Re: [OSM-talk] changes not appearing in osm

[Kenneth Gonsalves]

On Thursday 12 Nov 2009 12:56:58 pm Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
> > I find that changes made even 5-6 days ago are not showing up either in
> > mapnik  or in osmarender. I even downloaded the relevant extract from
> > geofabrik, but the changes are not showing there also. Is there some
> > problem?
> 
> Please give some more details. Which area (permalink is fine) and which
>  changed features do not show on the map?

this area:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=12.945577&lon=80.138336&zoom=18&layers=B000FTF

I have added a lot of shops here in the past week. Both here and in the 
sorrounding areas, and I can see them in josm.
> 

-- 
regards
Kenneth Gonsalves
Senior Project Officer
NRC-FOSS
http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] changes not appearing in osm

[Jukka Rahkonen]

Kenneth Gonsalves  au-kbc.org> writes:

> 
> hi,
> 
> I find that changes made even 5-6 days ago are not showing up either in 
> mapnik 
> or in osmarender. I even downloaded the relevant extract from geofabrik, but 
> the changes are not showing there also. Is there some problem?

Please give some more details. Which area (permalink is fine) and which changed
features do not show on the map?


-Jukka Rahkonen-



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] URGENT - Critical bug in JOSM 2417 [Fwd: [Talk-us] Possible destructive bug in JOSM build 2417 - need someone to duplicate]

[Chris Hunter]

I was hoping someone would have already bounced this thread, but I guess
not.

There is a confirmed bug in JOSM 2417 that breaks uploading, and may
encourage users to inadvertently delete ways if the validator plugin is
installed.

It looks like there's a partial fix in 2439SVN, but the root problem may not
be completely fixed yet.  Please see
http://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/3884 for the gory details.

I've not sure which group handles it, but I'd recommend at least adding a
note to the MOTD.  If anyone else thinks it's critical enough, then it might
be necessary to set the server to blacklist any edits that come from 2417 as
well.

Thanks,
Chris Hunter
DiverCTH

-- Forwarded message --
From: Nakor 
Date: Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Possible destructive bug in JOSM build 2417 - need
someone to duplicate
To: Chris Hunter 
Cc: talk...@openstreetmap.org, newb...@openstreetmap.org





 My apologies if this has already been reported to the dev mailing list, but
> I've been running up against a critical/showstopper bug in JOSM 2417 for the
> past few days.
>
> Can someone please try and duplicate this "precondition failed" bug:
>
> http://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/3884
>
> Here is the chain of events that seems to cause the most frequent problems:
>
> 1. Download and edit a small area (1 square mile or so).
> 2. Move along a way that was just edited, and download another small area.
> 3. Upload changes, but leave the changeset open. - Error may occur at this
> point.
> 4. Download and edit some more small areas along the same way.
> 5. Attempt to upload the new changes using the open changeset - Error
> *WILL* occur at this point.
>
> Depending on if the validator plugin is installed or not, you may also get
> a slew of warning messages about duplicate nodes.
>
>
>
I confirm the issue with 2417. I have it when downloading small areas along
my GPS tracks. A lot of ways come in "empty" (with 0 nodes) which causes
problems later for the validator and when trying to upload my work.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] changes not appearing in osm

[Kenneth Gonsalves]

hi,

I find that changes made even 5-6 days ago are not showing up either in mapnik 
or in osmarender. I even downloaded the relevant extract from geofabrik, but 
the changes are not showing there also. Is there some problem?
-- 
regards
Kenneth Gonsalves
Senior Project Officer
NRC-FOSS
http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Marcus Wolschon]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:13 AM, Ian Dees  wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm looking at some donated street centerline data that has addressing data
> in the form of "Right/Left From Addr" and "Right/Left To Addr" on each
> street centerline.

Can you identify the location of the Addr for the "From/To"?
If so it would be easy to calculate interpolation-ways right
and left of the streets using the Karlsruhe Schema.

> Is there an accepted way of applying these tags to the
> road ways?

No, only in applying it to houses next to the street and special
ways connecting next to the street for interpolating whole
streets of house-numbers at once.

> It doesn't really make very much sense to create and store a
> separate way just for the addressing information.

I disagree here because of the hundrets of special cases
that absolutely must be handled to be correct that come
from the fact that houses are not usually build in the middle
of a road.

> ...but I might have arrived too late in the argument to say that :-)...

