StopArea principle. (At least, I couldn't find it in a quick grepping of the data). http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NaPTAN/Local_schemes#York -- Peter J Stoner UK Regional Coordinator Traveline www.travelinedata.org.uk a trading name of Intelligent Travel Solutions Ltd company number 3826797 Drury House, 34-43 Russell Street, LONDON WC2B 5HA ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] NaPTAN bus stop database import
On 1 Mar 2009, at 21:51, Roger Slevin wrote: Peter It would be very misleading to the OSM community for them to take any notice of your hope to have stopareas everywhere in the NaPTAN database. More than half of the country do not use stopareas at all in the journey planner that they use - and there is no reason for the three regions I am familiar with to create stopareas where they don't exist. Creating them as explicit stopareas, where we have perfectly good procedures that maintain implicit stopareas automatically, is not only a lot of work - but also requires continual maintenance. We do not have the resources to do this - so your hope is quite unrealistic. From a DfT perspective the stoparea is an optional feature within NaPTAN - and there is no realistic prospect for that to change at a national level. OSM should ignore stopareas in NaPTAN, therefore - and focus on the stoppoint records which are the fundamental content of NaPTAN. The important thing from the modelling perspective is that what OSM call a Stop Area is the same as what Transmodel calls a Stop Area, and therefore what nearly every European transport profession sector know as a Stop Area and in many other places too. There is a current proposal in OSM to use the term Stop Area for something that might be more like a Stop Place (in IFOPT). Nick Knowles has very helpfully added a good chunk of definitions onto the Stop Area proposal page giving the Transmodel terms for things and the OSM community should possibly look to hamonise terms with Transmodel where possible. It would certainly help avoid modelling issues later and make it much more attractive for other places considering offering public transport data. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/unified_stoparea Modelling a Stop Area is very simple. In Transmodel a Stop Area is purely a collection of Stop Points with a name and a reference. As such this could easily be modelled with a relation. With regard to the NaPTAN import , I see no reason why the OSM community should not import Stop Areas where they exist so that people can get used to modelling them and using them. Stop Areas are a useful tool for producing less detailed mapping where one wants to loose excessing detail. Other examples of where one wants to loose detail are when one is making maps of dual carriageways and railways. When one is zoomed in one wants to see lots of detail (ie two carriageways, slip roads etc, multiple tracks) and when one zooms out one wants to see only a single line. The people writing code for the renderers need data to practice on, and by providing Stop Areas for even one part of the world (ie one UK county) they have something to chew on. Another place where Stop Areas are useful is for journey planning. there is already GraphServer, a PT journey planning tool that uses OSM data (http://graphserver.sourceforge.net/gallery.html), and I am sure people in that project would be interested in seeing what use they can do with Stop Areas. The OSM community could also create algorithms to create Stop Areas in places where they don't currently exist, based on the rules in NaPTAN, for example where there are stops almost opposite each other on a road a long way from any other stops. That is just to sort of thing that someone might do when the renderers start using them and there is a reason for better coverage. Also, even if the UK NaPTAN import ignores them for now, then I know that there are some other potential imports in the EU area that could use them and so for that reason alone we should get the modelling and terminology right from the start. I wonder if we might get the stops of Toulouse soon as part of the OTT project that Hugues Romain was talking about recently? There are also loads of Stop Points avaiable from Google Transit Exchange data (http://www.gtfs-data-exchange.com/). Someone might go through those soon and see which ones are available on suitable licenses and import them. Again that is a big source of Stop Points, and as such a potential source of Stop Areas. I think we should see the NaPTAN import as being a useful catalyst for all sorts of innovation, much of which will be unexpected, and as such we should chuck as much in the pot as the project can digest, and to date that it a lot! Regards, Peter Best wishes Roger -Original Message- From: talk-transit-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-transit-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Peter J Stoner Sent: 01 March 2009 21:18 To: talk-transit@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-transit] NaPTAN bus stop database import In message def74e78d2f74302bdf48ad40609a...@redsol Roger Slevin ro...@slevin.plus.com wrote: Thomas You comment that York doesn't appear to be aware of the stoparea principle ... this is widespread. There are no downstream
Re: [talk-ph] Is Mapnik rendering only on wednesdays?
Mapnik now renders in near real time: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-February/033970.html Not so for coastlines though :( On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Ed Garcia eppgar...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, Was surprised to see Mapnik updated on a non-wednesday. I just added provincial roads in the Manaoag - Mangaldan Pangasinan area last night and was surprised to see it on the Mapnik layers this morning. Are they updating more frequently now? cheers :) ed ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Is Mapnik rendering only on wednesdays?
Wow this is GREAT Got even more excited to add more roads! On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 10:23 AM, maning sambale emmanuel.samb...@gmail.comwrote: Mapnik now renders in near real time: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-February/033970.html Not so for coastlines though :( On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Ed Garcia eppgar...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, Was surprised to see Mapnik updated on a non-wednesday. I just added provincial roads in the Manaoag - Mangaldan Pangasinan area last night and was surprised to see it on the Mapnik layers this morning. Are they updating more frequently now? cheers :) ed ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- -- website administrator: - www.waypoints.ph - reeflife.eppgarcia.com PADI Divemaster #491048 ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Lawyer responses to use cases, major problems
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 10:35:21AM +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote: Simon Ward wrote: this could mean that anyone running osm2pgsql importing minutely data updates would possibly have to make available a ''psql dump of the whole planet'' for any snapshot time where someone cares to request it. So be it. Do you have any suggestion on how to achieve this technically? For such a large amount of data, not much if you actually had to redistribute the entire data yourself, but see below. ODbL already defines derivatives, produced works and collective databases separately, and is much more permissive for the latter two. Distribute a derived database, share it please. This is not about the distribution of a derived database; if I already have the database in a form that can be distributed, then sharing it is trivial. My question is about the distribution of a Produced Work and whether or not the underlying derived database needs to be made available even if it does not have any value added. Then you you have more than one thing here: * A derivative database, consisting of the original database imported into PostGIS. * A produced work, consisting of the derivative database and other elements. To make the exampe clear: http://c.tile.openstreetmap.org/7/63/42.png would, under the new license, be a Produced Work. It is based on nothing more than is available at planet.openstreetmap.org, imported into a PostGIS database which is updated once a minute. […] our own tile server would have to be scaled back to once-a-day updates because we could not possibly produce the PostGIS dumps once an hour. If your tileserver also provides the ability to directly query the derivative database, then I think you should be obliged to distribute the database. If you just have a tile browser, then probably not. It gets more difficult when you start providing things like place name searching: Is that still acceptably a produced work, or are you providing access to the database? I would err towards providing the database. If you do have to offer the derived database, you may not have to worry about providing frequent dumps. The licence specifically allows for distributing the whole database, or simply a file containing the alterations made. It doesn’t say how the differences should be encoded, so I think it’s reasonable to document that you used osm2pgsql, osmosis, or other, and exactly how you used it (command line arguments, inputs, etc). Richard has already commented on the relevant this part of the license (4.6(b))[1]. [1]: http://www.co-ment.net/text/844/ This does bring up some other questions though: What if the software doesn’t produce predictable results each time it is run? This could possibly be solved by extending the software to produce a trace of operations that it or another tool could process to perform exactly the same transformation of the database. This could become quite large though, so we’re back to distributing large amounts of data with frequent updates. In case you used an old version of the software that may no longer be distributed by the authors but could produce different results, should you provide the exact software you used? Can you just specify how you import the original database, and how each diff is imported, or do you have to document the whole process of importing and provding minutely updates? Simon -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.—John Gall signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Lawyer responses to use cases, major problems
Frederik Ramm wrote: I'm surprised that nobody else seems to see a problem in this. Am I perhaps barking up some completely imaginary tree? Not at all; I am still reading through the draft, and have exactly the same concern. It may be I have misunderstood how this is intended to apply, but I think both 4.6a and 4.6b end up making derivative databases (effectively any mechanical processing of the original content whatsoever, IMO) problematic. In many cases, generating a file containing all of the alterations will be at least as much work as making the derivative database available (leaving aside that publishing these alterations may reveal some proprietary information, making it less likely for OSM data to be used). That is not always practical, and if all my transformations are destructive then I don't think it's even useful (compared to simply making a copy of the original database available, to ensure the source data is never lost if openstreetmap.org goes away). I'm not sure what format a file containing all of the alterations would take. Does this mean a machine-readable list of the exact transformations that were performed, or simply a human-readable summary of the transformations made? If I map our fixed point lat/lons to 32-bit floats, I will create a derivative database (32-bit floats can't represent all integers exactly, so I've lost some information and can't go back). Do I need to publish exactly which floating point value each integer was mapped to, or simply say I converted all lat/lons to floats? The latter makes more sense, but do I also need to specify that they're IEEE floats and which of the four IEEE rounding modes were used? I don't have a better phrasing for 4.6b, but I would like to allow alterations to be specified as: - A literal set of transformations to apply (e.g., a lookup table or code that could be executed to apply the transform). - A human-readable set of instructions that are reasonable Introducing reasonable means I can have my lawyer argue with yours over whether convert to floats is a reasonable summary or not, and not have to worry about being sued because I used an unusual rounding mode like round-to-infinity and forgot to mention it. It also means you can publish imported into PostGIS using this schema as your alteration, and not have to provide the literal derivative database created by your particular version of PostGIS when run on a specific platform/OS. -dair ___ d...@refnum.com http://www.refnum.com/ ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Lawyer responses to use cases, major problems
2009/3/1 Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com: On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: I'm surprised that nobody else seems to see a problem in this. Am I perhaps barking up some completely imaginary tree? Nope, not at all, I'm exceptionally concerned about the implications on the cyclemap db. I'm combining PD SRTM data and OSM data, and as far as I'm concerned making both original sources available should be sufficient. That way every piece of geographic data used in the cyclemap is available. Being forced to offer a postgis dump would suck massively. And never mind for me - I've got the time and energy to deal with it if needs be. But it'll also suck for people doing things like my public transport experiments - as soon as you put up a picture of one of your experiments all of a sudden you'll have some guy demanding a dump of your postgis db. Seems overkill, and like you say, the intention should be to make the geographic data available, not the specific instance of (perhaps processed) data. Yes, for instance this page would just not exist under that interpretation: http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~random/progress/?region=northamerica There's no way I'd have bothered... and dev doesn't have a big enough hard disk anyway :-) Dave ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] compatibility with CC licenses
John Wilbanks wrote: (although I find the idea that freedom can only come from the barrel of a license deeply depressing). That's CC Zero out of the running then. If Big Company decides to run a mechanical turk contest on Amazon to extract facts from your DB one at a time, do they violate the license without having ever signed it - can they possibly be bound by it if they haven't signed it, clicked ok on a digital box etc? And at what point does the individual person working in the turk contest infringe - 5 facts, 10 facts, 100 facts? And who would you sue in the event you wanted to take it to court? This looks like a problem with using contract law rather than licence law. And yes I'm curious about this as well. - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-legal-talk] Proposal to update the Use Cases page
I am proposing the update the text on the Use Cases page. I intend to merge some of the different Use Cases and introduce some new ones based on the problematic areas we are exploring on the list. I will also tweek the wording to make it clearer for the next legal review (especially the ones where the lawyer said he didn't understand). I will create a verbatim copy of the contents of the current Use Case page to a new location 'Use Cases version 1' or something before I start. I think these Use Cases are going to end up being twins of an eventual FAQ that I imagine will exist. For example Use Case 1 might end up in the FAQ as 'I want to include a map produced by OSM data in my printed book/newsletter etc. Can I do this, how should I attribute it and what Licence should I use. ' Answer' Yes you can, you should attribute it to OSM using text such as This map contains information from www.OpenStreetMap.org , which is made available here under the Open Database Licence (ODbL). The attribution can either appear close to the map itself, an approach which will be suitable if there are other maps in the document form other sources, or you can include an attribution at the start of end of the document in a place were someone would be likely to look for it. You can licence the map anyway you like - Public Domain, CCBYSA, full copyright etc. Note that if you do need to update the mapping data itself then you need to make the improvements available to others. See Question xxx below for more details in this case. Let me know soon if you don't think that is a good idea! Regards, Peter ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] legal-talk Digest, Vol 31, Issue 4
(although I find the idea that freedom can only come from the barrel of a license deeply depressing). That's CC Zero out of the running then. Actually no. This is a slightly wonky lawyer debate about semantics, but we think tools like CC0 should be called *waivers* and not *licenses*. Licenses reserve some rights and impose some conditions - they are some rights reserved - and there's a contract established between two parties. Waivers do not reserve rights or impose conditions. They create zones of public domain, and there are no contracts between the parties. This is why if you peruse the CC0 site, you'll see it referred to as a legal tool and not a license. It's a small thing, but an important thing to remember. Conflating the waiving of rights with the licensing of rights is what we're trying to avoid in this context. jtw ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] legal-talk Digest, Vol 31, Issue 4
John Wilbanks wrote: This is why if you peruse the CC0 site, you'll see it referred to as a legal tool and not a license. It's a small thing, but an important thing to remember. Conflating the waiving of rights with the licensing of rights is what we're trying to avoid in this context. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/zero/1.0/legalcode 2. Should the Waiver for any reason be judged legally invalid or ineffective under applicable law, then the Waiver shall be preserved to the maximum extent permitted and Affirmer hereby grants to each such affected recipient of the Work a worldwide, royalty-free, non exclusive, perpetual (for the duration of the applicable copyright), non transferable, non sublicensable, irrevocable and unconditional license Sometimes we have to use licences where we would rather people or the law just allowed the right thing. Sometimes they are the least worst solution. But they are not the least worst solution if they don't work, and I am concerned about the scenario you describe where individuals who are not party to the contract extract the data. - Rob. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Lawyer responses to use cases, major problems
Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote: With the GPL, the right to request the source is attached to receiving and using the binary. Withe the AGPL it is attached to being a user of the service. You can't just wander by and say hey! please can I have the source?, you have to be a user of the binary. (In practice people just pop the source on an FTP server, but that's less onerous than having to make minute-by-minute snapshots of OSM available.) That touches on two of the Big Unexploded Lawyerbombs of the AGPL:- 1. are you still a user of the service if the service only says Access Denied to you? 2. if you pop the source on an FTP server, does that mean the service must stop if that FTP server is down? I don't know if either of those are concerns for the OSM licence. Regards, -- MJ Ray (slef) Webmaster for hire, statistician and online shop builder for a small worker cooperative http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ (Notice http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html) tel:+44-844-4437-237 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Plan discussion on talk...
