date:20100804


Richard Weait schrieb:

On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Heiko Jacobs heiko.jac...@gmx.de wrote:

Hello

I searched without success in the Wiki
who official decided, when and *WHY* they decided, that data of
contributors, who not (can) accept the ODbl, has to be removed.

In
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Open_Database_License/Implementation_Planoldid=488199
up to 2010-06-22 this questions stayed open:

 Week 13 (approximate)
Final cut-off. Community Question... What do we do with
the people who have said no or not responded?

But the discussion (and decision) seems to be much older ...?


The presumption is that contributors who joined under ccbysa only,
have the right to choose whether to proceed under ODbL or not.  Do you
suggest that they should not have a choice?

If the OSMF Board were to decide, okay, that's it.  All the data is
relicensed without asking contributors, is that in line with their
mandate to assist OpenStreetMap but not control it?

What would you suggest as an alternative?


Before I will discuss this points I want to see the official
decision and on which base this decision was made.
For such an important decision I assumed that is written down.

Mueck


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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data


Hello

First thanks a lot for some unknown (and known) interesting pages.

Frederik Ramm schrieb:

That again referenced the implementation plan at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Implementation_Plan 
Which, under the What do we do with people who have said no or not 
responded sentence that you quoted, linked to


And this sentence says up to 2010-06-21, that this has to be decided. But

 The final proposal linked from that E-Mail was:
 http://www.osmfoundation.org/images/3/3c/License_Proposal.pdf

... already says, that IS decided, that data has to removed ...
So the other page was wrong for half a year ...

While the proposal and plan have been drafted by the LWG before that 
date, and certainly have been the result of some discussion, the formal 
*decision* to proceed along the proposed lines was taken by the OSMF 
membership in that vote.


I'm still searching the former decision (of LWG or any other)
that the removal of data is mandatory and WHY it is on which legal
base of copyright, CC or anything other.
Such an important decision and its reason should be well documented
for the mappers ... I'm just missing this ... The pages you linked
only show discussions of the consequences of this decision, but not
the real reasons of it.

I also still searching archived versions of old (pre double
licensing) versions of contribution terms. You answered it in
talk-de citing a small sentence but with a preceding I guess ...
An archive without guess would be fine ;-)

Mueck


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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

2010-08-04 Thread 80n

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:

   3. Each element is examined and only those with an unbroken history chain
 from version 1 to the most recent ODbL'ed version are marked as OK.


Does anyone know whether the code exists to do this yet?

How are way splits handled (only one half of the way will have a full
history)?

80n
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data


Frederik Ramm schrieb:

Heiko Jacobs wrote:

I'm still searching the former decision (of LWG or any other)
that the removal of data is mandatory and WHY it is on which legal
base of copyright, CC or anything other.


I don't think that there is any decision necessary. CC-BY-SA says data 
must only be distributed under CC-BY-SA, and ODbL is != CC-BY-SA so 
that's that.


The decision might be a vote or might be a statement,
but the reason should be documented that others can follow
it or not and can discuss it.


I also still searching archived versions of old (pre double
licensing) versions of contribution terms. You answered it in
talk-de citing a small sentence but with a preceding I guess ...
An archive without guess would be fine ;-)


You should be able to find that in the rails_port source code history.


thanks, i try to find i there

Mueck


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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

2010-08-04 Thread Tom Hughes


On 04/08/10 12:06, Frederik Ramm wrote:


I also still searching archived versions of old (pre double
licensing) versions of contribution terms. You answered it in
talk-de citing a small sentence but with a preceding I guess ...
An archive without guess would be fine ;-)


You should be able to find that in the rails_port source code history.


I doubt it, because there weren't any contributor terms before that.

Tom

--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data


Hi,

80n wrote:
Does anyone know whether the code exists to do this yet? 


I doubt it.

How are way splits handled (only one half of the way will have a full 
history)?


I think they can be auto-detected (i.e. where in one changeset, one way 
suddenly loses some nodes and another springs up that uses exactly those).


Such auto-detection could be limited to areas where we have recorded 
contributions that are not being relicensed; in all other areas we would 
not have to bother.


Any such mechanism, in my eyes, need not be 100% perfect; it is 
sufficient to make a honest attempt at doing the right thing, and if a 
few things slip through, then fix them in case of complaints.


But I am not in the LWG and they might, unbeknownst to be, already have 
something that works.


Bye
Frederik

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

On 4 August 2010 21:48, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
 Any such mechanism, in my eyes, need not be 100% perfect; it is sufficient
 to make a honest attempt at doing the right thing, and if a few things slip
 through, then fix them in case of complaints.

Which goes against the usual OSM policy of rejecting it if unsure,
rather than accepting it.

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

2010-08-04 Thread Eugene Alvin Villar

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 8:20 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.orgwrote:

   3. Each element is examined and only those with an unbroken history
 chain from version 1 to the most recent ODbL'ed version are marked as OK.


 Does anyone know whether the code exists to do this yet?

 How are way splits handled (only one half of the way will have a full
 history)?


I imagine that the history of the nodes in split ways would provide the
needed provenance.
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data


Hi,

John Smith wrote:

Any such mechanism, in my eyes, need not be 100% perfect; it is sufficient
to make a honest attempt at doing the right thing, and if a few things slip
through, then fix them in case of complaints.


Which goes against the usual OSM policy of rejecting it if unsure,
rather than accepting it.


Yes and no. When it comes to using external sources etc., we always say 
when in doubt, don't. But when we have to remove someone's 
contributions because of a copyright violation, we usually do exactly 
what I have outlined above - make an honest attempt, but accept that a 
few fringe cases may remain which we'd then deal with if there is 
concrete complaint.


Bye
Frederik


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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 8:10 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
 Hi,

 John Smith wrote:

 Any such mechanism, in my eyes, need not be 100% perfect; it is
 sufficient
 to make a honest attempt at doing the right thing, and if a few things
 slip
 through, then fix them in case of complaints.

 Which goes against the usual OSM policy of rejecting it if unsure,
 rather than accepting it.

 Yes and no. When it comes to using external sources etc., we always say
 when in doubt, don't. But when we have to remove someone's contributions
 because of a copyright violation, we usually do exactly what I have outlined
 above - make an honest attempt, but accept that a few fringe cases may
 remain which we'd then deal with if there is concrete complaint.

We also presume good faith.

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

2010-08-04 Thread 80n

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:

 Hi,


 80n wrote:

 Does anyone know whether the code exists to do this yet?


 I doubt it.


  How are way splits handled (only one half of the way will have a full
 history)?


 I think they can be auto-detected (i.e. where in one changeset, one way
 suddenly loses some nodes and another springs up that uses exactly those).


This quickly gets quite complex when factored across multiple generations of
way splits.  Many roads start of as a single way that get repeatedly split
as one way sections, bridges and other detail gets added.

Changesets are a relatively recent invention.  Edits prior to the
introduction of changesets don't have any formal grouping so this approach
will not work for old data.

Even older data that was converted from segments will have no history at all
because it was discarded.  This has quite a significant impact on early
roads such as the M25 motorway (London Orbital) which was orginally created
as segments.  While it could easily be re-derived from Yahoo imagery today
the current ways are surely based on data for which there is no complete
history and would logically get deleted.  The knock on effects of this and
similar random deletions are likely to be problematic.




 Such auto-detection could be limited to areas where we have recorded
 contributions that are not being relicensed; in all other areas we would not
 have to bother.


Prolific editors don't tend to restrict their activity to a single
location.  This might be more widespread than anticipated.



 Any such mechanism, in my eyes, need not be 100% perfect; it is sufficient
 to make a honest attempt at doing the right thing, and if a few things slip
 through, then fix them in case of complaints.


Anyone who cares strongly enough to not want to relicense their work will
probably make a lot of complaints if their work is not fully purged  This
could generate a very large amount of manual remediation.


 But I am not in the LWG and they might, unbeknownst to be, already have
 something that works.


If there is anything under development it would be good if we could see it.
It is unlikely to be a trivial piece of code and I'd be very surprised if it
can be developed by September 1st if it hasn't already been started.

The whole relicensing effort would be a bit of a non-starter if this
deletion process cannot be done.

80n
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

2010-08-04 Thread Grant Slater

On 4 August 2010 14:00, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:

 The whole relicensing effort would be a bit of a non-starter if this
 deletion process cannot be done.


During late 2008 and early 2009 a user inappropriately imported (and
amend existing OSM data) into OSM for Lithuania from what was strongly
believed to be copyrighted data. The data accounted for roughly 20% of
the Lithuania data.

A custom tool was developed which used the methods as described. The
tool was used by the Data Working Group to revert his edits/import
including the sock puppet accounts he was using at the time.

80n weren't you a member of the OSMF board at the time? It went
through the board.

Regards
 Grant

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 9:00 AM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
 If there is anything under development it would be good if we could see it.
 It is unlikely to be a trivial piece of code and I'd be very surprised if it
 can be developed by September 1st if it hasn't already been started.

You've referred to your arbitrary September first deadline several
times.  When did you first suggest September first had some
significance?  It was weeks ago.

The LWG, OSMF Board, and implementation plan have no September first
deadline of which I am aware.

I don't recognize anything significant about your arbitrary deadline
but it seems to be important to you.  I'm pretty sure that the
implementation plan currently calls for more time than the calendar
provides between now and September first.  Avoid the rush.  Consider
your arbitrary marker to be passed.  Now what?  You declare failure?

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:32 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
[ ... ]
 September 1st represents
 a reasonable timeframe, based on the currently published implementation plan

Dear 80n,

Absolutely not.

From the implementation plan.  Phase 2 scheduled as 5 or 10 weeks.
Phase 3 as 8 weeks.  Plus undefined time for technical cut-over work.

How do you find your fictional September first deadline reasonable?

Best regards,
Richard

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

2010-08-04 Thread Liz

On Thu, 5 Aug 2010, Richard Weait wrote:
 How do you find your fictional September first deadline reasonable?

I consider it a political deadline.
Since 80n has mooted this deadline some time ago, and only now you consider 
it, of course you think it is quite short.

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

2010-08-04 Thread 80n

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 8:34 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:

 On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:32 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
 [ ... ]
  September 1st represents
  a reasonable timeframe, based on the currently published implementation
 plan

 Dear 80n,

 Absolutely not.

 From the implementation plan.  Phase 2 scheduled as 5 or 10 weeks.
 Phase 3 as 8 weeks.  Plus undefined time for technical cut-over work.

 How do you find your fictional September first deadline reasonable?

 The clock was started on 12th May 2010.  Three months is a reasonable time
scale and consistent with the schedule laid out at that time.

80n
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

[OSM-legal-talk] U.S Copyright

2010-08-04 Thread Rob Myers

Further to the recent debate in which I asked and was asked about US 
copyright...


Here (thanks to @mecredis on Twitter) is a reference to the split 
decision on derivative copyright -


http://lawgeek.typepad.com/lawgeek/2004/01/zephoria_kulesh.html

Here is a page about database copyright with lots of useful references 
to cases -


http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Copyright_protection_of_databases

- Rob.

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data


Liz,

Since 80n has mooted this deadline some time ago, and only now you consider 
it, of course you think it is quite short.


80n first mentioned this deadline on 14th July, i.e. at the time that 
was six weeks.


It was unclear to me what exactly the deadline was about; he wrote if 
there isn't a clear majority by September 1st then I'd say the 
relicensing has failed but a majority of whom, in what question?


Did anybody - you, 80n, anybody? - think that we'd somehow, in these six 
weeks, be able to email every contributor, and ask them to relicense 
their content, chase up those that don't answer, and consolidate the 
results? - Personally I didn't even think about that deadline becasue it 
seemed quite absurd.