Yes, you are. ;)

PS:
I`m not reading the talk-US but as you crossposted there, so do I.
Please let me know of yet another addressing-schema comes
that is in actual usage to make sure my address-search does
work on all the planet.

Marcus

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Addressing Question

[Ian Dees]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:17 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Anthony  wrote:
>
>>
>> On the other hand, putting the information directly on the way would
>> be problematic for many reasons.  Ranges might span multiple ways, and
>> right/left has to be reversed whenever the way is reversed being the
>> most troublesome.
>>
>> this is enough reason to stay away from such a scheme. if it's too
> difficult no one will use it or they will break the data.
>
> This scheme works for all of the places that I'm sourcing data from... they
have line segments that are tagged with the left/right-begin/end addresses.
Each road is broken up into line segments that have different address
values. When this is converted to OSM ways, each way has its address data
intact from the source information.

That being said, I do see your point about reversing the order of the way...
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Addressing Question

[Apollinaris Schoell]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Anthony  wrote:

>
> On the other hand, putting the information directly on the way would
> be problematic for many reasons.  Ranges might span multiple ways, and
> right/left has to be reversed whenever the way is reversed being the
> most troublesome.
>
> this is enough reason to stay away from such a scheme. if it's too
difficult no one will use it or they will break the data.


> It probably has to be a relation.  Include a start node, an end node,
> and a list of one or more ways (which are connected to form one
> logical way).
>
>  the ways have to be split at the start/end node. the relation members have
to be ordered. too many beginners and medium experienced mappers have
problems to understand such a scheme. how is that easier than the Karlsruhe
scheme?



> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> talk...@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[andrzej zaborowski]

2009/11/12 Ian Dees :
> What does the math look like to handle intersections? Curvy roads?

I admit that data wasn't complex, all segments were straight and all
nodes were treated as intersections.  Do you have parametric (e.g.
bezier) curves or just lots of short segments making soft turns?  (I'm
optimistic we can figure something out in both cases)

Regards

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] shp-to-osm 0.7

[Nakor]

Ian Dees wrote:
> A new version of shp-to-osm 0.7 has been released to fix a memory 
> problem when using huge shapefiles. If you're using shp-to-osm to read 
> shapefiles greater than a few megabytes, you will want to use this new 
> version.
>
> Get it at the URL below.
>
Hello,

Is there an alternative place to get this? I tried to download various 
versions but it always fails after a few 100k of download.

  Thanks,

N.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Ian Dees]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 9:47 PM, andrzej zaborowski wrote:

>
> That's a pretty pessimistic view.
>
>
Sorry, I am pretty grumpy today. The area I'm looking at actually has quite
a few mappers already, so I imagine this data would probably get updated
quickly.


>
> For the record an import I've done had only this left/right - to/from
> housenumber information, too, so I have an ugly python script here
> ready to throw at this kind of data (after adapting to whatever the
> input format is) and I would be happy to do the processing on my PC if
> you decide to go this way.  The whole toolchain should still behave
> reasonably for data size of TIGER (though obviously I didn't have that
> much data)
>
>
What does the math look like to handle intersections? Curvy roads?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[andrzej zaborowski]

2009/11/12 Ian Dees :
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:55 PM, andrzej zaborowski 
> wrote:
>> The hope is that local mappers there will be slowly improving imported
>> data until there are separate points for every address I think?  Then
>> I'd recommend just adding those separate ways and making it easier for
>> the mappers to build on this data, instead of making it harder for
>> nearly everyone dealing with OSM data by adding a whole different
>> addressing scheme.
>
> No, I doubt local mappers will improve the data. I sent this mail because

That's a pretty pessimistic view.

> almost all of the data I've seen available for import in the US (all the way
> from individual municipalities to TIGER's shapefiles) has this
> left/right-from/to scheme for addressing information.
>
> If the expectation is that we will always be following the Karlsruhe schema
> (with separate ways on each side of the road centerline), then importing
> this addressing data will be next to impossible*.

This would mean we are excluding some features, or some tagging
schemes, in some parts of the world due to disk space or processing
time but not in other parts of the world.  I'm sure we will never have
uniform tagging and uniform data quality everywhere but I still want
to aim at it.

