Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters

Am 30.05.2012 02:40, schrieb Russ Nelson: Frederik Ramm writes: > 2. I don't think you should continue to make mass edits under the > username "WorstFixer" because that implies that before you "fixed" > things they were among the "worst" which has the potential to offend people. I alwa

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters

Could you post the code used to generate the changesets? That would be the easiest way for some of us to review your proposed changes. It wouldn’t remove the need to explain it to non-programmers, but it would be much easier for some of us if we could look at the code. That being said, a few

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

HI there, I thought FOSM was off topic, where are all the moderators to stop this thread? I never wanted to leave osm, osm made me leave. I never wanted to fork osm, osm forked itself to some new license. lets keep the facts straight, people just wanted to continue with the same system as before,

Re: [OSM-talk] Import of buildings in Chicago

On 5/29/2012 1:09 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: I used to agree with you, but in terms of minimum labor, updates are best performed by retaining the original upload data, then doing a conflation between the original data and a later update. That will highlight only changes from the original source, a

Re: [OSM-talk] An indoor airport

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 7:49 PM, Russ Nelson wrote: > Toby Murray writes: >  > I pointed out this error before the edit was made but apparently >  > community feedback was not respected before the automated edit was >  > run... >  > >  > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2012-May/06302

Re: [OSM-talk] An indoor airport

Toby Murray writes: > I pointed out this error before the edit was made but apparently > community feedback was not respected before the automated edit was > run... > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2012-May/063021.html Okay, Worst Fixer, you said that you wouldn't make the e

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters

Frederik Ramm writes: > 2. I don't think you should continue to make mass edits under the > username "WorstFixer" because that implies that before you "fixed" > things they were among the "worst" which has the potential to offend people. I always thought it meant that he was the worst person

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters

Worst Fixer writes: > Just removed stream=fixme. Why? > Removed all id-like tags. Why? > If no valid objections will be raised, I upload this change on 2012-06-12. Don't. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters

Actually, the conclusion, while it involved that, also involved that there are potential other uses (e.g. on river=intermittent; stream=intermittent etc) that need to be checked too, and that this seems like an arbitrary renaming of tags that doesn't gain anything, but may destroy data. Thanks

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters

Hello. I used "reply to" instead of "reply to all" in my mail agent. We had a small thread with Thomas. Here is major result we achived. Thomas expressed opinion that not 100% of water=intermittent have other tags, so we have no way count them as water. In my sub-extract of water=intermittent:

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

On 29/05/12 15:29, Steve Bennett wrote: We'd be vulnerable to exactly the same kind of attack, right? Do we have any mechanisms to detect or prevent it? A community! Steve On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:21 AM, Toby Murray wrote: Hmm I seem to recall a stnav company accepting speed limit inform

Re: [OSM-talk] Waste map and OSM?

2012/5/28 valent.turko...@gmail.com : > You have probably seen this Waste map project that uses OpenStreetMap > as background for mapping waste all over the globe: > http://www.letsdoitworld.org/waste_map > > Does anybody know what technology did they use to overlay images and > circles with waste?

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

On 05/29/2012 12:48 PM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: > Sorry Emilie, it’s a pity if that creates some loss of data, > but you should take it like a man I'm afraid she won't. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://list

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

Steve Bennett wrote: We'd be vulnerable to exactly the same kind of attack, right? Do we have any mechanisms to detect or prevent it? Well (at the risk of stating the bleeding obvious) we can actually see data that says "maxspeed=0" rather than just wondering why we never actually get routed

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

We'd be vulnerable to exactly the same kind of attack, right? Do we have any mechanisms to detect or prevent it? Steve On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:21 AM, Toby Murray wrote: > Hmm I seem to recall a stnav company accepting speed limit information > from users and then having the problem that peopl

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

The node referenced created by cetest will not survive redaction (and I assume the rest of data to be similar), and neither do the edits on the way indicate anything other than normal editing (see http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=7539781). I am slightly at a loss to see what exactly Gert

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

Hmm I seem to recall a stnav company accepting speed limit information from users and then having the problem that people set the roads in front of their houses to a speed limit of "0" so that the satnav routing would avoid it... wasn't that TomTom? Toby __

