Re: [Talk-transit] Summary of Public Transport Proposal Criticism - a real example from Zürich
On 01/27/2011 07:20 AM, Dominik Mahrer (Teddy) wrote: On 01/26/2011 08:40 PM, Michał Borsuk wrote: The bus service number 10 in Wintherthur is the most simple case you can have. Absolutely no exceptions. See timetables of the two terminal stations: So there is yet another line 10 mixed at the same index. Interesting approach taken at HaCon, indeed. Line 10 Zürich: line# relation# # of runs 10 120 56 10 121 12 10 122 12 10 123 1 10 124 50 10 125 6 10 126 1 Interesting! Indeed. How do you imagine to build routing using present, or proposed, data structures? And where do they start and end? That's beyond my point, which was to show that complication of data structures in OSM is unnecessary, because even at the level you are proposing, adding routing information won't be possible. And again: Why can't you accept, that others want to map something more in detail then you do? I don't ever remember expressing how I would like to map, because I am not speaking about my personal preferences (unlike many people here), but about what in my opinion is good for the OSM and its future. I do not understand why so many people want to turn OSM into their personal playground, and do not think about new users, for whom learning curve is important. Let's just get down to differences, I say your proposal is too difficult. I've already spoken well about its data integrity, but new users don't care about it. We need something that is as good as yours in data integrity, and as easy to grasp as my proposals. Teddych LMB ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] Summary of Public Transport Proposal Criticism - a real example from Zürich
On 01/27/2011 06:56 PM, ant wrote: Hi, On 27.01.2011 10:49, Richard Mann wrote: Thanks, Richard. I think we've got three broad decisions: 1) Whether the use of stop area / group relations should be a) widespread b) exceptional b b, ideally with a definition to what cases those exceptions are. 2) Whether route relations should a) contain all the variants in one relation, with no attempt at ordering, just stops identified as forward/backward b) try to match all the individual stop-sets that you might find in a timetable c) contain an ordered set of ways/stops, in whatever fashion the mapper feels appropriate b (by the way: how would (a) work in the case of a ring line?) a or b For ring or spoon-shaped lines, select an arbitrary terminus/termini. IMHO It's easier to do an exception for the occasional ring line, than enforce more difficult data structures on mappers (although I personally dislike roles, and would love to see them improved). 3) Whether there should be a new public_transport key, to try to clarify the bus_stop/tram_stop distinction a) aim to move tram_stops to alongside the track, and put something else (tram_stop_group / tram_station?) on the track b) aim to move bus_stops onto the road, and put something else (platform?) alongside c) encourage the use of platforms on tram systems, and use those in the relation instead of tram_stop d) add a new public_transport key, so that public_transport=platform can be used for everything c and d (we shouldn't redefine tags that are in million-times use!) c. with pole *or* platform. Ideally there would be some degree of compatibility between tram stops and bus stops, i.e. a pair of tags on each side that are at least compatible to a degree. cheers ant Greetings, LMB ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] NEW Proposed Feature
On 01/28/2011 02:45 PM, Jo wrote: Yes that's one option. I'm a bit reluctant to put in separate relations for each direction unless someone actually gives me a compelling reason to do so. I already have some ways with more than 20 relations, and I don't really want to double that number without good reason. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.85106lon=4.75651zoom=17layers=M http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.85106lon=4.75651zoom=17layers=M Lijn 7 uses Krijkelberg twice. Bus stop Sint-Kamillus is served by both directions. This can be mapped without ambiguity if there is one relation for each direction. Do we need such level of details if we can't present it to the user at present? http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.881607lon=4.715zoom=18layers=M http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.881607lon=4.715zoom=18layers=M Bus station in Leuven. It's perfectly clear where the buses will travel. Not so if both directions are in only one relation. Is the improvement worth the extra time? Sure it would be possible to program something to process a 1 route relation, but it would not be straightforward. Such situations are quite exceptional. I would know, because I've mapped a mixed urban-suburban area, where some lines are the perfect A-to-B straight lines, and some are pretty crazy (spoon shape is the least strange of all). So: how about two relations per line are to be optional in cases where one relation does not successfully explain the route? Most importantly though, with one route relation per direction, it's a whole lot easier for the mappers to check that the relation is continuous. At the cost of extra time to enter and maintain, and confusion (it's not how it is on printed maps!). I've managed to check continuity with one route, and if you're worried about continuity in the aspect of future routing, then it's irrelevant - routing software does not follow the route itself, but its bus stops. I am a die-hard opponent of relation-per-direction, but please convince me that it is really worth it. As far as routes go that have a shorter itinerary during the week, I wouldn't make an extra sets of relations for those. Simply put the longest road traveled in both relations. Sure, that's the way to go, but what is your proposal for routes with different paths? I have at least 2 such routes, each has 4 variants. I have so far mapped them as one relation, but this is suboptimal. Four relations are not much better, and if I were to apply one relation per direction, I'd have eight. That's an overkill. Jo LMB ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] NEW Proposed Feature
Potlatch 2 includes a display of the ways/nodes in order, and you can move them about, but it doesn't currently tell you anything about the member, except the id and the role (so it's pretty much a list of random numbers). I've raised a ticket requesting at least the member's name to be displayed, maybe also the distance from the first member (which would let you put them in rough order, unless your route doubles back on itself). If we had something like that then I think ordered relations would at last be practical in Potlatch. Richard ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] NEW Proposed Feature
2011/2/2 Michał Borsuk michal.bor...@gmail.com: On 01/28/2011 02:45 PM, Jo wrote: Yes that's one option. I'm a bit reluctant to put in separate relations for each direction unless someone actually gives me a compelling reason to do so. I already have some ways with more than 20 relations, and I don't really want to double that number without good reason. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.85106lon=4.75651zoom=17layers=M http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.85106lon=4.75651zoom=17layers=M Lijn 7 uses Krijkelberg twice. Bus stop Sint-Kamillus is served by both directions. This can be mapped without ambiguity if there is one relation for each direction. Do we need such level of details if we can't present it to the user at present? We're mapping for the future. öpnvkarte is not functioning anymore anyway at present, so the only way of viewing routes is in an editor like JOSM. What I mean, is that at present we can't present anything to the user. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.881607lon=4.715zoom=18layers=M http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.881607lon=4.715zoom=18layers=M Bus station in Leuven. It's perfectly clear where the buses will travel. Not so if both directions are in only one relation. Is the improvement worth the extra time? That's something everyone will have to weigh for themselves. Sure it would be possible to program something to process a 1 route relation, but it would not be straightforward. Such situations are quite exceptional. I would know, because I've mapped a mixed urban-suburban area, where some lines are the perfect A-to-B straight lines, and some are pretty crazy (spoon shape is the least strange of all). Not all that exceptional, over here it seems to happen in 5-10% of all bus routes I'm mapping. Buses making loops and spoons, that is. So: how about two relations per line are to be optional in cases where one relation does not successfully explain the route? Sounds fair. Maybe we should have a tag to indicate which approach was used. paradigm=allinoneroute or paradigm=onerouteperdirection I'm sure someone will come up with better names. Most importantly though, with one route relation per direction, it's a whole lot easier for the mappers to check that the relation is continuous. At the cost of extra time to enter and maintain, and confusion (it's not how it is on printed maps!). Many things in OSM are not like in printed maps, since a printed map is only one of the possible goals. For instance people also want to create drawings of sequences of stops. I've managed to check continuity with one route, and if you're worried about continuity in the aspect of future routing, then it's irrelevant - routing software does not follow the route itself, but its bus stops. I am a die-hard opponent of relation-per-direction, but please convince me that it is really worth it. If the examples I've presented a few days ago can't convince you, I'm afraid nothing will, so 'I rest my case' :-) As far as routes go that have a shorter itinerary during the week, I wouldn't make an extra sets of relations for those. Simply put the longest road traveled in both relations. Sure, that's the way to go, but what is your proposal for routes with different paths? I have at least 2 such routes, each has 4 variants. I have so far mapped them as one relation, but this is suboptimal. Four relations are not much better, and if I were to apply one relation per direction, I'd have eight. That's an overkill. I guess I'm fortunate our PT company assigns a new ref number when such a situation occurs. This means there are many routes which share large parts of their paths... So the number of relations doesn't become less, but since the ref number is different, we don't have another choice but to create separate relations for these cases. Cheers, Jo ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] NEW Proposed Feature
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Jo winfi...@gmail.com wrote: Is it possible to add a way to a relation twice with Potlatch? And is it possible to show that 1 way is part of a relation multiple times? Yes. Oxford Bus route 9 now has a certain section of the Green Road roundabout twice. Richard ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] Summary of Public Transport Proposal Criticism - a real example from Zürich
On 02.02.2011 13:04, Michał Borsuk wrote: Let's just get down to differences, I say your proposal is too difficult. I've already spoken well about its data integrity, but new users don't care about it. We need something that is as good as yours in data integrity, and as easy to grasp as my proposals. Yours is good for beginners. And yours is also good for a white area mapper. Advanced mappers are not happy with it. In an every dog shit area a mapper wants to map with a higher resolution then highway=bus_stop can provide. And an every dog shit mapper is possibly interested in mapping detailed geo-based meta information like routes. I tried to reduce my proposal to allow simpler cases. stop_area_group has been completely removed. A lot is now optional (stop_position, platform, stop_area, route_master). So it should be possible for beginners to learn step-by-step what they want/need. And one relation per direction is easier to explain then forward/backward roles. And I do not think we (mappers) can replace an existing public transport routing solution like hafas (too complex and too dynamic). The maximum possible in my opinion is to import this data into OSM. But with a single route relation solution I do not see such a solution. Teddych ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] Summary of Public Transport Proposal Criticism - a real example from Zürich
On 02/03/2011 12:40 AM, Richard Mann wrote: On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 11:10 PM, Michael von Glasow mich...@vonglasow.com wrote: Hence, in most cases the extra node on the way is what I call courtesy tagging - it makes things easier for the renderer (less preprocessing) but can be automated. I would tend towards manual tagging only in those cases in which heuristics are likely to produce incorrect or unpredictable results (e.g. bus stop in the middle between two carriageways). I agree - it's courtesy tagging, but since the node is already there, it seems fairly harmless to tag it with something if/when people move railway=tram_stop to a node beside the way. It doesn't introduce complexity in the way that relations do. There is already a tag for this: public_transport=stop_position. Used 27'000 times in OSM. And you are right, in many (but not all) cases it is courtesy tagging. Therefore I have changed it in my proposal to optional. I'm quite happy if people want to leave tram_stop on the track for the moment. It's not ideal in terms of pedestrian routing, but that can wait. I do not think it is a good idea to redefine thousands of used railway=tram_stop. Teddych ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [talk-ph] QC Scout Area Mapping Party on February 12!
I propose we dedicate time/session for a bing tracing tutorial (how to calibrate/re-align imagery, etc.) On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 12:31 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: Trace away! We can always correct things with data from on the ground. :-) On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:58 PM, maning sambale emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com wrote: Is bing recent enough for tracing building in this area? On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: Hi guys, Our next Mapping Party will be on February 12, 2011, Saturday and we will be tackling the Quezon City Scout Area. This is basically the area bounded by Quezon Avenue, EDSA, and Diliman Creek, and covers the barangays South Triangle, Paligsahan, Laging Handa, Sacred Heart, Kamuning, Obrero, and Roxas. Wiki page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=QC_Scout_Area_Mapping_Party Come and join! =) Eugene (osm:seav) ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph -- cheers, maning -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] QC Scout Area Mapping Party on February 12!
Sound good to me. I say we do it during the afternoon meetup. :-) Anyway, here are my proposed meet-up places: Morning: McDo Timog http://osm.org/go/4zhTAkYwJ-?m Afternoon: Baang Coffee (free Wi-Fi!) http://osm.org/go/4zhSV_EQN--?m On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 6:07 PM, maning sambale emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com wrote: I propose we dedicate time/session for a bing tracing tutorial (how to calibrate/re-align imagery, etc.) On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 12:31 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: Trace away! We can always correct things with data from on the ground. :-) On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:58 PM, maning sambale emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com wrote: Is bing recent enough for tracing building in this area? On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: Hi guys, Our next Mapping Party will be on February 12, 2011, Saturday and we will be tackling the Quezon City Scout Area. This is basically the area bounded by Quezon Avenue, EDSA, and Diliman Creek, and covers the barangays South Triangle, Paligsahan, Laging Handa, Sacred Heart, Kamuning, Obrero, and Roxas. Wiki page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=QC_Scout_Area_Mapping_Party Come and join! =) Eugene (osm:seav) ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph -- cheers, maning -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- -- http://vaes9.codedgraphic.com ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] QC Scout Area Mapping Party on February 12!