Plus, I don't know if we need any kind of deadline at all.

We can simply decide to re-license, then ask everyone to agree, then 
disallow contributions from people who haven't agreed. All the time, the 
planet is still under CC-BY-SA. Then we evaluate the losses. Say we find 
that 20% of data has not been relicensed. Ok, we start working on 
replacing that data, using the work of people who are ok with ODbL. 
After a while, only 10% of old data is still there. We continue, with 
the planet still under CC-BY-SA. After another while, we have brought 
down the losses to 1%, or 0.1%, or whatever. At that time we throw out 
the rest and publish the planet under ODbL.


Who cares if that time is one year in the future? If it helps to keep 
our losses to a minimum - why not.


As you know we have many people who don't fear the license change, but 
they fear data loss incurred by people not agreeing. In theory, the LWG 
could even set an arbitrary limit (e.g. we promise not to re-license 
the planet until global data loss is less than x%). That should then 
bring all those people on board who fear data loss. Then we just carry 
on as I described above, slowly eliminating the old data by replacing 
it with re-surveyed new data until we achieve what we want.


Just a thought. Not necessarily bright. Might have its problems, might 
also 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] decision removing data


May I set a reminder to a mail of mine?

Everyone discusses consequenzes of the decision of removing
data from non-accepting people, but it seems, that they all
have forgotten, WHY they have decided to remove data?

For such an inportant thing like removing data from OSM project
while licence change anyone here should know, where the reasons
of this decisionare written down...

If we forgot the official reasons or if they had no worth to write
them down then we should also simply forget to remove any data ... ;-)

Heiko Jacobs schrieb:

Richard Weait schrieb:
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Heiko Jacobs 
heiko.jac...@gmx.de wrote:

Hello

I searched without success in the Wiki
who official decided, when and *WHY* they decided, that data of
contributors, who not (can) accept the ODbl, has to be removed.

In
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Open_Database_License/Implementation_Planoldid=488199 


up to 2010-06-22 this questions stayed open:

 Week 13 (approximate)
Final cut-off. Community Question... What do we do with
the people who have said no or not responded?

But the discussion (and decision) seems to be much older ...?


The presumption is that contributors who joined under ccbysa only,
have the right to choose whether to proceed under ODbL or not.  Do you
suggest that they should not have a choice?

If the OSMF Board were to decide, okay, that's it.  All the data is
relicensed without asking contributors, is that in line with their
mandate to assist OpenStreetMap but not control it?

What would you suggest as an alternative?


Before I will discuss this points I want to see the official
decision and on which base this decision was made.
For such an important decision I assumed that is written down.



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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

2010-08-04 Thread SteveC

This is simple straw man crap. 80n invents a deadline, proceeds to piss off 
everyone, take all our time and thus slow things down, then declare we're not 
meeting the deadline.

Steve

stevecoast.com


On Aug 4, 2010, at 3:35 PM, 80n wrote:

 On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
 Liz,
 
 
 Since 80n has mooted this deadline some time ago, and only now you consider 
 it, of course you think it is quite short.
 
 80n first mentioned this deadline on 14th July, i.e. at the time that was six 
 weeks.
 
 It was unclear to me what exactly the deadline was about; he wrote if there 
 isn't a clear majority by September 1st then I'd say the relicensing has 
 failed but a majority of whom, in what question?
 
 The thread you refer to was a discussion of when (or whether) the licence 
 change would be put to a vote by the whole community.  The alternative was 
 that there would never be a vote, but instead a process of gradual erosion.  
 That would clearly be very underhand.
 
 As for how to measure the majority - that's not defined and it doesn't really 
 matter.  It just needs to be compelling.
  
 Did anybody - you, 80n, anybody? - think that we'd somehow, in these six 
 weeks, be able to email every contributor, and ask them to relicense their 
 content, chase up those that don't answer, and consolidate the results? - 
 Personally I didn't even think about that deadline becasue it seemed quite 
 absurd.
 
 The process was started on May 12th.  Three months is not at all unreasonable.
  
 
 Plus, I don't know if we need any kind of deadline at all.
 
 Lack of a deadline will allow this dreadful process to drag on indefinitely.  
 This is not a reasonable burden to impose on this project.
 
  
 We can simply decide to re-license, then ask everyone to agree, then disallow 
 contributions from people who haven't agreed. All the time, the planet is 
 still under CC-BY-SA. Then we evaluate the losses. Say we find that 20% of 
 data has not been relicensed. Ok, we start working on replacing that data, 
 using the work of people who are ok with ODbL. After a while, only 10% of 
 old data is still there. We continue, with the planet still under CC-BY-SA. 
 After another while, we have brought down the losses to 1%, or 0.1%, or 
 whatever. At that time we throw out the rest and publish the planet under 
 ODbL.
 
 Who cares if that time is one year in the future? If it helps to keep our 
 losses to a minimum - why not.
 
 Prolonging this process is damaging to the project.  The license is the one 
 area where commercial organizations that are threatened by OSM can and will 
 attack it.  The threat and uncertainty surrounding ODbL and the contributor 
 terms in particular are a very attractive and easy target.
 
  
 
 As you know we have many people who don't fear the license change, but they 
 fear data loss incurred by people not agreeing. In theory, the LWG could even 
 set an arbitrary limit (e.g. we promise not to re-license the planet until 
 global data loss is less than x%). That should then bring all those people 
 on board who fear data loss. Then we just carry on as I described above, 
 slowly eliminating the old data by replacing it with re-surveyed new data 
 until we achieve what we want.
 
 Just a thought. Not necessarily bright. Might have its problems, might also 
 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
 
 ___
 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] decision removing data

On 5 August 2010 12:59, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
 This is simple straw man crap. 80n invents a deadline, proceeds to piss off 
 everyone, take all our time and thus slow things down, then declare we're not 
 meeting the deadline.

Regardless I've communicated with some older contributors in recent
times that flat out refuse to do anything with OSM until the license
is sorted out because they're worried that their contributions will
ultimately be a waste of time, the longer this goes on the increasing
number of people are going to be hesitant about contributing...

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

[OSM-talk] Marine taggine/OpenSeamap

2010-08-04 Thread Bernhard R. Fischer

Hi!

Is there somewhere a documentation about which data model is actually used by 
OSeaM?

For hours, I searched through the wiki and I also downloaded some parts of the 
map using Josm to find out which tags are actually being used.

The wiki list several different data models and this is extremely confusing:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/marine-tagging
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sea_mark
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Leuchtfeuer/Datenmodell
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Leuchtfeuer/S-57

Kind regards,
Bernhard


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Attribution of OSM on nearmap.om?

2010-08-04 Thread Roman Neumüller


I'm missing the attribution of OSM data on the maps of nearmap -
am I wrong or shouldn't it mention OSM on the map itself?
On nearmap I only see the attribution after clicking Terms of Use...

Roman

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Revert requests in general

2010-08-04 Thread Erik Johansson

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 3:45 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:

 Ben Last wrote:
 the edits that we're submitting all come from one user
 (that represents NearMap) since we don't (and can't) require
 users of our site to all be registered with OSM.


 Whenever it has been raised in the past, the opinion of the community has
 generally been that proxy edits like this are strongly discouraged.


You should go ahead with nearmap editing, even if it might become an
anonymous map doodle tool. It's a good thing that we are getting more
anonymous editting tools. It would be nice to beable to at least track
in the same way as wikipedia does (publicly showing IP addresses).


Amenity Editor, the web based anonymous editor, hasn't posed a problem
for me yet, but  the edits come in pretty low volume.

http://ae.osmsurround.org/
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/amenityeditor/edits


/emj

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution of OSM on nearmap.om?

2010-08-04 Thread Floris Looijesteijn

I guess you mean: http://www.nearmap.com/

They are not using OpenStreetMap, apparently they're using the closed
version: StreetMap

Nice website though!

Greetings,
Floris Looijesteijn

Roman Neumüller wrote:
 I'm missing the attribution of OSM data on the maps of nearmap -
 am I wrong or shouldn't it mention OSM on the map itself?
 On nearmap I only see the attribution after clicking Terms of Use...

 Roman

 ___
 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] Revert requests in general


Ben Last wrote:

I'm not sure I agree.  We don't want to put barriers in the way of an
average user (and I use that term to explicitly distinguish between
the average map site user and a mapping enthusiast) making simple
corrections such as adding address information or naming un-named
streets.  In particular, we don't want to bounce them to the OSM site
to register (and face yet another set of terms and conditions), when
they're already registered on our site.


I see your pain, but ease of getting map data into OSM doesn't trump 
concerns of legality and ownership of data. Otherwise I'd have 
introduced a Google aerial background into Potlatch like a shot. ;)


As Frederik says, Mapzen - designed, like your editor, to lower the 
barrier to entry - is an instructive example. The OAuth support was 
introduced exactly so that other sites could provide OSM editors, 
whether Mapzen, the mooted OpenCycleMap editor, or whatever.


In particular ODbL+CT will require a contractual relationship (i.e. the 
contributor terms) between OSMF and the user. If you are not exposing 
the user to the sign-up process, they are not agreeing to this contract.


Your lawyers can of course find a way which satisfies them (and you) 
that there is sufficient agreement between your user terms and 
CC-BY-SA/ODbl+CT, but for any novel way of getting data into OSM, the 
onus is on the importer to satisfy _OSM_, not just themselves. That's 
the conversation we need to have here, and potentially also that you 
need to have with OSMF. (I would suggest that, as a courtesy, you drop 
OSMF a line and ask them to consider the matter.)


My contention is that the only fair way to do it without imposing any 
risk on OSM is to require an explicit PD/CC0-type waiver from your 
users. For trivial edits made by a simple editor, this is probably good 
practice as they're unlikely to be substantial anyway.


As per previously cited blog post (http://www.systemeD.net/blog/?p=100) 
I'm of the opinion that tracing from aerial imagery does not carry 
through any IP from the photography. It's up to the provider of the 
imagery whether they want to impose contractual restrictions. So the 
ball's in your court, really. :)


 I hope by now that many OSMers will appreciate that we continue
 to do a lot of support OSM, and that we do take the integrity and
 reliability of the data very seriously.

Absolutely.

cheers
Richard

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Revert requests in general


Frederik Ramm wrote:

I kind of understand your situation but I think the way forward would be
to either use OpenStreetBugs or set up an OpenStreetBugs like system
yourself, maybe integrate that in your editor - so that users without an
OSM account can only place OSB markers, and those (the slightly more
advanced users) who have an OSM account can then pick these up and fix
OSM data properly.


Which is what Skobbler does, I think.
http://www.skobbler.co.uk/osmbugs

cheers
Richard

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution of OSM on nearmap.om?

2010-08-04 Thread Peteris Krisjanis

2010/8/4 Roman Neumüller r.neumul...@gmail.com:
 I'm missing the attribution of OSM data on the maps of nearmap -
 am I wrong or shouldn't it mention OSM on the map itself?
 On nearmap I only see the attribution after clicking Terms of Use...

And this is bad because...?

Is there any rules how you should attribute CC-BY-SA?

Cheers,
Peter.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution of OSM on nearmap.om?

It's credited in the same place as all the copyrights and credits are listed:
http://www.nearmap.com/legal/copyright
http://www.nearmap.com/legal/terms-of-use

You'll find it close to the section where we make it clear you can use
our photomaps to derive work under CC-BY-SA... for example, to
contribute to OSM :)

More seriously, though, this question has already been raised, and we
follow the guidelines at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#I_would_like_to_use_OpenStreetMap_maps._How_should_I_credit_you.3F
and credit OpenStreetMap in the same way and with the same prominence
as you would any other map supplier.

Cheers
b

On 4 August 2010 15:26, Floris Looijesteijn o...@floris.nu wrote:
 I guess you mean: http://www.nearmap.com/

 They are not using OpenStreetMap, apparently they're using the closed
 version: StreetMap

 Nice website though!

 Greetings,
 Floris Looijesteijn

 Roman Neumüller wrote:
 I'm missing the attribution of OSM data on the maps of nearmap -
 am I wrong or shouldn't it mention OSM on the map itself?
 On nearmap I only see the attribution after clicking Terms of Use...

 Roman

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



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




-- 
Ben Last
Development Manager (HyperWeb)
NearMap Pty Ltd

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Revert requests in general

On 4 August 2010 15:06, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
 Maybe worth taking a clue from Cloudmade here, who have a similar situation
 with their Mapzen editor - they go through some effort to make the process
 as painless as possible for their users while still requiring them to
 register with OSM *as well as* with CM.
Yes, we've looked quite closely at what Cloudmade do.  They're a site
aimed more at the mapping community than general user/media website
use, so I'd argue that the cases are different.  Certainly their
editor is still way too complex for the average user (for our
definition of average user).

 I'm pretty certain there was some kind of web-based tag editor just before
 OAuth was finally set up but I cannot find the mailing list references.
 There wasn't a huge discussion back then - it was clear to everyone that
 what that editor was doing could be a proof of concept at most because the
 account would soon be banned otherwise.
Hmm.  On what grounds would such an account be banned?

 One reason why we disallowed anonymous editing is to make sure that
 community members can always be contacted by other community members if
 their edits are worthy of discussion in one way or another. Do you have a
 strategy of how do deal with incoming messages for the nearmap user? Will
 you assign staff to forward these messages to the appropriate individual?
Yes, and yes.

There is actually another angle to this; the edits are being submitted
by NearMap to OSM.  The edits are given to NearMap by NearMap users,
under an appropriate licence (that's part of the terms and conditions
under which they'll register with us), and NearMap then submit them
separately (in a legal sense) to OSM.  So the edits are NearMap's,
in a legal sense, and submitted by NearMap.  From that point of view,
it makes most sense for them to be submitted under the NearMap
account.  We have to balance legality and ease of use.

 As I said, without knowing the internal Cloudmade procedures, I am pretty
 sure there will have been a number of people in that organisation who'd have
 said are you mad, every additional signup button loses us 50% of people...
 but still they do what they do. For a reason, I guess.
Indeed, and we have our reasons also; this isn't an arbitrary choice,
it's been the subject of internal debate :)

 I kind of understand your situation but I think the way forward would be to
 either use OpenStreetBugs or set up an OpenStreetBugs like system yourself,
 maybe integrate that in your editor - so that users without an OSM account
 can only place OSB markers, and those (the slightly more advanced users) who
 have an OSM account can then pick these up and fix OSM data properly. Maybe
 you can even do that in a way that lets people start easy in your
 application and then progress if they feel more comfortable with it.
Interesting idea, but one aim of this whole effort is to increase the
number of people who can contribute to OSM and help bring it to the
point where OSM data is a usable way to do geocoding or address-search
(which it isn't at the moment).  Using OSB doesn't really meet that
aim.

Richard Fairhurst wrote:
 I see your pain, but ease of getting map data into OSM doesn't trump concerns 
 of legality and ownership of data.
Um... and we're not arguing that it does!  It should be fairly clear
from our website that we take legality and ownership of data at least
as seriously as OSM :)

In particular ODbL+CT will require a contractual relationship (i.e. the 
contributor terms) between OSMF and the user. If you are not exposing the user 
to the sign-up process, they are not agreeing to this contract.
No, they're agreeing to terms and conditions with us.  We (NearMap)
are agreed to the terms and conditions with OSM, and submit the edits,
as NearMap, to OSM.  We're not trying to do some sort of back-to-back
legal framework; that would never work.  The edits come from NearMap.

Your lawyers can of course find a way which satisfies them (and you) that 
there is sufficient agreement between your user terms and CC-BY-SA/ODbl+CT, 
but for any
novel way of getting data into OSM, the onus is on the importer to satisfy 
_OSM_, not just themselves. That's the conversation we need to have here, and 
potentially
also that you need to have with OSMF. (I would suggest that, as a courtesy, 
you drop OSMF a line and ask them to consider the matter.)
Glad to.  Can you provide a way to contact someone there who'd be
willing to have the conversation?

I'm of the opinion that tracing from aerial imagery does not carry through any 
IP from the photography.
Our lawyers, looking at more than just English law, would beg to
differ :)  But like you say, if that were true, people would be
frantically tracing from Google imagery... and they're not.  I would
think that the OSM position would be that it's not worth the *risk* to
trace without it being clear that the licence allows it, since if it
turned out that your opinion is wrong, that

Re: [OSM-talk] [josm-dev] Change to changeset comment handling, RfD


Anthony,


The way I like to think of this is: If you speak to another mapper later that day, 
and they ask you what
you've been up to? and you answer them in one sentence - that's what you 
should put as a changeset
comment.


Sounds like a better place for that would be a diary entry.


If there were a way to link changesets to diary entries on upload (i.e. 
instead of selecting a changeset comment, select an existing diary entry 
to link this changeset to), that might be an idea. However, diary 
entries tend to be lengthy and unsuitable for display in a table view.


Also, I think this would be more of a burden on the mapper, not less.


fixed soandso junction from aerial imagery
added POIs from motorcycle survey


Be even better if the aerial imagery and motorcycle survey were in
a source tag rather than a comment tag.  And at least in the
latter case, I'd say skip the comment tag. Just added POIs isn't
helpful, and the from motorcycle survey part would be better off in
a source tag.


Arguably, the changeset comment could be split up in a number of 
individual tags. Currently, people use it for different things - they 
say something about the source, about their method, about where they 
worked, about why they changed something, or about whether or not the 
area still needs work... again, as long as we have difficulty in even 
getting people to describe their edits in *one* tag, it might be too 
much to ask of them if we asked them to fill in a *number of tags* in a 
structured manner. I think it would be counter-productive at this time.


The changeset comment tag as we have it now gives us, I believe, the 
most value for the smallest investment on the part of the mapper.


I'm taking this back to the talk@ list, it has nothing to do with JOSM.

Bye
Frederik



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Revert requests in general


Ben Last wrote:

In particular ODbL+CT will require a contractual relationship
(i.e.  the contributor terms) between OSMF and the user. If

 you are not exposing the user to the sign-up process, they
 are not agreeing to this contract.

No, they're agreeing to terms and conditions with us.  We (NearMap)
are agreed to the terms and conditions with OSM, and submit the edits,
as NearMap, to OSM.  We're not trying to do some sort of back-to-back
legal framework; that would never work.  The edits come from NearMap.


The major problem arises when, for example, a NearMap user starts 
correcting 300 street names using Google Maps as a source 
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/blocks/10); or they make a whole bunch of 
fictitious corrections a la Charlie Sheen Highway 
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/blocks/19).


There are procedures for when an actual OSM user does this - both 
organisational procedures and code written specially for the purpose. 
But it's a whole lot harder when there's an intermediary involved. We 
can't message the user to say this is against the terms  conditions 
you signed up to when they signed up to something else, and besides, 
they're behind a proxy so they're not messageable anyway.


The Data Working Group could in theory block the NearMap account every 
time this happens, and this would indeed be the standard way of sorting 
this out, given that it's the responsibility of the user (i.e. NearMap) 
to modify their behaviour. But I guess that wouldn't be something that 
appeals to you. :)



[e-mailing OSMF]
Glad to.  Can you provide a way to contact someone there who'd be
willing to have the conversation?


http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Groups

I'd suggest you e-mail the Data Working Group (d...@osmfoundation.org) 
as a first port of call.



[tracing]
I would
think that the OSM position would be that it's not worth the *risk* to
trace without it being clear that the licence allows it, since if it
turned out that your opinion is wrong, that would lead to data loss.


Yes, absolutely. cf the Big Important Disclaimer bit at the start of 
the blog post (in red and everything!).


cheers
Richard

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution of OSM on nearmap.om?


Ben Last wrote:
 More seriously, though, this question has already been raised, and we
 follow the guidelines at
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#I_would_like_to_use_OpenStreetMap_maps._How_should_I_credit_you.3F
 and credit OpenStreetMap in the same way and with the same 
 prominence as you would any other map supplier.

...which goes on to say: For a browsable electronic map (e.g. embedded in a
web page or mobile phone application), the credit should typically appear in
the corner of the map, as commonly seen with map APIs/libraries such as
Google Maps.

At present the credit is one click away from this and the licence
information is two clicks away.

cheers
Richard
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Attribution-of-OSM-on-nearmap-om-tp5371443p5371646.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution of OSM on nearmap.om?

should typically != must :)

But the key point is that we attribute OSM with the same prominence as
we do any other supplier.  You'll note that there is no copyright
message relating to the photomaps on the main page (for us, or any
supplier).

Cheers
b

On 4 August 2010 16:32, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:

 Ben Last wrote:
 More seriously, though, this question has already been raised, and we
 follow the guidelines at
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#I_would_like_to_use_OpenStreetMap_maps._How_should_I_credit_you.3F
 and credit OpenStreetMap in the same way and with the same
 prominence as you would any other map supplier.

 ...which goes on to say: For a browsable electronic map (e.g. embedded in a
 web page or mobile phone application), the credit should typically appear in
 the corner of the map, as commonly seen with map APIs/libraries such as
 Google Maps.

 At present the credit is one click away from this and the licence
 information is two clicks away.

 cheers
 Richard
 --
 View this message in context: 
 http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Attribution-of-OSM-on-nearmap-om-tp5371443p5371646.html
 Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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




-- 
Ben Last
Development Manager (HyperWeb)
NearMap Pty Ltd

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

Hi,

Heiko Jacobs wrote:

I searched without success in the Wiki
who official decided, when and *WHY* they decided, that data of
contributors, who not (can) accept the ODbl, has to be removed.

The formal decision for OSMF to go on with the ODbL relicensing process
was the result of a vote among OSMF members.

This vote began on 5th December 2009, and the results were announced on
27 December 2009. 89% of those who voted approved the process that had
been suggested by the License Working Group.

Here is the E-Mail that formed the basis of the vote:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Implementation_Plan/OSMF_Vote_Email

The final proposal linked from that E-Mail was:

http://www.osmfoundation.org/images/3/3c/License_Proposal.pdf

That again referenced the implementation plan at

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Implementation_Plan

Which, under the What do we do with people who have said no or not
responded sentence that you quoted, linked to

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Backup_Plan

which details the procedure, and I'm quoting that part of the wiki page
in full:

These are the proposed stages of the migration process, subject to change based
on technical or policy feasibility. This is not the final plan, and may change
as we figure out the best way to do it, but this is the general outline. A date
will be announced for this in advance based on the Implementation Plan.

1. Database is taken to read-only mode.
2. A dump of all geographic data, most likely full-history planet, is made
available under CC BY-SA. This will be hosted on [1] and mirrors and we will
try to keep it available for as long as is practical.
3. Each element is examined and only those with an unbroken history chain from version
1 to the most recent ODbL'ed version are marked as OK.
4. The database will be taken to offline mode.
5. Elements and versions not marked OK are hidden somehow.
6. A fixup script will be run to fix errors introduced by such hiding and
restore referential integrity.
7. The database will be taken to read-only mode.
8. Dump first ODbL planet, possibly both a full-history and current. Since
the API will be read-only for the duration, this should correspond exactly to
the final CC BY-SA planet dumped in step 2.
9. Database is taken to read-write mode.

At no point in the process will we delete data which hasn't been made available.

Outstanding questions

Getting edits 'back'

There is a technical question about how to remove non-ODbL contributions from
the database. The following methods are under consideration:

* Mark the edits in the database as hidden, but do not remove the records. This
means changing the API code to allow edits to be recovered after the migration by the user's
agreement to the contributor terms, which creates difficulties when the element history was
partially recovered and forked subsequently by other ODbL edits. This is the most
technically challenging method.
* Remove the records from the database, but supply the latest versions
(per-user) to be downloaded by the user and re-merged manually into the
database using an editor. This puts a lot of work onto the user, who may decide
not to merge their old edits back in.
* Remove the records from the database and rely on the full-history dump to provide those element histories to any editor interested in recovering them. This may be the most practical method.

So this is what OSMF members have voted on (I have taken care to
retrieve those versions of the pages that were in effect when the vote
was held but it didn't make a difference.)

It is pretty clear from that that non-ODbL contributions would either be
marked hidden and thus inaccessible in the database, or removed from
it (while of course not being removed from the last CC-BY-SA version
published).

While the proposal and plan have been drafted by the LWG before that
date, and certainly have been the result of some discussion, the formal
*decision* to proceed along the proposed lines was taken by the OSMF
membership in that vote.

(The OSMF board decision to hold the vote is in the board meeting
minutes of 12th November, here:
https://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_24fks9cpdq.)

Bye
Frederik

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution of OSM on nearmap.om?

2010-08-04 Thread Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 08:53, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote:
 should typically != must :)

 But the key point is that we attribute OSM with the same prominence as
 we do any other supplier.  You'll note that there is no copyright
 message relating to the photomaps on the main page (for us, or any
 supplier).

I find this attribution to be completely reasonable. The Legal FAQ is
just a FAQ, but the only thing that applies in the CC-BY-SA, which
just includes clauses like reasonable to the medium.

Map - Information - Copyrights and credits is no different than e.g.:

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenStreetMap
2. File - 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cambridge-Openstreetmap-08-06-13.svg
3. Look at Permission.

Having a floating OpenLayers attribution element in the lower right
corner is one way to do it, but it's not the only way, and people that
don't pick that particular way aren't doing anything wrong as far as I
can tell.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Revert requests in general


Ben,

Ben Last wrote:

I'm pretty certain there was some kind of web-based tag editor just before
OAuth was finally set up but I cannot find the mailing list references.
There wasn't a huge discussion back then - it was clear to everyone that
what that editor was doing could be a proof of concept at most because the
account would soon be banned otherwise.



Hmm.  On what grounds would such an account be banned?


I think at the time we assumed that either it would be banned because it 
invited unaccounted vandalism, or it would be banned after the first 
such vandalism occurred, which was just a question of time.



I kind of understand your situation but I think the way forward would be to
either use OpenStreetBugs or set up an OpenStreetBugs like system yourself,
maybe integrate that in your editor - so that users without an OSM account
can only place OSB markers, and those (the slightly more advanced users) who
have an OSM account can then pick these up and fix OSM data properly. Maybe
you can even do that in a way that lets people start easy in your
application and then progress if they feel more comfortable with it.



Interesting idea, but one aim of this whole effort is to increase the
number of people who can contribute to OSM and help bring it to the
point where OSM data is a usable way to do geocoding or address-search
(which it isn't at the moment).  Using OSB doesn't really meet that
aim.


I was thinking more along the lines of using OSB as an entry drug.

You kind of have a point there with addresses and all; assume you'd just 
produce your very own database of house numbers built by your users, 
then release that, say, as PD or CC0. It would only be days until 
someone in OSM came along and proposed to import your database into OSM, 
which would effectively end up the same (all data being contributed 
under one user id).


But in that scenario, the importing user would take full responsibility, 
and if it turned out that a significant portion of the import was in 
some way faulty, the whole import would be rolled back.



I would
think that the OSM position would be that it's not worth the *risk* to
trace without it being clear that the licence allows it


That is indeed generally the OSM position.


Which is one reason we make it clear that you can derive data from our
images under CC-BY-SA, to remove that risk.


I'll post something about CC-BY-SA datasources in a separate thread.

Bye
Frederik

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Marine taggine/OpenSeamap

2010-08-04 Thread Malcolm Herring

Bernhard,

The OpenSeaMap data model definitions are contained in three files:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tonne/Datenmodell
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bake/Datenmodell
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Leuchtfeuer/Datenmodell

You will note that all the key/value pairs are prefixed seamark: This is the 
namespace that the OpenSeaMap renderer uses.
You may find nodes in the map that have other keys as well as seamark:-prefixed 
ones, but those keys are not parsed by OpenSeaMap.

If you are interested in adding seamarks to the map, there is web-based editor 
and also a JOSM plugin. I am in the process of upgrading the plugin  will 
check in the JAR as soon as I have finished testing it. In the meantime, you 
will find the existing ones on the openseamap.org web site.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data


Hi,

Heiko Jacobs wrote:

I'm still searching the former decision (of LWG or any other)
that the removal of data is mandatory and WHY it is on which legal
base of copyright, CC or anything other.


I don't think that there is any decision necessary. CC-BY-SA says data 
must only be distributed under CC-BY-SA, and ODbL is != CC-BY-SA so 
that's that.



I also still searching archived versions of old (pre double
licensing) versions of contribution terms. You answered it in
talk-de citing a small sentence but with a preceding I guess ...
An archive without guess would be fine ;-)


You should be able to find that in the rails_port source code history.

Bye
Frederik

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Problems with names with postfixes / types

2010-08-04 Thread Brian Quinion

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:57 AM, woll w...@2-islands.com wrote:
 Better to keep this thread restricted to the subject of is it valid to tag
 names with postfixes, and have any technical discussions separately in the
 trac report!

Yes - it was probably a mistake to reference the ticket in this
message, I was really just supplying some background.

The basic question is the one you have stated - Is it valid to tag
names with postfixes?

And spiting it down:

  Are there circumstances where it is / is not valid?

  Should different versions of the name be split into seperate tags?

  e.g. name:ja = 福岡福岡市
  base_name:ja = 福岡

  Is including the 市 tagging for render or is this the 'real' name?

  How do we define the 'real' name for consistency?


Basically it would make my life a lot easier as a data user if there
was some hard and fast rules in this  :)

--
 Brian

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution of OSM on nearmap.om?

2010-08-04 Thread Floris Looijesteijn

I take back my earlier comments, apparently it is ok to have it behind a
link. Another website you might know also has it like this:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/

If you could also fix the StreetMap and OpenStreetMaps texts this website
will be a excellent addition to OSM.

Greetings,
Floris Looijesteijn

Ãvar ArnfjÃ¶rÃ° Bjarmason wrote:
 On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 08:53, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote:
 should typically != must :)

 But the key point is that we attribute OSM with the same prominence as
 we do any other supplier. Â You'll note that there is no copyright
 message relating to the photomaps on the main page (for us, or any
 supplier).

 I find this attribution to be completely reasonable. The Legal FAQ is
 just a FAQ, but the only thing that applies in the CC-BY-SA, which
 just includes clauses like reasonable to the medium.

 Map - Information - Copyrights and credits is no different than e.g.:

 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenStreetMap
 2. File -
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cambridge-Openstreetmap-08-06-13.svg
 3. Look at Permission.

 Having a floating OpenLayers attribution element in the lower right
 corner is one way to do it, but it's not the only way, and people that
 don't pick that particular way aren't doing anything wrong as far as I
 can tell.

 ___
 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] Problems with names with postfixes / types

2010-08-04 Thread Emilie Laffray

2010/8/4 Brian Quinion openstreet...@brian.quinion.co.uk

 On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:57 AM, woll w...@2-islands.com wrote:
  Better to keep this thread restricted to the subject of is it valid to
 tag
  names with postfixes, and have any technical discussions separately in
 the
  trac report!

 Yes - it was probably a mistake to reference the ticket in this
 message, I was really just supplying some background.

 The basic question is the one you have stated - Is it valid to tag
 names with postfixes?

 And spiting it down:

  Are there circumstances where it is / is not valid?

  Should different versions of the name be split into seperate tags?

  e.g. name:ja = 福岡福岡市
  base_name:ja = 福岡

  Is including the 市 tagging for render or is this the 'real' name?


My understanding is that 市 (and the other type) is part of the name while at
the same time indicating the type of municipality. In our company, we kept
the postfix symbol to represent the municipality based on some reports of
some Japanese people.

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 9:00 AM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:

 Hi,

 80n wrote:

 Does anyone know whether the code exists to do this yet?

 I doubt it.

 How are way splits handled (only one half of the way will have a full
 history)?

 I think they can be auto-detected (i.e. where in one changeset, one way
 suddenly loses some nodes and another springs up that uses exactly those).

 This quickly gets quite complex when factored across multiple generations of
 way splits.  Many roads start of as a single way that get repeatedly split
 as one way sections, bridges and other detail gets added.

A new full history dump was just published.
http://planet.openstreetmap.org/full-experimental/full-planet-100801.osm.bz2

So folks with the inspiration and ability could start coding ways to
look at the effects of users accepting and methods of displaying the
results.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Revert requests in general

2010-08-04 Thread ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen


Andrzej,


You kind of have a point there with addresses and all; assume you'd just
produce your very own database of house numbers built by your users, then
release that, say, as PD or CC0. It would only be days until someone in OSM
came along and proposed to import your database into OSM, which would
effectively end up the same (all data being contributed under one user id).

But in that scenario, the importing user would take full responsibility, and
if it turned out that a significant portion of the import was in some way
faulty, the whole import would be rolled back.


That's possibly the worst way to handle it


I was just using that as an example which would lead to all data being 
under the same account, and in a way that nobody on OSM's side would 
complain. I wasn't suggesting they actually do that.



Note that nearmap.com is taking it pretty seriously about taking
responsibility. 


I was trying to explain that this responsibility might mean that OSM 
takes measures - such as reverting all contributions - against a 
particular user, even if that one user happens to be a concentration 
point for contributions of many human beings.



Also note that they mentioned in another thread that
they want to contribute under share-alike licenses (including ODbL) so
that they can use improvements made to data that they release or that
is based on the imagery.  The repeated asking for releasing as PD is
amounting to trolling.


As I said above, that was just a theoretical situation in which someone 
else's data would be concentrated under one account. I said PD or CC0 
in the example as a placeholder for a license that is guaranteed to be 
compatible with anything OSM uses at the time.


Bye
Frederik

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Death by a thousand nitpicks

2010-08-04 Thread Iván Sánchez Ortega


On 04/08/2010 15:34, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

Let's try not to subject OSM data users to death by a thousand
self-appointed license nitpickers.


Self-appointed license nitpickers. Geez, I do love that quote. Can I 
use from time to time?


--
Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Death by a thousand nitpicks

2010-08-04 Thread Joseph Reeves

Let's try not to subject OSM data users to death by a thousand
self-appointed license nitpickers.

Mapquest, Microsoft and now Nearmap; whenever anybody tries to do
anything with OSM, there's always a license / attribution backlash.
It's really sad, but hopefully largely ignored outside the world of
the talk mailing list.

Cheers, Joseph




2010/8/4 Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es:
 On 04/08/2010 15:34, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

 Let's try not to subject OSM data users to death by a thousand
 self-appointed license nitpickers.

 Self-appointed license nitpickers. Geez, I do love that quote. Can I use
 from time to time?

 --
 Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es

 ___
 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] Death by a thousand nitpicks

2010-08-04 Thread Kevin Peat

On 4 August 2010 14:34, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason ava...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 11:53, Floris Looijesteijn o...@floris.nu wrote:

 snipped

 Let's try not to subject OSM data users to death by a thousand
 self-appointed license nitpickers.


+1

The negative attitude to nearmap is unjustified. It would be nice to see
more businesses use the data and contribute back to the project in a
responsible way as they are trying to do.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Death by a thousand nitpicks

2010-08-04 Thread Floris Looijesteijn

Kevin Peat wrote:

chop chop


 The negative attitude to nearmap is unjustified. It would be nice to see
 more businesses use the data and contribute back to the project in a
 responsible way as they are trying to do.

I did not mean to sound that negative, I'm indeed no native English speaker.
I had never heard of Nearmap and thought it was something new and that's
why I made the request to use the right names. But it did sound too
negative...

Let me try again:

I really like the interface of www.nearmap.com, the rendering of the maps
and the amount of detail (zoom 24). Go Nearmap!

Greets,
Floris

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Death by a thousand nitpicks

2010-08-04 Thread Stefan de Konink


On Wed, 4 Aug 2010, Joseph Reeves wrote:


Let's try not to subject OSM data users to death by a thousand
self-appointed license nitpickers.


Mapquest, Microsoft and now Nearmap; whenever anybody tries to do
anything with OSM, there's always a license / attribution backlash.
It's really sad, but hopefully largely ignored outside the world of
the talk mailing list.


Do you really think that the OSMF tries to sue? Given their biggest 
license debate stuff is currently 'the license is not appropriate'?


Worst case it becomes factual data, protected by some local laws or 
european dirrective. Sadly the fud is indeed the main issue.



Stefan

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Revert requests in general

2010-08-04 Thread andrzej zaborowski

Hi,

On 4 August 2010 15:47, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
 You kind of have a point there with addresses and all; assume you'd just
 produce your very own database of house numbers built by your users, then
 release that, say, as PD or CC0. It would only be days until someone in
 OSM
 came along and proposed to import your database into OSM, which would
 effectively end up the same (all data being contributed under one user
 id).

 But in that scenario, the importing user would take full responsibility,
 and
 if it turned out that a significant portion of the import was in some way
 faulty, the whole import would be rolled back.

 That's possibly the worst way to handle it

 I was just using that as an example which would lead to all data being under
 the same account, and in a way that nobody on OSM's side would complain. I
 wasn't suggesting they actually do that.

Sorry then, good that it's clear.  It did sound like a suggestion.


 Note that nearmap.com is taking it pretty seriously about taking
 responsibility.

 I was trying to explain that this responsibility might mean that OSM takes
 measures - such as reverting all contributions - against a particular user,
 even if that one user happens to be a concentration point for contributions
 of many human beings.

Let's look at it practically.  If a proxy (e.g. nearmap) user commits
vandalism, there are several things OSM may want to do: 1. undo the
vandalism, 2. contact the user, 3. block the user.

For 1. it's actually better that the edits are logically grouped into
changesets, rather than imported by a 3rd party in 5 element
changesets.  Obviously it would be even better if all the proxy user's
changesets were grouped in an individual user account.  But Ben
mentioned that changes were going to be tagged, so I suppose it will
be possible to locate all the individual human editor's edits.

For 2. again Ben mentioned that there would be a way to do that, and
for 3. he hasn't said anything but I expect they have thought of it
too.  So considering this, blocking the entire account would be
overzealous.  But then if it is eventually determined that nearmap.com
were the bad guys, that would be useful.

Yes, it would require support in editors like JOSM to see who edited a
given feature last.. on the other hand most of the times if you have
doubts about the quality of some change, you have to see the full
history of the object, because the interesting edit may have been
before last edit.

Cheers

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Death by a thousand nitpicks

2010-08-04 Thread Iván Sánchez Ortega


On 04/08/2010 16:17, Stefan de Konink wrote:

Do you really think that the OSMF tries to sue? Given their biggest
license debate stuff is currently 'the license is not appropriate'?


Hey, we'd sue the ass off Nike if they didn't have a litigation 
department. And if we could actually enforce the license over the data 
(which we can't, 'cause it's still CC-by-sa and not yet ODbL).




Worst case it becomes factual data, protected by some local laws or
european dirrective. Sadly the fud is indeed the main issue.


Hey, if the USGS can take over OSM in the US and make it public domain, 
don't expect me to exactly cry all over it :-)



Best,
--
Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Revert requests in general

2010-08-04 Thread Emilie Laffray

On 4 August 2010 15:13, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:


 Let's look at it practically.  If a proxy (e.g. nearmap) user commits
 vandalism, there are several things OSM may want to do: 1. undo the
 vandalism, 2. contact the user, 3. block the user.

 For 1. it's actually better that the edits are logically grouped into
 changesets, rather than imported by a 3rd party in 5 element
 changesets.  Obviously it would be even better if all the proxy user's
 changesets were grouped in an individual user account.  But Ben
 mentioned that changes were going to be tagged, so I suppose it will
 be possible to locate all the individual human editor's edits.

 For 2. again Ben mentioned that there would be a way to do that, and
 for 3. he hasn't said anything but I expect they have thought of it
 too.  So considering this, blocking the entire account would be
 overzealous.  But then if it is eventually determined that nearmap.com
 were the bad guys, that would be useful.

 Yes, it would require support in editors like JOSM to see who edited a
 given feature last.. on the other hand most of the times if you have
 doubts about the quality of some change, you have to see the full
 history of the object, because the interesting edit may have been
 before last edit.


What nearmap could do is provide some kind of hash in the changeset that
could help identify someone. Hopefully, that would allow us to point out to
them when someone is behaving very badly. How that hash is defined is of
course to be defined (it would probably be a composite key, and they would
be the only who knows what it means).

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Death by a thousand nitpicks

2010-08-04 Thread Stefan de Konink


On Wed, 4 Aug 2010, Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:


 Worst case it becomes factual data, protected by some local laws or
 european dirrective. Sadly the fud is indeed the main issue.


Hey, if the USGS can take over OSM in the US and make it public domain, don't 
expect me to exactly cry all over it :-)


At least we get the blessing from SteveC that it will slowly die (given 
the government funding is endless and the USA is bankrupt ;)


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Death by a thousand nitpicks

Do you really think that the OSMF tries to sue? Given their biggest 
license debate stuff is currently 'the license is not appropriate'?

Worst case it becomes factual data, protected by some local laws or 
european dirrective. Sadly the fud is indeed the main issue.

+1

Even protected, no one will defend us, but ourselves.

Let's create a fund to pay for license related legal action ;))
After all it is so sad having a license and not be able
to enforce it !
Who is willing to contribute, say 5 dollars, to pay some lawyersjust
in case.


Gert 

-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org] Namens Stefan de Konink
Verzonden: woensdag 4 augustus 2010 16:18
Aan: Joseph Reeves
CC: OSM Talk List
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Death by a thousand nitpicks

On Wed, 4 Aug 2010, Joseph Reeves wrote:

 Let's try not to subject OSM data users to death by a thousand
 self-appointed license nitpickers.

 Mapquest, Microsoft and now Nearmap; whenever anybody tries to do
 anything with OSM, there's always a license / attribution backlash.
 It's really sad, but hopefully largely ignored outside the world of
 the talk mailing list.

Do you really think that the OSMF tries to sue? Given their biggest 
license debate stuff is currently 'the license is not appropriate'?

Worst case it becomes factual data, protected by some local laws or 
european dirrective. Sadly the fud is indeed the main issue.


Stefan

___
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] Death by a thousand nitpicks

2010-08-04 Thread Iván Sánchez Ortega


On 04/08/2010 19:01, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote:

Let's create a fund to pay for license related legal action ;))
After all it is so sad having a license and not be able
to enforce it !
Who is willing to contribute, say 5 dollars, to pay some lawyersjust
in case.


http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Donate

--
Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Death by a thousand nitpicks

2010-08-04 Thread Stefan de Konink


On Wed, 4 Aug 2010, Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:


On 04/08/2010 19:01, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote:

 Let's create a fund to pay for license related legal action ;))
 After all it is so sad having a license and not be able
 to enforce it !
 Who is willing to contribute, say 5 dollars, to pay some lawyersjust
 in case.


http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Donate


No ear-marked donations, no real foundation status, no tax deduction... 
and best of all: no party. OSMF did not provide any data into the OSM 
database. Thus can only present some users who think their data was 
copied and what to be represented by the OSMF.



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Death by a thousand nitpicks

2010/8/4 Stefan de Konink ste...@konink.de

 On Wed, 4 Aug 2010, Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:

  On 04/08/2010 19:01, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote:

  Let's create a fund to pay for license related legal action ;))
  After all it is so sad having a license and not be able
  to enforce it !
  Who is willing to contribute, say 5 dollars, to pay some lawyersjust
  in case.


 http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Donate


 No ear-marked donations, no real foundation status, no tax deduction... and
 best of all: no party. OSMF did not provide any data into the OSM database.
 Thus can only present some users who think their data was copied and what to
 be represented by the OSMF.


Wait, how did the thread about NOT nitpicking over licensing issues turn
into a donate so we can hire lawyers to nitpick thread?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Death by a thousand nitpicks

2010-08-04 Thread ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen

2010/8/4 Stefan de Konink ste...@konink.de

 On Wed, 4 Aug 2010, Ian Dees wrote:

  Wait, how did the thread about NOT nitpicking over licensing issues turn
 into a donate so we can hire lawyers to nitpick thread?


 Probably because some people instead of doing something with our data (like
 big location based businesses) want to protect our data. I personally like
 the do now, care later mentality.


If you scare the users of our data away by hiring lawyers to nitpick over
how OSM is represented in every which way then there's really no point in
collecting all this data, is there?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Death by a thousand nitpicks

Maybe because you missed the irony ?

 

If you scare the users of our data away by hiring lawyers to nitpick
over how OSM is represented 

in every which way then there's really no point in collecting all this
data, is there

 

+1  

So get rid of any license, as a license without lawyers, is of no
meaning !

OSM got to the level of maturity that market players (such as BING/MS)
without ANY scruples

are getting interested. None of us is going to defend against the legal
power

of any such player, whatever the strength of the license.

 

In a few years OSM will be the one of the three major map providers
world wide

with advantages over the other 2, that we all know and appreciate.

 

Donate it to the world, make it free as in free , not free as in free
beer.

What do we have to loose ?

 

Gert

 

Van: talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org] Namens Ian Dees
Verzonden: woensdag 4 augustus 2010 19:29
Aan: Stefan de Konink
CC: talk@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Death by a thousand nitpicks

 

 

2010/8/4 Stefan de Konink ste...@konink.de

On Wed, 4 Aug 2010, Ian Dees wrote:

Wait, how did the thread about NOT nitpicking over licensing issues turn
into a donate so we can hire lawyers to nitpick thread?

 

Probably because some people instead of doing something with our data
(like big location based businesses) want to protect our data. I
personally like the do now, care later mentality.

 

If you scare the users of our data away by hiring lawyers to nitpick
over how OSM is represented in every which way then there's really no
point in collecting all this data, is there?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] State of the Map slides

2010-08-04 Thread andrzej zaborowski

On 25 July 2010 20:56, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote:
 My two talks for State of the Map
  * Tag Central - a schema for OpenStreetMap
  * What I learned making a real map on real paper for real people and real
 money
 are now available online at http://www.frankieandshadow.com/sotm10/

Hi,
I was also called to post something I promised during the SOTM, if you
remember my lightning talk (one before the last talk in the session),
and here it is:

The JOSM patch to revolutionise the user experience and beat Potlatch
in statistics.

(I hardcoded it into JOSM at that time but actually promised a plugin.
 It later turned out that there's no after-upload hook for plugins
so I'm just attaching the patch.  You also need to run wget
openstreetmap.pl/balrog/beep.wav -O ~/.josm/beep.wav)

Cheers
From c39182908789f38fd01e7a61d0b2333a6e474cad Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Andrzej Zaborowski balr...@gmail.com
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 21:20:38 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Change the JOSM user experience for ever!!

---
 .../josm/gui/io/UploadPrimitivesTask.java  |   21 
 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/core/src/org/openstreetmap/josm/gui/io/UploadPrimitivesTask.java b/core/src/org/openstreetmap/josm/gui/io/UploadPrimitivesTask.java
index bbed508..38ef82d 100644
--- a/core/src/org/openstreetmap/josm/gui/io/UploadPrimitivesTask.java
+++ b/core/src/org/openstreetmap/josm/gui/io/UploadPrimitivesTask.java
@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ import static org.openstreetmap.josm.tools.I18n.tr;
 import static org.openstreetmap.josm.tools.I18n.trn;
 
 import java.io.IOException;
+import java.io.File;
 import java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException;
 import java.util.HashSet;
 import java.util.logging.Logger;
@@ -14,6 +15,11 @@ import java.util.logging.Logger;
 import javax.swing.JOptionPane;
 import javax.swing.SwingUtilities;
 
+import javax.sound.sampled.AudioInputStream;
+import javax.sound.sampled.AudioSystem;
+import javax.sound.sampled.Clip;
+import javax.sound.sampled.DataLine;
+
 import org.openstreetmap.josm.Main;
 import org.openstreetmap.josm.data.APIDataSet;
 import org.openstreetmap.josm.data.osm.Changeset;
@@ -291,6 +297,7 @@ public class UploadPrimitivesTask extends  AbstractUploadTask {
 }
 if (uploadCancelled) return;
 cleanupAfterUpload();
+beep();
 }
 
 @Override protected void finish() {
@@ -360,4 +367,19 @@ public class UploadPrimitivesTask extends  AbstractUploadTask {
 }
 }
 }
+
+protected void beep() {
+try {
+AudioInputStream sound = AudioSystem.getAudioInputStream(
+new File(System.getProperty(user.home) +
+/.josm/beep.wav));
+DataLine.Info info = new DataLine.Info(
+Clip.class, sound.getFormat());
+Clip clip = (Clip) AudioSystem.getLine(info);
+clip.open(sound);
+clip.start();
+} catch (Exception e) {
+System.out.println(Beeping raised  + e.toString());
+}
+}
 }
-- 
1.5.3.4

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Marine taggine/OpenSeamap

2010-08-04 Thread Bernhard R. Fischer

On Wednesday 04 August 2010 12:58:13 Malcolm Herring wrote:
 Bernhard,
 
 The OpenSeaMap data model definitions are contained in three files:
 
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tonne/Datenmodell
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bake/Datenmodell
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Leuchtfeuer/Datenmodell
 
 You will note that all the key/value pairs are prefixed seamark: This is
 the namespace that the OpenSeaMap renderer uses. You may find nodes in the
 map that have other keys as well as seamark:-prefixed ones, but those keys
 are not parsed by OpenSeaMap.
 
 If you are interested in adding seamarks to the map, there is web-based
 editor and also a JOSM plugin. I am in the process of upgrading the plugin
  will check in the JAR as soon as I have finished testing it. In the
 meantime, you will find the existing ones on the openseamap.org web site.


Malcolm,

Thanks for your response, this is very helpful.
I know the Josm plugin and I tried to use it but it has very limited 
capabilities (e.g. I cannot add lighthouses).
Thus, I thought about building my own simple, script-based light tag 
generator.

What is the tag listed at the topic Render Hints 
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Leuchtfeuer/Datenmodell) good for?

seamark:light:#=*:colour:###,#:###,#:###

Isn't this a redundant definition of everything that is listed above it?
And what does the * stand for?

Best regards,
Bernhard


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

2010-08-04 Thread Liz

On Wed, 4 Aug 2010, Frederik Ramm wrote:
  Prolific editors don't tend to restrict their activity to a single 
  location.  This might be more widespread than anticipated.
 
 Prolific editors also tend not to leave the project in a huff.
No, they continue to make noise before they do.

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

[OSM-talk] Street Slide expands Street View functionality

2010-08-04 Thread simon

Fairly interesting improvement on the 'street view bubble' from Microsoft

http://flowingdata.com/2010/08/04/browse-street-side-with-microsoft-street-slide/

Simon


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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data


Frederik Ramm schrieb:

I doubt it, because there weren't any contributor terms before that.


I told him that before we had the contributor terms, there was a note on 
the signup page saying, in effect, that by signing up you agree that all 
data you upload is placed under CC-BY-SA.


Indeed. The history of this notes from rails:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Contributor_Terms/History

Documents about decision of data removal is still missing.

Mueck


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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

2010-08-04 Thread Liz

On Thu, 5 Aug 2010, Frederik Ramm wrote:
 Liz,
 
  Since 80n has mooted this deadline some time ago, and only now you
  consider it, of course you think it is quite short.
 
 80n first mentioned this deadline on 14th July, i.e. at the time that
 was six weeks.
 
 It was unclear to me what exactly the deadline was about; he wrote if
 there isn't a clear majority by September 1st then I'd say the
 relicensing has failed but a majority of whom, in what question?
 
 Did anybody - you, 80n, anybody? - think that we'd somehow, in these six
 weeks, be able to email every contributor, and ask them to relicense
 their content, chase up those that don't answer, and consolidate the
 results? - Personally I didn't even think about that deadline becasue it
 seemed quite absurd.
 
 Plus, I don't know if we need any kind of deadline at all.
 
 We can simply decide to re-license, then ask everyone to agree, then
 disallow contributions from people who haven't agreed. All the time, the
 planet is still under CC-BY-SA. Then we evaluate the losses. Say we find
 that 20% of data has not been relicensed. Ok, we start working on
 replacing that data, using the work of people who are ok with ODbL.
 After a while, only 10% of old data is still there. We continue, with
 the planet still under CC-BY-SA. After another while, we have brought
 down the losses to 1%, or 0.1%, or whatever. At that time we throw out
 the rest and publish the planet under ODbL.
 
 Who cares if that time is one year in the future? If it helps to keep
 our losses to a minimum - why not.
 
 As you know we have many people who don't fear the license change, but
 they fear data loss incurred by people not agreeing. In theory, the LWG
 could even set an arbitrary limit (e.g. we promise not to re-license
 the planet until global data loss is less than x%). That should then
 bring all those people on board who fear data loss. Then we just carry
 on as I described above, slowly eliminating the old data by replacing
 it with re-surveyed new data until we achieve what we want.
 
 Just a thought. Not necessarily bright. Might have its problems, might
 also work.
 
 Bye
 Frederik

Frederick i compliment you on actually thinking instead of holding firm in a 
particular viewpoint.
I have not changed my mind, as you still will have changed the licence by 
stealth and creep.
As you realise, in my jurisdiction, CC-by-SA is a better licence than ODbL, as 
it has been well checked and has government use.
In other jurisdictions the matter is different.

A previous idea of yours was different licences for different areas, and this 
has not been fully explored.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Revert requests in general

I'm slightly confused by all this talk about needing contractual
agreements with all the end users and the OSM-F, or needing to
identify Nearmap users to OSM-F.

OSM already has data in the database from other projects, which was
community sourced and licensed under various cc-by style licenses,
sure it was bulk imported, possibly only once, and the only difference
here is Nearmap will be bulk importing in real time, frankly they
should be applauded for taking a pro-active approach to try to deal
with faulty data themselves, rather than leaving it up to the OSM
community to deal with it later like other bulk imports have.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Revert requests in general

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 4:53 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:

 I'm slightly confused by all this talk about needing contractual
 agreements with all the end users and the OSM-F, or needing to
 identify Nearmap users to OSM-F.

 OSM already has data in the database from other projects, which was
 community sourced and licensed under various cc-by style licenses,
 sure it was bulk imported, possibly only once, and the only difference
 here is Nearmap will be bulk importing in real time, frankly they
 should be applauded for taking a pro-active approach to try to deal
 with faulty data themselves, rather than leaving it up to the OSM
 community to deal with it later like other bulk imports have.


I think the point that Frederik was trying to make was that this model
(bulk imported in real time) is not ideal. Ideally, we want the users
interacting directly with the OSM API rather than going through some
intermediary service.

We want this for at least two reasons:
1) So we can follow our standard procedure for blocking users that perform
unwanted edits (whether they be vandals, inappropriate imports, or unusable
sources).
2) So we can communicate with the end mapper (regarding license changes,
community events, etc.).

OAuth was implemented for exactly this purpose. The user creates an account
on OSM.org, NearMap's client authenticates with OAuth, and the user can make
edits. It sounds like NearMap has an issue with sending the user off to
OSM.org to generate a user account and trying to draw them back in to
complete the OAuth process.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Revert requests in general

On 5 August 2010 08:02, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
 I think the point that Frederik was trying to make was that this model
 (bulk imported in real time) is not ideal. Ideally, we want the users
 interacting directly with the OSM API rather than going through some
 intermediary service.

It's obvious that Nearmap, and others, want something simpler than
potlatch to allow people to add their home address or even just a
missing street name as a one off, sure this might get abused and it
will be up to Nearmap or others running these services to deal with
abuse or face the problem of having their account blocked until they
can. Making this process unnecessarily complicated is exactly the
reason why Nearmap is attempting this in the first place.

 We want this for at least two reasons:
 1) So we can follow our standard procedure for blocking users that perform
 unwanted edits (whether they be vandals, inappropriate imports, or unusable
 sources).

As above, this will be up to Nearmap to police, and to some extent
this should shift some burden from the OSM community onto others, with
paid staff, to monitor so others can get on and do the mapping, I see
this as a good thing!

 2) So we can communicate with the end mapper (regarding license changes,
 community events, etc.).

These users don't give a toss about licenses, they just want to fix a
mistake, such as a missing street name, why make things more
complicated than that?

 OAuth was implemented for exactly this purpose. The user creates an account
 on OSM.org, NearMap's client authenticates with OAuth, and the user can make
 edits. It sounds like NearMap has an issue with sending the user off to
 OSM.org to generate a user account and trying to draw them back in to
 complete the OAuth process.

It might have been, but that's authentication, not account creation,
which is the whole point Ben made in the first place, they don't want
to subject their users to multiple sets of terms and conditions and
confirming account creation and so on and so forth just to add a
street name, no wonder OSM is only for the geeks when the process has
to be so convoluted and overly engineered just to fix a simple mistake
like a missing street name.

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

2010-08-04 Thread Anthony

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
 We can simply decide to re-license, then ask everyone to agree, then
 disallow contributions from people who haven't agreed. All the time, the
 planet is still under CC-BY-SA. Then we evaluate the losses. Say we find
 that 20% of data has not been relicensed. Ok, we start working on replacing
 that data, using the work of people who are ok with ODbL. After a while,
 only 10% of old data is still there. We continue, with the planet still
 under CC-BY-SA. After another while, we have brought down the losses to 1%,
 or 0.1%, or whatever. At that time we throw out the rest and publish the
 planet under ODbL.

Presumably the CC-BY-SA data would be locked, so that it can't be
edited, only deleted and replaced?

I think 20% is a very optimistic estimate of how little data will not
be relicensed.  And keeping the CC-BY-SA data around while you're
making the ODbL data is just going to promote copying.  But otherwise,
seems like the best you can do.

 Who cares if that time is one year in the future?

Who cares if that time is never?

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

On 5 August 2010 08:25, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
 Who cares if that time is one year in the future?

 Who cares if that time is never?

I'm guessing those that are more pragmatic and would like to be not
redoing 20% or more of the work already mapped so they fork and move
on with their lives under a different project which sticks with
cc-by-sa license and no fear of loosing data in future when a small
minority tries to push through a PD change because of uncertainty of
contributor terms and so on...

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Revert requests in general

2010-08-04 Thread Richard Mann

As long as the user is traceable, contactable and blockable (by
Nearmap), and that user is clearly reminded not to copy data off other
maps, then I'd let them get on with it.

Richard

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 11:20 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 5 August 2010 08:02, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
 I think the point that Frederik was trying to make was that this model
 (bulk imported in real time) is not ideal. Ideally, we want the users
 interacting directly with the OSM API rather than going through some
 intermediary service.

 It's obvious that Nearmap, and others, want something simpler than
 potlatch to allow people to add their home address or even just a
 missing street name as a one off, sure this might get abused and it
 will be up to Nearmap or others running these services to deal with
 abuse or face the problem of having their account blocked until they
 can. Making this process unnecessarily complicated is exactly the
 reason why Nearmap is attempting this in the first place.

 We want this for at least two reasons:
 1) So we can follow our standard procedure for blocking users that perform
 unwanted edits (whether they be vandals, inappropriate imports, or unusable
 sources).

 As above, this will be up to Nearmap to police, and to some extent
 this should shift some burden from the OSM community onto others, with
 paid staff, to monitor so others can get on and do the mapping, I see
 this as a good thing!

 2) So we can communicate with the end mapper (regarding license changes,
 community events, etc.).

 These users don't give a toss about licenses, they just want to fix a
 mistake, such as a missing street name, why make things more
 complicated than that?

 OAuth was implemented for exactly this purpose. The user creates an account
 on OSM.org, NearMap's client authenticates with OAuth, and the user can make
 edits. It sounds like NearMap has an issue with sending the user off to
 OSM.org to generate a user account and trying to draw them back in to
 complete the OAuth process.

 It might have been, but that's authentication, not account creation,
 which is the whole point Ben made in the first place, they don't want
 to subject their users to multiple sets of terms and conditions and
 confirming account creation and so on and so forth just to add a
 street name, no wonder OSM is only for the geeks when the process has
 to be so convoluted and overly engineered just to fix a simple mistake
 like a missing street name.

 ___
 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] Revert requests in general

On 4 August 2010 16:27, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
 The major problem arises when, for example, a NearMap user starts correcting
 300 street names using Google Maps as a source
 (http://www.openstreetmap.org/blocks/10); or they make a whole bunch of
 fictitious corrections a la Charlie Sheen Highway
 (http://www.openstreetmap.org/blocks/19).

 There are procedures for when an actual OSM user does this - both
 organisational procedures and code written specially for the purpose. But
 it's a whole lot harder when there's an intermediary involved. We can't
 message the user to say this is against the terms  conditions you signed
 up to when they signed up to something else, and besides, they're behind a
 proxy so they're not messageable anyway.
Actually, you can message them, since they are us (NearMap).  Which
is my point; the edits come from us, and we're the ones taking on the
necessary responsibility.  This is us, as a company aiming to support
OSM, trying to remove barriers from contributions; that's going to
involve us in spending effort and money in doing so.  It's somewhat
frustrating to find this being immediately classified in the same box
as anonymous editing and/or vandalism.

Anyway; whatever the reasoning, it's clear that there are some who
object to this.  From our point of view, we need clarity on whether
something is acceptable or not (and unfortunately clarity is not
always possible to get from a mailing list).  I'm going to email the
Data Working Group, as per your (Richard's) helpful suggestion and see
if I can get a clear response on this.

Just noting the additional points made by Emilie and Andrzej; the
system we have built tags all edits with information identifying the
originating user (in our user database), exactly so that it's easy to
find all related edits.  We'd happily add any other necessary data to
changesets or edits.  We are also happy to provide ways to contact
users (though we've accepted that would be our responsibility to do
that if needed) and we're also able to (and prepared to) block users
from editing if need be.

Cheers
b

-- 
Ben Last
Development Manager (HyperWeb)
NearMap Pty Ltd

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Revert requests in general

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote:

 It's somewhat
 frustrating to find this being immediately classified in the same box
 as anonymous editing and/or vandalism.


I wanted to make it clear that I'm ecstatic to finally see a simple map
editor coming out. I look forward to seeing how it works.

The point I was trying to make is that we should figure out how to make this
whole process easier rather than try and shoehorn it in to the current
system. SteveC has talked about this several times: we should do everything
we can to speed up immediate feedback to users' edits while maintaining
quality and blocking spammy stuff.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Revert requests in general

On 5 August 2010 09:02, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
 So let's talk about making that process easier instead of using the current
 broken system.

Here we have Nearmap willing to spend time, money and other resources
to address the issue and you want to waste further resources to
discuss something no one else really seems to want to spend time and
effort doing something about it.

 Licensing is an important part of OSM, but I don't think I mentioned
 anything about licensing in my response...

You didn't even read the part of your email that I quoted?

 2) So we can communicate with the end mapper (regarding license changes, 
 community events, etc.).

That looks like licensing to me... As I said, the people likely to
make one off changes want to fix 1 maybe 2 errors, they don't care
about licenses and they don't want to become part of a community. So
this point is completely irrelevant.

The alternative is like someone else pointed out, Nearmap adopt an OSB
style system and then someone else has to update both the map data and
the bug to achieve the same goal, I did this earlier in the week for
some OSB reports and it's not much fun, in fact if there were a lot of
them I wouldn't bother and I doubt anyone else will long term either.

 Again, let's fix that problem instead of trying to wedge it into the current
 system.

I'm pretty sure this is inline with some of SteveC's ideas that
everyone was shouting down earlier this year, so what happened after
Steve stopped talking about it, pretty much nothing as far as I can
see.

If we want to keep growing I doubt we can exclude the efforts of
others, like Nearmap, we just don't have the resources, or the
foresight, to do something like this, there is too many nay sayers
like yourself that shouts down anything remotely beyond the status quo
and the existing user base.

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

Re: [Talk-de] Mehrere Geschäfte unter einer Hausnum mer

2010-08-04 Thread Andreas Neumann

Am 04.08.2010 06:23, schrieb Jan Tappenbeck:
 Ich kenne das Problem und löse es durch zwei Verfahren:
 * entweder habe ich das Gebäude gemappt. Dieses bekommt die Adressdaten
 und die Shops werden darin als Node oder Area platziert

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=69691968

 * oder, wenn ich das Gebäude nicht mappen kann/will, wird einfach eine
 virtuelle Area drumrum gezogen. Sprich ein Viereck, was die Adressdaten
 bekommt und darin kommen als nodes die Geschäfte.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=38450569
(gesamtes Haus = Wenzelsches Haus, Teil = Hsnr. 12 darin ein Cafe (und
früher die Touristeninfo))

MfG Andreas

-- 
Diese Nachricht wurde maschinell erstellt und ist daher ohne
Unterschrift gültig.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Bing integriert Openstreetmap-Karten - Klappt doch nur mit Silverlight

2010-08-04 Thread Andreas Labres

 On 03.08.10 23:17, Sven Geggus wrote:
 Ehrlich gesagt mag ich für das anzeigen von Onlinekarten keine
 dubiose proprietäre Software verwenden. HTML plus javascript ist mir
 da lieber.

Javascript ist ok und OpenLayers ist super und sicher das Richtige für OSM, ACK,
brauch'ma gar nicht zu diskutieren. Anderseits ist dieses Deep Zoom (das MS ja
auch nur von irgendwo aufgekauft hat) grade für solche riesige, gekachelte
Pixelbilder mit mehreren Zoomlevels gemacht und das Feeling beim Benutzen eben
schon nett.

 Dieses Silberdingens ist doch der Versuch von Microsoft
 Flash zu besiegen.

Naja, mehr als das, es ist der Versuch, die MS API Welt (und das Microsoft'sche
Verständnis von Rich Internet Apps) ins Internet zu kriegen... Aber das hier
zu diskutieren ist glaub' ich out of scope... ;)

/al

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

Re: [Talk-de] Mehrere Geschäfte unter einer Hausnummer

2010-08-04 Thread André Riedel

Am 3. August 2010 20:01 schrieb Jan Tappenbeck o...@tappenbeck.net:
 * irgendwie die Nodes zu einer Hausnummer gehörig zusammenfassen und dann
 eine Relation machen.

Ich nutze dafür die Relation type=site. Diese enthält die Adresse und
als Mitglieder alle Knoten (Nodes) und Flächen (Areas) der enthaltenen
Läden und anderen POIs sowie das zugehörige Gebäude.

André

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

Re: [Talk-de] Bing integriert Openstreetmap-Karten

2010-08-04 Thread godofglow


Ich finds echt schade dass das Routing leider nicht auf OSM basiert.
Wäre noch ne Klasse Erweiterung was Bing einführen könnte...

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Bing-integriert-Openstreetmap-Karten-tp5367374p5371552.html
Sent from the Germany mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-de] Skobbler Bugs endlich sinnvoll abzuarbeiten



Johann H. Addicks wrote:
 
 *Die Skobbler-Bugs sind endlich sinnvoll zu bearbeiten!*
 Denn unter Details gibt es jetzt auf der Karte
 - die geplante Routeegonnen hat.
 ...
 Damit lässt sich das Szenario eines Fehler wirklich gut nachvollziehen.
 
mach nix, wenn du das thema mal wieder aufwärmst ist ja ne gute sache,
wenn es - bei mir - funktionieren würde ;(
von 1-2 monaten hab ich die zusätzlichen informationen gesehen aber nun
nicht mehr. wer hat da ein problem? FF unter ubuntu oder skobbler?
kleiner tip ob es woanders mit ff 3.6.8 geht wäre nett.

lg
walter


-
if it's there and you can see it, it's REAL
if it's there and you can't see it, it's TRANSPARENT 
if it's not there and you can see it, it's VIRTUAL
if it's not there and you can't see it, it's GONE
  Roy Wilks,
1983
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Skobbler-Bugs-endlich-sinnvoll-abzuarbeiten-tp5370440p5371880.html
Sent from the Germany mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-de] Skobbler Bugs endlich sinnvoll abzuarbeiten

2010-08-04 Thread Claudius


Am 04.08.2010 12:10, Walter Nordmann:



Johann H. Addicks wrote:


*Die Skobbler-Bugs sind endlich sinnvoll zu bearbeiten!*
Denn unter Details gibt es jetzt auf der Karte
- die geplante Routeegonnen hat.
...
Damit lässt sich das Szenario eines Fehler wirklich gut nachvollziehen.


mach nix, wenn du das thema mal wieder aufwärmst ist ja ne gute sache,
wenn es - bei mir - funktionieren würde ;(
von 1-2 monaten hab ich die zusätzlichen informationen gesehen aber nun
nicht mehr. wer hat da ein problem? FF unter ubuntu oder skobbler?
kleiner tip ob es woanders mit ff 3.6.8 geht wäre nett.


Die erweiterten Fehlermeldungen werden nicht rückwirkend bei älteren 
Fehlermeldungen angezeigt, sondern nur bei neu mit der aktualisierten 
Skobbler-Mobilversion erstellten.


Claudius


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

Re: [Talk-de] Skobbler Bugs endlich sinnvoll abzuarbeiten

2010-08-04 Thread Thomas Zimmermann

Am Mittwoch 04 August 2010, 12:10:42 schrieb Walter Nordmann:
 mach nix, wenn du das thema mal wieder aufwärmst ist ja ne gute sache,
 wenn es - bei mir - funktionieren würde ;(
 von 1-2 monaten hab ich die zusätzlichen informationen gesehen aber nun
 nicht mehr. wer hat da ein problem? FF unter ubuntu oder skobbler?
 kleiner tip ob es woanders mit ff 3.6.8 geht wäre nett.
 
 lg
 walter

Bei mir gehts mit iceweasle 3.6.7. Allerdings gibt es nicht für alle Bugs 
diese Zusatzinformationen.

Hier sind z.B. welche: http://beta.skobbler.de/osmbugs/detail/sko-23425
Hier aber nicht: http://beta.skobbler.de/osmbugs/detail/sko-23591

Gruß
Thomas

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

[Talk-de] Vorsicht! Bissiger Hund (auf Rad- und Wanderrouten)

2010-08-04 Thread Martin Czarkowski


 Hi,

beim letzten Mapper-Treffen 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Landshut unserer Landshuter Gruppe, 
hat sich uns die Frage gestellt, wie wir auf der OSM-Karte einen 
bissigen Hund markieren können.
Es gibt oft Rad- und Wanderrouten die durch Bauernhöfe und Einöden/ 
Weile führen, dort wachen sehr oft große und kleine Hunde über die 
Grundstücke, dann heißt es Rennen was das Zeug hält.


Habt Ihr Vorschläge wie so was getagged werden sollte? Im Renderer 
sollten die Hinweise dann natürlich auch zu sehen sein.


Gruß
Martin [OSM-User: Czmartin]
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Mehrere Geschäfte unter einer Hausnummer

2010-08-04 Thread Jan Tappenbeck


Am 04.08.2010 09:28, schrieb André Riedel:

Am 3. August 2010 20:01 schrieb Jan Tappenbecko...@tappenbeck.net:

* irgendwie die Nodes zu einer Hausnummer gehörig zusammenfassen und dann
eine Relation machen.


Ich nutze dafür die Relation type=site. Diese enthält die Adresse und
als Mitglieder alle Knoten (Nodes) und Flächen (Areas) der enthaltenen
Läden und anderen POIs sowie das zugehörige Gebäude.

André

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


Moin !

wenn ich das richtig sehe dann sind wieder beide Varianten vertreten.

Es wäre schön, wenn sich noch einige mehr äußern würden damit man etwas 
mehr Einheitlichkeit bekäme.


Ich würde, wenn es die Karten nicht so belasten würde für die Variante - 
für jeden Node eine Adresse - sein. Das wäre am einfachsten auch für die 
Gelegenheitsmapper zu realisieren und später könnte dann sichlich 
automatisch eine Relationsgenerierung erfolgen.


Gruß Jan :-)


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

Re: [Talk-de] Vorsicht! Bissiger Hund (auf Rad- und Wanderrouten)


Martin Czarkowski schrieb:
Es gibt oft Rad- und Wanderrouten die durch Bauernhöfe und Einöden/ 
Weile führen, dort wachen sehr oft große und kleine Hunde über die 
Grundstücke, dann heißt es Rennen was das Zeug hält.


Habt Ihr Vorschläge wie so was getagged werden sollte? 


minspeed=50
Haftpflichtdestierhalters=xy AG
Handyempfang=ja/nein
Letztetollwutimpfungdeshundes=2009-12-12
... ;-)

Wenn er zurecht dort wacht:
access=private

Gruß Mueck


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

Re: [Talk-de] Vorsicht! Bissiger Hund (auf Rad- und Wanderrouten)

2010-08-04 Thread André Joost


Am 04.08.10 12:45, schrieb Martin Czarkowski:

Hi,

beim letzten Mapper-Treffen
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Landshut unserer Landshuter Gruppe,
hat sich uns die Frage gestellt, wie wir auf der OSM-Karte einen
bissigen Hund markieren können.
Es gibt oft Rad- und Wanderrouten die durch Bauernhöfe und Einöden/
Weile führen, dort wachen sehr oft große und kleine Hunde über die
Grundstücke, dann heißt es Rennen was das Zeug hält.

Habt Ihr Vorschläge wie so was getagged werden sollte? Im Renderer
sollten die Hinweise dann natürlich auch zu sehen sein.



hazard=dog

Wobei mir die Hunde mit Heerchen an der Leine beim radfahren mindestens 
ebenso suspekt sind ;-)


Gruß,
André Joost


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

Re: [Talk-de] Max. Speed für highway = servi ce?


Garry schrieb:
OK, wenn es so gemeint wäre hätte man die Autobahn nicht explizit 
erwähnen müssen..


Eben!

Wenn der Parkplatz also zur Autobahn zählt darf man dort weder halten, 
noch aussteigen, noch wenden/Rückwärtsfahren...


Das wurde an anderer Stelle auch eingeworfen.
Das P-Schild scheint des Rätsels Lösung zu sein ...
So ungefähr auch der StVO-Kommentar von Bouska von 1999
mit Verweis auf ein Urteil.

Gruß Mueck


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

Re: [Talk-de] Vorsicht! Bissiger Hund (auf Rad- und Wanderrouten)

2010-08-04 Thread Ulf Lamping


Am 04.08.2010 13:00, schrieb André Joost:

Wobei mir die Hunde mit Heerchen an der Leine beim radfahren mindestens
ebenso suspekt sind ;-)


Ach, die wollen doch nur spielen ;-)

Gruß, ULFL

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

Re: [Talk-de] Vorsicht! Bissiger Hund (auf Rad- und Wanderrouten)

2010-08-04 Thread Martin Czarkowski



Am 04.08.2010 12:59, schrieb Heiko Jacobs:

Wenn er zurecht dort wacht:
access=private 
Wie schon geschrieben, die Wege sind beschildert und führen durch die 
Grundstücke, als kein access=private


Gruß Martin

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

Re: [Talk-de] Vorsicht! Bissiger Hund (auf Rad- und Wanderrouten)

2010-08-04 Thread Jacques Nietsch


Hallo,
Am 04.08.2010, 13:00 Uhr, schrieb André Joost andre+jo...@nurfuerspam.de:


...
hazard=dog


Gruß,
André Joost


Die Eigenschaft muss es sowohl für Node und Way geben.
Bei meinen Motorrollerfahrten auf Gomera bin ich kilometerlang von
Hund zu Hund durchgereicht worden.
Hier sollte man vielleicht den Begriff 'Abschnittshund' einführen.

Jacques ;)


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

Re: [Talk-de] Vorsicht! Bissiger Hund (auf Rad- und Wanderrouten)

2010-08-04 Thread bundesrainer

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Am 04.08.2010 13:34, schrieb Martin Czarkowski:
 
 Am 04.08.2010 12:59, schrieb Heiko Jacobs:
 Wenn er zurecht dort wacht:
 access=private 
 Wie schon geschrieben, die Wege sind beschildert und führen durch die
 Grundstücke, als kein access=private

Wenn das private Grundstücke sind, sollten sie mit access=permissive
getaggt werden.
Es gibt bei mir in der Nähe ein paar private Wege, über die Wanderwege
laufen. Manchmal findet man ein Schild Benutzung auf eigene Gefahr
und die Wege sind dann auch nur dürftig bis gar nicht gepflegt.

Beste Grüße,
Rainer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMWViXAAoJEPT/XJzV1tNzyM4IAJSRuagff7IqdSNboVH2UK7q
z/UfZsQr+LwEynyaeKH7UqKFWowRC4Jwlzn5Xc6cjGrD83+fbKaQeesavlS+2drg
FgbltV1dF6+M0Rmu1f1b2gjeAXNeSof5IoAhEm9Mdws3C0n1f4sRVGz5QfGPJ93i
lY2xoRwN4A65qrWdlfPCCZzZHnJmdDXnVmAfMsi9nZBBAVckjwkesBJ1xqGw4pxU
NyLHD8CUUSJmXCyzuKzzo+3TV1Pn8zPoYtA+AenggiucfseFjJlT+AscmV0Rg4EO
Fm5GiCd+copzj50bNG95DmmuFWfYGa5bBEKhXxGp//2YbpTJFz4+p7Mb5J16KaU=
=chqP
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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

Re: [Talk-de] Skobbler Bugs endlich sinnvoll abzuarbeiten



Claudius Henrichs wrote:
 
 Die erweiterten Fehlermeldungen werden nicht rückwirkend bei älteren 
 Fehlermeldungen angezeigt, sondern nur bei neu mit der aktualisierten 
 Skobbler-Mobilversion erstellten.
tnx, das wars. 
der user muss seine software upgraden - alles klar
danke
walter


-
if it's there and you can see it, it's REAL
if it's there and you can't see it, it's TRANSPARENT 
if it's not there and you can see it, it's VIRTUAL
if it's not there and you can't see it, it's GONE
  Roy Wilks,
1983
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Skobbler-Bugs-endlich-sinnvoll-abzuarbeiten-tp5370440p5372277.html
Sent from the Germany mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

[Talk-de] frage zu schild


hi, hat einer ne ahnung, was dieses schild bedeutet?
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/file/n5372657/Screenshot-1.png 

gruss
walter

-
if it's there and you can see it, it's REAL
if it's there and you can't see it, it's TRANSPARENT 
if it's not there and you can see it, it's VIRTUAL
if it's not there and you can't see it, it's GONE
  Roy Wilks,
1983
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/frage-zu-schild-tp5372657p5372657.html
Sent from the Germany mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-de] frage zu schild

2010-08-04 Thread bernhard zwischenbrugger


hi

hi, hat einer ne ahnung, was dieses schild bedeutet?
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/file/n5372657/Screenshot-1.png

   

Das ist ein UFO Landeplatz.

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

Re: [Talk-de] Vorsicht! Bissiger Hund (auf Rad- und Wanderrouten)

2010-08-04 Thread malenki

Martin Czarkowski schrieb:

Es gibt oft Rad- und Wanderrouten die durch Bauernhöfe und Einöden/ 
Weile führen, dort wachen sehr oft große und kleine Hunde über die 
Grundstücke, dann heißt es Rennen was das Zeug hält.

Um den Jagdinstinkt der möchtegern-Wölfe zu animieren? Auf meinen
Radtouren half bisher immer folgendes (in dieser Reihenfolge):
*Abruptes Bremsen
*Anbrüllen (Den Vierbeiner. Agressive Viecher mit Herrchen dran/dabei
   hatte ich noch ned)
*Steine (oder was grad zur Hand ist) werfen (evtl. schon vor dem Bremsen
 danach Ausschau halten)

Spätestens nach Punkt drei waren alle überzeugt, dass ich nicht
schmecke.

hth
malenki



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

[Talk-de] Richtungsschilder an Bäumen

2010-08-04 Thread Kilian Marquardt

Hallo,
ich wollte mal wissen, wie und ob man Richtungsschilder an Bäumen
einträgt. Solche Schilder wie zum Beispiel hier
(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/302122/Richtungsschild.JPG), teilweise auch
ohne Kilometerangabe. Sollten solche Schilder eingetragen werden und
wenn, wie?

Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Kilian Marquardt

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

Re: [Talk-de] Vorsicht! Bissiger Hund (auf Rad- und Wanderrouten)

2010-08-04 Thread Jonas Stein

 Es gibt oft Rad- und Wanderrouten die durch Bauernhöfe und Einöden/ 
 Weile führen, dort wachen sehr oft große und kleine Hunde über die 
 Grundstücke, dann heißt es Rennen was das Zeug hält.

 Habt Ihr Vorschläge wie so was getagged werden sollte? Im Renderer 
 sollten die Hinweise dann natürlich auch zu sehen sein.

Das ist nicht Kartentauglich, trotzdem stellt die Situation ein 
Problem dar, die man mit Betreiber des Wanderwegs besprechen sollte.

Vielleicht ist der Wanderweg auch nicht mehr so wie beschildert und
die Leute laufen durchs Grundstueck, was der Bauer mit seinem Wachhund
verhindern moechte.

Also wenn, dann am ehesten 
access=private, note=Wachhund taggen.

Gruesse,

-- 
Jonas Stein n...@jonasstein.de


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

Re: [Talk-de] frage zu schild