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2012/5/29 Phil Endecott : No doubt at some point someone decided that "lake:shore_length:miles=2" was a useful thing to record, and you want to remove it. Â Why? because there is no such thing as a "shore length", it depends on the resolution. Aside from this there

Re: [OSM-talk] An indoor airport

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 7:52 AM, SomeoneElse wrote: > The fence around an airport here (Bishkek in Kyrgyzstan): > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.83491&lon=74.5764&zoom=16&layers=M > > Seems to have been tagged "building = yes, building:levels = 2".  I'm sure > it gets chilly there in the w

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters

2012/5/29 Phil Endecott : >  You're going to remove 9413 ele tags; why?  No doubt at some point someone > decided that "lake:shore_length:miles=2" was a useful thing to record, and > you want to remove it.  Why? because there is no such thing as a "shore length", it depends on the resolution. Asi

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters

Worst Fixer wrote: I ask you to review my planned edit. There are lot of ways to tag intermittent water feature found in database. Most popular is intermittent=yes. All others come from different old imports. Date ist 2009-2010 year. I countiered ~350 000 features tagged in different such ways.

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters

> 2. I don't think you should continue to make mass edits under the > username "WorstFixer" because that implies that before you > "fixed" > things they were among the "worst" which has the potential to > offend people. I've not been following what has and hasn't been done, or is proposed, but the

[OSM-talk] moderation on "OSM : It's a shame !!!"

All In case you didn't see it the first time, this and related threads are moderated. Do not respond further to these threads, or you will be individually moderated. Thanks Mikel & Moderators   * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron___ talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters

Hi, On 05/29/12 13:51, Worst Fixer wrote: There are lot of ways to tag intermittent water feature found in database. Most popular is intermittent=yes. All others come from different old imports. Date ist 2009-2010 year. I countiered ~350 000 features tagged in different such ways. Most is done b

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

Hello, Please, do not respond further to this thread. Any further comments will receive individual moderation. -Mikel   * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron > > From: Emilie Laffray >To: "ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen" >Cc: talk@ope

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Emilie Laffray wrote: > Hello, > > First of all, let me just say it is indeed impolite to share private > conversation but I would love to see that tested in a court. > That said, the whole point of people in FOSM waiting for OSM to fail is kind > of annoying. I

[OSM-talk] An indoor airport

The fence around an airport here** (Bishkek in Kyrgyzstan): http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.83491&lon=74.5764&zoom=16&layers=M Seems to have been tagged "building = yes, building:levels = 2". I'm sure it gets chilly there in the winter, but this seems unlikely. Perhaps someone local to

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

Hello, I will retract the troll bit as you seem actually to be "enthusiastic" but you seriously have to work on the perception that you give to people in the first place. Goodwill is something difficult enough to accrue in the first place. However, I will not retract the fact that I consider that

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

On May 29, 2012 1:16 AM, "Nick Whitelegg" wrote: > This is a very one sided argument and assumes that commercial online maps are accurate. It also completely neglects the fact that you can use OSM data without a fee andf without someone telling you what you can and cannot do with it. I'd imagine

Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters

On 29 May 2012, at 12:51, Worst Fixer wrote: > Hello. > > I ask you to review my planned edit. > > There are lot of ways to tag intermittent water feature found in database. > Most popular is intermittent=yes. All others come from different old imports. > Date ist 2009-2010 year. I countiered

[OSM-talk] Moderated Re: OSM : It's a shame !!!

All This thread has gotten way out of line. Please refrain from posting anything more on this thread, or related threads (ie (dis)Honesty and Copyright). I suggest taking a moment and reviewing the Etiquette page on the wiki. Thanks Mikel & Moderators

[OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters

Hello. I ask you to review my planned edit. There are lot of ways to tag intermittent water feature found in database. Most popular is intermittent=yes. All others come from different old imports. Date ist 2009-2010 year. I countiered ~350 000 features tagged in different such ways. Most is done

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

Hello, Fine. So you are saying that the email you sent to Thomas was out of kindness not out of petty goals? Also you are not answering my points in the first place. I find you pretty disingenuous at time and while I do respect the other projects out there, you are not helping them in any way. As