OK. So for those who can't attend the full day mapping can participate in the bing session. On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: Sound good to me. I say we do it during the afternoon meetup. :-) Anyway, here are my proposed meet-up places: Morning: McDo Timog http://osm.org/go/4zhTAkYwJ-?m Afternoon: Baang Coffee (free Wi-Fi!) http://osm.org/go/4zhSV_EQN--?m On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 6:07 PM, maning sambale emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com wrote: I propose we dedicate time/session for a bing tracing tutorial (how to calibrate/re-align imagery, etc.) On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 12:31 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: Trace away! We can always correct things with data from on the ground. :-) On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:58 PM, maning sambale emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com wrote: Is bing recent enough for tracing building in this area? On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: Hi guys, Our next Mapping Party will be on February 12, 2011, Saturday and we will be tackling the Quezon City Scout Area. This is basically the area bounded by Quezon Avenue, EDSA, and Diliman Creek, and covers the barangays South Triangle, Paligsahan, Laging Handa, Sacred Heart, Kamuning, Obrero, and Roxas. Wiki page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=QC_Scout_Area_Mapping_Party Come and join! =) Eugene (osm:seav) ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph -- cheers, maning -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- -- http://vaes9.codedgraphic.com -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
2011/2/1 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: I know that at OSM we always used to say: If the layers are separable then you can have different licenses on each; if not, then not. Of course this would result in a map that can *not* be copied under CC-BY-SA because it is virtually impossible to make a copy and leave out the foreign data that has been printed on top. I agree with you that such a map would probably have to be considered produced work and not collective, but IANAL. At least our intentions with cc-by-sa are that such a work would become completely cc-by-sa (or can't be produced if this is not possible), isn't that the whole point with the desired viral aspect? cheers, Martin ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-legal-talk] Coloriuris compatibility
Hi, I have just left a meeting with representatives of my local concil (Zaragoza, a Spanish city with 700.000 inhabitants). They have the willing to provide transparency and open data to its citizens, however, I have not been able to make a clear agreement to license their data under CC-BY-SAODBL. They have their own custom license which is equivalent in spirit (free usage even commercial, attribution) and have even more relaxed terms, but I am afraid that it may not be compatible with current OSM license(s). Upon asked for explicit permission, they answered that their lawyers had to have a look at the details of our license. Conversations are still open. The license is this one [0]. Sorry, it is only in Spanish, but a copy and paste to Google translate will provide you something more or less readable. Another odd thing is that every data set can only be downloaded, separately, after having signed that you are ok with the license. I do not know who should be the entity to sign it from our part, in case it would be useful (the Spanish chapter, the OSMF?). I would not bother you with the problems with this concrete import I am trying to negotiate if it weren't because this Coloriouris licenses[1], although not so popular as CCs, are being used for other potential data sources both in Spain and Latin America. In this case, for example, it is vector data (some of it, real time!), of all services of one of the largest municipalities in Spain. Any help or advice about license compatibility or how to deal with this subject will be grateful, [0] https://www.coloriuris.net/risp-ayto-zaragoza/contenido/104 [1] http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coloriuris -- Jynus ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Jonathan Harley j...@spiffymap.net wrote: On 02/02/11 16:15, Anthony wrote: What is meant by content is unmodified? Obviously the printed base map is going to be modified from the original database. So under your interpretation, the part about the content being unmodified either prohibits everything, or allows everything. Or is there some other interpretation for content is unmodified that you can think of? I have assumed it refers to the geodata, which is unmodified unless you start changing the latitudes and longitudes of points. That's the only reading I can think of that makes any sense of the phrase unmodified form in the context of map data (in fact, of any kind of data). It couldn't possibly refer to the geodata, because the license is usable for more than just geodata. My take is that it refers to the separate and independent work. So that means you can make any modifications you want, so long as those modifications are CC-BY-SA. These modifications are made under the clause allowing you to make derivative works, not under the clause allowing you to use the work as part of a collection. It's only when you start adding non-CC-BY-SA works to the collection that you no longer can make modifications. Clearly no rendering of any map is going to be unmodified in the sense of having identical sequences of 0s and 1s to the database, in which case there could be no such thing as a collective work based on a database, ever. Is that what you mean by prohibits everything or allows everything? Yes. It seems clear to me that the CC licenses are attempting to allow stuff but impose conditions, not to prohibit everything. I agree, and that's why I think my interpretation of what separate and independent means is correct. I think you have to look at the requirements of separate, independent, and unmodified together as a whole, not as independent requirements. CC-BY-SA 3.0 is more clear on this, though you could still argue that it has the same loophole. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On 02/02/2011 05:13 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: I think that in those examples, there was the concept of interaction and co-dependency - the question of does the overlaid stuff work without the map. So if you carefully place your photo or illustration at a certain point in the map, and your photo or illustration would lose its meaning without the map, then it is clearly a derived work; but if your photo just sits there and could just as well sit there without the map, then it could be called a collection. This is not an interpretation I necessarily share and I'm not sure about the exact wording but it has something going for it. Combining image elements (that may or may not embody data) is collage. Collage produces derivative works, not collective works: http://www.google.com/search?q=collage+derivative+work Individual photos over a map are like individual samples over a backing beat (IANAL, TINLA). People haven't had much luck arguing that the latter doesn't create a derivative work. I don't think this interpretation is particularly strict. There have indeed been several people requesting that my OSM book be fully CC-BY-SA'ed because it contains OSM illustrations on some pages - *That* I call a strict reading (and one I clearly don't share). Wikipedia would agree with you. :-) - Rob. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: On 02/02/11 18:00, Peter Miller wrote: And this one showing the location of the 'Trafford Law Centre' unless the photo was also on a free license or moved so as not to obscure the map. http://www.traffordlawcentre.org.uk/contact_us/contact.htm This is a funny example because you could conceivably cut out a corner from the map, then place the image where it is now... it is just about conceivable to make a copy of this map without copying the image so maybe this could work as a collection. I think so. The main point that I would argue is that the modification of cutting out a corner is independent from the image. I suppose you could argue the same if you cut out holes from an OSM map, without knowing what you were going to put there, and then laid in copyrightable non-CC-BY-SA elements into the holes. Maybe technically legal, but definitely a subversion of the spirit of the license. How about this map of the Isle of White overlaid with illustrations? http://www.steve.shalfleet.net/ Certainly the whole map needs to by CC-BY-SA. We did have some pages with examples about this on our wiki, years ago. I remember the example was a tourist guide with maps and photos, and there were several cases where maps and photos (and text) were sometimes superimposed, sometimes side-by-side, and the whole thing was commented as to what is derived and what is collected. I cannot find it now, however. I think that in those examples, there was the concept of interaction and co-dependency - the question of does the overlaid stuff work without the map. So if you carefully place your photo or illustration at a certain point in the map, and your photo or illustration would lose its meaning without the map, then it is clearly a derived work; but if your photo just sits there and could just as well sit there without the map, then it could be called a collection. This is not an interpretation I necessarily share and I'm not sure about the exact wording but it has something going for it. Indeed anything overlaid on the map, or any other ccbysa image or photograph would need to be on an open license if the strict interpretation was used. I don't think this interpretation is particularly strict. There have indeed been several people requesting that my OSM book be fully CC-BY-SA'ed because it contains OSM illustrations on some pages - *That* I call a strict reading (and one I clearly don't share). Bye Frederik ___ 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] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On 02/02/11 17:05, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Jonathan Harley wrote: Clearly no rendering of any map is going to be unmodified in the sense of having identical sequences of 0s and 1s to the database, in which case there could be no such thing as a collective work based on a database, ever. For print, yes, that's about the size of it. I don't see what print's got to do with it. Any rendering, whether to paper or to a screen, changes the bits used; if you take that as the meaning of modified, then there could be no unmodified renderings of any database, which means in turn that there could be no collective works, so the conditions about being separate and independent would be irrelevant. But I don't think that rendered is a sensible meaning of modified in this context, any more than changing the font or line length would be considered modifying a text. Jonathan. -- Jonathan Harley: Managing Director : SpiffyMap Ltd Email: m...@spiffymap.com Phone: 0845 313 8457 www.spiffymap.com Post: The Venture Centre, Sir William Lyons Road, Coventry CV4 7EZ ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Jonathan Harley j...@spiffymap.net wrote: On 02/02/11 17:05, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Jonathan Harley wrote: Clearly no rendering of any map is going to be unmodified in the sense of having identical sequences of 0s and 1s to the database, in which case there could be no such thing as a collective work based on a database, ever. For print, yes, that's about the size of it. I don't see what print's got to do with it. Me neither. I don't agree with using javascript and layers to try to subvert the intent of the license. I think Frederick is wrong when he says If the layers are separable then you can have different licenses on each. However... Any rendering, whether to paper or to a screen, changes the bits used; One argument which could be used is that a rendering to a screen is not fixed, therefore it is not a derivative work. For a US case where this was successfully argued, see Galoob v. Nintendo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Galoob_Toys,_Inc._v._Nintendo_of_America,_Inc.). However, I believe there was a more recent ruling regarding website framing which largely limited the application of Galoob v. Nintendo to websites. if you take that as the meaning of modified, then there could be no unmodified renderings of any database, I agree. which means in turn that there could be no collective works, so the conditions about being separate and independent would be irrelevant. Did you read my earlier explanation? The rendered map is released under CC-BY-SA, and then *that* can be part of a collective work. Alternatively, the database, as it exists on disk, is a collective work with the other files on disk being other works which are part of the collection. There's no bar against collective works. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On 02/02/2011 05:49 PM, Jonathan Harley wrote: I don't see what print's got to do with it. Any rendering, whether to paper or to a screen, changes the bits used; if you take that as the Where multiple sources of bits are combined to produce a single new work, that new work is a derivative of each source. meaning of modified, then there could be no unmodified renderings of any database, which means in turn that there could be no collective works, so the conditions about being separate and independent would be irrelevant. Combining multiple elements into a new derivative work is not the same as mechanically transforming a single element to produce a new derivative work. It is easy to distinguish them conceptually, legally, and in the licence. But I don't think that rendered is a sensible meaning of modified in Combined and printed is, though. this context, any more than changing the font or line length would be considered modifying a text. Modifying font or line length might not change a text but it would certainly change the typographic arrangement. - Rob. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On 02/02/2011 06:47 PM, Jonathan Harley wrote: I think we may have differing interpretations of the intent of the license. Mine is that the license is supposed to allow people to use the map in a variety of ways, online and in print, so long as any new data is open and OSM is attributed; not that it was intended to prevent people from creating works in which not all elements are free. The intent of the licence is to protect the freedom of individuals to use the map. Any derivative work must therefore be under the same licence. Making works where all the elements are not free is precisely what this is intended to protect against. - Rob. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On 02/02/2011 06:39 PM, Peter Miller wrote: So... you are suggesting that you believe that no one will ever be able to overlay an osm map, or indeed an ccbya image with any image that not available on an open license even if the context of the two images is completely different? The context of the two images is the single derivative image. For the avoidance of doubt the base map is a direct clone of standard osm map rendering so is already available for reuse. It is only the combined image that is not. The fact that it is combined makes the resulting combination of the two works a derivative of both. Please refer to the specific examples I have posed above to help direct the discussion. These include a map of the USA overlaid with crime statistics, a directions map overlaid with a photograph and a map of the Isle of White overlaid with some illustrations. They are all collages (combinations of visual elements in a single image) and are therefore all derivative works. Frederik has explained how it can be argued that BY-SA's private use exception allows online mash-ups. Printed versions of the same works would be distributed/publicly exhibited and so cannot be made under the same exception. (IANAL, TINLA) - Rob. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On 2 February 2011 19:05, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote: On 02/02/2011 06:39 PM, Peter Miller wrote: So... you are suggesting that you believe that no one will ever be able to overlay an osm map, or indeed an ccbya image with any image that not available on an open license even if the context of the two images is completely different? The context of the two images is the single derivative image. I don't believe that a court would see it that way and it is a very unhelpful view for the project to take. For the avoidance of doubt the base map is a direct clone of standard osm map rendering so is already available for reuse. It is only the combined image that is not. The fact that it is combined makes the resulting combination of the two works a derivative of both. See above! Please refer to the specific examples I have posed above to help direct the discussion. These include a map of the USA overlaid with crime statistics, a directions map overlaid with a photograph and a map of the Isle of White overlaid with some illustrations. They are all collages (combinations of visual elements in a single image) and are therefore all derivative works. As you will guess by I disagree with this statement as well! Frederik has explained how it can be argued that BY-SA's private use exception allows online mash-ups. Printed versions of the same works would be distributed/publicly exhibited and so cannot be made under the same exception. (IANAL, TINLA) Indeed, I don't believe that there are any lawyers in the house! I do wish that the Foundation would pay for one from time to time to help with general questions like this which matter a lot to potential users of our lovely mapping. 10 non-lawyers are not the same as one lawyer. I will bounce this question of our lawyer at some point in the future and let people know at that point, until then I would encourage people to create combined works. Regards, Peter Miller - Rob. ___ 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] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On 2 February 2011 20:02, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote: Indeed, I don't believe that there are any lawyers in the house! I do wish that the Foundation would pay for one from time to time to help with general questions like this which matter a lot to potential users of our lovely mapping. Yes. Sorry. I simply haven't had time recently to contribute at all helpfully. Too many hearings and too many clients with problems to afford any spare for this. -- Francis Davey ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