For the record an import I've done had only this left/right - to/from
housenumber information, too, so I have an ugly python script here
ready to throw at this kind of data (after adapting to whatever the
input format is) and I would be happy to do the processing on my PC if
you decide to go this way.  The whole toolchain should still behave
reasonably for data size of TIGER (though obviously I didn't have that
much data)

Cheers

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Addressing Question

[Anthony]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 9:21 PM, Ian Dees  wrote:
> No, I doubt local mappers will improve the data.

If that's true (and I'm really not sure if it is), then it really
shouldn't be in OSM in the first place.

> I sent this mail because
> almost all of the data I've seen available for import in the US (all the way
> from individual municipalities to TIGER's shapefiles) has this
> left/right-from/to scheme for addressing information.
>
> If the expectation is that we will always be following the Karlsruhe schema
> (with separate ways on each side of the road centerline), then importing
> this addressing data will be next to impossible*.

On the other hand, putting the information directly on the way would
be problematic for many reasons.  Ranges might span multiple ways, and
right/left has to be reversed whenever the way is reversed being the
most troublesome.

It probably has to be a relation.  Include a start node, an end node,
and a list of one or more ways (which are connected to form one
logical way).

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Ian Dees]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:55 PM, andrzej zaborowski wrote:

> Hiya,
>
> 2009/11/12 Ian Dees :
> > I'm looking at some donated street centerline data that has addressing
> data
> > in the form of "Right/Left From Addr" and "Right/Left To Addr" on each
> > street centerline. Is there an accepted way of applying these tags to the
> > road ways? It doesn't really make very much sense to create and store a
> > separate way just for the addressing information.
>
> The hope is that local mappers there will be slowly improving imported
> data until there are separate points for every address I think?  Then
> I'd recommend just adding those separate ways and making it easier for
> the mappers to build on this data, instead of making it harder for
> nearly everyone dealing with OSM data by adding a whole different
> addressing scheme.
>

No, I doubt local mappers will improve the data. I sent this mail because
almost all of the data I've seen available for import in the US (all the way
from individual municipalities to TIGER's shapefiles) has this
left/right-from/to scheme for addressing information.

If the expectation is that we will always be following the Karlsruhe schema
(with separate ways on each side of the road centerline), then importing
this addressing data will be next to impossible*.

-Ian

* Ok, not "impossible", but the import size would triple and the CPU time to
compute the new addressing-only ways might make it hard for the "regular
mapper" to do.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[andrzej zaborowski]

Hiya,

2009/11/12 Ian Dees :
> I'm looking at some donated street centerline data that has addressing data
> in the form of "Right/Left From Addr" and "Right/Left To Addr" on each
> street centerline. Is there an accepted way of applying these tags to the
> road ways? It doesn't really make very much sense to create and store a
> separate way just for the addressing information.

The hope is that local mappers there will be slowly improving imported
data until there are separate points for every address I think?  Then
I'd recommend just adding those separate ways and making it easier for
the mappers to build on this data, instead of making it harder for
nearly everyone dealing with OSM data by adding a whole different
addressing scheme.

Cheers

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Ian Dees]

Hi everyone,

I'm looking at some donated street centerline data that has addressing data
in the form of "Right/Left From Addr" and "Right/Left To Addr" on each
street centerline. Is there an accepted way of applying these tags to the
road ways? It doesn't really make very much sense to create and store a
separate way just for the addressing information.

...but I might have arrived too late in the argument to say that :-)...
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Seamark/Marine-Tagging-Proposal open for Voting

[Ulf Lamping]

Mario Salvini schrieb:
> Hi Sam,
> 
> man_made=lighthouse tells us something about the physical issue of this 
> building.
> seamark=lighthouse tells us something about the role as a naval 
> navigation mark.
> 
> the same problem we have with man_made=beacon.
> Without any further information nobody can define a use for navigation
> seamark=beacon (for ships) and airmark=beacon (for aircrafts) can help 
> to give more information here.

And a lot of man_made=lighthouse are simply out of order in regard of 
"light signals".

Regards, ULFL

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Seamark/Marine-Tagging-Proposal open for Voting

[Mario Salvini]

Hi Sam,

man_made=lighthouse tells us something about the physical issue of this 
building.
seamark=lighthouse tells us something about the role as a naval 
navigation mark.

the same problem we have with man_made=beacon.
Without any further information nobody can define a use for navigation
seamark=beacon (for ships) and airmark=beacon (for aircrafts) can help 
to give more information here.