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

Emilie, I defend 2 legal interests: Mine : I invested time work and money, that I co-licensed under CC-by-SA to the previous OSM OSM: by keeping the OSM database clean of tainted data If you call that trolling .. Sometimes I think that people are called trolls because they d

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

On Tue, 2012-05-29 at 20:37 +1000, Steve Bennett wrote: > > > > > I think the most interesting part of this is actually direct criticism > from our commercial competitors. You know the Gandhi thing: First they > ignore you, then

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Maarten Deen wrote: > Ok, they don't name us, but I think "a leading open source map" does refer > to us. > > I think the most interesting part of this is actually direct criticism from our comm

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

On Tuesday 29 May 2012, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: > I did not give you permission to share > a private conversation on the list. > > That is also about copyrights, Davie. Public interest defence trumps this. Next! robert. _

Re: [OSM-talk] (dis)Honesty and Copyright

O , 2012-05-29 11:50 +0200, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen rakstīja: > > > > I am really astonished about the way some users on this list > > react to a claim to respect (my and CC-by-SA) copyright . > Hi Gert! First, keep tone civil and you won't get nasty replies as before

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

Hello, First of all, let me just say it is indeed impolite to share private conversation but I would love to see that tested in a court. That said, the whole point of people in FOSM waiting for OSM to fail is kind of annoying. I understand why the fork happened (doesn't mean that I agree with it);

Re: [OSM-talk] (dis)Honesty and Copyright

Gert, Although I would have chosen a different tone of voice you are absolutely right to raise this issue. Let's just try to keep the discussion civilized. Greetings, Floris Looijesteijn On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:50 AM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: > ** ** > > I am rea

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

On 29 May 2012 11:01, Thomas Davie wrote: > If I remember correctly (someone correct me if I don't), a lawyer has agreed > that it's okay to keep node positions and ways where a user would reasonably > have created the same way from an ODbL compatible data source. I don't know if a lawyer has s

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

On 29 May 2012, at 10:53, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: > I did not give you permission to share > a private conversation on the list. > > That is also about copyrights, Davie. Sure, but having a copyright there would involve having made an original work in a skilled way,

Re: [OSM-talk] (dis)Honesty and Copyright

On 29 May 2012, at 10:50, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: > > I am really astonished about the way some users on this list > react to a claim to respect (my and CC-by-SA) copyright . Do you have an example of such a reply that astonishes you? Thanks Tom Davie

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

I did not give you permission to share a private conversation on the list. That is also about copyrights, Davie. Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Thomas Davie [mailto:tom.da...@gmail.com] Verzonden: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 11:43 AM Aan: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen CC:

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

On 29 May 2012 11:28, Thomas Davie wrote: > On 29 May 2012, at 10:27, Floris Looijesteijn wrote: > >> That's some great imagery if he can read the name signs on that street... > > The fact that all the tags were ODbL safe had already been established – they > were created by another user who had

[OSM-talk] (dis)Honesty and Copyright

I am really astonished about the way some users on this list react to a claim to respect (my and CC-by-SA) copyright . The whole business of changeing license IS about copyright. If there is only a single grain of non-respect to copyright in your heads (those that are addressed, do kn

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

On 29 May 2012 08:44, Maarten Deen wrote: > Ok, they don't name us, but I think "a leading open source map" does refer > to us. > > > RichardF has a comprehensive slap down of their FUD: http://www.systemed.net/blog/index.php?p

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

On 29 May 2012, at 10:36, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: > Off list ! No need to annoy the list with > comments with suggestion on how to cheat even more. No, I'd rather keep it on list, as I'd really like people to know the quickest and best methods for keeping as much da

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

On 29 May 2012, at 10:27, Floris Looijesteijn wrote: > That's some great imagery if he can read the name signs on that street... The fact that all the tags were ODbL safe had already been established – they were created by another user who had accepted. Thanks Tom Davie

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

That's some great imagery if he can read the name signs on that street... Greets, Floris Looijesteijn On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Thomas Davie wrote: > If I remember correctly (someone correct me if I don't), a lawyer has agreed > that it's okay to keep node positions and ways where a use