Hi, On 02/02/11 19:39, Peter Miller wrote: So... you are suggesting that you believe that no one will ever be able to overlay an osm map, or indeed an ccbya image with any image that not available on an open license even if the context of the two images is completely different? Yes, I am not only suggesting that I believe that, I am pretty sure that this is the letter and the spirit of the license we have been using for the last ~6 years. Bye Frederik ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
Hi, On 02/02/11 19:47, Jonathan Harley wrote: I think we may have differing interpretations of the intent of the license. Mine is that the license is supposed to allow people to use the map in a variety of ways, online and in print, so long as any new data is open and OSM is attributed; not that it was intended to prevent people from creating works in which not all elements are free. Let us not confuse CC-BY-SA (about which I'm talking here) with the new license, ODbL. CC-BY-SA does *not* make a distinction between data and other content, indeed it is not even primarily meant to govern data. This is different for ODbL, and ODbL will actually allow you to make just the kind of work I am talking about here, but ODbL is the planned future license and I am talking about the current license. The *only* way to create a work in which one part is CC-BY-SA and the other is not free is if that work is a collective work. In my opinion, something were images from CC-BY-SA and non-CC-BY-SA licensed sources are intermixed in a way that they are not easily separable is *clearly* not a collective work. Bye Frederik ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 4:02 AM, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote: On 2 February 2011 19:05, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote: On 02/02/2011 06:39 PM, Peter Miller wrote: Frederik has explained how it can be argued that BY-SA's private use exception allows online mash-ups. Printed versions of the same works would be distributed/publicly exhibited and so cannot be made under the same exception. (IANAL, TINLA) Indeed, I don't believe that there are any lawyers in the house! I do wish that the Foundation would pay for one from time to time to help with general questions like this which matter a lot to potential users of our lovely mapping. 10 non-lawyers are not the same as one lawyer. I will bounce this question of our lawyer at some point in the future and let people know at that point, until then I would encourage people to create combined works. Francis Davey, who has piped up in this thread and is a lawyer, can provide his opinion when he has time. It would also be good if you can also consult with your lawyer and share his opinion here as well. For the record, I also think that Frederik's view is correct. That's how I understand how derivative works operate from working with images and illustrations in Wikipedia, and this OSM interpretation just strengthens that idea. This is one of the two main reasons why I was convinced that CC-BY-SA a poor choice of license for the OSM database (and why ODbL is better): CC forces derivative map images to be CC-BY-SA as well as any inseparable mash-ups of those map images. (The second reason is that you don't have up-front access to the raw data used to make the derivative map images, which I consider more valuable than the image itself in the context of OSM.) ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On 02/02/11 20:02, Peter Miller wrote: I don't believe that a court would see it that way and it is a very Courts have seen it that way in the case of Shepher Fairey, Jeff Koons, Andy Warhol, Richard Prince, The Beastie Boys, and many other artists and musicians. unhelpful view for the project to take. The ODbL solves this. The fact that it is combined makes the resulting combination of the two works a derivative of both. See above! I believe that this is the legal reality of combining two works into a single derivative work (or of adding new content to a work to produce a derivative work) and how this is regarded by the BY-SA licence. They are all collages (combinations of visual elements in a single image) and are therefore all derivative works. As you will guess by I disagree with this statement as well! I may be missing some aspect of your argument, and I apologize if I am. I am however reasonably certain that the examples under discussion are not collective works. They are of a different character to the examples of collective works that I am aware of. - Rob. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
Peter, On 02/02/11 21:02, Peter Miller wrote: I don't believe that a court would see it that way and it is a very unhelpful view for the project to take. The whole attribution-and-share-alike thing is a very unhelpful situation for the project but it doesn't go away simply because it is identified as such, much less by simply using a definition that suits one's own view. Much as I'd like to! Bye Frederik ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Hi, On 02/02/11 18:49, Jonathan Harley wrote: For print, yes, that's about the size of it. I don't see what print's got to do with it. Any rendering, whether to paper or to a screen, changes the bits used The difference is who makes the work. If you have an image comprising two separatable layers - say, an OpenLayers map with a CC-BY-SA source and a proprietary source - then both these images are published by the people operating the servers (may be the same server, may be different servers). You have two images, with different licensing, and it is *you* who combines them, using software that runs on *your* computer, into one rendering. If *that* rendering was now published, it would certainly have to be CC-BY-SA (say if you make a screenshot or a print). However, the people you get the images from do not publish that rendering; they publish two distinct images, licensed differently, which is totally ok. There's no way that would ever hold up in court. For one thing, I don't think you're right that the person doing the combining is the person who visits the website, or the person who owns the computer which does the combining. Rather, I'd say the person doing the combining is the person who instructs the computer to combine the images, in other words, the people you get the images from. Furthermore, even if the direct infringer *was* the person who visited the website, the person who wrote the website to facilitate the infringement would still be guilty of contributory infringement. The only way to get around infringement in the case of layers is to successfully claim 1) that no derivative work is produced (probably under the argument that the combined work is not fixed; or 2) that the license permits the particular combination. Of course, the real issue here is that we're talking about infringement for which the actual damages are miniscule, and for which statutory damages probably aren't available (as the work has not been registered). That's the difference between print (where the image is already combined for you, and published in combined form) and a layered web application (where it is you, through certain instructions you give to software running on your machine, who creates the derived work by superimposing the images). Nonsense. The person visiting the website doesn't give the instructions to the machine. The person providing the website does. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 11:39 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: Nonsense. The person visiting the website doesn't give the instructions to the machine. The person providing the website does. If you wrote a website which intentionally caused the computer of the person visiting it to overheat, catch on fire, and burn down a building, the person guilty of arson wouldn't be the person who visited the website, it'd be the person who wrote the website. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] New tool in Potlatch 2 for areas that share a way
Hi, On 02/02/11 11:24, Steve Bennett wrote: Certainly that information is of use to someone, but I don't think OSM should try and be all things to all people. For starters, we simply don't have the manpower. In the Australian context, it looks like we might be able to do better than Google Maps, but having more information than Melway/Brisway/... will be a real challenge. Adding on the difficulty of the kinds of things you're talking about (plus everyone else's pet interests, like accessibility, micromapping, ...) is essentially impossible without a massive influx of contributors. These things need not be, and have never been, global in OSM. If one local community happens to have the manpower locally then it's great if they manage to record all that detail, and we should be very careful not to make decisions that keep them from doing so because we figured that we'd never be able to collect that data for the whole country or the whole world. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] New tool in Potlatch 2 for areas that share a way
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 9:36 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: These things need not be, and have never been, global in OSM. If one local community happens to have the manpower locally then it's great if they manage to record all that detail, and we should be very careful not to make decisions that keep them from doing so because we figured that we'd never be able to collect that data for the whole country or the whole world. That is true - good point. I guess issues arise when we have to choose between a tagging scheme that allows maximum power (although that power will rarely be realised) and one that is most useful to most people. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] help from people with first-hand knowledge
dear list, is there a website similar to this: http://toolserver.org/~flacus/OSM/checkcrossing/spain/C03-spain-20110128.htm where people with first-hand knowledge can provide names for streets and buildings without using an editor? for example, with a textbox and a submit button which updates some table or sends an email to a list or user who actually uses an editor. regards juan lucas ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] New tool in Potlatch 2 for areas that share a way
I believe that if one is tagging an area to imply that there is contamination, one should cite an authoritative source. Having your property tagged as potentially contaminated could lead to difficulties in selling or refinancing the property. Even if a property was contaminated, it could be remediated to the point where no contamination exists on the site anymore. If the tags are not maintained, they will likely be inaccurate. In the US, when a person/corporation has a major financial or ownership transaction related to a property, there is often a review of the current and historical activities that have taken place on and in the vicinity of the property. (A Phase I Environmental Assessment). The result of this is a list of potential environmental risks or hazards. I would suggest keeping information about contamination out of OSM and leave it up to the end user to mash OSM data with up-to-date data from the local environmental authority. If one has knowledge about current (and maybe past) land use activities, they could tag that. This in turn could be a good source for people who are doing environmental assessments. Think about the weight of tagging a property as contaminated. Incorrectly tag a property as a pub and you might get some frustrated people parked in front of the house on a Saturday night. Incorrectly tag a property as contaminated and you may delay an important transaction or force a person to spend money to prove that their property isn't contaminated. David. On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 4:58 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 9:36 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: These things need not be, and have never been, global in OSM. If one local community happens to have the manpower locally then it's great if they manage to record all that detail, and we should be very careful not to make decisions that keep them from doing so because we figured that we'd never be able to collect that data for the whole country or the whole world. That is true - good point. I guess issues arise when we have to choose between a tagging scheme that allows maximum power (although that power will rarely be realised) and one that is most useful to most people. Steve ___ 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] Creative Commons: Use CC for databases
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote: It is not, as you imply, a reason for not agreeing to the Contributor Terms (these would still allow us to go for CC 4.0 licenses) It's not in itself a reason to not agree to the CT, but it does fairly well eliminate most of the reasons *to* agree to the CT. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] help from people with first-hand knowledge