Sam Vekemans schrieb:
> Hi,
> I would think that man_made=lighthouse also needs to be changed so 
> that an additional tag of seamark=lighthouse to show the same thing. 
> as IMO 'seamark' seems to  more appropriate ... as a 'land' lighthouse 
> is a 'man_made=tower'.
>
> Cheers,
> Sam

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Why do you use Google Maps instead of OSM? Because of buildings...

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Peter Miller wrote:
> To be clear, the ODbL license, when it arrives, will allow people to  
> create renderings [...]

I tend to use a slightly different wording: The ODbL license, if we 
should adopt it, would allow people to create...

I'm trying not to create the impression that ODbL is a done deal because 
it isn't.

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] Apostrophist corrects punctuation on street signs

[Liz]

On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, David Lynch wrote:
> Depends on which variant of English you're using. In the USA, the
> formal rule is to put a period after any abbreviation comprised of the
> first and last letter of a word, but US Postal Service fiat is that
> abbreviations can have no punctuation other than hyphens and that has
> generally been copied into most maps.

In Australia the periods and apostrophes are being progressively dropped.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] State of the Map Meeting via Skype 8pm GMT

[Hurricane]

Hi OSMers!

We're having a SOTM meeting this evening/ today via Skype at 8pm GMT (9pm  CET 
and 1pm MST).
Everyone is welcome to join in!


Please find me or best is Henk on Skype at :
Hurricanemcewen
or toffehoff


Best,

Hurricane McEwen






___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Apostrophist corrects punctuation on street signs

[David Lynch]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:23, David Earl  wrote:
> On 11/11/2009 16:17, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote:
>> and other punctuation (eg St. to St as an abbreviation for
>> Saint).
>
> St. is wrong anyway - strictly speaking there should only be a period
> after an abbreviation where letters are omitted, hence

Depends on which variant of English you're using. In the USA, the
formal rule is to put a period after any abbreviation comprised of the
first and last letter of a word, but US Postal Service fiat is that
abbreviations can have no punctuation other than hyphens and that has
generally been copied into most maps. Thus, Saint Elmo Road is "St.
Elmo Rd." in a newspaper, but "St Elmo Rd" on an envelope or in TIGER
data.

I tend to cringe at the signs on a street named William Cannon
locally. There are a lot of places where "WM. CANNON" got replaced
with "W. M. Cannon" when they last renewed the signs and switched from
all-caps to mixed case.

-- 
David J. Lynch
djly...@gmail.com

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Apostrophist corrects punctuation on street signs

[Richard Fairhurst]

David Earl wrote:
> St. is wrong anyway - strictly speaking there should only be a 
> period after an abbreviation where letters are omitted

Like so much English orthography, it's a matter of house style rather than a
hard and fast rule.

The most common house style in British English, at least, over the last 25
years has been pretty much what you say: the full stop is only used where
the word wouldn't usually end with the final letter of the abbreviation. So
Street->St, Saint->St (also), railway->rly, but abbreviation->abbr.,
acknolwedgement->ackn., and so on.

That said, increasingly, the trend is to drop full stops altogether. I'd say
that "Leics" and "Worcs" are now more often found than "Leics." and
"Worcs.". "tbc" is certainly more common than "t.b.c.". I _think_ Rev is
rapidly becoming as common as Rev., but abbr. and ackn. seem to be hanging
on... for now.

cheers
Richard
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://old.nabble.com/Apostrophist-corrects-punctuation-on-street-signs-tp26302219p26304352.html
Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Apostrophist corrects punctuation on street signs

[David Earl]

On 11/11/2009 16:17, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote:
> and other punctuation (eg St. to St as an abbreviation for
> Saint). 

St. is wrong anyway - strictly speaking there should only be a period 
after an abbreviation where letters are omitted, hence
   St. for st...reet
   St for S...ain...t
   Dr, Mr for D...octo...r, M...iste...r
   Rev. for Rev...erend
   Blvd for boulevard
   Ho. for Ho...use

David



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Apostrophist corrects punctuation on street signs

[Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)]

David Earl wrote:
>Sent: 11 November 2009 4:05 PM
>To: Ed Avis
>Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Apostrophist corrects punctuation on street signs
>
>On 11/11/2009 14:31, Ed Avis wrote:
>> Frustrated by living in "St Johns Close", in Turnbridge Wells, Mr Gatward
>> decided to buy a can of black paint and a craft brush before correcting
>the name
>> to "St John's Close".
>
>I've come across any number of streets where the apostrophe is missing
>on one sign and present on another either opposite or at the other end
>of the street.