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote: Can we also ensure that any issues that we identify on the list get onto the Open Issues page on the wiki. In that way we can get the legal folk to only review the wiki page and not the whole conversation. I assume they will also be responding to comments on the co-ment.net page, so we don't need to copy the discussion from there onto the wiki? http://www.co-ment.net/text/844/ ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ODbL License + Outline Procedure
What's the purpose of S5.0 (disclaimer of moral rights), especially since the plain meaning of that section appears to differ from the 'attribution' element of the current license (not that I think attribution is a great idea with so many contributors, but some bulk-data donors include attribution in their license to us) More importantly, is S5.0 still meaningful if it doesn't apply to everyone? e.g. imagine its purpose is to reduce attribution requirements to this is OSM data' rather than requiring 2 million names and pseudonyms on the back of each map (this being a guess as to its purpose, hence 1st question). Is it even worth bothering if we still have to list the names of anyone who contributed from an area where they don't waive their moral rights? suppose the I accept this new licence tickbox is implemented and I tick it while on holiday in Algeria. Will I then get the opportunity to demand that all OSM-derived products list me as the author, and object to anything which portrays the map in a manner I'm not happy with? ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Plan discussion on talk...
Hi, On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 05:34:59PM +, Peter Miller wrote: Would it be possible for someone to summarise the License Plan thread on Talk when it has come to a conclusion? Personally I am finding the intensity of license discussion a bit much the moment and would prefer to concentrate on one list. In addition to talk and legal-talk, we have the national mailing lists, the Open Data Commons mailing list, our wiki, the com-ments web page, plus a number of OpenStreetMap forums in English and other languages. We'll surely try to shuttle back and forth and collect information in our Wiki but it will be a hell of a lot of work. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Lawyer responses to use cases, major problems
Hi, Frederik Ramm wrote: We need to clarify this once and for all: Where exactly in the following typical rendering chain does the thing cease to be a database in our definition? * download (section of) OSM data * make changes to OSM data * render OSM data into vector graphics format (say SVG) * make changes to SVG file (say using Inkscape) * render SVG file into bitmap * make changes to bitmap Let me explain why I think that this is so important, and please correct me if you have a different interpretation than I have. ODbL says you have to share a derived database if you publish it. You do *not* have to share the full chain of derived databases that led you from the planet file to your final derived database, just the latest one that you publish. If you create and publish a Produced Work, then you have to share the derived database on which it is built. This means that in any case, only *one* database from the above chain will have to be published. If we, say that no item in the above list is a Produced Work, i.e. even a bitmap is still a database, then the person running the above process will *only* have to publish and share the bitmap and *not* his improved OSM database. If we say that the vector graphics is still a database but the rendering of a bitmap makes it into a produced work, then the publisher of the bitmap need not share the bitmap, and neither his improved OSM database, but (only) the vector graphics. If we say that the database is lost and a Produced Work created when rendering the vector graphics from the OSM database, then neither the vector graphics nor the bitmap need be shared, but the modified OSM database has to be. Obviously a shared bitmap without the OSM data behind it is rather worthless to us... it is better than nothing of course, but the shared bitmap is what CC-BY-SA gives us today. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Spam] Re: License Plan discussion on talk...
On 1 Mar 2009, at 21:37, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 05:34:59PM +, Peter Miller wrote: Would it be possible for someone to summarise the License Plan thread on Talk when it has come to a conclusion? Personally I am finding the intensity of license discussion a bit much the moment and would prefer to concentrate on one list. In addition to talk and legal-talk, we have the national mailing lists, the Open Data Commons mailing list, our wiki, the com-ments web page, plus a number of OpenStreetMap forums in English and other languages. We'll surely try to shuttle back and forth and collect information in our Wiki but it will be a hell of a lot of work. I suggest we try to gather all the issues that we raise on our lists on the wiki. We can then ensure that we get the appropriate responses onto the com-ments web page after we have discussed them. People can of course put their own comments on directly, but I think we can ensure we do a more thorough job if we try to assemble all our issues together in one place and then review them. Regards, Peter Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Proposal to update the Use Cases page
On 1 Mar 2009, at 21:49, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, Peter Miller wrote: I think these Use Cases are going to end up being twins of an eventual FAQ that I imagine will exist. I am starting to think that perhaps the license should be accompanied by a kind of interpretation document which may or may not be the same as this FAQ. There are probably things that the license will never specify exactly, like the question of where in this chain does that database cease to exist. As stated numerous times on this list, applying the EU definition of database, even a PNG tile is a database... So if we'd have a document clarifying these things for OSM - even if this might not be legally binding but just an expression of intent - that would be a much better basis for the individual mapper to actually say yes. I agree. The license is the License, and that is by necessity written in legal language. If we use the Use Case page to describe common real life situations and then get the lawyers in the end to give their verdict on them it will form a very useful bridge between the practical and the legal. It will also mean that most people will be able to see 'their' use listed with a bit 'yes' next to it which will be reassuring, Peter Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Lawyer responses to use cases, major problems
Hi, Dair Grant wrote: It may be I have misunderstood how this is intended to apply, but I think both 4.6a and 4.6b end up making derivative databases (effectively any mechanical processing of the original content whatsoever, IMO) problematic. In many cases, generating a file containing all of the alterations will be at least as much work as making the derivative database available (leaving aside that publishing these alterations may reveal some proprietary information, making it less likely for OSM data to be used). I think it was RichardF who, long ago, suggested that we could perhaps amend 4.6 by something like c. An algorithm or computer program, or reference to a publicly available algorithm or computer program, that performs the alterations I'm sure some details about this would need to be hammered out, but this could be a way for the publisher to say I used osm2pgsql for this rather than actually having to provide osm2pgsql's output. This could, however, still touch on someone's business secrets when he has a very clever way of arranging OSM data that allows him to, for example, create faster, bigger, better, more tiles than the competition. We might need to introduce an entirely new section somewhere that says something like For the purpose of this license, any modification to a database that does not add original content but only transforms existing content algorithmically is not considered a derived database. In a way, something like this is already implicit because everyone assumes that copying the database from one media to another will not constitute a derived database even though, for example through the characteristics of the underlying file system, the arrangement of data will change. We would basically say that running osm2pgsql on your data, or creating an index, or lowercasing all tags, is not different from unzipping the planet or copying the planet from a FAT32 onto an ISO9660 file system. (I'm sure the license must provide for this not constituting a derived database... or does it?) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] A simplification of the agreement on the signup page.
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 11:30:41AM -0500, Russ Nelson wrote: Creative Commons license (by-sa). or under the ODbL. If you choose not to give us your email address, or your email address stops working, you waive all right to ownership of your edits. This needs a safeguard to allow for email addresses temporarily not working. I’m not even sure this is the right thing to do anyway. It’s far safer getting rid of a user’s data than it is assuming ownership of it. Simon -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.—John Gall signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] A simplification of the agreement on the signup page.
On Mar 1, 2009, at 12:46 PM, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: Russ Nelson schrieb: [...], or your email address stops working, you waive all right to ownership of your edits. Probably about as legally binding as posting a note on the site that says By reading this you agree to sacrifice your firstborn to the OSMF. Nothing is perfect, nothing is absolute. You could have an airplane crash on your house and kill you in your sleep. That is no reason to fail to make plans for tomorrow, or to take clear steps towards solving a problem. Yes, it probably has problems under copyright laws which recognize inalienable authorship rights, but the author would have to show or prove authorship. It's a reasonable standard to require ownership of an email address to prove ownership of the copyrighted work. In order to lose your ownership rights under this standard, you would have to 1) forget your password AND 2) not be able to receive email at the email address. Yes, somebody could come along later and propose a different standard. -- Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson r...@cloudmade.com - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] A simplification of the agreement on the signup page.