Hi there Juan, well you can simply use www.walking-papers.org to add informations by penpaper. Another way would be to use www.osmbugs.org to add markers with hints online. There are a few other services that offer direct tagging for dedicated feature sets (www.wheelmap.org, www.karbukoo.com,...) You might have a look here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/List_of_OSM_based_Services regards Matthias ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On 02/02/11 13:21, Rob Myers wrote: On 02/01/2011 06:17 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Peter says that I would consider the proposed resulting work to be 'two or more distinct, separate and independent works selected and arranged into a collective whole with the ccbysa content being used in an entirely unmodified form'. If it's a whole then by definition it's not a collection (a mere aggregation). By referring to a collective whole, it seems to me that the license is asserting that such a thing can exist. I think Peter is right - as long as the CC-BY content is unmodified, it can be assembled with other things to form a collective work. The CC-BY licenses do not say that they still have to be separate and independent after assembly, just before. Layers combined destructively (such as in print) are modified, and so are an adaptation. Firstly, the topmost layer is clearly unmodified by this kind of combination. If a CC-BY tile is below the top layer, then yes, you could argue that it is either modified, or no longer being used whole, by parts of it being hidden. But if we're talking about using OSM data, which is made up of points, as long as they're unmodified before assembly - ie rendering - then I still think it's a collective work and only has to be attributed, not restricted to the same license. ODbL is much clearer about this, but has this same effect - produced works have to be attributed but it doesn't attempt to force a license on them, only on the database they came from. Jonathan (not-a-lawyer, but a user-of-lawyers) -- Jonathan Harley: Managing Director : SpiffyMap Ltd Email: m...@spiffymap.com Phone: 0845 313 8457 www.spiffymap.com Post: The Venture Centre, Sir William Lyons Road, Coventry CV4 7EZ ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Jonathan Harley j...@spiffymap.net wrote: I think Peter is right - as long as the CC-BY[-SA] content is unmodified, it can be assembled with other things to form a collective work. The CC-BY[-SA] licenses do not say that they still have to be separate and independent after assembly, just before. Maybe that's a loophole in the license. But if so, it's a pretty big one. What is meant by content is unmodified? Obviously the printed base map is going to be modified from the original database. So under your interpretation, the part about the content being unmodified either prohibits everything, or allows everything. Or is there some other interpretation for content is unmodified that you can think of? ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On 02/02/11 15:59, Jonathan Harley wrote: By referring to a collective whole, it seems to me that the license is asserting that such a thing can exist. I think Peter is right - as long Oh I see, I didn't realise that's the wording of the licence. That's an unfortunate turn of phrase then. :-) I'll suggest it's changed for CC 4.0. 2.0 UK states: Collective Work means the Work in its entirety in unmodified form along with a number of other separate and independent works http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/uk/legalcode Flattened layers are not separate or independent. 2.0 unported gives some good examples of what is meant by a collective work: Collective Work means a work, such as a periodical issue, anthology or encyclopedia http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/legalcode The examples are of discrete, spatially separated aggregations of separate entities. Flattened layers are unambiguously derivative works. as the CC-BY content is unmodified, it can be assembled with other things to form a collective work. The CC-BY licenses do not say that they still have to be separate and independent after assembly, just before. It says precisely that they must be unmodified, separate and independent after collection. Otherwise they are derivative works. Layers combined destructively (such as in print) are modified, and so are an adaptation. Firstly, the topmost layer is clearly unmodified by this kind of combination. The derived work that exists as a result of combining it with the underlying tiles makes it an adaptation as per UK BY-SA 2.0 1.c If a CC-BY tile is below the top layer, then yes, you could argue that it is either modified, or no longer being used whole, by parts of it being hidden. But if we're talking about using OSM data, I do argue that, and it is the case. But I also argue that it is being combined with other material to create a derivative work, rather than placed alongside it to make a collective work. In either case it is an adaptation and therefore a Derivative Work. which is made up of points, as long as they're unmodified before assembly - ie rendering - then I still think it's a collective work But the rendering of those points, as a derivative of them, is under BY-SA. and only has to be attributed, not restricted to the same license. If it was a collective work then yes. ODbL is much clearer about this, but has this same effect - produced works have to be attributed but it doesn't attempt to force a license on them, only on the database they came from. ODbL is explicitly a database copyleft. It does force a licence on the producers of produced works, and the attribution is forced on the produced works as a way of advertising this. (IANAL, TINLA). - Rob. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] help from people with first-hand knowledge
thanks, osmbugs.org is exactly what I was looking for. regards --- On Wed, 2/2/11, Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de wrote: From: Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] help from people with first-hand knowledge To: talk@openstreetmap.org Date: Wednesday, February 2, 2011, 4:47 PM Hi there Juan, well you can simply use www.walking-papers.org to add informations by penpaper. Another way would be to use www.osmbugs.org to add markers with hints online. There are a few other services that offer direct tagging for dedicated feature sets (www.wheelmap.org, www.karbukoo.com,...) You might have a look here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/List_of_OSM_based_Services regards Matthias ___ 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-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On 02/02/11 16:15, Anthony wrote: On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Jonathan Harleyj...@spiffymap.net wrote: I think Peter is right - as long as the CC-BY[-SA] content is unmodified, it can be assembled with other things to form a collective work. The CC-BY[-SA] licenses do not say that they still have to be separate and independent after assembly, just before. Maybe that's a loophole in the license. But if so, it's a pretty big one. What is meant by content is unmodified? Obviously the printed base map is going to be modified from the original database. So under your interpretation, the part about the content being unmodified either prohibits everything, or allows everything. Or is there some other interpretation for content is unmodified that you can think of? I have assumed it refers to the geodata, which is unmodified unless you start changing the latitudes and longitudes of points. That's the only reading I can think of that makes any sense of the phrase unmodified form in the context of map data (in fact, of any kind of data). Clearly no rendering of any map is going to be unmodified in the sense of having identical sequences of 0s and 1s to the database, in which case there could be no such thing as a collective work based on a database, ever. Is that what you mean by prohibits everything or allows everything? It seems clear to me that the CC licenses are attempting to allow stuff but impose conditions, not to prohibit everything. Jonathan. -- Jonathan Harley: Managing Director : SpiffyMap Ltd Email: m...@spiffymap.com Phone: 0845 313 8457 www.spiffymap.com Post: The Venture Centre, Sir William Lyons Road, Coventry CV4 7EZ ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
I have been following the discussion but have been in meetings today so haven't been able to contribute. I agree we can discuss at lenght what 'separable' and 'unmodified' mean as abstract concepts but, as usual with legal contracts, the words will be interpreted in a particular context. It is probably worth looking at some more real examples therefore, in addition to my legal forest boundary example. The strict view expressed above by Frederick and others would mean that it would be impossible to use osm mapping as a bacground for this crime data as in the chart, 'Violent crime in the USA' unless the overlaid data was also on an open licence or the crime data was to the side of the map. http://thesocietypages.org/graphicsociology/2009/02/17/typical-crime-map-victimization/ And this one showing the location of the 'Trafford Law Centre' unless the photo was also on a free license or moved so as not to obscure the map. http://www.traffordlawcentre.org.uk/contact_us/contact.htm How about this map of the Isle of White overlaid with illustrations? http://www.steve.shalfleet.net/ Indeed anything overlaid on the map, or any other ccbysa image or photograph would need to be on an open license if the strict interpretation was used. In my view any corrections or additions to the map of features represented on that map view belong in the DB, anything else can be used to create a collection. Regards, Peter On 2 February 2011 16:35, Jonathan Harley j...@spiffymap.net wrote: On 02/02/11 16:15, Anthony wrote: On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Jonathan Harleyj...@spiffymap.net wrote: I think Peter is right - as long as the CC-BY[-SA] content is unmodified, it can be assembled with other things to form a collective work. The CC-BY[-SA] licenses do not say that they still have to be separate and independent after assembly, just before. Maybe that's a loophole in the license. But if so, it's a pretty big one. What is meant by content is unmodified? Obviously the printed base map is going to be modified from the original database. So under your interpretation, the part about the content being unmodified either prohibits everything, or allows everything. Or is there some other interpretation for content is unmodified that you can think of? I have assumed it refers to the geodata, which is unmodified unless you start changing the latitudes and longitudes of points. That's the only reading I can think of that makes any sense of the phrase unmodified form in the context of map data (in fact, of any kind of data). Clearly no rendering of any map is going to be unmodified in the sense of having identical sequences of 0s and 1s to the database, in which case there could be no such thing as a collective work based on a database, ever. Is that what you mean by prohibits everything or allows everything? It seems clear to me that the CC licenses are attempting to allow stuff but impose conditions, not to prohibit everything. Jonathan. -- Jonathan Harley: Managing Director : SpiffyMap Ltd Email: m...@spiffymap.com Phone: 0845 313 8457 www.spiffymap.com Post: The Venture Centre, Sir William Lyons Road, Coventry CV4 7EZ ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
Jonathan Harley wrote: Clearly no rendering of any map is going to be unmodified in the sense of having identical sequences of 0s and 1s to the database, in which case there could be no such thing as a collective work based on a database, ever. For print, yes, that's about the size of it. It illustrates that CC have a mountain to climb in making CC 4.0 relevant to databases, and I (genuinely) wish them luck. Electronically, you could perhaps layer one database (represented as pushpins, say) on top of another (represented as other pushpins, or a polyline, or even a map), in a separable way (e.g. layers can be switched off), and call it a collective work. OSM users have traditionally permitted this, but I believe Rob generally refers to it as a consensual hallucination. :) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-CC-BY-SA-Non-separatable-combination-of-OSM-other-tp5982104p5985604.html Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
Hi, On 02/02/11 18:00, Peter Miller wrote: The strict view expressed above by Frederick and others would mean that it would be impossible to use osm mapping as a bacground for this crime data as in the chart, 'Violent crime in the USA' unless the overlaid data was also on an open licence or the crime data was to the side of the map. http://thesocietypages.org/graphicsociology/2009/02/17/typical-crime-map-victimization/ Yes. (In fact I presume the overlaid data is PD in this case so no problem.) And this one showing the location of the 'Trafford Law Centre' unless the photo was also on a free license or moved so as not to obscure the map. http://www.traffordlawcentre.org.uk/contact_us/contact.htm This is a funny example because you could conceivably cut out a corner from the map, then place the image where it is now... it is just about conceivable to make a copy of this map without copying the image so maybe this could work as a collection. How about this map of the Isle of White overlaid with illustrations? http://www.steve.shalfleet.net/ Certainly the whole map needs to by CC-BY-SA. We did have some pages with examples about this on our wiki, years ago. I remember the example was a tourist guide with maps and photos, and there were several cases where maps and photos (and text) were sometimes superimposed, sometimes side-by-side, and the whole thing was commented as to what is derived and what is collected. I cannot find it now, however. I think that in those examples, there was the concept of interaction and co-dependency - the question of does the overlaid stuff work without the map. So if you carefully place your photo or illustration at a certain point in the map, and your photo or illustration would lose its meaning without the map, then it is clearly a derived work; but if your photo just sits there and could just as well sit there without the map, then it could be called a collection. This is not an interpretation I necessarily share and I'm not sure about the exact wording but it has something going for it. Indeed anything overlaid on the map, or any other ccbysa image or photograph would need to be on an open license if the strict interpretation was used. I don't think this interpretation is particularly strict. There have indeed been several people requesting that my OSM book be fully CC-BY-SA'ed because it contains OSM illustrations on some pages - *That* I call a strict reading (and one I clearly don't share). Bye Frederik ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote: The strict view expressed above by Frederick and others would mean that it would be impossible to use osm mapping as a bacground for this crime data as in the chart, 'Violent crime in the USA' unless the overlaid data was also on an open licence or the crime data was to the side of the map. http://thesocietypages.org/graphicsociology/2009/02/17/typical-crime-map-victimization/ Yes, that is the intent of the license (specifically, the overlaid data must be CC-BY-SA, not just on an open license). This is my intent when I license my works under the license. And this one showing the location of the 'Trafford Law Centre' unless the photo was also on a free license or moved so as not to obscure the map. http://www.traffordlawcentre.org.uk/contact_us/contact.htm I would say that this is fine. How about this map of the Isle of White overlaid with illustrations? http://www.steve.shalfleet.net/ Whole thing must be CC-BY-SA. Indeed anything overlaid on the map, or any other ccbysa image or photograph would need to be on an open license if the strict interpretation was used. Yes, that certainly could be argued, and if you want to be safe, you should release it all under CC-BY-SA. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] help from people with first-hand knowledge
Juan Lucas Domínguez Rubio wrote: is there a website similar to this: http://toolserver.org/~flacus/OSM/checkcrossing/spain/C03-spain-20110128.htm where people with first-hand knowledge can provide names for streets and buildings without using an editor? There is the Amenity Editor at http://ae.osmsurround.org/ae/index But: * you can only edit Nodes * the interface is in german (and not as plain-simple as you want it) anyway, maybe it is of interest malenki ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] help from people with first-hand knowledge
One of last year's Google Summer of Code projects was a simple web based editor targeted at new users - see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Google_Summer_of_Code/2010/AcceptedProjects/SimpleMapEditor . It still needs some development, but it would be a good start for something that has very limited functionality, like just being able to change the name of things. I have a feeling Potlatch2 is supposed to be customisable, so you may be able to achieve something with that, but I have never looked into it. Graham. On 2 February 2011 19:04, malenki o...@malenki.ch wrote: Juan Lucas Domínguez Rubio wrote: is there a website similar to this: http://toolserver.org/~flacus/OSM/checkcrossing/spain/C03-spain-20110128.htm where people with first-hand knowledge can provide names for streets and buildings without using an editor? There is the Amenity Editor at http://ae.osmsurround.org/ae/index But: * you can only edit Nodes * the interface is in german (and not as plain-simple as you want it) anyway, maybe it is of interest malenki ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Graham Jones Hartlepool, UK. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] New tool in Potlatch 2 for areas that share a way