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

On 29 May 2012, at 10:15, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: > At the time it was judged to be important to > keep reference to the original and data. > I remember copying lots of old AND tags > onto my created roads. > > I think what should be leading here is > the version numb

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

On 29/05/2012 08:44, Maarten Deen wrote: Ok, they don't name us, but I think "a leading open source map" does refer to us. Sounds like they're scared to me. With them looking over their shoulders at OSM, it means their ta

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

At the time it was judged to be important to keep reference to the original and data. I remember copying lots of old AND tags onto my created roads. I think what should be leading here is the version number, as recorded by the server. Whatever excuse there may be, including reference to anonymous

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

On 2012-05-29 10:43, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: Apparently this ownership is more complex then at first sight. A way is defined by its nodes and its tags. Maarten only took a look at the tags. cetest did not only add a residential tag, but created the nodes (Version 1)

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

If I remember correctly (someone correct me if I don't), a lawyer has agreed that it's okay to keep node positions and ways where a user would reasonably have created the same way from an ODbL compatible data source. So for example, in this case, the user could reasonably create the exact same

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Thomas Davie wrote: > To be honest, if a road has no classification, and is made of mud and gravel, > it's a track... The ones I reclassified typically had two wheel-tracks of soil-colour and grass between them, I think. If it's asphalt-coloured, even if there i

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

Apparently this ownership is more complex then at first sight. A way is defined by its nodes and its tags. Maarten only took a look at the tags. cetest did not only add a residential tag, but created the nodes (Version 1) that defines this particular way with GPS acquired data, later assisted

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

To be honest, if a road has no classification, and is made of mud and gravel, it's a track... If it's an "official" road in some way, then clearly it is classified ;) Thanks Tom Davie On 29 May 2012, at 09:32, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2012/5/29 John Sturdy : >> footpaths as roads" --- I d

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

2012/5/29 John Sturdy : > footpaths as roads" --- I don't think I've seen any of those, but I > have found quite a few "unclassified roads" that look more like > "tracks" on Bing (and have adjusted them accordingly where confident > of it). +1 to the rest, but I don't think we should change class

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

Certainly Apple mark footpaths as roads in the data that they have used from us, but that's a rendering issue, not a data issue. Tom Davie On 29 May 2012, at 09:14, Nick Whitelegg wrote: > > Whatever. I've certainly seen "footpaths classified as roads" in commercial > online maps for instance

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

Nick Whitelegg wrote: > Whatever. I've certainly seen "footpaths classified as roads" in > commercial > online maps for instance. It's basically a misreading of how OSM data works. Essentially they're saying that the fact we use the "highway=track" tag means "OMG OSM MISCLASSIFIES FOREST TRACKS A

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:44 AM, Maarten Deen wrote: > Ok, they don't name us, but I think "a leading open source map" does refer > to us. > > > > Oh wauw. We're not perfect. Let's close up the shop. Thanks to SteveC for > all t

Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

Whatever. I've certainly seen "footpaths classified as roads" in commercial online maps for instance. This is a very one sided argument and assumes that commercial online maps are accurate. It also completely neglects the fact that you can use OSM data without a fee andf without someone tellin

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

On 2012-05-29 09:49, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 5/29/2012 3:00 AM, Maarten Deen wrote: On 2012-05-29 08:41, Thomas Davie wrote: "It's So Funny" has not copied your data here, he has simply modified it (in this case, changing highway=residential to highway=unclassified). When the redaction bot

[OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us

Ok, they don't name us, but I think "a leading open source map" does refer to us. Oh wauw. We're not perfect. Let's close up the shop. Thanks to SteveC for all the effort, but it wasn't enough. Well, probably one of the ve

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

I've sent CeesW a message asking him to join the discussion here. Most of his other edits seem legit, but the comment on this changeset is somewhat remarkable: "... data reconciliation ODbl". Let's hope he explains himself. Greets, Floris Looijesteijn On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Maarten De

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!

On 2012-05-29 08:41, Thomas Davie wrote: "It's So Funny" has not copied your data here, he has simply modified it (in this case, changing highway=residential to highway=unclassified). When the redaction bot is unleashed, if you have still not accepted the CTs (do you have a particular reason not