And we know of councils that have a policy on new signs to drop all
apostrophise and other punctuation (eg St. to St as an abbreviation for
Saint). There are also many examples I have of the space between some words
being dropped. Summer Hill to Summerhill I spotted at the weekend for
instance. You can also see this happening when you compare the old names
found on OOC mapping and the names used on streets when the area has been
urbanised.

Cheers

Andy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Apostrophist corrects punctuation on street signs

[David Earl]

On 11/11/2009 14:31, Ed Avis wrote:
> Frustrated by living in "St Johns Close", in Turnbridge Wells, Mr Gatward
> decided to buy a can of black paint and a craft brush before correcting the 
> name
> to "St John's Close". 

I've come across any number of streets where the apostrophe is missing 
on one sign and present on another either opposite or at the other end 
of the street.

David


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Why do you use Google Maps instead of OSM? Because of buildings...

[Peter Miller]

On 11 Nov 2009, at 14:58, Anthony wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Peter Miller  > wrote:
>> My reading of this is
>> that CloudMade are claiming (c) over the rendered images which would
>> make it illegal to copy them without permission. Such a restriction  
>> is
>> of course incompatible with the CC-BY-SA OSM data licence
>
> No it isn't.  You have to copyright a work in order to release it
> under the CC-BY-SA license.

Sure, but they are not stating that they are releasing their  
copyrighted rendering as CC-BY-SA so I don't know if I can recommend  
that people use it.

To be clear, the ODbL license, when it arrives, will allow people to  
create renderings that are (c) and are which are not then released  
CCBYSA which I think will be good for the project because people will  
be able to commercially exploit clever rendering and analysis of OSM  
data to create beautiful things - including artistic maps based on OSM  
data. Currently the artist would probably need to release their work  
as CCBYSA. Using ODbL people will also be able to public domain  
renderings. All of this creates a ot of new incentives to use OSM data  
for different purposes.

The big rule in ODbL is that the core database (as distinct from  
rendering) must be released under an open data license and also any  
derived database from the osm database must be released under ODbL  
which therefore allows anyone else to produce beautiful renderings in  
competition with these people so we have a nice level of competition  
working.

Indeed, it is important to our company (ITO World) that we can produce  
sophisticated images and analysis by combining OSM data with other  
separate databases and create a work that we can then protect and sell  
- without that right to earn income from our analysis and rendering  
then we would be much less interested in OSM.

I suspect that the same may be true for CM in that they have spent a  
lot of money building up a rendering system, have created excellent  
rendering rules and built a style editor and now need to earn some  
money from it somehow - allowing anyone to harvest their tiles for any  
purpose for free including being able to host tiles scraped from CM on  
a competing (free?) service would probably be really bad news for them.

As such I think they have probably written their attribution to suit  
the upcoming license rather than the current one, but without  
clarification I would not suggest that people should scrape their map  
times for use on other services.



Regards,



Peter Miller





Regards,


Peter




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Why do you use Google Maps instead of OSM? Because of buildings...

[Anthony]

On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Peter Miller  wrote:
> My reading of this is
> that CloudMade are claiming (c) over the rendered images which would
> make it illegal to copy them without permission. Such a restriction is
> of course incompatible with the CC-BY-SA OSM data licence

No it isn't.  You have to copyright a work in order to release it
under the CC-BY-SA license.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Why do you use Google Maps instead of OSM? Because of buildings...

[Ed Avis]

Peter Miller  itoworld.com> writes:

>A brief update - Shaun and I have been sorting this out with CBT in  
>the past 24 hours and they now have a new shiny CloudMade slippery map  
>interface on their site with the normal CM attribution[1].

Nice work!

Perhaps, then, Cloudmade Maps should be the default suggestion, rather than
OSM's Mapnik tiles?

-- 
Ed Avis 


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Apostrophist corrects punctuation on street signs

[Ed Avis]

>
This news story shows that what's printed on the street sign is not
necessarily the correct street name:



>Frustrated by living in "St Johns Close", in Turnbridge Wells, Mr Gatward
>decided to buy a can of black paint and a craft brush before correcting the 
>name
>to "St John's Close". 