I see your point. Data potentially infringing if removed now could be recreated now, making later bookkeeping easier. On Mar 1, 2009, at 7:33 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, Russ Nelson wrote: I don't see much value in removing the data now on the chance that we might have to remove it later. Viral licenses are called viral for a reason. If you have to remove something it is always good to do so before it has infected a lot of other things. Or more practical, if someone draws the basic road grid for a city in a day and you remove it BEFORE everyone else has built on top of that, you lose only a day's work; if you remove it half a year later (and remove everything that can be said to be derived from it), then you might lose a lot more. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk -- Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson r...@cloudmade.com - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] The Illustrated ODbL
Hi, rich...@weait.com wrote: I've attempted to illustrate ways to use the OpenStreetMap database under ODbL and comply with the ODbL obligations. The box at the end of the Produced Work stream says: Share Alike is required if database is derivative. Attribution is always required. - It should perhaps be made clear that Share Alike of the Produced Work is never required; only sharing the derivative database may be required. Of course your illustration also glosses over a lot of open questions being discussed here, for example your illustrations clearly say that something that comes out of osm2pgsql is not already a derived database (we're not clear about this yet, the license seems to say otherwise!), and your illustrations also clearly say that tiles are not a database (another thing that is not clear). Also, you're using the phrase Convey Produced Work... which, while proper English, seems to clash with the ODbL's own use of the word Convey (ODbL only ever uses the word for databases, not Produced Works), so maybe replace this by simply publish? You say that the Produced Work can be put under any license; I used so say that as well but at the moment it looks like the Produced Work can never be under any Free license (such as CC-something, GFDL, ...) because these licenses do not allow you to add the extra by the way, reverse engineering will cause X clause that ODbL mandates. These are, of course, all somewhat open issues that we hope to resolve one way or another. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ODbL: incompatibility issues
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 3:03 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Not so, it turns out; the Produced Work freedom allows us to combine OSM data *only* with other data whose license does not prohibit the addition of constraints, because ODbL mandates that we add the reverse engineering leads to ODbL licensing rule. I do not read the ODbL this way. I read that only persons bound by the license/contract are prohibited from reverse engineering. Clarification here is needed. - Gustav ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-talk] how to point the openlayers instance to mapnik
Hi, I have been working on doing my own slippy map with mapnik and mod_tile. The documentation mentions the following steps: * Download the planet file from planet.openstreetmap.org * Import into a PostGIS database using osm2pgsql * Set up mapnik and test using osm.xml and the generate_image.py * Compile and install mod_tile * Run the rendering daemon and ensure it can write to the tile storage directory * Configure your Apache server to load and run the module * Change the OpenLayers instance to point to your server After a long laborious battle I have reached the last stage. I need to point the openlayers instance to my server, but cannot find documentation how to do it. Can anyone point me to this? -- regards Kenneth Gonsalves Associate NRC-FOSS http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] rights of way and designation=*
... England and Wales specific - not the rest of the UK! Mike Harris _ From: Gustav Foseid [mailto:gust...@gmail.com] Sent: 28 February 2009 09:34 To: osm Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] rights of way and designation=* On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Robert Vollmert rvollmert-li...@gmx.net wrote: I've had a look at tagwatch (unfortunately not terribly up-to-date) and documented this suggestion and current use at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:designation . Please flesh the page out! It'd be nice to have a list of sensible values there; also, should there be a :uk or uk: in the tag or value? I think I was one of the first to mention uk (as in uk_row for the tag). This was just to make the point that the tag could (and maybe even should) be rather UK-specific, not necessarily that uk should be part of the name. - Gustav ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] how to point the openlayers instance to mapnik
Lookup the map creating section in the JS code of your website where
OpenLayers is used. It should look something like this:
map = new OpenLayers.Map(
Then add a new TMS layer pointing to your Mapnik instance. The example
below shows two of the Mapnik instances used on the Dutch tileserver:
var layerFastNL = new OpenLayers.Layer.TMS(
SpeedLayer,
http://93.186.180.157/;,
{type:'png', getURL: get_osm_url,
border:1,
transitionEffect: 'resize'} );
var layerNL = new OpenLayers.Layer.TMS(
NL (current),
[
http://a.tile.openstreetmap.nl/tilecache.py/1.0.0/mapnik/;,
http://b.tile.openstreetmap.nl/tilecache.py/1.0.0/mapnik/;,
http://c.tile.openstreetmap.nl/tilecache.py/1.0.0/mapnik/;
],
{type:'png', getURL: get_osm_url,
border:1,
maxExtent: new
OpenLayers.Bounds(311549.5,6555477.5,822458.8125,7118943.5)}
);
That's about it.
Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
Hi,
I have been working on doing my own slippy map with mapnik and mod_tile. The
documentation mentions the following steps:
* Download the planet file from planet.openstreetmap.org
* Import into a PostGIS database using osm2pgsql
* Set up mapnik and test using osm.xml and the generate_image.py
* Compile and install mod_tile
* Run the rendering daemon and ensure it can write to the tile storage
directory
* Configure your Apache server to load and run the module
* Change the OpenLayers instance to point to your server
After a long laborious battle I have reached the last stage. I need to point
the openlayers instance to my server, but cannot find documentation how to do
it. Can anyone point me to this?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Lawyer responses to use cases, major problems
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: I'm surprised that nobody else seems to see a problem in this. Am I perhaps barking up some completely imaginary tree? Nope, not at all, I'm exceptionally concerned about the implications on the cyclemap db. I'm combining PD SRTM data and OSM data, and as far as I'm concerned making both original sources available should be sufficient. That way every piece of geographic data used in the cyclemap is available. Being forced to offer a postgis dump would suck massively. And never mind for me - I've got the time and energy to deal with it if needs be. But it'll also suck for people doing things like my public transport experiments - as soon as you put up a picture of one of your experiments all of a sudden you'll have some guy demanding a dump of your postgis db. Seems overkill, and like you say, the intention should be to make the geographic data available, not the specific instance of (perhaps processed) data. Cheers, Andy ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Lawyer responses to use cases, major problems
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 05:59:40AM +, Jukka Rahkonen wrote: I do regularly import some osm data into PostGIS and reproject it inside the database. Would it be enough to tell where to download the original OSM data and what script to run, or should I really make a dump from my imported and reprojected database tables if someone requests? The result would be identical. I think this is reasonable, but I have no idea how, or if, this should be written into the licence. Where actually goes the limit between database and something else? I believe that if I convert the data from osm format directly into ESRI Shapefiles then I do not have a database, or do I? You don’t have a relational database. The collection of Shapefiles could still be considered a database. But if I let ArcGIS to store the shapefile data into its own personal geodatabase, then I would have a derived database again? How about if I store some attributes from osm data into Excel vs. Access, the latter forms obviously a derived database while the first doesn't? The software used, or whether or not the work is held in what we might normally consider a database is not relevant. From the directive[1], article 1: “2. For the purposes of this Directive, 'database` shall mean a collection of independent works, data or other materials arranged in a systematic or methodical way and individually accessible by electronic or other means.” I would say all of your examples are databases under this definition. [1]: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31996L0009:EN:HTML Simon -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.—John Gall signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] One billion tags
Jukka Rahkonen wrote: Jochen Topf jochen at remote.org writes: The OSM database now contains over 1 billion tags on nodes, ways and relations together. Congratulations all around! Jochen Big number really. I guess it is the American billion and not the European one (thousand millions vs. million millions), but still. How are you calculating your statistics, and do you nkow how the daily statistics behind the wiki main page link are computed? There seem to be some difference in the numbers. OpenStreetMap stats report run at Sun Mar 01 00:00:07 + 2009 Number of users 95760 Number of uploaded GPS points 705163261 Number of nodes 315901319 Number of ways25524745 Number of relations 71123 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk Never let statistics get in the way of congratulations or celebrations. You should be glad that OSM has gotten this far, regardless of what definition you want to use. Big thanks to everyone involved in reaching this milestone :-) Kyle -- Kyle Gordon - 2M1DIQ Web: http://lodge.glasgownet.com Jabber/Email/SIP: k...@lodge.glasgownet.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Lawyer responses to use cases, major problems
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 11:51:24AM +, Dair Grant wrote: I'm not sure what format a file containing all of the alterations would take. Does this mean a machine-readable list of the exact transformations that were performed, or simply a human-readable summary of the transformations made? I take this as unspecified as the licence stands. It can be anything you like. I was going to comment on the wording because it requires a single file, but then I realised, just like OpenDocument Text can be represented in a single archive, so could a number of files describing transformations to the database, so it’s irrelevant. If I map our fixed point lat/lons to 32-bit floats, I will create a derivative database (32-bit floats can't represent all integers exactly, so I've lost some information and can't go back). Do I need to publish exactly which floating point value each integer was mapped to, or simply say I converted all lat/lons to floats? If you really did this manually, I’d say that you have a point, but, computers being computers, things are done programmatically. If you perform the transformations repeatedly, you’ll want some software to do it for you. That is your set of very precise instructions for transforming the database. Even if you didn’t have just one script that does everything, document what software you did use, and how, because you inevitably did use some software. I think the process needs to be consistently reproducable, and I don’t think “I converted all lat/lons to floats” is enough. - A human-readable set of instructions that are reasonable Introducing reasonable means I can have my lawyer argue with yours over whether convert to floats is a reasonable summary or not, and not have to worry about being sued because I used an unusual rounding mode like round-to-infinity and forgot to mention it. It introduces a whole host of ways of getting around the requirement to provide the alterations due to the ambiguity. Someone intent on using a database, but is reluctant to share their derivative or process to create the derivative (maybe they feel they’ve done something that gives them an edge over competitors), can word this set of instructions in such a way that it is difficult to reproduce. They can claim it is “reasonable”, and run the risk should anyone contend. The problem is, when it comes to bringing out the lawyers, not everyone is in a position to contend. If human readable instructions must be allowed, they should be such that each instruction is clearly defined, and the same transformation is consistently reproducable. It then comes down to contending that you can or can not reproduce the derivative database, which I feel is much more clear cut than “reasonable”. Simon -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.—John Gall signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] A Creative Commons iCommons license
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Not on the map per se, but if you use the map to re-create the original database then - at least that's what I was thinking! - you are not using your own database but you are (again) using the database compiled by the original owner, so you need his permission to use it. This is - I thought - absolutely independent of the channel through which you received the original database. Think of CC0 (waive all database rights) or WTFPL (Can I... trace from the map and sell the result?). With such licenses you can not keep any databse rights. But then again, the ODbL says [a]ny product of this type of reverse engineering activity (whether done by You or on Your behalf by a third party) is governed by this License. I fail to see how a person having access to only the Produced Work (that would be, for instance, a user of an online mapping service using OSM data), could be bound by the ODbL. As long as he or she does not reverse engineer on Your behalf, it seems such reverse engineering would be allowed. - Gustav ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Lawyer responses to use cases, major problems
On 1 Mar 2009, at 10:19, Andy Allan wrote: On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: I'm surprised that nobody else seems to see a problem in this. Am I perhaps barking up some completely imaginary tree? Nope, not at all, I'm exceptionally concerned about the implications on the cyclemap db. I'm combining PD SRTM data and OSM data, and as far as I'm concerned making both original sources available should be sufficient. That way every piece of geographic data used in the cyclemap is available. Being forced to offer a postgis dump would suck massively. I think that is a collective DB, see my other post on the subject. There is still the question about whether the process of rearranging the OSM db is a 'derivative DB' or not. Again see my last post for suggestions. And never mind for me - I've got the time and energy to deal with it if needs be. But it'll also suck for people doing things like my public transport experiments - as soon as you put up a picture of one of your experiments all of a sudden you'll have some guy demanding a dump of your postgis db. Seems overkill, and like you say, the intention should be to make the geographic data available, not the specific instance of (perhaps processed) data. Can I suggest that when we reach consensus on an issue (this one or any other) that firstly look to the OSM Foundation licencing group to give their official opinion based on their private working group discussion, and then (with or without this input) we agree a response to the consultation by OpenDataCommons. Regards, Peter Cheers, Andy ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] compatibility with CC licenses
Interoperability of data would be nice, but as far as I am concerned it’s not a primary aim unless the interoperability is with other similarly free (freedom) and licensed such that further redistribution is also free. Simon I understand that, and I'm not trying to reopen the argument about PD v. ODbL (although I find the idea that freedom can only come from the barrel of a license deeply depressing). I was responding to a set of questions about whether or not ODbL was compatible with CC licenses, and pointing out that the use of the ODbL contradicts CC policy on database licensing. This tends to indicate that compatibility conversations would have to start at that level and not the are the freedoms compatible in these two licenses level. I also have a use case, one of a few that turned us from an ODbL path towards a PD path. It'd be nice to get a WSGR reaction to it. If Big Company decides to run a mechanical turk contest on Amazon to extract facts from your DB one at a time, do they violate the license without having ever signed it - can they possibly be bound by it if they haven't signed it, clicked ok on a digital box etc? And at what point does the individual person working in the turk contest infringe - 5 facts, 10 facts, 100 facts? And who would you sue in the event you wanted to take it to court? jtw -- John Wilbanks VP for Science, Creative Commons http://creativecommons.org http://sciencecommons.org http://neurocommons.org We make sharing easy, legal, and scalable. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] One billion tags
On 1 Mar 2009, at 11:21, Jukka Rahkonen wrote: Jochen Topf jochen at remote.org writes: The OSM database now contains over 1 billion tags on nodes, ways and relations together. Congratulations all around! Jochen Big number really. I guess it is the American billion and not the European one (thousand millions vs. million millions), but still. How are you calculating your statistics, and do you nkow how the daily statistics behind the wiki main page link are computed? There seem to be some difference in the numbers. OpenStreetMap stats report run at Sun Mar 01 00:00:07 + 2009 Number of users 95760 Number of uploaded GPS points 705163261 Number of nodes 315901319 Number of ways25524745 Number of relations 71123 These stats don't give anything information about tags. There will usually be multiple tags on each node, way and relation. This is the script used: http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/sites/rails_port/script/statistics Shaun ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] how to point the openlayers instance to mapnik
There's an easier method than this, see:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenLayers_Simple_Example#Extensions
On 01/03/2009, Lambertus o...@na1400.info wrote:
Lookup the map creating section in the JS code of your website where
OpenLayers is used. It should look something like this:
map = new OpenLayers.Map(
Then add a new TMS layer pointing to your Mapnik instance. The example
below shows two of the Mapnik instances used on the Dutch tileserver:
var layerFastNL = new OpenLayers.Layer.TMS(
SpeedLayer,
http://93.186.180.157/;,
{type:'png', getURL: get_osm_url,
border:1,
transitionEffect: 'resize'} );
var layerNL = new OpenLayers.Layer.TMS(
NL (current),
[
http://a.tile.openstreetmap.nl/tilecache.py/1.0.0/mapnik/;,
http://b.tile.openstreetmap.nl/tilecache.py/1.0.0/mapnik/;,
http://c.tile.openstreetmap.nl/tilecache.py/1.0.0/mapnik/;
],
{type:'png', getURL: get_osm_url,
border:1,
maxExtent: new
OpenLayers.Bounds(311549.5,6555477.5,822458.8125,7118943.5)}
);
That's about it.
Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
Hi,
I have been working on doing my own slippy map with mapnik and mod_tile.
The
documentation mentions the following steps:
* Download the planet file from planet.openstreetmap.org
* Import into a PostGIS database using osm2pgsql
* Set up mapnik and test using osm.xml and the generate_image.py
* Compile and install mod_tile
* Run the rendering daemon and ensure it can write to the tile storage
directory
* Configure your Apache server to load and run the module
* Change the OpenLayers instance to point to your server
After a long laborious battle I have reached the last stage. I need to
point
the openlayers instance to my server, but cannot find documentation how to
do
it. Can anyone point me to this?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
--
Regards,
Thomas Wood
(Edgemaster)
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] One billion tags
Jochen Topf jochen at remote.org writes: The OSM database now contains over 1 billion tags on nodes, ways and relations together. Congratulations all around! Jochen Big number really. I guess it is the American billion and not the European one (thousand millions vs. million millions), but still. How are you calculating your statistics, and do you nkow how the daily statistics behind the wiki main page link are computed? There seem to be some difference in the numbers. OpenStreetMap stats report run at Sun Mar 01 00:00:07 + 2009 Number of users 95760 Number of uploaded GPS points 705163261 Number of nodes 315901319 Number of ways 25524745 Number of relations 71123 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] One billion tags
The OSM database now contains over 1 billion tags on nodes, ways and relations together. Congratulations all around! Jochen -- Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org http://www.remote.org/jochen/ +49-721-388298 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
On 28/02/09 12:21, 80n wrote: What percentage of data would other people feel willing to see sacrificed in order to move forward with the new license? We should probably exclude mass donated data as 90% is probably TIGER anyway. So what percentage of *user contributed* data would other people feel willing to see sacrificed in order to move forward with the new license? I'm not sure it's particularly useful to speculate on the question. Why don't we go through the exercise of attempting relicensing, see what the percentage actually is, and if there are particular areas or countries which would be hard-hit, and then have the debate? If I say 10%, and the actual figure was 11%, what would I do? No idea. Gerv ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
On Feb 27, 2009, at 4:03 PM, Gustav Foseid wrote: On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: I think it's pretty unarguable that, in the UK, your tracing of the Peruvian lakes would merit copyright or similar protection (as sweat-of-the- brow). Both the UK sweat-of-the-brow and the Norwegian (and Dutch?) protection of a large number of facts _might_ be invalid after the database directive. I think that the reason that the US only protects creativity and not facts is because the US doesn't want to give out a monopoly on a set of facts about the world. I'm unfamiliar with how sweat-of-the-brow works. Does it actually give a monopoly on a listing of facts? For example, in the US, you could make a listing of every postcode, and your only claim to copyrightability would be any judgement your exercised on which postcodes you listed and which you chose to not list. It seems like in the UK, you could do the same thing and have a copyright on it -- but another person could exercize the same brow- sweating and claim a copyright on EXACTLY the same facts. Which then brings up the interesting possibility of a third party infringing two copyrights. -- Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson r...@cloudmade.com - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] A Creative Commons iCommons license
On 1 Mar 2009, at 11:44, Gustav Foseid wrote: On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Not on the map per se, but if you use the map to re-create the original database then - at least that's what I was thinking! - you are not using your own database but you are (again) using the database compiled by the original owner, so you need his permission to use it. This is - I thought - absolutely independent of the channel through which you received the original database. Think of CC0 (waive all database rights) or WTFPL (Can I... trace from the map and sell the result?). With such licenses you can not keep any databse rights. But then again, the ODbL says [a]ny product of this type of reverse engineering activity (whether done by You or on Your behalf by a third party) is governed by this License. I fail to see how a person having access to only the Produced Work (that would be, for instance, a user of an online mapping service using OSM data), could be bound by the ODbL. As long as he or she does not reverse engineer on Your behalf, it seems such reverse engineering would be allowed. Agreed. I am awaiting an explanation of this one from someone 'on the inside' of the legal negotiations on this one. I fail to see how one can insist on any terms on a Produced Work that is released as PD and I thought this was one of more important findings from the last time we reviewed the license (the previous version) and this was the reason I suggested that one would have to put license conditions on Produced Works. I am not aware of any comment from the 'inside' except for the legal council comments to Use Case 1 which confirms the ambiguity saying The ODbL imposes no license restrictions on the Produced Works, although it does restrict reverse engineering the Produced Work in order to re-create the Database and place it under a different license. Ihmo, If this consultation is going to be meaningful we really do need some authoritative voices from within the Foundation / License Team on the matter Can anyone hear us?.. Peter - Gustav ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-legal-talk] A simplification of the agreement on the signup page.
I'm thinking that we should modify the agreement that people make when they sign up. It should read something like this: By creating an account, you agree that all work uploaded to openstreetmap.org and all data created by use of any tools which connect to openstreetmap.org is to be (non-exclusively) licensed under this Creative Commons license (by-sa). or under the ODbL. If you choose not to give us your email address, or your email address stops working, you waive all right to ownership of your edits. Should we, God forbid, need to change the license ever again, or make any other kind of legal change, we have a defensible legal position for those people whose edits have, or become, anonymous. -- Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson r...@cloudmade.com - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] A simplification of the agreement on the signup page.
Has the ODbL been finalized yet ? If not it will either need to read something like ODbL version X or later. I support you and I would like to go even further. Namely any license that the OSMF chooses. But at least one of the OSMF members (Mikel?) was opposed to it because it's so easy to get OSMF membership (and as a consequence a controlling majority on the board). On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 6:30 PM, Russ Nelson r...@cloudmade.com wrote: I'm thinking that we should modify the agreement that people make when they sign up. It should read something like this: By creating an account, you agree that all work uploaded to openstreetmap.org and all data created by use of any tools which connect to openstreetmap.org is to be (non-exclusively) licensed under this Creative Commons license (by-sa). or under the ODbL. If you choose not to give us your email address, or your email address stops working, you waive all right to ownership of your edits. Should we, God forbid, need to change the license ever again, or make any other kind of legal change, we have a defensible legal position for those people whose edits have, or become, anonymous. -- Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson r...@cloudmade.com - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] A simplification of the agreement on the signup page.
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote: Has the ODbL been finalized yet ? If not it will either need to read something like ODbL version X or later. The or later seems to be included in the text of ODBL S4.4 (unlike GPL etc where its a per-project choice) with the slight difference that ODBL doesn't specify who's allowed to publish the next version. In fact, isn't this a controversial paragraph anyway, since it gives whoever publishes the licenses power to do whatever they want with the data, simply by writing a new version? ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] A simplification of the agreement on the signup page.
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote: But at least one of the OSMF members (Mikel?) was opposed to it because it's so easy to get OSMF membership (and as a consequence a controlling majority on the board). Did someone calculate how much it would cost to buy the OSMF? (i.e. how many membership fees you'd need to pay to have the controlling vote, assuming you had a supply of people to accept the memberships and do the voting) ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] A simplification of the agreement on the signup page.
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote: I support you and I would like to go even further. Namely any license that the OSMF chooses. But at least one of the OSMF members (Mikel?) was opposed to it because it's so easy to get OSMF membership (and as a consequence a controlling majority on the board). OSMF currently has around 200 members. Anyone determined to control OSMF would simply need to buy that many memberships. At £15 a time you could buy the whole Foundation for about £3,000. Bestowing OSMF with this kind of responsibility might not be a wise move. 80n ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] A simplification of the agreement on the signup page.
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 5:06 PM, OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com wrote: On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote: Has the ODbL been finalized yet ? If not it will either need to read something like ODbL version X or later. The or later seems to be included in the text of ODBL S4.4 (unlike GPL etc where its a per-project choice) with the slight difference that ODBL doesn't specify who's allowed to publish the next version. In fact, isn't this a controversial paragraph anyway, since it gives whoever publishes the licenses power to do whatever they want with the data, simply by writing a new version? The ODbL license is owned by OpenDataCommons: http://www.opendatacommons.org/about/advisory-council/ I believe this group of people controls future versions of this and the FIL license. The Open Knowledge Foundation http://www.okfn.org/projects claims that Open Data Commons is one of their projects. I am not sure how that relationship works though. 80n ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] A simplification of the agreement on thesignup page.
On 1 Mar 2009, at 17:11, OJ W wrote: On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote: But at least one of the OSMF members (Mikel?) was opposed to it because it's so easy to get OSMF membership (and as a consequence a controlling majority on the board). Did someone calculate how much it would cost to buy the OSMF? (i.e. how many membership fees you'd need to pay to have the controlling vote, assuming you had a supply of people to accept the memberships and do the voting) It is also interesting to note that a quorum for a board meeting is two and that the chairman has a casting vote. The Board may meet together for the dispatch of business, adjourn and otherwise regulate their meetings as they think fit, and determine the quorum necessary for the transaction of business. Unless otherwise determined, two shall be a quorum. Questions arising at any meeting shall be decided by a majority of votes. In case of an equality of votes the Chairman shall have a second or casting vote. http://foundation.openstreetmap.org/articles-of-association/ I have advocated for some time now that the articles of association need to be tightened up. I suggest that for now we assume that we can resolve these vulnerabilities of the OSMF as a separate issue and concentrate on the licence for now. With regard to up-issuing the license then I believe it is the open knowledge foundation that would hold the keys, not the OSMF. Possibly I am wrong. I don't know a lot about the OKF and intend to find out more. Again Can we please please have some authoritative input from someone on the OSMF board who has been in on these discussions. It is clear from comments on the list in the past 24 hours that the directors who are currently engaged in this conversation have not be involved in these discussions at board level. I wonder who has? anyone? or has it all be 'left to the lawyers'? Steve? Where is Steve, has anyone seen him recently on this list... (sorry to be bitchy, but it does seem bizarre at present that no one is able to answer any of these questions) Regards, Peter ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-legal-talk] Me, You, the Licensor and the Contract
The Licensor (as defined below) and You (as defined below) agree as follows: reads the beginning of ODbL. The Licensor is the natural or legal person the that offers the Database under the terms of this Licence. Who will be the licensor (owner) of the database for OSM? For the factual information license, the wording is rather similar, but here the OSM user is the Licensor. Who will be You? When applying the license to a database, you do this by adding a copyright notice. In what jurisdictions will this form a legal contract? What will happen if a database is distributed without the copyright notice? - Gustav ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] A simplification of the agreement on the signup page.
Russ Nelson schrieb: [...], or your email address stops working, you waive all right to ownership of your edits. Probably about as legally binding as posting a note on the site that says By reading this you agree to sacrifice your firstborn to the OSMF. Philipp ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Russ Nelson r...@cloudmade.com wrote: I think that the reason that the US only protects creativity and not facts is because the US doesn't want to give out a monopoly on a set of facts about the world. I'm unfamiliar with how sweat-of-the-brow works. Does it actually give a monopoly on a listing of facts? For example, in the US, you could make a listing of every postcode, and your only claim to copyrightability would be any judgement your exercised on which postcodes you listed and which you chose to not list. It seems like in the UK, you could do the same thing and have a copyright on it -- but another person could exercize the same brow-sweating and claim a copyright on EXACTLY the same facts. Which then brings up the interesting possibility of a third party infringing two copyrights. Whether you infringe on copyright depends on where you copied it from. If you copied from both datasets then quite possibly you infringe both. If you don't copy form someone else then there's no problem. It's the means that matter, not the results. Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout klep...@gmail.com http://svana.org/kleptog/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Proposal to update the Use Cases page
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 10:06 PM, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote: On 1 Mar 2009, at 21:49, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, Peter Miller wrote: I think these Use Cases are going to end up being twins of an eventual FAQ that I imagine will exist. I am starting to think that perhaps the license should be accompanied by a kind of interpretation document which may or may not be the same as this FAQ. There are probably things that the license will never specify exactly, like the question of where in this chain does that database cease to exist. As stated numerous times on this list, applying the EU definition of database, even a PNG tile is a database... So if we'd have a document clarifying these things for OSM - even if this might not be legally binding but just an expression of intent - that would be a much better basis for the individual mapper to actually say yes. I agree. The license is the License, and that is by necessity written in legal language. If we use the Use Case page to describe common real life situations and then get the lawyers in the end to give their verdict on them it will form a very useful bridge between the practical and the legal. It will also mean that most people will be able to see 'their' use listed with a bit 'yes' next to it which will be reassuring, that would only be meaningful if it were incorporated into the license? (e.g. see SCO vs Novell where the language of a contract was sufficiently clear that the parties' interpretations of it were not even considered) ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-talk] Bad Bot Activity: Maarten Deen
Annoying... Stop stripping highway = xxx_link Just because you are smart enough to write a bot doesn't mean you should. I love my data, don't go f*** it up. Tiny Snapshot of stupid bot activity... http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7801086/historyhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7801086/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/27719598/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7797723/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/26368630/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/26368718/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/23284354/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/23284362/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/31108800/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7801085/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7801086/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/4425454/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/4672026/history / Grant ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Proposal to update the Use Cases page
On 1 Mar 2009, at 22:33, OJ W wrote: On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 10:06 PM, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote: On 1 Mar 2009, at 21:49, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, Peter Miller wrote: I think these Use Cases are going to end up being twins of an eventual FAQ that I imagine will exist. I am starting to think that perhaps the license should be accompanied by a kind of interpretation document which may or may not be the same as this FAQ. There are probably things that the license will never specify exactly, like the question of where in this chain does that database cease to exist. As stated numerous times on this list, applying the EU definition of database, even a PNG tile is a database... So if we'd have a document clarifying these things for OSM - even if this might not be legally binding but just an expression of intent - that would be a much better basis for the individual mapper to actually say yes. I agree. The license is the License, and that is by necessity written in legal language. If we use the Use Case page to describe common real life situations and then get the lawyers in the end to give their verdict on them it will form a very useful bridge between the practical and the legal. It will also mean that most people will be able to see 'their' use listed with a bit 'yes' next to it which will be reassuring, that would only be meaningful if it were incorporated into the license? (e.g. see SCO vs Novell where the language of a contract was sufficiently clear that the parties' interpretations of it were not even considered) I am not familiar with that case, but I think we should ensure that everything in the FAQ/Use Cases is confirmed by the license, but it is written in a much more useful and relevant form for most people. The FAQ would say at the top 'this is not the license, the license is the license and if there is a conflict then the license and what is written here then the license is the definitive source. This is not too different from the CC summary page that says 'This is a human-readable summary of the Legal Code (the full license). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ Regards, Peter ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-talk] The Illustrated ODbL
Hi all, I've attempted to illustrate ways to use the OpenStreetMap database under ODbL and comply with the ODbL obligations. legal-talk: patches welcome! talk: perhaps you'll find the illustration instructive without having to participate in all of the discussion on legal-talk. http://weait.com/content/odbl-use-cases-illustrated Best regards, Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Bad Bot Activity: Maarten Deen
Same here in the Philippines. Please stop removing the highway = xxx_link tag. On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 6:39 AM, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote: Annoying... Stop stripping highway = xxx_link Just because you are smart enough to write a bot doesn't mean you should. I love my data, don't go f*** it up. Tiny Snapshot of stupid bot activity... http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7801086/historyhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7801086/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/27719598/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7797723/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/26368630/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/26368718/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/23284354/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/23284362/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/31108800/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7801085/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7801086/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/4425454/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/4672026/history / Grant ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-legal-talk] The Illustrated ODbL
Hi, rich...@weait.com wrote: I've attempted to illustrate ways to use the OpenStreetMap database under ODbL and comply with the ODbL obligations. The box at the end of the Produced Work stream says: Share Alike is required if database is derivative. Attribution is always required. - It should perhaps be made clear that Share Alike of the Produced Work is never required; only sharing the derivative database may be required. Of course your illustration also glosses over a lot of open questions being discussed here, for example your illustrations clearly say that something that comes out of osm2pgsql is not already a derived database (we're not clear about this yet, the license seems to say otherwise!), and your illustrations also clearly say that tiles are not a database (another thing that is not clear). Also, you're using the phrase Convey Produced Work... which, while proper English, seems to clash with the ODbL's own use of the word Convey (ODbL only ever uses the word for databases, not Produced Works), so maybe replace this by simply publish? You say that the Produced Work can be put under any license; I used so say that as well but at the moment it looks like the Produced Work can never be under any Free license (such as CC-something, GFDL, ...) because these licenses do not allow you to add the extra by the way, reverse engineering will cause X clause that ODbL mandates. These are, of course, all somewhat open issues that we hope to resolve one way or another. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] how to point the openlayers instance to mapnik
On Sunday 01 March 2009 17:51:17 Thomas Wood wrote: There's an easier method than this, see: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenLayers_Simple_Example#Extensions great! I am all done - thanks to everyone on this list. -- regards Kenneth Gonsalves Associate NRC-FOSS http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk-nl] Open Geo data repository
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Geodata_Repository#On_Offer_.21 Mooie show case van gratis geo-data sets. ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [talk-au] suburb boundaries import
You ripper! How long are we looking at for the whole import? - Original Message - From: Franc Carter franc.car...@gmail.com Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009 1:43 pm Subject: [talk-au] suburb boundaries import To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org talk-au@openstreetmap.org Is now running, please leave anything with source=ABS_2006 alone until the import is complete cheers -- Franc ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] suburb boundaries import
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 11:30 PM, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: Wow, that's almost a month. Well, keep us all posted :). This is rather exciting! Ok, that's nerdy, but we're on OSM so it's allowed, right? Yeah - the latency from here to the UK is just nasty. I'll send out updates interesting milestones. Do you know what area it is uploading? As in, can you link to a nicely rendered area once part of the upload is done? Not really, the upload is happening based of the order of extraction from a perl hash table which is effectively random cheers Apologies for the disjointed writing, I should be asleep. - Original Message - From: Franc Carter franc.car...@gmail.com Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009 11:14 pm Subject: Re: [talk-au] suburb boundaries import To: b.schulz...@scu.edu.au Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Quite a while going on the current rate. The estimate from bulk_upload is 647 hours - but the estimate is still not particularly stable. cheers On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 11:06 PM, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: You ripper! How long are we looking at for the whole import? - Original Message - From: Franc Carter franc.car...@gmail.com Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009 1:43 pm Subject: [talk-au] suburb boundaries import To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org talk-au@openstreetmap.org Is now running, please leave anything with source=ABS_2006 alone until the import is complete cheers -- Franc ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au -- Franc -- Franc ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] suburb boundaries import
Yep, but I didn't have any luck finding a server to do it from - my inquiry on the dev list didn't get any response cheers On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 11:38 PM, Cameron osm-mailing-li...@justcameron.comwrote: Could it be interrupted and run on a server in the UK (or even better, on an OSM server in the same location as the db server?) ~Cameron 2009/3/1 Franc Carter franc.car...@gmail.com On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 11:30 PM, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: Wow, that's almost a month. Well, keep us all posted :). This is rather exciting! Ok, that's nerdy, but we're on OSM so it's allowed, right? Yeah - the latency from here to the UK is just nasty. I'll send out updates interesting milestones. Do you know what area it is uploading? As in, can you link to a nicely rendered area once part of the upload is done? Not really, the upload is happening based of the order of extraction from a perl hash table which is effectively random cheers Apologies for the disjointed writing, I should be asleep. - Original Message - From: Franc Carter franc.car...@gmail.com Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009 11:14 pm Subject: Re: [talk-au] suburb boundaries import To: b.schulz...@scu.edu.au Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Quite a while going on the current rate. The estimate from bulk_upload is 647 hours - but the estimate is still not particularly stable. cheers On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 11:06 PM, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: You ripper! How long are we looking at for the whole import? - Original Message - From: Franc Carter franc.car...@gmail.com Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009 1:43 pm Subject: [talk-au] suburb boundaries import To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org talk-au@openstreetmap.org Is now running, please leave anything with source=ABS_2006 alone until the import is complete cheers -- Franc ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au -- Franc -- Franc ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au -- Franc ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] suburb boundaries import
Could it be interrupted and run on a server in the UK (or even better, on an OSM server in the same location as the db server?) ~Cameron 2009/3/1 Franc Carter franc.car...@gmail.com On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 11:30 PM, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: Wow, that's almost a month. Well, keep us all posted :). This is rather exciting! Ok, that's nerdy, but we're on OSM so it's allowed, right? Yeah - the latency from here to the UK is just nasty. I'll send out updates interesting milestones. Do you know what area it is uploading? As in, can you link to a nicely rendered area once part of the upload is done? Not really, the upload is happening based of the order of extraction from a perl hash table which is effectively random cheers Apologies for the disjointed writing, I should be asleep. - Original Message - From: Franc Carter franc.car...@gmail.com Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009 11:14 pm Subject: Re: [talk-au] suburb boundaries import To: b.schulz...@scu.edu.au Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Quite a while going on the current rate. The estimate from bulk_upload is 647 hours - but the estimate is still not particularly stable. cheers On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 11:06 PM, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: You ripper! How long are we looking at for the whole import? - Original Message - From: Franc Carter franc.car...@gmail.com Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009 1:43 pm Subject: [talk-au] suburb boundaries import To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org talk-au@openstreetmap.org Is now running, please leave anything with source=ABS_2006 alone until the import is complete cheers -- Franc ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au -- Franc -- Franc ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [Talk-de] verschachtelte Multipolygone
On Sun, 1 Mar 2009, Torsten Leistikow wrote: Eigenschaft in einem speziellen Fall vorangig dargestellt werden sollte. Dafuer muesste man dann aber Renderer-Kontroll-Tags einfuehren und nicht die Daten kuenstlich verbiegen, wie z.B. durch falsches Anbringen von Layer-Tags. Stellt Dir vor. Das Layer-Tag ist genau dieses Render-Kontrolltag. Es sagt nämlich dass Objekt x oberhalb/unterhalb von Objekt y ist. Das manche dort unbedingt physikalische Eigenschaften hineininterpretieren wollen ändert daran nichts. Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] OpenLayers WMS
Hallo, hat jemand ein funktionierendes Beispiel, wie man WMS in OpenLayers einbindet? Mein Versuch (im Anhang) lädt leider nur schwarze Kacheln (auf Luftbild-Ebene umschalten). Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)Title: Test Mit freundlicher Untersttzung von openstreetmap.org ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] OpenLayers WMS
Hi, Dirk Stöcker wrote: hat jemand ein funktionierendes Beispiel, wie man WMS in OpenLayers einbindet? wms.geofabrik.de Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Data Layer on osm.org and landuse areas
Frederik Ramm schrieb: Hi, does anyone have a good trick how to select individual roads on the openstreetmap.org data layer when the whole village is covered by a freaking landuse polygon? I can only ever select the polygon ;-( Falsche Liste? ;-) Hab das selbe festgestellt, manchmal kann ich irgendwie die Straße auswählen, manchmal aber auch nur das polygon. Alternativ kann man über die object list gehen, ist aber nur eine Notlösung. Gruß Jonas ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Data Layer on osm.org and landuse areas
2009/3/1 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: Hi, does anyone have a good trick how to select individual roads on the openstreetmap.org data layer when the whole village is covered by a freaking landuse polygon? I can only ever select the polygon ;-( What I do is zooming in until the area is bigger than the map view, so it won't be downloaded. Now you can select individual Objects in the area - but it's still a pain in the ass. ;-) -Martin ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Data Layer on osm.org and landuse areas
Hi, does anyone have a good trick how to select individual roads on the openstreetmap.org data layer when the whole village is covered by a freaking landuse polygon? I can only ever select the polygon ;-( Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Eine Milliarde Tags
Hi! Die OSM-Datenbank enthält jetzt über eine Milliarde Tags an Nodes, Ways und Relations zusammen. Herzlichen Glückwunsch! Jochen -- Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org http://www.remote.org/jochen/ +49-721-388298 ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Höhennetz/Höhendatenbank
Hallo, Wenn jede Höhenlinie ihr eigenes Konfidenzintervall mitbringt, wird es natürlich sehr fein. Nicht dass man das in einer Straßenkarte dargestellt haben möchte :-) Wie soll ich das machen? 1. Wie bestimme ich die Höhenlinie rechnerisch? 2. Wie dann das Konfidenzintervall? Spätestens nach dem Auffüllen der Lücken sind die Fehler doch sehr geschätzt. Gruß Dimitri ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Data Layer on osm.org and landuse areas
Frederik Ramm schrieb: does anyone have a good trick how to select individual roads on the openstreetmap.org data layer when the whole village is covered by a freaking landuse polygon? I can only ever select the polygon ;-( Das Problem wurde irgendwann im Forum diskutiert. Manche lösen das Problem offenbar indem sie die landuse areas einfach loeschen. Ich halte das zwar nicht für gut, aber immerhin kann man die Gebiete später wiederherstellen. Grungelborz ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] OpenLayers WMS
On Sun, 1 Mar 2009, Sven Geggus wrote: Dirk Stöcker openstreet...@dstoecker.de wrote: hat jemand ein funktionierendes Beispiel, wie man WMS in OpenLayers einbindet? Das geht sehr einfach: http://geggus.net/gmaps/myfsmap.html Wichtig zu wissen ist, dass Openlayers selbst nicht umprojizieren kann, d.h. Dein WMS muss Simple Mercator (Google Projektion EPSG:900913) anbieten, was die meisten WMS-Server eher nicht machen. Das hilft nicht. Wenn EPSG:900913 unterstützt würde, dann würde es wahrscheinlich funktionieren. Warum muss es denn EPSG:900913 sein? Ich habe die Layer doch alle separat. Die müssen doch überhaupt nicht die gleiche Projektion nutzen. Bei Overlays würde ich es ja verstehen, aber bei separaten Layern? Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Data Layer on osm.org and landuse areas
Hallo, Frederik Ramm schrieb: does anyone have a good trick how to select individual roads on the openstreetmap.org data layer when the whole village is covered by a freaking landuse polygon? I can only ever select the polygon ;-( Klick Manualy select a different area. Ziehe einen Auswahlrahmen auf, der die Poligongrenze NICHT schneidet. Gruß nk ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Höhennetz/Höhendatenbank
Dimitri Junker o...@dimitri-junker.de [Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 03:22:50AM CET]: Hallo, Wenn jede Höhenlinie ihr eigenes Konfidenzintervall mitbringt, wird es natürlich sehr fein. Nicht dass man das in einer Straßenkarte dargestellt haben möchte :-) Wie soll ich das machen? 1. Wie bestimme ich die Höhenlinie rechnerisch? 2. Wie dann das Konfidenzintervall? Höhenlinien mit Konfidenzintervallen bezüglich ihrer Lage sind sicherlich Unfug, da sie in flachen Gegenden sehr ungenau werden. Aber jeden Höhenpunkt in Deinem 1024x1024-Gitter möchte man schon mit einer Präzisionsangabe versehen haben. Spätestens nach dem Auffüllen der Lücken sind die Fehler doch sehr geschätzt. Sicher sind die Fehler geschätzt, wenn ich sie genau kennen würde, könnte ich sie vom Messwert abziehen und bin fertig. -- Johannes Hüsing There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture mailto:johan...@huesing.name from such a trifling investment of fact. http://derwisch.wikidot.com (Mark Twain, Life on the Mississippi) ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Eine Milliarde Tags
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 11:30:30AM +, Sven Geggus wrote: Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote: Die OSM-Datenbank enthält jetzt über eine Milliarde Tags an Nodes, Ways und Relations zusammen. Herzlichen Glückwunsch! Welcher Datentyp wird denn für die OSM-ID verwendet? Müssen wir uns da Sorgen machen? 32-Bit unsigned sind nämlich nur 4294967295 Die genannte Milliarde ist da schon erstaunlich nahe dran: 10 Eine Milliarde sind die Tags, die haben keine IDs. Nodes gibts nur ca. 300 Mio. :-) Allerdings werden gelöschte IDs nicht wieder vergeben sodass wir 20% oder so Overhead haben. Ein bischen reicht das aber noch mit 32 bit, aber nicht ewig. 64-Bit unsigned sollte etwas länger reichen: 18446744073709551615 Die MySQL nimmt 64Bit Ints. Aber nicht alle Software, die die Daten nutzt macht das auch... Jochen -- Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org http://www.remote.org/jochen/ +49-721-388298 ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] OpenLayers WMS
On Sun, 1 Mar 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote: hat jemand ein funktionierendes Beispiel, wie man WMS in OpenLayers einbindet? wms.geofabrik.de Hmm, nach vielen Probieren bekomme ich WMS hin. Sobald ich aber einen OSM-Layer als Alternative anbieten will, schaltet der mir für WMS auf EPSG:900913 unabhängig davon was ich will. Binde ich erst WMS und dann einen OSM-Layer ein, dann geht OSM nicht. Irgendwas ist an den OSM-OpenLayers-Skripten noch falsch. Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] OpenLayers WMS
On Sun, 1 Mar 2009, Sven Geggus wrote: Dirk Stöcker openstreet...@dstoecker.de wrote: Die Frage warum ich für alle Layer gleiche Projektionen brauche bleibt Deine darstellbare Fläche hat ja eine fixe Begrenzung x1,x2,y1,y2 Naja, für meine Anwendung brauche ich keine fixe Fenstergröße. Das Zentrum ist wichtiger :-) So, jetzt brauche ich nur noch die Methode, wie man GPX-Spuren darstellen kann. Ich bin mir sicher, dass ich einen Link auf ein gutes Beispiel hatte, nur wo der wieder hin ist ... Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] verschachtelte Multipolygone
Hi Torsten. Torsten Leistikow wrote: Bei dem Beispiel mit dem Park sehe ich das Problem, dass sich in meinen Augen Wald und Park eigentlich ausschliessen. Fuer Wald haben wir zwei allg. akzeptierte Tags: landuse=forest steht fuer forstwirtschaftlich genutzte Flaechen und natural=wood steht fuer naturbelassenen Urwald. Beides gehoert eigentlich nicht zu einem Park. Stattdessen sehe ich das eigentlich eher so, dass das Tag leisure=park bereits beinhaltet, dass da Baeume stehen. Das war hier letztens mal Thema: Kurzfassung: landuse=forest und landuse=park schließen sich aus (logisch). landuse=park und natural=wood schließen sich nicht aus (auch logisch, es sei denn man ist der Meinung in einem Park dürfe es keine Bäume geben). Ergebnis könnte dann etwa so aussehen: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.26866lon=10.55489zoom=16layers=B000FTF natural=wood als Synonym für Urwald zu benutzen ist quatsch. Richtig ist, das das meiste landuse=forest auch natural=wood ist. In Deutschland treten, außer in Schutzgebieten, vermutlich beide tags meistens parallel auf... In einem Park müssen IMHO überhaupt keine Bäume stehen. Manchmal gibt es große, alte, einzelne Bäume, die würde ich aber nicht mit natural=wood taggen (sondern natural=tree auf node). Gerrit ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] OpenLayers WMS
Dirk Stöcker openstreet...@dstoecker.de wrote: hat jemand ein funktionierendes Beispiel, wie man WMS in OpenLayers einbindet? Das geht sehr einfach: http://geggus.net/gmaps/myfsmap.html Wichtig zu wissen ist, dass Openlayers selbst nicht umprojizieren kann, d.h. Dein WMS muss Simple Mercator (Google Projektion EPSG:900913) anbieten, was die meisten WMS-Server eher nicht machen. Bei obiger URL ist der WMS-Layer leider proprietär, sodass ich ihn mit username und passwort schützen muss. Das dahinterliegende geoTiff für den Mapserver muss nun entweder direkt in EPSG:900913 vorliegen oder der Mapserver muss das umprojizieren. Beides funktioniert. Gruss Sven -- Thinking of using NT for your critical apps? Isn't there enough suffering in the world? (Advertisement of Sun Microsystems in Wall Street Journal) /me is gig...@ircnet, http://sven.gegg.us/ on the Web ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] OpenLayers WMS
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 12:55:58PM +0100, Dirk Stöcker wrote: On Sun, 1 Mar 2009, Dirk Stöcker wrote: Wichtig zu wissen ist, dass Openlayers selbst nicht umprojizieren kann, d.h. Dein WMS muss Simple Mercator (Google Projektion EPSG:900913) anbieten, was die meisten WMS-Server eher nicht machen. Das hilft nicht. Doch. Der Code hat geholfen. Danke. Die Frage warum ich für alle Layer gleiche Projektionen brauche bleibt aber. Also wenn Du sie überlagern willst, ist ja klar. Und dafür ist Open Layers halt ausgelegt. Es kann nicht für Dich umrechnen kann, wenn Du die Layer wechselst. Du kannst aber natürlich die Layer-Wechselei komplett selbst machen und immer hin- und herrechnen. Das ist etwas mühsam geht aber. Bei http://tools.geofabrik.de/mc/ muss ich das auch machen, wenn man zwischen Google- und OSM-Layern wechselt. Jochen -- Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org http://www.remote.org/jochen/ +49-721-388298 ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Eine Milliarde Tags
Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote: Die OSM-Datenbank enthält jetzt über eine Milliarde Tags an Nodes, Ways und Relations zusammen. Herzlichen Glückwunsch! Welcher Datentyp wird denn für die OSM-ID verwendet? Müssen wir uns da Sorgen machen? 32-Bit unsigned sind nämlich nur 4294967295 Die genannte Milliarde ist da schon erstaunlich nahe dran: 10 64-Bit unsigned sollte etwas länger reichen: 18446744073709551615 Gruss Sven -- /* * Wirzenius wrote this portably, Torvalds fucked it up :-) */(taken from /usr/src/linux/lib/vsprintf.c) /me is gig...@ircnet, http://sven.gegg.us/ on the Web ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] OpenLayers WMS
Dirk Stöcker openstreet...@dstoecker.de wrote: Die Frage warum ich für alle Layer gleiche Projektionen brauche bleibt Deine darstellbare Fläche hat ja eine fixe Begrenzung x1,x2,y1,y2 Wenn Du nun eine Andere Projektion wählt, sagen wir mal zum Beispiel lat/long WGS84, was ja eine völlig verzerrte Darstellung ist, dann kannst Du ja die selbe Bounding-Box in dieser anderen Projektion gar nicht wirklich darstellen, wenn man die Fenstergröße mal als Fix ansieht. Natürlich könnte man die Karte verzerrt darstellen und WMS kann das im Prinzip. Ob man das haben möchte ist ein ganz andere Thema. Sven -- The American news-media is no longer a news source; it is a cheerleading squad. (unknown source) /me is gig...@ircnet, http://sven.gegg.us/ on the Web ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Höhenkarte für Aachen
Johannes Huesing schrieb: Wenn diese Punkte 40 m entfernt auf einem Track liegen, erregen schon 10 Höhenmeter Differenz Verdacht. In Dortmund-Hörde haben wir an einem Punkt 10 Höhenmeter auf 2 Meter (Bahnstrecke) und etwas weiter an der Schnettkerbrücke das Z-fache (Grund: Emschertal): http://www.arbg-dortmund.nrw.de/service/Weitere_Informationen/Aktuelles/Schnettkerbruecke.JPG Unter 20 Meter Endhöhengenauigkeit wäre - meiner Meinung nach - die Höhenmessung für den Popo. Für den ermittelten Wert schon (für den einzelnen Messwert nicht, auch wenn der ein sehr geringes Gewicht in der Höhenschätzung hätte), aber für Punkte weit ab von Messpunkten kann das natürlich passieren. Woher willst Du wissen, dass der ermittelte Punkt weitab von einem Messpunkt einen Fehler hat? ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Aachen - Komplettdownload
Johannes Huesing schrieb: http://www.file-upload.net/download-1481299/GPX_Aachen.zip.html Ich weiß ich war nciht angesprochen, aber er macht 'nen 404 hier. Habe es auf den Uni-Server gelegt. Lebt für 1 Woche ab jetzt: http://depot.tu-dortmund.de/get/wemq8z ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] key: building - Dachformen?
Hallo Community, aus älterem Projekt-Bestand zur Errechnung von Solarpotential in Wohnbebauung habe ich noch Daten, die ich für OpenStreetMap verwenden könnte. Hinterlegt sind: - Dachfläche (teilw. Modulfläche) - Dachform - Dachneigung - Dachexposition - Dachverschattung Viele Teile lassen sich aus den anderen Berechnen, wobei für die meisten Mapper eh nur die Dachform interessant wäre. Gibt es schon einen roof-Key? Attribute wären z.B.: - flat (Flachdach) - gable (Satteldach) - hip (Walmdach) - mansard (Mansardendach) - monopitch (Schleppdach) - shed (Pultdach) Dann noch Optionen, wie dormers (Dachgauben). Auch im Hinblick auf die Projekte der Uni Bonn sollte das immer wichtiger für uns werden. Grüße Tobias ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] ORS - Fußgänger-Routing über Pl ätze
Hallo Community, ich frage mal hier, um die ORS-Leute nicht von der Entwicklung abzuhalten :-) Ist generell schon ein Routing über Plätze möglich, auf denen keine Wege vorhanden, sondern uneingeschränktes Bewegen für Fußgänger möglich ist? Wichtige Plätze hier in Dortmund werden umgangen, obwohl man einfach quer drüber laufen kann und soll. Getaggt ist z.B. der Hansaplatz als highway: pedestrian. Auch scheinen die Verbindungen der angrenzenden Straßen korrekt angebracht worden zu sein. Habt Ihr ähnliche Erfahrungen gemacht? Grüße Tobias ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] verschachtelte Multipolygone
Gerrit Lammert schrieb: landuse=park und natural=wood schließen sich nicht aus (auch logisch, es sei denn man ist der Meinung in einem Park dürfe es keine Bäume geben). Das haben hier ein paar Leute so formuliert, ein paar fanden das gut, ein paar nicht. Ich bin ein bisschen konservativ und finde es besser, wenn man sich an die Vorgaben im Wiki haelt (so es denn welche zu einem Thema gibt)und ncht einfach sein eigenes Sueppchen kocht. D.h. wenn man die Bedeutung eines etablieretn Tags aendern will (das gilt sowohl fuer natural=wood als auch fuer das layer-Tag), dann sollte man am besten dafuer den Approval-Prozess anschmeissen, da bestimmt nicht alle fuer diese Aenderung sind. Auf alle Faelle sollte man aber die Beschreibung im Wiki anpassen. OSM ist ja gewollt sehr frei gehalten und ich habe auch nichts dagegen, wenn man seine eigenen Tags definiert. Aber bei der Bedeutung von bereits etabliereten Tags sollte man doch lieber zurueckhaltend sein, denn sonst weiss ja wirklich keiner mehr, was die Sachen in der Datenbank sollen. Anstatt das Layer-Tag umzudeuten (es ist von Anfang an als physikalisches Uebereinander definiert worden), kann man ja einfach ein neues Tag render_layer einfuehren. Alternativ muessten wir naemlich sonst auch ein neues Tag fuer die physikalische Anordnung erfinden. Und statt natural=wood umzudeuten kann man ja auch ein vegetation=wood einfuehren mit der gewuenschten Bedeutung. Das liesse sich dann auch gleich auf vegetation=gras und vegetation=flowers und aehnliche Sachen erweitern und koennte als Ergaenzung problemlos neben den bisherigen landuse-Tags existieren. Gruss Torsten ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] OpenLayers WMS
Dirk Stöcker openstreet...@dstoecker.de wrote: So, jetzt brauche ich nur noch die Methode, wie man GPX-Spuren darstellen kann. Das kann Openlayers. http://geggus.net/gmaps/radtour-ausflug2008.shtml Gruss Sven -- Software is like sex; it's better when it's free (Linus Torvalds) /me is gig...@ircnet, http://sven.gegg.us/ on the Web ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] OpenLayers WMS
Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote: Bei http://tools.geofabrik.de/mc/ muss ich das auch machen, wenn man zwischen Google- und OSM-Layern wechselt. Huch? Ich dachte Google und OSM würden die selbe Projektion verwenden? Sven -- The American news-media is no longer a news source; it is a cheerleading squad. (unknown source) /me is gig...@ircnet, http://sven.gegg.us/ on the Web ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] key: building - Dachformen?
Tobias Wendorff schrieb: Gibt es schon einen roof-Key? Attribute wären z.B.: - flat (Flachdach) - gable (Satteldach) - hip (Walmdach) - mansard (Mansardendach) - monopitch (Schleppdach) - shed (Pultdach) Dann noch Optionen, wie dormers (Dachgauben). Es gibt das ältere Proposal zu Gebäudeattributen: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Building_attributes Nicht so verbreitet laut Tagwatch und auch nicht unbedingt eine ideale Lösung (soweit ich sehe, vermischt es Material und Form). Vielleicht kannst du ja ein paar Ideen rausfischen und zusammen mit deinen Vorschlägen ins Wiki packen? Durch die sich abzeichnenden 3D-Verwendungen könnte inzwischen der Antrieb für so was da sein, den es zur Erstellungszeit des genannten Proposals (2006) noch nicht gab. Tobias Knerr ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Eine Milliarde Tags
Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote: 64-Bit unsigned sollte etwas länger reichen: 18446744073709551615 Die MySQL nimmt 64Bit Ints. Aber nicht alle Software, die die Daten nutzt macht das auch... Signed int? Das wäre dann 9223372036854775807 mögliche Nodes. Die gesamte Landfläche der Erde ist 510.000.000 km² daraus ergeben sich wenn ich richtig gerechnet habe 18085 Nodes Pro m². Das sollte reichen :) Gruss Sven -- I'm a bastard, and proud of it (Linus Torvalds, Wednesday Sep 6, 2000) /me is gig...@ircnet, http://sven.gegg.us/ on the Web ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] key: building - Dachformen?
Am 1. März 2009 16:10 schrieb Tobias Wendorff tobias.wendo...@uni-dortmund.de: Hallo Community, aus älterem Projekt-Bestand zur Errechnung von Solarpotential in Wohnbebauung habe ich noch Daten, die ich für OpenStreetMap verwenden könnte. Hinterlegt sind: - Dachfläche (teilw. Modulfläche) eher uninteressant da ableitbar - Dachform komplexes Thema. Wie willst Du beispielsweise die Ausrichtung angeben? Die Ausrichtung ist sehr wichtig, weil wenn sie nicht stimmt, das ganze Dach schlechter ist als gar nicht drin. - Dachneigung gehört das nicht zur Form? Zumindest um überhaupt die Form einigermaßen interpretieren zu können ist die Neigung auf jeden Fall erforderlich - Dachexposition - Dachverschattung beides eher Werte, die sich berechnen lassen, wenn man das Dach in 3d drin hat Viele Teile lassen sich aus den anderen Berechnen, wobei für die meisten Mapper eh nur die Dachform interessant wäre. naja, m.E. Form und Neigung, eigentlich auch First- und Traufhöhe, Dachüberstand Gibt es schon einen roof-Key? Attribute wären z.B.: das ist m.E. als building attributes vorgeschlagen, gut wäre wohl, das wie von Dir impliziert unter einem Subtag zu subsummieren: building:roof - flat (Flachdach) bis zu welcher Neigung? 5%? 5 Grad? - gable (Satteldach) - hip (Walmdach) - mansard (Mansardendach) - monopitch (Schleppdach) (ist eigentlich dasselbe wie ein Pultdach, als Besonderheit geht es ohne Übergang in die Hauptdachfläche über) - shed (Pultdach) ein shed ist kein Pultdach, bzw. könnte man es evtl. als Serie von Pultdächern begreifen. Pultdach heisst auf englisch eher monopitch oder pitched-roof (oder lean-to roof) Dachformen sind sehr variantenreich, da kann man sehr weit gehen, wichtig wären aber m.E. in jedem Fall noch ein paar weitere Dachformen (wie Du schon schreibst: z.B.): Krüppelwalmdach Tonnendach Kuppel Zeltdach/Pyramidendach Zwiebelhaube/Zwiebelturm (bzw. allgemein Hauben) Shed-Dach Kegeldach Berliner Dach sowie diverse ausländische Dachformen... Dann noch Optionen, wie dormers (Dachgauben). Fledermausgauben, Schleppgauben, ... sollten die dann einzeln gezeichnet werden? Auch im Hinblick auf die Projekte der Uni Bonn sollte das immer wichtiger für uns werden. ja, allgemein für 3D sehr nice to have. Gruß Martin ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] key: building - Dachformen?
Tobias Knerr schrieb: Durch die sich abzeichnenden 3D-Verwendungen könnte inzwischen der Antrieb für so was da sein, den es zur Erstellungszeit des genannten Proposals (2006) noch nicht gab. Allerdings fehlen noch geeignete Editoren. Google hat ja damals Sketchup gekauft, mit dem man sehr gut und einfach Gebäude einzeichnen kann. Naja, das kommt ja bei uns vielleicht auch noch. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] key: building - Dachformen?
2009/3/1 Tobias Wendorff tobias.wendo...@uni-dortmund.de: Tobias Knerr schrieb: Durch die sich abzeichnenden 3D-Verwendungen könnte inzwischen der Antrieb für so was da sein, den es zur Erstellungszeit des genannten Proposals (2006) noch nicht gab. Allerdings fehlen noch geeignete Editoren. Google hat ja damals Sketchup gekauft, mit dem man sehr gut und einfach Gebäude einzeichnen kann. Naja, das kommt ja bei uns vielleicht auch noch. wenn Du das hier problemlos einzeichnen kannst: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/Guggenheimbilbao.jpg sollte auch alles andere machbar sein. Gruß Martin ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] key: building - Dachformen?
Martin Koppenhoefer schrieb: eher uninteressant da ableitbar Wie ich bereits schreiben. - Dachform komplexes Thema. Wie willst Du beispielsweise die Ausrichtung angeben? Die Ausrichtung ist sehr wichtig, weil wenn sie nicht stimmt, das ganze Dach schlechter ist als gar nicht drin. Da ich in der Materie drin stecke, darfst Du mir die Frage nicht stellen. Du solltest eher fragen, wie Normalmapper es notieren würden. Google hat es mit Sketchup optimal gelöst, finde ich. - Dachneigung gehört das nicht zur Form? Zumindest um überhaupt die Form einigermaßen interpretieren zu können ist die Neigung auf jeden Fall erforderlich Du weißt als Architekt selber, was für Kombinationen möglich sind. - Dachexposition - Dachverschattung beides eher Werte, die sich berechnen lassen, wenn man das Dach in 3d drin hat Wie ich bereits schreiben. - flat (Flachdach) bis zu welcher Neigung? 5%? 5 Grad? Kann der normale Mapper eh nicht genau bewerten. Ansonsten gibt es genug Fachliteratur. - monopitch (Schleppdach) (ist eigentlich dasselbe wie ein Pultdach, als Besonderheit geht es ohne Übergang in die Hauptdachfläche über) Wie gesagt: für einen normalen Mapper oder einen Bauherren gibt es da sicherlich einen Unterschied. - shed (Pultdach) ein shed ist kein Pultdach, bzw. könnte man es evtl. als Serie von Pultdächern begreifen. Pultdach heisst auf englisch eher monopitch oder pitched-roof (oder lean-to roof) Okay, sind sheds dann diese Fabrikhallendächer? Dachformen sind sehr variantenreich, da kann man sehr weit gehen, wichtig wären aber m.E. in jedem Fall noch ein paar weitere Dachformen (wie Du schon schreibst: z.B.): [...] Dann noch Optionen, wie dormers (Dachgauben). Fledermausgauben, Schleppgauben, ... Ja, dritte Google Eintrag. Muss jetzt nicht alles hier 10 mal bezeichnet werden. Auch im Hinblick auf die Projekte der Uni Bonn sollte das immer wichtiger für uns werden. ja, allgemein für 3D sehr nice to have. Es ist ja, wie oben beschrieben, nicht nur eine Anguck-Anwendung, sondern auch möglich, daraus das Solarpotential zu berechnen. Grüße Tobias ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Neue Lizenz: Forschritte
Am 28. Februar 2009 16:01 schrieb Ulf Möller use...@ulfm.de: Sascha Silbe schrieb: Gab es tatsächlich Fälle, wo die Daten _explizit_ ohne jegliche Einschränkungen zur Verfügung gestellt wurden? Ja. Die TIGER-Daten sind PD; die Strassendatenbank NRW wurde zur freien Nutzung ohne Lizenzeinschränkungen zur Verfügung gestellt; Yahoo sagt, dass das Abzeichnen der Bilder ihre Rechte nicht beeinträchtigt. Gegenbeispiele wie die Frida-Daten in Osnabrück gibt es natürlich auch. ja, oder die AND-Daten (Niederlande und Indien) oder in Italien sämtliche Verwaltungsgrenzen der höheren Ebenen (ab Kommune) und diverse andere GIS-Spenden (Schweiz, Österreich, Frankreich, Italien, etc.) sowohl von privaten Firmen als auch von der öffentlichen Hand. Die staatl. US-Daten sind PD, aber sehr viele der anderen Spender haben das erstmal gemacht in der Gewissheit, dass wir ein CC-BY-SA-Projekt sind. Diese müsste man auf jeden Fall alle anfragen. Für diese Spenden wäre es sicher auch nicht schlecht, eine tabellarische Auflistung zu haben mit den Angaben, ob sie der Lizenzänderung zustimmen sowie wieviele Nodes und Ways davon jeweils betroffen sind. Gruß Martin ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] key: building - Dachformen?
Am 1. März 2009 16:49 schrieb Tobias Wendorff tobias.wendo...@uni-dortmund.de: Google hat es mit Sketchup optimal gelöst, finde ich. Du weißt als Architekt selber, was für Kombinationen möglich sind. als Architekt weiss ich, dass ich ALLES machen kann, solange es dicht ist und nicht einstürzt. Dicht kleben kann man heutzutage praktisch alles, nicht einstürzen ist bei fachgerechter Planung auch gegeben. - Dachexposition - Dachverschattung beides eher Werte, die sich berechnen lassen, wenn man das Dach in 3d drin hat Wie ich bereits schreiben. - flat (Flachdach) bis zu welcher Neigung? 5%? 5 Grad? Kann der normale Mapper eh nicht genau bewerten. Ansonsten gibt es genug Fachliteratur. Das ist eine Frage der Definition, die wiederum davon abhängt, in welchem Land ich baue. Dächer ohne Neigung (also ganz flach) gibt es eigentlich nur, wenn Mist gebaut wurde. - monopitch (Schleppdach) (ist eigentlich dasselbe wie ein Pultdach, als Besonderheit geht es ohne Übergang in die Hauptdachfläche über) Wie gesagt: für einen normalen Mapper oder einen Bauherren gibt es da sicherlich einen Unterschied. meinst Du Baumeister? Bauherr ist im deutschen genau definiert und bezeichnet den Auftraggeber, also nicht unbedingt einen Sachkundigen. - shed (Pultdach) ein shed ist kein Pultdach, bzw. könnte man es evtl. als Serie von Pultdächern begreifen. Pultdach heisst auf englisch eher monopitch oder pitched-roof (oder lean-to roof) Okay, sind sheds dann diese Fabrikhallendächer? ja, mit in fast allen Fällen Oberlichter im steilen Bereich. Dachformen sind sehr variantenreich, da kann man sehr weit gehen, wichtig wären aber m.E. in jedem Fall noch ein paar weitere Dachformen (wie Du schon schreibst: z.B.): [...] was meinst Du mit ...? Ich würde die relevanten Möglichkeiten gleich zusammentragen, in diesem Sinne habe ich diese Auflistung als konstruktive Ergänzung Deiner Liste gesehen. Dann noch Optionen, wie dormers (Dachgauben). Fledermausgauben, Schleppgauben, ... Ja, dritte Google Eintrag. Muss jetzt nicht alles hier 10 mal bezeichnet werden. ist ein komplexes Thema, Dachgauben. Die haben ja oft wieder eigene Neigungen und Ausrichtungen, ohne 3D-Software nur mit Tags sehe ich das ein bisschen schwierig, diese hier auch zu berücksichtigen (einzeichnen wird man sie in jedem Fall müssen). Nicht ganz unrelevant wären übrigens auch Balkone und Dachterrassen. Es ist ja, wie oben beschrieben, nicht nur eine Anguck-Anwendung, sondern auch möglich, daraus das Solarpotential zu berechnen. Aha? Wenn man davon ausgeht, dass man die Paneele direkt auf das Dach montiert? Ansonsten kann man die ja auch: - in die Fassade integrieren - losgelöst von der Dachhaut- und Ausrichtung/Dachneigung aufmontieren Gruß Martin ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] OpenLayers WMS
On Sun, 1 Mar 2009, Sven Geggus wrote: So, jetzt brauche ich nur noch die Methode, wie man GPX-Spuren darstellen kann. Das kann Openlayers. Ja, ist mir bewusst. Ich hatte ja schon ein schönes Beispiel dafür. http://geggus.net/gmaps/radtour-ausflug2008.shtml Und ich glaube, das hier war es. Jetzt habe ich fast alles in ein Skript kondensiert, was Du in den vielen Beispielen gezeigt hast. Langsam gehen mir die Herausforderungen aus. Ist aber ein richtig schöner Anfahrtsplan geworden :-) Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Verwendung von Openstreetmap ohne Quellenangabe
Am 28. Februar 2009 23:56 schrieb Patrick Kolesa patrick.kol...@web.de: malenki schrieb: Die dort verlinkte Karte dürfte sehr wahrscheinlich mit OSM-Daten erstellt worden sein, ein Hinweis darauf fehlt. Unten links im Kartenausschnitt kann man noch ein eetMap erkennen. Ist meiner Meinung nach ein Export aus den Osmarendertiles. Gruß Patrick mittlerweile ist ja ein Hinweis auf OSM auf der verlinkenden Seite und das Versprechen, dass dieser auch auf der Karte selbst demnächst angebracht werden wird. Gruß Martin ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