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 1:13 PM, nicholas.g.lawre...@tmr.qld.gov.au wrote: Risk assessment and hazards are also relevant. The grassy area next to a steel mill might not be plain old grass, who knows what has been stored there and what kind of hazards, from chemicals to rusty nails are left behind? Certainly that information is of use to someone, but I don't think OSM should try and be all things to all people. For starters, we simply don't have the manpower. In the Australian context, it looks like we might be able to do better than Google Maps, but having more information than Melway/Brisway/... will be a real challenge. Adding on the difficulty of the kinds of things you're talking about (plus everyone else's pet interests, like accessibility, micromapping, ...) is essentially impossible without a massive influx of contributors. Steve What I meant was, by tagging the larger area as industrial and _not_ micro-mapping it as grass, you have a tag (industrial) that implies a certain amount of industrial activity, which in turn implies that it might not be as safe as your average grassy area. So, I was arguing in favour of tagging the larger block of land as industrial. nick *** WARNING: This email (including any attachments) may contain legally privileged, confidential or private information and may be protected by copyright. You may only use it if you are the person(s) it was intended to be sent to and if you use it in an authorised way. No one is allowed to use, review, alter, transmit, disclose, distribute, print or copy this email without appropriate authority. If this email was not intended for you and was sent to you by mistake, please telephone or email me immediately, destroy any hardcopies of this email and delete it and any copies of it from your computer system. Any right which the sender may have under copyright law, and any legal privilege and confidentiality attached to this email is not waived or destroyed by that mistake. It is your responsibility to ensure that this email does not contain and is not affected by computer viruses, defects or interference by third parties or replication problems (including incompatibility with your computer system). Opinions contained in this email do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Department of Transport and Main Roads, Maritime Safety Queensland or endorsed organisations utilising the same infrastructure. *** ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk-nl] Gemeentes naar Duitsland en België verhuisd?
Hallo mappers, Ik probeerde net de routeplanner van open.mapquest.com en toen viel mij op dat mijn thuishaven *Briljantstraat, Groningen, Grafschaft Bentheim, Aurich, Groningen, Germany* ( http://open.mapquestapi.com/nominatim/v1/details.php?place_id=14356098) heet. Oorspronkelijk dacht ik aan een fout bij het bewerken van de map van mij, maar het komt door het hele land voor. Drenthe, Overijssel, en Gelderland horen nu ook bij Duitsland. Noord-Brabant, Limburg en Zeeland zijn verhuisd naar een land waar hun *g* niet meer zacht genoemd wordt. Nog een andere vraag die ik heb. Ik had besloten de Briljantstraat van huisnummer te voorzien. Daar heb ik de terracer-tool voor gebruikt. Er bestaat ook een adres-interpolatie-tool die niet van een rijtjeshuis acht huizen maakt. Welke methode is beter? Het principe is don't map for the renderer, maar al die kleine hokjes zijn verre van mooi. Wat is beter? Groeten, Martien ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
[talk-au] waterway=coastline
Hi Everyone, I have noticed that all the Gold Coast canals are taged with waterway=coastline. I understand that the coastline should connect around the coastline in an unbroken line. ie. should connect across the river where it meets the sea. I understand the canals should be done with tag waterway=riverbank probably as relations. Is this correct? Thanks Peter Watson ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] waterway=coastline
On 2 February 2011 20:40, Peter Watson peter.bmwk7...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Everyone, I have noticed that all the Gold Coast canals are taged with waterway=coastline. I understand that the coastline should connect around the coastline in an unbroken line. ie. should connect across the river where it meets the sea. I understand the canals should be done with tag waterway=riverbank probably as relations. Is this correct? It's a subjective thing, personally I agree with you, but at the same time it's not wrong what has been done either. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] waterway=coastline
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Peter Watson peter.bmwk7...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Everyone, I have noticed that all the Gold Coast canals are taged with waterway=coastline. I understand that the coastline should connect around the coastline in an unbroken line. ie. should connect across the river where it meets the sea. I understand the canals should be done with tag waterway=riverbank probably as relations. Is this correct? What do you mean by canal? I thought they were saltwater...hence, waterway=coastline is ok? Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] waterway=coastline
On 2 February 2011 21:28, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: What do you mean by canal? I thought they were saltwater...hence, waterway=coastline is ok? Should we tag salt lakes as coastline too using that logic? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] waterway=coastline
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Peter Watson peter.bmwk7...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Everyone, I have noticed that all the Gold Coast canals are taged with waterway=coastline. I understand that the coastline should connect around the coastline in an unbroken line. ie. should connect across the river where it meets the sea. I understand the canals should be done with tag waterway=riverbank probably as relations. Is this correct? What do you mean by canal? I thought they were saltwater...hence, waterway=coastline is ok? Steve Yes all canals are tidal saltwater, however I understood from the Wiki that the coastline tag was to be used for the actual coast line only and should be connected across river outlets etc. to determine the edge of the continent. Peter ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] waterway=coastline
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 10:36 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 February 2011 21:28, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: What do you mean by canal? I thought they were saltwater...hence, waterway=coastline is ok? Should we tag salt lakes as coastline too using that logic? Let's keep comments helpful. Thanks. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] waterway=coastline
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 10:46 PM, Peter Watson peter.bmwk7...@gmail.com wrote: Yes all canals are tidal saltwater, however I understood from the Wiki that the coastline tag was to be used for the actual coast line only and should be connected across river outlets etc. to determine the edge of the continent. Well, in that case, let's do as the wiki says :) Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] waterway=coastline
On 2 February 2011 22:05, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 10:36 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 February 2011 21:28, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: What do you mean by canal? I thought they were saltwater...hence, waterway=coastline is ok? Should we tag salt lakes as coastline too using that logic? Let's keep comments helpful. Thanks. Just pointing out the flaws in your logic, salt content isn't useful due to many reasons. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] waterway=coastline
Just pointing out the flaws in your logic Please refrain from doing so. It's not helpful, and just contributes to the snarky atmosphere this list suffers from. Thanks, Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Fwd: HOT for Cyclone Yasi
-- Forwarded message -- From: Mikel Maron mikel_ma...@yahoo.com Date: 3 February 2011 06:44 Subject: HOT for Cyclone Yasi To: John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com, Shoaib Burq sho...@nomad-labs.com, Kashif Rasul kashif.ra...@gmail.com Cc: hot...@gmail.com Are you all, or others in the Australian community, wanting to coordinate response to Cyclone Yasi? What are the mapping needs if any? -Mikel == Mikel Maron == +254(0)724899738 @mikel s:mikelmaron http://mapkibera.org/ http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Haiti ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [Talk-br] Duvida Public GPS traces
2011/2/2 David Kurka david.ku...@gmail.com: Alexandre, 2011/2/1 Alexandre da Costa Medeiros ale...@gmail.com Pessoal, Estou fazendo alguns inputs de trechos que tenho de Campinas/SP através de um app para iPhone chamado OSMTrack. Parece que funciona bem, os uploads foram aceitos pelo site, etc. Alguém se habilita para mexer nesses dados? O problema é que eu consigo fazer a coleta mas não tenho muito tempo esse ano para fazer a edição desse material... Bem vindo ao osm David! Estou ficando bem contente com o progresso em Campinas. Durante muito tempo não tinha nada lá e ultimamente está melhorando rápido lá, parabéns para todos envolvidos. Em São Carlos, que estou mapeando, usamos GPS e as imagens satélite do Bing. GPS são necessários para: a) areas mais novas do que imagens aéreas b) areas que não tem cobertura do imagens aéreas c) como um fonte para alinhar imagens aéreas c) é particularmente importante. As imagens por aqui tem um deslocamento de 10-15m, e tudo ia ficar errado sem compensar o deslocamento das imagens aéreas. Passei algumas vezes em Campinas de ônibus/taxi/carro com GPS, eles devem ser suficientes para corregir o deslocamento. -- Johan Dahlin ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
Re: [Talk-br] Duvida Public GPS traces
Em 2 de fevereiro de 2011 01:08, David Kurka david.ku...@gmail.comescreveu: Tendo imagens de alta resolução do Bing disponíveis, vale a pena investir em traces gps? (pessoas além do Alexandre podem me responder isso também! :)) Vale sim. Esses traces serão úteis para fazer o alinhamento das imagens antes de mapear. Ainda mais em regiões com muito relevo: neste caso, o realinhamento precisa ser feito de um bairro para outro. -- Rodrigo de Avila Analista de Desenvolvimento (51) 9733-3488 • rodr...@avila.net.br • www.avila.net.br ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
Re: [Talk-br] Duvida Public GPS traces
2011/2/2 David Kurka david.ku...@gmail.com: [...] Tendo imagens de alta resolução do Bing disponíveis, vale a pena investir em traces gps? (pessoas além do Alexandre podem me responder isso também! :)) Se eu não sonhei, eu li em lugar (Wiki do OSM, provavelmente) que esses traces são bons até como uma prova em uma eventual ação legal (nós não copiamos, olha só: teve colaborador nosso passando por ali) Fora isso, para mim, a forma mais divertida de mapear é usar um GPS e um gravador de som. Dá para pegar muitos detalhes (POIs, em particular) que não dá para ver pelas imagens aéreas. LMB ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
Re: [Talk-br] Duvida Public GPS traces
Oi Kurka, Eu e o usuário pablotc (ele está na lista?) também estavamos traçando Campinas pelas novas imagens na virada do ano... Temos que retomar as atividades por lá... Fiz até alguns screenshoots do nosso progresso: http://www.flickr.com/photos/claudomiro/sets/72157625835769191/ 2011/2/2 David Kurka david.ku...@gmail.com Alexandre, 2011/2/1 Alexandre da Costa Medeiros ale...@gmail.com Pessoal, Estou fazendo alguns inputs de trechos que tenho de Campinas/SP através de um app para iPhone chamado OSMTrack. Parece que funciona bem, os uploads foram aceitos pelo site, etc. Alguém se habilita para mexer nesses dados? O problema é que eu consigo fazer a coleta mas não tenho muito tempo esse ano para fazer a edição desse material... eu moro em Campinas e tenho mapeado várias ruas daqui... eu posso ajudar a mecher nesses dados... mas de que região em específico você está coletando? Você já conferiu se não está mapeada ainda Tendo imagens de alta resolução do Bing disponíveis, vale a pena investir em traces gps? (pessoas além do Alexandre podem me responder isso também! :)) Abraços! -- Alexandre C Medeiros ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br -- David Kurka ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
Re: [Talk-br] Duvida Public GPS traces
2011/2/2 Claudomiro Nascimento Junior claudom...@claudomiro.com: Oi Kurka, Eu e o usuário pablotc (ele está na lista?) também estavamos traçando Campinas pelas novas imagens na virada do ano... Temos que retomar as atividades por lá... Fiz até alguns screenshoots do nosso progresso: http://www.flickr.com/photos/claudomiro/sets/72157625835769191/ Adorei! Como você gerou as imagems? -- Johan Dahlin ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
Re: [Talk-br] Duvida Public GPS traces
2011/2/2 Leandro Motta Barros lmbar...@gmail.com 2011/2/2 David Kurka david.ku...@gmail.com: [...] Tendo imagens de alta resolução do Bing disponíveis, vale a pena investir em traces gps? (pessoas além do Alexandre podem me responder isso também! :)) Se eu não sonhei, eu li em lugar (Wiki do OSM, provavelmente) que esses traces são bons até como uma prova em uma eventual ação legal (nós não copiamos, olha só: teve colaborador nosso passando por ali) a melhor forma de identificar isso, é através da tag source, certo? logo, ruas com tag source=gps devem ter prioridade à source=gps? Fora isso, para mim, a forma mais divertida de mapear é usar um GPS e um gravador de som. Dá para pegar muitos detalhes (POIs, em particular) que não dá para ver pelas imagens aéreas. eu também acho bem divertido... eu tava quase terminando de andar de bicicleta por todas as ruas de barão geraldo (distrito de Campinas), quando chegaram as imagens do bing... :) agora deu mais preguiça de continuar... OSM faz bem pra saude! :) LMB ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br -- David Kurka ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
Re: [Talk-br] Duvida Public GPS traces
2011/2/2 Claudomiro Nascimento Junior claudom...@claudomiro.com Oi Kurka, Eu e o usuário pablotc (ele está na lista?) também estavamos traçando Campinas pelas novas imagens na virada do ano... Temos que retomar as atividades por lá... Fiz até alguns screenshoots do nosso progresso: http://www.flickr.com/photos/claudomiro/sets/72157625835769191/ mto legal os screenshots cara... eu tava acompanhando o trabalho de vocês pelos logs e cheguei a trocar algumas mensagens com o pablotc... eu estou/estava mapeando mais a região norte da cidade, que é onde eu moro... (inclusive o distrito de Barão Geraldo, onde fica a Unicamp e que não apareceu nesses screenshots..) conte comigo pra continuar com as atividades e quem sabe fazermos um planejamento mais concreto.. o curioso é que, pelo que eu vi, nem vocêm, nem o pablo moram em Campinas... seria legal ter mais campineiros ajudando tb... :) 2011/2/2 David Kurka david.ku...@gmail.com Alexandre, 2011/2/1 Alexandre da Costa Medeiros ale...@gmail.com Pessoal, Estou fazendo alguns inputs de trechos que tenho de Campinas/SP através de um app para iPhone chamado OSMTrack. Parece que funciona bem, os uploads foram aceitos pelo site, etc. Alguém se habilita para mexer nesses dados? O problema é que eu consigo fazer a coleta mas não tenho muito tempo esse ano para fazer a edição desse material... eu moro em Campinas e tenho mapeado várias ruas daqui... eu posso ajudar a mecher nesses dados... mas de que região em específico você está coletando? Você já conferiu se não está mapeada ainda Tendo imagens de alta resolução do Bing disponíveis, vale a pena investir em traces gps? (pessoas além do Alexandre podem me responder isso também! :)) Abraços! -- Alexandre C Medeiros ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br -- David Kurka ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br -- David Kurka ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
[Talk-br] Re-2: Duvida Public GPS traces
usar source=survey. a melhor forma de identificar isso, é através da tag source, certo? logo, ruas com tag source=gps devem ter prioridade à source=gps? ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
Re: [Talk-br] Re-2: Duvida Public GPS traces
Complementando: Se você *coletou os dados pessoalmente* andando na rua, de carro, bicicleta, moto, a pé, etc, *source=survey* outros valores podem ser: *source=Bing*, *source=Yahoo*, *source=IBGE*, etc http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt-br:Key:source 2011/2/2 c...@geobahia.net.br usar source=survey. a melhor forma de identificar isso, é através da tag source, certo? logo, ruas com tag source=gps devem ter prioridade à source=gps? ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br -- dio...@diogow.com ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
Re: [Talk-br] [OpenStreetMap] Fwd: Re: CBERS 2B image over Bom Jardim
Hi, there ! Tks ever so much for your warm welcome. Cheers, my new friends. Arlete 2011/2/2 Jean-Guilhem Cailton j...@arkemie.com: Arlete, I transmitted your request to our contact at Spot Image earlier today, just after receiving it. But, from my understanding of how the Disaster Charter works, frankly, I would not expect other post-disaster imagery to be available. We already know that several attempts had been made, that could not complete because of cloud coverage, before it was possible to obtain the scene that is currently available. On the other hand, with the SpotMaps that is currently available, it should already be possible to improve significantly the OSM base map of Bom Jardim. It is from 2008-2009, and, from what I've heard, its geometrical accuracy is generally considered to be good. I don't understand very well what makes you consider it difficult to vectorize/trace details (according to your PDF, which is too large to be sent to the mailing list). It's probably because you are a new JOSM user. Something that many new users (including myself when I was one) do not find at first is that, if you click with the right mouse button on your SPOT_2008-2009 layer, you get a menu where you can Change resolution to adapt it to your current frame of view. If you do this when the scale bar in the upper left corner is around 100 m long, you should be able to see the image at full resolution (2.5 m I think, which is fine to trace roads and many streets). Also, due to a mysterious particularity with the current SpotMaps WMS server and its access from JOSM, if you see overlapping tiles, it is better to change JOSM projection method to WGS 84 (code EPSG:4326), in Modify / Preferences / Map projection. (And then, delete, and reload the layer). From what I remember from mapping after Alagoas floods, the primary highways sourced from IBGE can probably be considered not to be very accurate at large scale, as can be seen when comparing them to satellite imagery. So do not hesitate to fix them. You can find a JOSM guide to beginners on: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Guide The Brazilian OSM community can probably help you better than me if you encounter other difficulties, and more generally for mapping this area. I copy this message to the Brazilian OSM mailing list. Best wishes, and warm welcome to OpenStreetMap. Jean-Guilhem PS: I was not aware of your journal before today. I think that Claudio had mentioned on jabber that Bom Jardim had been cut off after the floods and landslides. Le 02/02/2011 13:38, Arlete Meneguette a écrit : Bráulio Obrigada por responder minha msg. Estou enviando Cc para o Jean-Guilhem. Bom Jardim foi severamente afetada, mais de 5000 pessoas estão desabrigadas/desalojadas. O prejuízo é de R$75milhões. Eu não sei usar o OSM, mas quero aprender. Veja o PDF em anexo. Um abraço. Arlete Em 2 de fevereiro de 2011 08:15, Bráulio brauliobeze...@gmail.com escreveu: Oi, tudo bem Infelizmente as imagens do Spot recentes acabam justamente em Bom Jardim. Não sei o que pode ser feito, se eles poderiam liberar mais imagens, mas acho difícil e eu não tenho os contatos para isso. A cidade foi afetada pelas enchentes? Talvez falar com o Jean-Guilhem (j...@arkemie.com) seja o melhor caminho. -- Bráulio 2011/2/1 Arlete Meneguette arletemenegue...@gmail.com Bráulio Tudo bem ? Por favor, vc poderia me ajudar ? Valeu ! Arlete -- Forwarded message -- From: Arlete Meneguette arletemenegue...@gmail.com Date: 2011/2/1 Subject: Re: [OpenStreetMap] Fwd: Re: [Talk-br] CBERS 2B image over Bom Jardim To: AlNo m-159580-782...@messages.openstreetmap.org, srcv...@minaslivre.org Samuel e JG Tudo bem ? Estou tendo dificuldade em obter imagens recentes de Bom Jardim. Vejam os arquivos em anexo, por favor. Aguardo contato. Um abraço ! Arlete 2011/1/22 AlNo m-159580-782...@messages.openstreetmap.org: Olá Arlete Meneguette, AlNo enviou uma mensagem pelo OpenStreetMap para você com o assunto Fwd: Re: [Talk-br] CBERS 2B image over Bom Jardim: == FYI Hi, It is nice to see how the map has improved in the area covered with CBERS imagery. Another CBERS 2B image, from 20080217, is available. It covers Bom Jardim, which was cut off after the flash floods and landslides. Its boundary is http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=96117488 It is included in teresopolisregiao TMS layer. In WMS Add dialog, the layer is titled bomjardin20080217-CBERS_2B_HRC_20080217_150_C_125_2_L2_BAND1 Best wishes, Jean-Guilhem ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br == Você pode ser a mensagem em http://www.openstreetmap.org/message/read/159580 e pode respondê-la em http://www.openstreetmap.org/message/reply/159580 ___ Talk-br
[Talk-br] Plugin 'Turn restrictions' do JOSM
Olá pessoal. Gostaria de confirmar algo: se eu utilizar o plugin 'Turn Restrictions' do JOSM para indicar as proibições de sentidos em um cruzamento, por exemplo, é suficiente para que os dados sejam corretamente tratados pelos aparelhos gps? Se for vai ser uma mão na roda, pois ficar desenhando saídas da via para que o servidor não entenda que há possibilidade de se virar a esquerda em um cruzamento é triste! Obrigado! Flávio Henrique ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
Re: [Talk-de] Dauer von Datenänderung bis diese gerendert ist
Hallo Frederik, Claudius, Fabian, danke für die ausführliche Erklärung und die Links. Ganz schön komplex, was da alles im Hintergrund geschieht! Erstaunlich wie schnell OSM ist! Das beeindruckt Kursteilnehmer immer wieder. Formulierungen wie keine 10 Minuten oder in wenigen Minuten passen also gut im Zusammenhang mit Aktualität ist ein herausragendes Qualitätsmerkmal von OSM. In Kursen demonstriere ich das: die Teilnehmer ändern etwas mit JOSM, ich erkläre etwas dazu oder beantworte eine Frage - und schon ist das Ergebnis in der Karte sichtbar :-) _Wiki_ Wir könnten doch eine Wikiseite zum Thema Aktualität machen... Wo wir den Weg von der Dateneingabe bis zum Erscheinen auf der Karte beschreiben. Frederik's Info könnten wir als Basis nehmen. Was wäre ein sinnvoller Seitentitel? Gruss, Markus ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Open Windrad Map
Hi, gibt es schon irgendwo eine Karte, auf der man Windräder in niedrigeren Zoomstufen zu sehen bekommt? Gruß, Fabian. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Open Windrad Map
Mir sind zwei Karten bekannt, auf denen man die Windräder schon in niedriger Zoomstufe sieht: http://energy.freelayer.net/ http://www.tappenbeck.net/osm/maps/deu/index.php?id=1019 (leider sind beide Karten aber nur für DE) Am 02.02.2011 10:36, schrieb Fabian Schmidt: Hi, gibt es schon irgendwo eine Karte, auf der man Windräder in niedrigeren Zoomstufen zu sehen bekommt? Gruß, Fabian. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Hallo, ich aegere mich ziemlich ueber die TMC-Daten in der OSM-Datenbank. Ich habe nicht die Uebersicht, wer da alles dran arbeitet und dran gearbeitet hat, also es besteht die Gefahr, dass ich jetzt einigen ehrbaren Mappern auf die Fuesse trete, aber wenn's nach mir geht, muss das Zeug raus. Wir haben fast aussschliesslich menschenlesbare Daten in OSM. Schnapp Dir ein beliebiges Objekt, und Du kannst in aller Regel verstehen, was die Tags daran bedeuten. Wir sind keine Datenbank fuer irgendwelche externen Daten, die in OSM nicht wartbar sind, Daten, die man im RL nicht verifizieren kann. Vielleicht kann mir mal einer den folgenden Vorgang erklaeren. Da ist also eine harmlose Ampel in Dortmund, Node-ID 270090818, getaggt als highway=traffic_signals. Dann kommt am 31, Januar der User ruhri daher und ergaenzt das Tag: TMC:cid_58:tabcd_1:LocationCode = 47739 Wo hat er das her? Steht das auf einem Aufkleber an der Ampel? Wenn nicht (wenn es aus einer externen Liste/Datenbank kommt), warum muss das dann in OSM stehen - kann das nicht derjenige, der die Daten auswerten will, dann aus genau dieser externen Liste hinzufuegen? Fuenf Stunden spaeter kommt ein TMCbot - der uebrigens, soweit ich sehen kann, keiner der ueblichen Anforderungen an Bots genuegt - und behauptet qua Changeset-Kommentar: Korrektur von Schreib- und Datenintegritätsfehlern in Key/Value-Paaren des deutschen TMC Schemas. Was er aber tatsaechlich tut, ist, noch drei weitere Tags hinzuzufugegen: TMC:cid_58:tabcd_1:Class = Point TMC:cid_58:tabcd_1:LCLversion = 9.00 TMC:cid_58:tabcd_1:PrevLocationCode = 28866 Wo hat er sich die jetzt wieder hergeholt? Ist es nicht offensichtlich, dass es sich bei diesem Node um einen Point handelt? Was besagt diese LCLversion, und woher weiss der Bot, dass der User ruhri 9.00 gemeint hat? Grundsaetzlich bin ich ja fuer Anarchie beim Tagging. Aber was wir hier haben, ist ganz offensichtlich irgendeine externe Spezialdatenbank, die unter massiven Eingriffen in OSM irgendwie auf OSM abgebildet wird, und zwar so, dass man nicht nur tonnenweise unverstaendlichen Code in OSM kippen muss (highway=traffic_signals versteht jeder, aber TMC:cid_58:tabcd_1 versteht nur ein Computer), sondern auch noch taeglich Bots laufen lassen muss, um diese Daten irgendwie in Schuss zu halten. Wenn jemand ein paar tausend Fotos hat und an irgendwelche Nodes in Deutschland sowas dranpappt wie foto_url=..., dann sagt ja keiner was (das versteht vorallem auch jeder). Aber von diesen TMC-Tags gibt es mittlerweile 175000 in Deutschland. Die Botschaft, die bei einem neuen Mapper da ankommt, ist doch: Oh, ein kryptisch getaggtes Objekt. Das fass ich mal lieber nicht an. Mir erschliesst sich der Nutzen dieser Tags nicht - kann mir jemand mal eine praktische Anwendung zeigen, die diese Tags benutzt? Mir sieht das nach einem grossangelegten Designfehler aus. Da haette man von vornherein ein OSM-externes Mapping TMC-OSM bauen muessen, statt praktisch die ganze TMC-Datenbank auf OSM aufzupropfen. Ich will jetzt nicht die Revolution anzetteln und morgen alle TMC-Daten loeschen (und ich aergere mich, dass ich der Geschichte nicht viel frueher widersprochen habe). Aber wenn es nicht irgendwelche ueberwaeltigenden Gruende dafuer gibt, warum diese Daten in OSM bleiben muessen, dann bin ich sehr dafuer, dass diejenigen, die diese Daten verwenden, sich da irgendwie etwas basteln, was weniger invasiv ist. Wenn jetzt an einem Objekt z.B. nur eine TMC-ID dranstehen wuerde und alles weitere - was fuer eine Klasse, was ist die naechste ID, die vorherige ID, wassweissich - waere extern, koennte man damit ja schon leben. Ich suche also sozusagen eine Exit-Strategie. Ich will herausfinden, was und wem diese Daten nutzen, und dann ein Konzept machen, wie wir die Daten aus OSM entfernen koennen, ohne diesen Nutzen zu ruinieren. Ausser natuerlich, alle ausser mir finden diese TMC-Daten ganz knorke und haetten lieber noch viel mehr Tags der Art BPF:grq_23:tiwwhs_2:MegaCode = 281763. Bye Frederik ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Open Windrad Map
Am 02.02.2011 10:36, schrieb Fabian Schmidt: Hi, gibt es schon irgendwo eine Karte, auf der man Windräder in niedrigeren Zoomstufen zu sehen bekommt? Ich arbeite an einer Karte zu Kraftwerken und Stromnetzen. Es gibt noch technische Probleme (siehe Thread Performanceprobleme bei Mapnik/SQL) aber vielleicht hilft dir schon die die Karte bis Z=9: http://toolserver.org/~osm/styles/?zoom=11lat=54.2584lon=10.03051layers=F0FFF0FFFB000T Viele Grüße, Stephan ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Hallo Frederik, ich selber finde die TMC-Daten ganz ok. - auch wenn diese kryptisch sind und für Menschen nicht verständlich... Unten sind noch ergänzende Worte... Am 02.02.2011 11:10, schrieb Frederik Ramm: Hallo, Mir erschliesst sich der Nutzen dieser Tags nicht - kann mir jemand mal eine praktische Anwendung zeigen, die diese Tags benutzt? Wenn ich mich nicht irre, werden die TMC-Daten von openrouteservice ausgewertet Mir sieht das nach einem grossangelegten Designfehler aus. Da haette man von vornherein ein OSM-externes Mapping TMC-OSM bauen muessen, statt praktisch die ganze TMC-Datenbank auf OSM aufzupropfen. Da sehe ich dann das Problem, wenn man ein Navigerät nutzen will, das auch die TMC-Daten auswertet. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Hallo, On 02/02/11 11:34, Fred Jelk wrote: Mir sieht das nach einem grossangelegten Designfehler aus. Da haette man von vornherein ein OSM-externes Mapping TMC-OSM bauen muessen, statt praktisch die ganze TMC-Datenbank auf OSM aufzupropfen. Da sehe ich dann das Problem, wenn man ein Navigerät nutzen will, das auch die TMC-Daten auswertet. Kein Navi benutzt OSM-Daten direkt; bei allen ist ein Vorverarbeitungsschritt noetig. Wenn das Navi tatsaechlich die TMC-Daten aus OSM verwenden kann, muss das entsprechende Vorverarbeitungsprogramm die Daten richtig extrahieren - und koennte das genauso gut aus einer externen Datenbank, nehme ich jetzt mal an. Bye Frederik ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Am 02.02.11 11:10, schrieb Frederik Ramm: Hallo, ich aegere mich ziemlich ueber die TMC-Daten in der OSM-Datenbank. Ich habe nicht die Uebersicht, wer da alles dran arbeitet und dran gearbeitet hat, also es besteht die Gefahr, dass ich jetzt einigen ehrbaren Mappern auf die Fuesse trete, aber wenn's nach mir geht, muss das Zeug raus. +1 Wenn jemand ein paar tausend Fotos hat und an irgendwelche Nodes in Deutschland sowas dranpappt wie foto_url=..., dann sagt ja keiner was (das versteht vorallem auch jeder). Aber von diesen TMC-Tags gibt es mittlerweile 175000 in Deutschland. Komisch, auf den Wiki-Seiten ist von 42537 Objekten in DE die Rede. Wenn man natürlich jede Fahrbahn und Ampel einzeln taggt... Du kannst aber ruhri2010 gerne nach seiner Motivation fragen. Mir kommt er wie ein OSMkoholic vor ;-) Seine ÖPNV-Kreationen sind jedenfalls nicht unbedingt von Detail- oder Ortskenntnis geprägt. Ausser natuerlich, alle ausser mir finden diese TMC-Daten ganz knorke und haetten lieber noch viel mehr Tags der Art BPF:grq_23:tiwwhs_2:MegaCode = 281763. Nö, sowas muss nicht sein. Gruß, André Joost ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Hallo Solche kryptischen Dinge gibt es bei Importen recht häufig. Die Hausnummern in Dänemark haben zich Tags, die man in OSM nicht bräuchte. In Italien schwirren auch einige herum. Ich verstehe, dass man irgendsowas braucht, um bspw. später Updates zu fahren. Aber meiner Meinung nach gehört so eine übersetzung in eine externe Datenbank und dann neben den OSM-üblichen Tags eine eindeutige ID in unsere Datenbank. Diese ID kann dann auch gerne kryptische Values und keys haben. Daher zu deinen Ausführungen über TMC-Daten ein +1. Die TMC-Daten an sich scheinen ja frei zugänglich zu sein, sodass man diese Daten ähnlich wie auch die Höhendaten aus der externen Datenbank mit der in OSM hinterlegten ID ziehen kann. Viele Grüße Henning ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Hallo, Am Mittwoch 02 Februar 2011 11:10:25 schrieb Frederik Ramm: Hallo, [ ] Vielleicht kann mir mal einer den folgenden Vorgang erklaeren. Da ist also eine harmlose Ampel in Dortmund, Node-ID 270090818, getaggt als highway=traffic_signals. Dann kommt am 31, Januar der User ruhri daher und ergaenzt das Tag: TMC:cid_58:tabcd_1:LocationCode = 47739 Ich antworte jetzt mal, obwohl ich den TMC-Kram inhaltlich auch nicht ganz verstehe. So weit ich weiß, gibt es aber im Wiki dazu eine Erklärung. Ganz grob für den ahnungslosen Mapper: Es sind Codes, die im Verkehrsfunk gesendet werden, um Hindernisse (Stau, Sperrung etc), die im Rundfunk so kodiert gesendet werden, einer geografischen Position auf einem Weg zuordnen zu können. Diese Geschichte funktioniert auf meinem Nüvi bereits insofern, dass es die Hindernisse anzeigt. Was jetzt noch fehlt, ist die Berücksichtigung in der Routenplanung. Da hoffe ich auf Fortschritte bei mkgmap. Wo hat er das her? Steht das auf einem Aufkleber an der Ampel? Wenn nicht (wenn es aus einer externen Liste/Datenbank kommt), warum muss das dann in OSM stehen - kann das nicht derjenige, der die Daten auswerten will, dann aus genau dieser externen Liste hinzufuegen? Das kann er nur bedingt. Wenn ein ahnungsloser Mapper eine Ampel, die keine TMC-Codes hat, löscht und ein paar Meter neu einträgt, ist das für die Kartenansicht ok. Wenn aber in der externen TMC-Datenbank die ID der Ampel vermerkt ist, muss jedes mal manuell die TMC-ID auf die neue OSM-ID gesetzt werden. Das ist deutschlandweit kaum zu machen. So bleibt aber zu hoffen, dass der Mapper vorher wenigstens vorsichtshalber die Tags der alten Ampel auf die neue kopiert oder die Ampel verschiebt, statt sie zu löschen. Fuenf Stunden spaeter kommt ein TMCbot - der uebrigens, soweit ich sehen kann, keiner der ueblichen Anforderungen an Bots genuegt - und behauptet qua Changeset-Kommentar: Korrektur von Schreib- und Datenintegritätsfehlern in Key/Value-Paaren des deutschen TMC Schemas. Was er aber tatsaechlich tut, ist, noch drei weitere Tags hinzuzufugegen: TMC:cid_58:tabcd_1:Class = Point TMC:cid_58:tabcd_1:LCLversion = 9.00 TMC:cid_58:tabcd_1:PrevLocationCode = 28866 [ ] Wenn jemand ein paar tausend Fotos hat und an irgendwelche Nodes in Deutschland sowas dranpappt wie foto_url=..., dann sagt ja keiner was (das versteht vorallem auch jeder). Aber von diesen TMC-Tags gibt es mittlerweile 175000 in Deutschland. Die Botschaft, die bei einem neuen Mapper da ankommt, ist doch: Oh, ein kryptisch getaggtes Objekt. Das fass ich mal lieber nicht an. Das ist auch gar nicht so schlecht. Ein neuer Mapper sollte in so einem Fall jemanden fragen, der schon länger dabei ist. Mir erschliesst sich der Nutzen dieser Tags nicht - kann mir jemand mal eine praktische Anwendung zeigen, die diese Tags benutzt? Unser Tagging-Stil ist doch das berühmte Wir taggen nicht für Insofern ist es egal, ob es dafür zur Zeit eine Anwendung gibt. Im Übrigen hoffe ich, dass mkgmap irgendwann in der Lage sein wird, den TMC-Kram so aufzubereiten, dass die Garmin-Navis das komplett verstehen. [ ] Wenn jetzt an einem Objekt z.B. nur eine TMC-ID dranstehen wuerde und alles weitere - was fuer eine Klasse, was ist die naechste ID, die vorherige ID, wassweissich - waere extern, koennte man damit ja schon leben. Das wäre wahrscheinlich die beste Lösung. Ich suche also sozusagen eine Exit-Strategie. Ich will herausfinden, was und wem diese Daten nutzen, und dann ein Konzept machen, wie wir die Daten aus OSM entfernen koennen, ohne diesen Nutzen zu ruinieren. Ausser natuerlich, alle ausser mir finden diese TMC-Daten ganz knorke und haetten lieber noch viel mehr Tags der Art BPF:grq_23:tiwwhs_2:MegaCode = 281763. Einen Vorteil haben die tags noch: Sieht auf Präsentationen wesentlich professioneller aus als highway=traffic_light. :-) Gruß, Wolfgang ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Open Windrad Map
Am 02.02.2011 10:53, schrieb Fred Jelk: Mir sind zwei Karten bekannt, auf denen man die Windräder schon in niedriger Zoomstufe sieht: http://energy.freelayer.net/ http://www.tappenbeck.net/osm/maps/deu/index.php?id=1019 (leider sind beide Karten aber nur für DE) Hi ! = werde vielleicht noch Spanien auf den Weg bringen - was hättest Du den am liebsten noch ? Gruß Jan :-) ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Hi, Fred Jelk schrieb: Am 02.02.2011 11:10, schrieb Frederik Ramm: Hallo, Mir erschliesst sich der Nutzen dieser Tags nicht - kann mir jemand mal eine praktische Anwendung zeigen, die diese Tags benutzt? Wenn ich mich nicht irre, werden die TMC-Daten von openrouteservice ausgewertet derzeit verwendet ORS diese OSM TMC Tags noch nicht, ich arbeite aber daran und wollte dies in Zukunft integrieren. Ich habe mich in der Vergangenheit etwas intensiver mit TMC und OSM beschäftigt und für die FOSSGIS auch einen Vortrag darüber eingereicht. Frederik kommt mit seiner Diskussion jetzt etwas früh ;), ich wollte bei der FOSSGIS nach meinem Vortrag auch eine Diskussion diesbzgl. starten, etwas überspitzt: Macht es Sinn, wie (ob) derzeit die TMC Daten in OSM eingearbeitet werden? viele gruesse pascal ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Am 02.02.2011 11:53, schrieb Henning Scholland: Hallo Solche kryptischen Dinge gibt es bei Importen recht häufig. Die Hausnummern in Dänemark haben zich Tags, die man in OSM nicht bräuchte. In Italien schwirren auch einige herum. Ich verstehe, dass man irgendsowas braucht, um bspw. später Updates zu fahren. Aber meiner Meinung nach gehört so eine übersetzung in eine externe Datenbank und dann neben den OSM-üblichen Tags eine eindeutige ID in unsere Datenbank. Diese ID kann dann auch gerne kryptische Values und keys haben. Ich würde bei 1:1-Zuordnungen nicht einmal eine ID in die OSM-Datenbank einfügen, sondern diese Verknüpfung in der extra-DB oder einer dritten Verknüpfungsinstanz halten. Daher zu deinen Ausführungen über TMC-Daten ein +1. Die TMC-Daten an sich scheinen ja frei zugänglich zu sein, sodass man diese Daten ähnlich wie auch die Höhendaten aus der externen Datenbank mit der in OSM hinterlegten ID ziehen kann. Ich hab im Wiki mal nachgelesen. Die Daten sind nicht ganz frei verfügbar, aber die Erlaubnis zu Verwendung in OSM ist wohl da. Das Wiki dokumentiert eigentlich insgesamt recht gut, was da gemacht wird und welches Tagging-Schema verwendet wird. Ob man das gerne so hätte oder nicht, ist eine andere Frage; Frederiks Kritik, die Daten seien nicht lesbar, stimme ich durchaus zu. Die Argumente im Wiki sind allerdings auch nicht ganz von der Hand zu weisen; und immerhin wird mit TMC: ein eindeutiges Prefix verwendet. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Ich bin gegen ein Löschen der TMC-Daten. Richtig ist zwar, dass relativ viele Information zusätzlich gespeichert werden, welche nicht immer notwendig sind, da sie einfach von einem Bot hinzugefügt werden können. Aber ein genereller Abgleich ist nicht fehlerfrei möglich. Marcus Wohlschon (der Initiator) hat bereits einige Automatismen untersucht. Deutschland dient daher in erster Linie zum Test von Import/Verknüpfung von TMC in/mit OSM. Bei Straßen mit einem way oder einfachen Kreuzungen ist eine automatische Verknüpfung in 99% möglich. Komplizierter wird es bei mehrspurigen Straßen (Autobahnen) mit getrennten Ways für Hin- und Rückweg sowie Kreuzungen mehrspuriger Straßen. Visualisierung und Stand des TMC-Imports: http://osm-tmc.anders-hamburg.de/?zoom=13lat=51.05703lon=13.73706layers=B0T Die Diskussion sollte daher nicht in die Richtung, Wie können wir die Daten so schnell wie möglich löschen? sondern mehr in Richtung Wie können wir das Tagging vereinfachen/lesbarer gestalten? gehen. Ciao André ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
On 02.02.11 12:33, Pascal Neis wrote: ich wollte bei der FOSSGIS nach meinem Vortrag auch eine Diskussion diesbzgl. starten, etwas überspitzt: Macht es Sinn, wie (ob) derzeit die TMC Daten in OSM eingearbeitet werden? Ich kenne die Natur dieser TMC Daten/Location Codes nicht, grundsätzlich würde ich meinen, eine Referenzierung dieser Location Code bezeichnet diese(s) Element(e) in OSM würde grundsätzlich Sinn machen. Sodaß eine auswertende App verstehen kann: auf Stück X der Autobahn ist Stau, daher zeichne ich dort eine rote Line (oder ein Router weiß, diese Kanten verwende ich nicht oder bewerte ich mit Aufschlag). Sollten die TMC-Daten aber nur Punkte/Flächen definieren, macht es keinen Sinn, das kann man dann anhand der Lage verschneiden. Vielleicht kannst Du (oder jemand andere mit Detailwissen) das mal näher erklären, bitte? Servus, Andreas ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Am 2. Februar 2011 11:10 schrieb Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: Wir haben fast aussschliesslich menschenlesbare Daten in OSM. Schnapp Dir ein beliebiges Objekt, und Du kannst in aller Regel verstehen, was die Tags daran bedeuten. ich kenne die Details der TMC-Daten nicht, aber durch das TMC-Präfix ist ja klar, in welche Richtung das gehört, von daher finde ich das jetzt nicht so tragisch. Wenn jemand ein paar tausend Fotos hat und an irgendwelche Nodes in Deutschland sowas dranpappt wie foto_url=..., dann sagt ja keiner was (das versteht vorallem auch jeder). wenn aber jeder Facebook-nutzer im Schnitt 100 Fotos in OSM verortet, würde man vielleicht schon was sagen. Zumindest sind das erstmal keine Geodaten (ohne das Foto), sondern Linksammlungen. Ähnlich verhält es sich zwar auch mit TMC, aber die Daten sind wenigstens öffentlich zugänglich, was man bei vielen der verlinkten Fotos nicht sagen kann. Aber von diesen TMC-Tags gibt es mittlerweile 175000 in Deutschland. ohne die Qualität der Daten zu kennen, hört sich das doch erstmal beeindruckend ein. Die Italiener sind jedenfalls neidisch auf die Daten ;-) Gruß Martin ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Hallo, Am Mittwoch 02 Februar 2011 12:34:46 schrieb Peter Wendorff: Am 02.02.2011 11:53, schrieb Henning Scholland: Hallo Solche kryptischen Dinge gibt es bei Importen recht häufig. Die Hausnummern in Dänemark haben zich Tags, die man in OSM nicht bräuchte. In Italien schwirren auch einige herum. Ich verstehe, dass man irgendsowas braucht, um bspw. später Updates zu fahren. Aber meiner Meinung nach gehört so eine übersetzung in eine externe Datenbank und dann neben den OSM-üblichen Tags eine eindeutige ID in unsere Datenbank. Diese ID kann dann auch gerne kryptische Values und keys haben. Ich würde bei 1:1-Zuordnungen nicht einmal eine ID in die OSM-Datenbank einfügen, sondern diese Verknüpfung in der extra-DB oder einer dritten Verknüpfungsinstanz halten. Sobald in OSM ein Node gelöscht wird, ist die Zuordnung für die Katz. Das funktioniert nicht, zumal man dann in OSM gar nicht erkennen kann, dass am Node etwas dranhängt. Wenn ich einen Node in einem Straßenverlauf lösche, nehme ich einen ohne tags. Gruß, Wolfgang ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Hi, Andreas Labres schrieb: On 02.02.11 12:33, Pascal Neis wrote: ich wollte bei der FOSSGIS nach meinem Vortrag auch eine Diskussion diesbzgl. starten, etwas überspitzt: Macht es Sinn, wie (ob) derzeit die TMC Daten in OSM eingearbeitet werden? Ich kenne die Natur dieser TMC Daten/Location Codes nicht, grundsätzlich würde ich meinen, eine Referenzierung dieser Location Code bezeichnet diese(s) Element(e) in OSM würde grundsätzlich Sinn machen. Sodaß eine auswertende App verstehen kann: auf Stück X der Autobahn ist Stau, daher zeichne ich dort eine rote Line (oder ein Router weiß, diese Kanten verwende ich nicht oder bewerte ich mit Aufschlag). ich greife meinem Vortrag jetzt mal etwas vor: Bei dem was Andreas oben beschreibt liegt z.B. bereits ein Problem vor, weil dies so derzeit nicht ganz einfach aus OSM herauszubekommen ist, es aber so benötigt werden würde. Meiner Meinung nach sollte man etwas überdenken wie man die TMC Codes einträgt. TMC Staus oder Verkehrsbehinderungen beziehen sich im Normalfall immer auf Straßenstücke. Diese werden durch einen LocationCode From und To angegeben. Diese Information ist so aber derzeit nicht bei uns in den Daten drin und lässt sich auch eher nur mühselig aus den OSM Daten ableiten. Dazu kommen dann noch Faktoren wie OSM Relations und tlw. nicht richtig eingetragene TMC Codes oder unsauber getrennte OSM Ways ... viele gruesse pascal ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Hallo, On 02/02/11 13:12, Wolfgang wrote: Ich würde bei 1:1-Zuordnungen nicht einmal eine ID in die OSM-Datenbank einfügen, sondern diese Verknüpfung in der extra-DB oder einer dritten Verknüpfungsinstanz halten. Sobald in OSM ein Node gelöscht wird, ist die Zuordnung für die Katz. Das funktioniert nicht, zumal man dann in OSM gar nicht erkennen kann, dass am Node etwas dranhängt. Wenn ich einen Node in einem Straßenverlauf lösche, nehme ich einen ohne tags. Das ist allerdings ein allgemeines Problem, das immer wieder aufkommt - wie kann man von extern in OSM hinein linken und dabei halbwegs fehlertolerant sein (d.h. ohne in OSM ein Loesch- und Editierverbot des verlinkten Objekts zu fordern). Natuerlich kann man das Problem umgehen, indem man aus OSM heraus auf die externe Datenbank linkt - aber das skaliert nicht, oder im Volksmund: Wenn das jeder machen wuerde ;) Bye Frederik ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
On 02.02.11 14:05, Pascal Neis wrote: TMC Staus oder Verkehrsbehinderungen beziehen sich im Normalfall immer auf Straßenstücke. Das wäre auch mein Verständnis/meine praktische Erfahrung mit TMC. Und die gilt es in OSM identifizierbar zu machen (IMO). Wenn dazu die Strategie des Taggens geändert werden muß, sollte man das tun. Servus, Andreas ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Kraftwerks-Karte (war: Open Windrad Map)
Eine leichte Thread-Entführung: Am 02.02.2011 11:28, Stephan Wolff: Am 02.02.2011 10:36, schrieb Fabian Schmidt: gibt es schon irgendwo eine Karte, auf der man Windräder in niedrigeren Zoomstufen zu sehen bekommt? Ich arbeite an einer Karte zu Kraftwerken und Stromnetzen. Wäre toll, wenn du dabei auch das erweiterte Schema http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:generator:source für Quelle und Art der Stromerzeugung unterstützen könntest. Claudius ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
On Wed, 2011-02-02 14:19:50 +0100, Andreas Labres l...@lab.at wrote: On 02.02.11 14:05, Pascal Neis wrote: TMC Staus oder Verkehrsbehinderungen beziehen sich im Normalfall immer auf Straßenstücke. Das wäre auch mein Verständnis/meine praktische Erfahrung mit TMC. Und die gilt es in OSM identifizierbar zu machen (IMO). Wenn dazu die Strategie des Taggens geändert werden muß, sollte man das tun. ...und in ganz NRW gibts Nebel und Eisregen. Sowas kommt nicht nur gesprochen vom Radio-Moderator, sondern wird eben auch via TMC übertragen. In TMC (via Radio bzw. teilweise auch via Sat-Radio zu empfangen) werden letztlich drei Zahlen geschickt. Zwei davon (wobei eine leer sein kann) ist der Location Code, die dritte Zahl gibt den Grund (und ggf. die geschätzte Dauer) an. Problematisch ist, daß die Punkte/Strecken/Polygone nicht trivial auf die OSM-Gegenstücke übertragbar sind. Es gibt beispielsweise straßentechnisch nicht das Kreuz A2/A1, sondern ein ganzes Bündel an Ab- und Auffahrten. Um dann das Stück Strecke zwischen (beispielsweise) diesem Kreuz und einer Abfahrt davor (wo möglicherweise der Stau beginnt) herauszufinden, ist in den guten OSM-Daten eben etwas mehr Aufwand nötig, weil u.a. die Fahrtrichtung berücksichtigt werden muß. Daher ists auch nicht so einfach machbar, einfach einen Punkt aufs das Kreuz zu setzen und den Location Code dabeizuschreiben... MfG, JBG -- Jan-Benedict Glaw jbg...@lug-owl.de +49-172-7608481 Signature of: ...und wenn Du denkst, es geht nicht mehr, the second : kommt irgendwo ein Lichtlein her. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
On Wed, 2011-02-02 14:22:50 +0100, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: On 02/02/11 12:34, Peter Wendorff wrote: Das Wiki dokumentiert eigentlich insgesamt recht gut, was da gemacht wird und welches Tagging-Schema verwendet wird. Also offensichtlich gibt es da eine TMC-Datenbank mit bestimmten Punkten, die Vorgaenger und Nachfolger haben - also sowas wie Ways bei uns. Richtig; zusätzlich gehören die allermeisten Objekte immer auch einem höherwertigen Objekt an. (Autobahn-Abfahrt - Streckenabschnitt - Bundeland) Diese Datenbank ist von sich aus, so wie ich das verstehe, erstmal konsistent, d.h. alle Vorgaenger und Nachfolger existieren tatsaechlich, es gibt keine Luecken usw. Nun ist es eine Sache, die einzelnen Punkte auf OSM abzubilden. Das waere ideal komplett extern, aber es ginge auch noch mit einer TMC-Id an einem OSM-Objekt (dieses OSM-Objekt ist in der TMC-Datenbank der Knoten 12345). Dafuer brauche ich genau ein Tag, das ich noch dazu relativ menschenlesbar gestalten koennte, z.B. tmc_code=12345 Das reicht leider nicht, weil damit die /gerichtete/ Natur der BASt-Liste nicht abgebildet werden kann. Ein TMC-Code alleine sagt Dir noch keine /Richtung/. Wenn ich nun aber - aus welchen Gruenden auch immer - damit beginne, nicht nur ein Mapping zwischen dem externen Graphen und der OSM-Datenbank zu bauen, sondern den externen Graphen direkt in OSM einzubauen, dann gibt das ganz verschiedene Probleme. Ich schaffe damit (logisch betrachtet) ja ein zweites Netz von Ways, die von einem TMC-Knoten zum naechsten fuehren. Das wird nun krude ueber eine Art Vorgaenger-Pointer abgebildet, der, je nachdem, wie die OSM-Datenbank grade dasteht, auch mal ins Leere zeigen kann, weil das entspr. Objekt bei OSM fehlt oder umgetaggt wurde - obwohl ich aus der externen Datenbank ja wissen koennte, welches das betr. Objekt ist... Das wiederum läßt sich anhand der Dumps recht einfach testen. Bliebe herauszufinden, *wieso* hier die Enscheidung getroffen wurde, nicht nur die Nodes zu mappen, sondern auch den Versuch zu unternehmen, den kompletten Graphen mit zu uebernehmen. - Wir haben ja durchaus mehrere Graphen in OSM, zum Beispiel Stromleitungsnetze oder Pipeline-Netze oder die Eisenbahnlinien. Aber die sind alle mit Ways umgesetzt und nicht mit irgendwelchen speziellen numerischen Pointern. Die einzelnen Nodes sind bei TMC nicht so selbständig, wie das bei diesen anderen Netzen der Fall ist. Bei TMC liegt die Intelligenz darin, daß mit einem Knoten und einer Richtung indirekt gleich mal noch der Straßenabschnitt, die Straße, das Bundeland etc. mitgegeben ist. Aus der Richtung folgt damit (insbesondere bei Autobahnen und größeren Bundesstraßen) auch die Fahrbahn. TMC kannt keine Fahrbahn in dem Sinne, sondern nur A2 in Positiv-Richtung und A2 in Negativ-Richtung. Irgendso auf der A2 (welcher der beiden OSM-Spuren jetzt eigentlich?) also ein tag tmc_lcl_code=12345 zu setzen bringt also nichts, weil das entweder auf der Gegenspur fehlen würde oder ihm die Richtung fehlt... Wenn man die zusätzlichen Tags nicht aufbringt, ist die Auswertung noch schlechter machbar, als das jetzt schon per TMC-Liste (von der BASt) zu machen ist.) Also, in mir festigt sich die Ansicht: So, wie es ist, ist es nicht nur nervig fuer die Mapper, sondern auch fuer die TMC-Anwender unnoetig kompliziert; haette man die TMC-Datenbank extern, koennte man damit sogar besser arbeiten. Klares nein. Die übrigen Nutzer merken nicht viel von den TMC-Tags. Im schlimmsten Fall gehen sie verloren. (Daß wer mutwillig TMC-Tags vertauscht, weil es geht, wär' ja eher absurd...) Einfache Mappings sind mit TMC so nicht zu machen. Wie gesagt, bis zu einem gewissen Grad wuerde ich da auch jedem zugestehen, sein eigenes Ding irgnedwo in einer Nische bei OSM zu machen. Eigener Prefix und gut is. Aber hier haben wir es mit einem ziemlichen Kraken zu tun, der noch dazu einen taeglich laufenden Korrektur-Bot braucht, und da hoert fuer mich irgendwann der Spass auf. Der Bot wiederum sollte, nachdem die Daten einmal da sind (und solange die BASt keine neue Listen-Version raushaut) recht unnötig sein. MfG, JBG -- Jan-Benedict Glaw jbg...@lug-owl.de +49-172-7608481 Signature of:Arroganz verkürzt fruchtlose Gespräche. the second : -- Jan-Benedict Glaw signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Am 2. Februar 2011 14:07 schrieb Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: Sobald in OSM ein Node gelöscht wird, ist die Zuordnung für die Katz. Das funktioniert nicht, zumal man dann in OSM gar nicht erkennen kann, dass am Node etwas dranhängt. Wenn ich einen Node in einem Straßenverlauf lösche, nehme ich einen ohne tags. Das ist allerdings ein allgemeines Problem, das immer wieder aufkommt - wie kann man von extern in OSM hinein linken und dabei halbwegs fehlertolerant sein (d.h. ohne in OSM ein Loesch- und Editierverbot des verlinkten Objekts zu fordern). Wieso merkt sich die externe Datenbank dann nicht einfach die Koordinaten des OSM-Objektes, solange es da ist (und ggf. den groben Objekttyp und ref/name) und löst einen Bugreport aus, wenn sie feststellt, daß das verlinkte OSM-Objekt nicht mehr Existiert, seine Position um mehr als 100m verändert hat oder Objekttyp/ref/name geändert wurde? Damit könnte die externe Datenbank Updates erhalten, ohne in OSM schreiben zu müssen und bei Veränderungen in OSM, auf die die externe Datenbank linkt, könnte für *deren* Maintainer Alarm ausgelöst werden. :-) In einfachen Fällen nach bestimmten Kriterien (z.B. shop-Node gelöscht und als way mit gleichen tags an gleicher Position (+- X m) wieder hochgeladen) könnte man die Verlinkung eventuell sogar automatisch nachführen. Am besten wäre es vermutlich, für solche Fälle eine API zu haben, über die sich externe Datenbanken über Veränderungen bestimmter abonnierter Objekte in OSM informieren können - dann wäre es auch einfacher, externe Datenbanken wie Fahrpläne, Öffnungszeiten, Veranstaltungskalender etc. mit OSM-Objekten zu verknüpfen... Gruß, Martin (der keine Ahnung hat, ob und wie sowas tatsächlich umgesetzt werden könnte) ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Hallo, Am Mittwoch 02 Februar 2011 14:07:53 schrieb Frederik Ramm: Hallo, Natuerlich kann man das Problem umgehen, indem man aus OSM heraus auf die externe Datenbank linkt - aber das skaliert nicht, oder im Volksmund: Wenn das jeder machen wuerde ;) Das sehe ich in diesem Fall komplett anders. DIe TMC-Geschichte gehört zu den zentralen Daten, die zumindest mit OSM eng vermascht werden müssen. Routing mit Verkehrsinfo ist einfach Stand der Technik. Darum einen Bogen zu machen, weil man die Radiowellen oder tags in der Natur nicht sieht, damit man nichts auf den ersten Blick unverständliches lesen muss, ist für mich indiskutabel. Manche tags gehören einfach rein, auch wenn sie nur virtuell vorhanden sind. Zur Erinnerung: Die tmc-Tags sind keine Erfindung irgendwelcher OSM-Spezies, sondern vorgegebene virtuelle Marken, die der Nutzer, der OSM-Daten für sein Navi verwenden möchte, braucht. Drin lassen oder sehr eng verlinken, auch aus OSM heraus! Gruß, Wolfgang ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Hallo. Am Mittwoch 02 Februar 2011, 15:56:03 schrieb Wolfgang: DIe TMC-Geschichte gehört zu den zentralen Daten, die zumindest mit OSM eng vermascht werden müssen. Routing mit Verkehrsinfo ist einfach Stand der Technik. Aber ist nicht einerseits die Datenübertragung des TMC und auch die Herangehensweise wie die TMC-Codes definiert sind stark veraltete Technik und wird das nicht in Zukunft sowieso anders laufen? Also es ist ja abzusehen, dass die UKW-Übertragung alsbald von einer Internet- Übertragung abgelöst wird, fast alle jetzt neu entwickelten Geräte haben ja mobilen Internetzugang. Wäre die Frage ob die TMC-Codes für diese Übertragungen auch nötig sind oder ob die das auf die für mich naheliegendere Weise machen: Von Koordinate [X] bis Koordinate [Y] auf Straße [Z] mit ganz normalen GPS-Koordinaten und einem Straßennamen (A 1) den das Navi auf seine Daten projeziert. Weiß jemand wie TMCpro hier arbeitet? Auch mit (den selben) Location-Codes? Gruß, Bernd -- Fachbegriffe der Informatik (#286): Googlehupf Abstand zwischen zwei Suchergebnissen. (Markus Kempken) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
On Wed, 2011-02-02 16:19:59 +0100, Bernd Wurst be...@bwurst.org wrote: Am Mittwoch 02 Februar 2011, 15:56:03 schrieb Wolfgang: DIe TMC-Geschichte gehört zu den zentralen Daten, die zumindest mit OSM eng vermascht werden müssen. Routing mit Verkehrsinfo ist einfach Stand der Technik. Aber ist nicht einerseits die Datenübertragung des TMC und auch die Herangehensweise wie die TMC-Codes definiert sind stark veraltete Technik und wird das nicht in Zukunft sowieso anders laufen? Veraltet? Naja, Das Nutzdaten-pro-Bit-Verhältnis ist bei dem, was übertragen wird, echt verdammt gut! Wenn veraltet und anders laufen bedeutet, daß mehr bloat kommt, dann... Also es ist ja abzusehen, dass die UKW-Übertragung alsbald von einer Internet- Übertragung abgelöst wird, fast alle jetzt neu entwickelten Geräte haben ja mobilen Internetzugang. Wäre die Frage ob die TMC-Codes für diese UKW gibts für lau. Bzw. gegen GEZ-Gebühr. Wifi und UMTS gibts nur gegen Extra-Geld, die Technik ist (denk' auch an die Navis) teurer und komplizierter. Maximal kommen die Daten noch in DAB (bzw. DAB+) mit rein, aber ich geh' davon aus, daß es TMC noch sehr, sehr lange Zeit geben wird. Übertragungen auch nötig sind oder ob die das auf die für mich naheliegendere Weise machen: Von Koordinate [X] bis Koordinate [Y] auf Straße [Z] mit ganz normalen GPS-Koordinaten und einem Straßennamen (A 1) den das Navi auf seine Daten projeziert. Das paßt nicht in die behördlichen Vorgänge ;-) MfG, JBG -- Jan-Benedict Glaw jbg...@lug-owl.de +49-172-7608481 Signature of:http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html the second : signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Moin, Am 02.02.2011 15:56, schrieb Wolfgang: Hallo, Am Mittwoch 02 Februar 2011 14:07:53 schrieb Frederik Ramm: Natuerlich kann man das Problem umgehen, indem man aus OSM heraus auf die externe Datenbank linkt - aber das skaliert nicht, oder im Volksmund: Wenn das jeder machen wuerde ;) Das sehe ich in diesem Fall komplett anders. DIe TMC-Geschichte gehört zu den zentralen Daten, die zumindest mit OSM eng vermascht werden müssen. Routing mit Verkehrsinfo ist einfach Stand der Technik. Darum einen Bogen zu machen, weil man die Radiowellen oder tags in der Natur nicht sieht, damit man nichts auf den ersten Blick unverständliches lesen muss, ist für mich indiskutabel. Manche tags gehören einfach rein, auch wenn sie nur virtuell vorhanden sind. Zur Erinnerung: Die tmc-Tags sind keine Erfindung irgendwelcher OSM-Spezies, sondern vorgegebene virtuelle Marken, die der Nutzer, der OSM-Daten für sein Navi verwenden möchte, braucht. Drin lassen oder sehr eng verlinken, auch aus OSM heraus! muß mich schon stark wundern, das hört sich nach Relevanz-Diskussionen ala Wikipedia an. TMC ist funktional direkt auf Navigationssysteme ausgelegt und nicht für Mikrowellen und Waschmaschinen. Die Aktualität dürfte in der Regel größer als bei Telefonnummern irgendwelcher Restaurants sein. OSM ist gerade für Navigationssyteme und für Landkarten gedacht. Und die Logik: Kenn ich nicht, ess ich nicht kann wohl kein Grund sein, TMC-Daten zu löschen. Da fallen mir auf Anhieb Tags ein, die weder mit Landkarten, noch Navis etwas zu haben, aber die Krücke muß ich wohl hier nicht bemühen. *entsetzt* Elwood ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Hallo. Am Mittwoch 02 Februar 2011, 16:35:38 schrieb Jan-Benedict Glaw: Aber ist nicht einerseits die Datenübertragung des TMC und auch die Herangehensweise wie die TMC-Codes definiert sind stark veraltete Technik und wird das nicht in Zukunft sowieso anders laufen? Veraltet? Naja, Das Nutzdaten-pro-Bit-Verhältnis ist bei dem, was übertragen wird, echt verdammt gut! Wenn veraltet und anders laufen bedeutet, daß mehr bloat kommt, dann... Das mag sein, aber macht das in der Praxis was aus? Also viel zu oft geht die Daten-Sparsamkeit in die Richtung, dass dann irgendwelche proprietären oder zumindest fast nicht re-implementierbaren Algorithmen zum Zug kommen. Siehe meinen naiven Vorschlag, das ist zwar vermutlich etwas bloated aber trivial auszuwerten ohne jedliche Dritt-Daten, Chiffre-Listen oder sonstiges Zeug wofür man jederzeit Geld verlangen könnte. Selbst ein GPS-Gerät ohne jegliche Karte könnte einem sagen wo man nicht hin fahren soll. Zudem hier ja nur Broadcast zur Verfügung steht, bei einer IP-Verbindung würde man naheliegender Weise ein Poll-Verfahren benutzen und nur das runterladen was einen interessiert. UKW gibts für lau. Bzw. gegen GEZ-Gebühr. Wifi und UMTS gibts nur gegen Extra-Geld, die Technik ist (denk' auch an die Navis) teurer und komplizierter. Maximal kommen die Daten noch in DAB (bzw. DAB+) mit rein, aber ich geh' davon aus, daß es TMC noch sehr, sehr lange Zeit geben wird. Ich teile diese Meinung zu UKW, aber schau dir die Praxis an. Youtube und Co sind so ziemlich das schlimmste was man dem Internet antun konnte und trotzdem ist es gemacht worden. Und auch die Öffentlich-rechtlichen Anstalten mischen kräftig mit indem sie eine Infrastruktur betreiben die das Fernsehschauen via IP-Verbindung (und eben nicht Multicast!) ermöglicht. Es gibt heute TV- Receiver ohne jeglichen Tuner (siehe Telekom) und ähnlich wildes Zeug. Und UMTS-Verbindungen werden in den allerwenigsten Fällen individuell abgerechnet, da setzt sich die Trafficpauschale doch sehr durch. Und in einem MB Traffic bekommt man auch viele aufgeblähte Infos unter. Man muss das nicht gut finden, aber das ist die Entwicklung der Dinge. Nicht dass morgen jemand den Schalter umlegt und TMC abschaltet, nein. Aber wenn wir jetzt erst anfangen die Infrastruktur für TMC in den Daten zu bauen, ist es dann noch von Bedeutung wenn es benutzbar wird? Übertragungen auch nötig sind oder ob die das auf die für mich naheliegendere Weise machen: Von Koordinate [X] bis Koordinate [Y] auf Straße [Z] mit ganz normalen GPS-Koordinaten und einem Straßennamen (A 1) den das Navi auf seine Daten projeziert. Das paßt nicht in die behördlichen Vorgänge ;-) TMCpro hat mit behördlichen Vorgängen ja nichts zu tun, das ist ja privatwirtschaftlich organisiert. Auch diese Entwicklung muss man nicht gut finden, aber wenn Behörden banale Dinge zu umständlich machen gibt es halt Firmen die das ganze für Geld einfacher anbieten. Daher erneut die Frage: Nutzt TMCpro ebenfalls diese Technik? Gerüchteweise (habe kein TMCpro-Gerät) soll das ja detailliertere Infos bieten. Gruß, Bernd -- Ich moechte Windows kaufen. Sind Sie verrueckt? Gehoert das zu den Lizenzbedingungen? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Koennen wir die TMC-Daten rauswerfen?
Hallo, On 02/02/11 16:52, Frank Gruender wrote: TMC ist funktional direkt auf Navigationssysteme ausgelegt und nicht für Mikrowellen und Waschmaschinen. Die Aktualität dürfte in der Regel größer als bei Telefonnummern irgendwelcher Restaurants sein. OSM ist gerade für Navigationssyteme und für Landkarten gedacht. Das ist doch aber kein Argument. TMC ist keine inhaerente Eigenschaft der Strassen und Wege, die wir vor uns sehen. TMC ist eine komplett separate Datenbank, die mit OSM erstmal nichts zu tun hat und die sich irgendeine dritte Stelle ausgedacht hat. Eine von ziemlich vielen, wie ich annehme. Ich bin nicht ueberzeugt, dass diese Datenbank nur nutzbar gemacht werden kann, indem sie komplett in OSM importiert und dort gepflegt wird. Und die Logik: Kenn ich nicht, ess ich nicht kann wohl kein Grund sein, TMC-Daten zu löschen. Da fallen mir auf Anhieb Tags ein, die weder mit Landkarten, noch Navis etwas zu haben, aber die Krücke muß ich wohl hier nicht bemühen. Grundsaetzlich haben die meisten Leute Respekt vor fremden Daten, die sie nicht kennen. Trotzdem muss man davon ausgehen, dass unverstaendliche und un-ueberpruefbare Daten oefter mal unter die Raeder geraten oder verfaelscht werden, auch voellig unabsichtlich. Das, was wir im Augenblick haben, ist ganz bestimmt keine tragfaehige Loesung, und wenn es, wie jemand anders sagte, ein Pilotschema zur Erfassung von TMC in anderen Laendern sein sollte, dann wuerde ich sagen, es ist gescheitert. Aber ich bin sicher, dass es eine Loesung gibt, die es ermoeglicht, die TMC-Datenbank z.B. bei der Datenaufbereitung fuers Navi hinzuzuladen, statt die TMC-Datenbank komplett in OSM zu stopfen und damit (a) allen auf die Nerven zu fallen und (b) Datenfehlern Tuer und Tor zu oeffnen. Jan-Benedict, habe ich Dich richtig verstanden, dass ein TMC-Code praktisch sowas bezeichnet wie eine etwas abstrakte Strassenkreuzung? Das haben wir doch z.B. bei Mautpunkten auch - da wird die Maut zwischen der Anschlusstelle A und der Anschlusstelle B berechnet, und diese Anschlusstellen sind ja bei uns in OSM auch keine Nodes, sondern ein Sammelsurium an Nodes, motorway_links, usw. Wenn ich nun z.B. eine Relation haette, die mir besagt: Die folgenden 15 Objekte machen zusammen die Anschlusstelle 13 der A8 aus, und das ganze Ding hat den TMC-Code soundso - wuerde mir das dann reichen? Oder hat die Anschlusstelle 13 verschiedene TMC-Codes, je nachdem, in welche Richtung man sie betrachtet? Und warum TMC:cid_58:tabcd_1:... - muss man davon ausgehen, dass es die gleichen LocationCodes auch im Namensraum TMC:cid_59:tabcd_1 oder TMC:cid_58:tabcd_2 gibt? Und nochmal meine Frage von eingangs: Der Mapper hatte zunaechst nur LocationCode = 47739 gesetzt. Der Bot hat dann PrevLocationCode = 28866 ergaenzt. Wo hat der Bot diese Information her - und wenn es einen Algorithmus gibt, nach dem der Bot das ermitteln konnte, warum muss es dann explizit in der Datenbank stehen? Koennte es sein, dass der Algorithmus falsche Ergebnisse liefert und ich das dann von Hand im Einzelfall auf PrevLocationCode = 28867 korrigieren muss oder so? Bye Frederik ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