>A Tunbridge Wells Borough Council spokesman said they would not be following 
>the
>example of Birmingham City Council, which announced this year that they would 
>be
>banning the apostrophe from road signs for simplicity.
>
>The spokesman added that were the signs ever to be replaced, they would be
>punctuated correctly.

-- 
Ed Avis 


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Seamark/Marine-Tagging-Proposal open for Voting

[Sam Vekemans]

Yup, A chat on IRC, that yup its fine to use both tags, as they mean the
same thing :)

Anyway, looks like some work needs to be done on the wiki.
i'll add it to my todo list. If someone gets bored of mapping. :)

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:beacon

Cheers,
Sam


On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 5:59 AM, John F. Eldredge wrote:

> I take it you are distinguishing between a lighthouse that stands on land,
> and one that is set directly in the water (not on an island)?  The latter
> would still be a man made tower, so it would seem that the manmade=tower
> would still be applicable.
>
> --
> John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
> "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not
> to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sam Vekemans 
> Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 05:12:15
> To: Mario Salvini
> Cc: ; Tag discussion,strategy and related tools<
> tagg...@openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Seamark/Marine-Tagging-Proposal open for Voting
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Seamark/Marine-Tagging-Proposal open for Voting

[John F. Eldredge]

I take it you are distinguishing between a lighthouse that stands on land, and 
one that is set directly in the water (not on an island)?  The latter would 
still be a man made tower, so it would seem that the manmade=tower would still 
be applicable.

-- 
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to 
think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria

-Original Message-
From: Sam Vekemans 
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 05:12:15 
To: Mario Salvini
Cc: ; Tag discussion,strategy and related 
tools
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Seamark/Marine-Tagging-Proposal open for Voting

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Fwd: Seamark/Marine-Tagging-Proposal open for Voting

[Nop]

Zur Info:

 Original-Nachricht 
Datum: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:15:14 +0100
Von: Mario Salvini 
An: talk@openstreetmap.org
Betreff: [OSM-talk] Seamark/Marine-Tagging-Proposal open for Voting

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/marine-tagging.

Let's vote or continue discussing critical details.

Best Regard
  Mario

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

-- 
DSL-Preisknaller: DSL Komplettpakete von GMX schon für 
16,99 Euro mtl.!* Hier klicken: http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/dsl02

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Seamark/Marine-Tagging-Proposal open for Voting

[Sam Vekemans]

Hi,
I would think that man_made=lighthouse also needs to be changed so that an
additional tag of seamark=lighthouse to show the same thing.
as IMO 'seamark' seems to  more appropriate ... as a 'land' lighthouse is a
'man_made=tower'.

Cheers,
Sam



On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:15 AM, Mario Salvini  wrote:

> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/marine-tagging.
>
> Let's vote or continue discussing critical details.
>
> Best Regard
>  Mario
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Seamark/Marine-Tagging-Proposal open for Voting

[Mario Salvini]

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/marine-tagging.

Let's vote or continue discussing critical details.

Best Regard
  Mario

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Why do you use Google Maps instead of OSM? Because of buildings...

[Peter Miller]

On 8 Nov 2009, at 20:12, Anthony wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Liz  wrote:
>> On Mon, 9 Nov 2009, Anthony wrote:
>>> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 3:00 AM, Lester Caine   
>>> wrote:
 Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> Yes, we know that everyone could probably use OSM maps for their
> business website if they spent a week surveying their  
> surrounding area
> / creating custom renderings. But that's not very helpful when  
> they
> can just embed Google instantly and get the same results.

 And how many of their competitors would also be linked to that  
 site via
 google's linked advertising?
>>>
>>> In this case (http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/about_us/map), none,
>>> because they plagiarized the map.
>>>
>>
>> and from http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/terms
>>
>> The material on this site is protected by international copyright and
>> trademark laws.
>>
>> They don't actually claim to own the material.
>
> More to the point, they don't claim to have created the material.  But
> they do use the work of others without giving those others credit.
> There's no mention of Google, and no mention of Tele Atlas.
>

A brief update - Shaun and I have been sorting this out with CBT in  
the past 24 hours and they now have a new shiny CloudMade slippery map  
interface on their site with the normal CM attribution[1]. They also  
still have their link to the CycleStreets site with a pre-defined  
destination for their office in the link which works really well.

Moral of the story - assume good intentions and contact the  
organisation involved!

[1] http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/about_us/map



Regards,


Peter

> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk