[talk-au] Fwd: Re: Plea to Australian decliners. An agreement from morb_au.
My response to Grant Slater. Original Message Subject:Re: Plea to Australian decliners. An agreement from morb_au. Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 09:20:47 +1000 From: Brendan Morley morb...@commonmap.info Organisation: CommonMap Inc To: Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com CC: talk-au talk-au@openstreetmap.org, osm-f...@googlegroups.com Hi Grant, Thank you for the invitation. It's time for me to show some leadership on this issue. I'm going to agree to OSM's request for new Contributor Terms. For sure, the OSM licence change made me think long and hard about what I really wanted to get out of my contributions. And that's a conversation for another day. But my philosophy is pretty simple. Ultimately I want my contributions to be write once, use anywhere. But there are practical considerations. Many of my contributions were built upon work that did not explicitly agree to OSMF's new terms; NearMap and Yahoo in particular. Could I really agree to the OSMF terms anyway? In private conversations with @rweait and @melaskia I have been assured that yes, I can. I'm certainly keeping @rweait's email for safe keeping, just in case. There being no further excuses not to accept OSMF's offer, I am going to say yes. It would be petty of me to continue to hold out. I would suggest if other holdouts have had similar concerns, they consider this philosophy and see if it works for them. Quickly. Thanks, Brendan -- Brendan Morley President, CommonMap Inc. morb...@commonmap.info http://commonmap.org/ Queensland Incorporated Association 37762 Also find us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn -- On 31/03/2012 12:54 AM, Grant Slater wrote: Australian Decliners, As a mapper, contributor and member of the project's sysadmin team I kindly ask you to please reconsider your declined status. Time is about to run out. The strength of the project is mappers (bonus points to GPS mappers) and other contributors. If you have decided to move onto FOSM.org, CommonMap or other fork I wish you luck and morn the loss of you as an OSM mapper. Declining hurts fellow Australian mappers who have in good faith build data on-top of your contributions and will leave animosity between our projects. Thanks Grant Mapper and overworked volunteer OpenStreetMap sysadmin. This message is all mine. I am not some cheap rent boy paid by OSMF, Bing / Microsoft, MapQuest / AOL, Lizard-People or any other group. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [OSM-talk] Tag for true OSM data?
Hi Jukka, I'm just wondering why you would prefer using Corine landcover data [...] from the original sources and not pushed through OSM? Thanks, Brendan On 31/03/2011 5:51 PM, Jukka Rahkonen wrote: Hi, I am mostly interested in truly original OSM data created by our contributors. Now when folks are more and more importing data into OSM it is getting less usable for me. For example if I want to use Corine landcover data I prefer using it from the original sources and not pushed through OSM. Could it be reasonable to have some true_osm=yes tag for the original OSM features? -Jukka Rahkonen- ___ 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: [talk-au] Charleville, Qld survey suggestions sought
Suggest you survey shopfronts / parks (or work out which land parcels are parks) / public buildings. IMO street names and addresses are on life row (opposite to death row I guess) for release under CC By in Queensland. And yes there is an astronomy observatory near the airport, fairly well signposted from memory (I visited there ~1998). On 7/09/2011 1:09 PM, Christopher Barham wrote: Hi, I'm in Charleville, Qld for a couple of days with an iPhone, a garmin oregon GPS and, from tomorrow, a vehicle. The place is pretty much unsurveyed, but the DCDB has been used to add streets so the road geometry is ok. Will do what I can (street names etc) , but I wondered if there is anything you guys could suggest would benefit from a survey around and about... maybe further out from the town itself? Cheers Chris Sent from my iPhone ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [OSM-talk] Hitting reset on talk-au
On 11/07/2011 8:08 PM, Simon Poole wrote: It's really up to -them- to remedy the mistakes -they- made (ABS2006 import and similar). I'm sad to think you characterise ABS2006 as a mistake. *** Warning - some licensing discussion follows *** ABS2006 is a CC BY dataset isn't it? While I haven't been following many of the latest arguments, for me it seems the irreconcilable differences stem from: * The Australian Government is in love with the CC By and related CC licences for any Australian publicly funded information, refer www.ausgoal.gov.au for the latest incarnation of this policy. * AusGov seem to have no problem with the use of CC By for databases. * Mappers are in love with the highest quality open representation of the map possible (I assume). * If ABS2006 is a mistake licensing-wise, then it would be a mistake to import any Australian Government geodata into OSM these days. * Some of these AusGov geodatasets are hard to simulate any other way (e.g. land parcels and suburb boundaries). * The move away from CC By-SA materially reduces the quality available to the OSM map in Australia - both from Government and Nearmap sources. * People get cranky if their perceived quality of life gets threatened - the quality of the OSM data in Australia being a proxy for this in the Australian OSMming community. This is the main reason why I created CommonMap. I am not interested in share-alike (geodata that is freely published cannot be taken) and I am interested in the highest quality open representation of the map possible. It seems, for better or for worse, that there is no longer a way to do this using OSM in the Australian context. Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Hitting reset on talk-au
Hi Frederik, thanks for discussing. On 11/07/2011 10:58 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 07/11/11 14:46, Brendan Morley wrote: * If ABS2006 is a mistake licensing-wise, then it would be a mistake to import any Australian Government geodata into OSM these days. I belive importing *any* data into OSM is a mistake most of the time. It doesn't help you at all in building a community. If the foundation of your project are imports then you'll utimately have a few bigwigs writing the scripts and deciding how things are done. That's a different kind of project - a collection of open government data maybe. I believe ESRI are doing something like that. But you'll not find a community caring for your imported gov't data. Well as you may know I'm taking a different tack again to either of the above - essentially I want the highest quality open map. We have an opportunity (in Australia at least) to let the government inside the tent, and allow government and the community as equals in information sharing. If OSM is about building a community, over building the highest quality open map, then yes I agree we have very different visions. By the way, ESRI has its own peculiarities: refer http://commonmap.org/faq#10n127 and http://commonmap.org/faq#188n194 There's really no reason for official land parcel data in OSM. Importing official land parcel data will certainly deteriorate, and not improve, the quality of OSM. With respect I'm completely gobsmacked by this attitude. Accurate boundaries are a WIN, surely? The only trick is to preserve the foreign key, so that one can detect changes in the source dataset and synchronise changes over time. I take it personally to be honest. Often we get Public Notices in our local newspapers that refer only to Lot on Plan information. Up until now it's been very difficult to track down where in space those L/P's refer to. The whole, are they going to build a freeway next to by house kind of question. (Mind you, the new license doesn't seem to keep the Brits from drawing on attribution-only sources released by *their* government but maybe the law is stricter down under?) Indeed, I don't know why the ABS2006 data is an issue. However, I would guesstimate the Australian Government would be highly unlikely to take action, after all, AusGov wants to use the most permissive attribution licence available. However, if an OSM editor started shifting the boundaries around and still claimed it to be straight ABS data - that would be a moral rights issue. Thanks, Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Hitting reset on talk-au
On 12/07/2011 1:53 AM, Simon Poole wrote: Am 11.07.2011 14:46, schrieb Brendan Morley: On 11/07/2011 8:08 PM, Simon Poole wrote: It's really up to -them- to remedy the mistakes -they- made (ABS2006 import and similar). I'm sad to think you characterise ABS2006 as a mistake. The import was made at a point in time when it was clear that the license change process was going to start in earnest. At least a couple of warning bells should have gone off and red lights start flashing. I'll have to get back in my time machine to be sure, but I don't think that was clear to me at the time. I think there was plenty of enthusiasm for the fact that AusGov had finally opened something up of use to the OSM community. If the change process was in the consciousness, I think there may have still have been hope that people could vote no. But I'm not complaining about that, mistakes happen and it is done deed now. BUT as you point out the Australian government has become more flexible about licensing and there is a fair chance that either the data could be relicensed under CC-by (which might be compatible with the ODbL) or that special permission could be obtained to keep the material in the database. I think re-importing might be a better outcome. For example, Queensland now has official suburb boundaries up under CC By - better resolution than the ABS version anyway. But instead of trying to help the Australian community resolve this issue, you and others, keep on peddling their respective forks-of-the-day, The situation is irreconcilable. In my case, if I realised then what I know now, OSM was the wrong project for me to choose in the first place. That's because I believe Share Alike doesn't actually add anything in a practical sense, it actually gets in the way of better community mapping. Then again I also believe that innovation should happen at the speed of capital entrepreneurship, not just the developers' own itches. In the Australian market, OSM is caught between a rock and a hard place: * Whenever the share-alike aspect is not guaranteed forever, NearMap will refuse to be a derivation/adaptation source. (SA is an essential part of their business model - believe me, I tried to change their mind on that.) * Whenever the share-alike aspect is declared, no government will participate in the crowd-to-agency part of geodata roundtripping. Contracts are now being let that explicitly require the captured geodata to be releasable under CC By. OSM contributions by definition are simply not in the running. which flatly is simply SPAM (in your case well disguised). Fair call. Though I'm only doing this in response to Steve Coast's recent blog post http://opengeodata.org/hitting-reset-on-talk-au Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF ! + PD / CC0 projects
On 11/06/2011 10:02 AM, Nic Roets wrote: Not at all - I know of no form of democracy that distinguishes between grudging acceptance or evangelical zeal. Dermot, I would quite like to take my data and start my own PD / CC0 project. Nic, Before you go doing that, please consider the fine choices already in play. For example I am setting up CommonMap which is CC By and CC0 friendly. Have a look at http://commonmap.org/faq - if you like what you see, please contribute in the customary manner (cash, developer time, advocacy, import processing, etc). If that is not your style, enter OSM-Fork into your favourite search engine and you'll come across some other systems in play. Thanks, Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-ca] NAD83-SCRS vs WGS84 Reference systems
Daniel, I was musing on a similar topic just recently, which I've cc'd to: http://www.commonmap.org/blog/commonmaps-common-datum/2011-03-27 I assume you mean NAD83(CSRS) coordinates, by the way? My understanding is the de facto datum of OSM is WGS84/ITRF with epoch varying with the age of each entered coordinate, and planimetric accuracy at best 10 metres (at 10m, WGS84=ITRF). Given NAD83 and WGS84 are also within the 10m error, you could just argue that you can just upload the coordinates to OSM as is. Leave a note in the changeset (maybe per boundary way?) noting where the rigorous values can transformation methods can be found. However if you want to adjust the coordinates, you could try the NAD83-ITRF (WGS84) 7(+3 dynamic) parameter similarity (Helmert) conversion for areas without a better option. This paper is the best I've found on the matter; see Section 4 of: http://www.geod.nrcan.gc.ca/publications/papers/pdf/nad83csrs.pdf Remember that the coordinates start drifting with 2-3cm/annum velocity as soon as you enter then into OSM! Do you want to be this rigorous? Brendan On 27/03/2011 5:55 AM, Daniel Begin wrote: Hi all, I need someone to confirm the following about reference system... Context: Paul and I are uploading US-Canada boundary monuments/turning points to get a stable and verifiable information. The data is available from their web site and I got the confirmation that the data can be used without any restriction. The data can be found here... http://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/products.html and it is available for NAD27 and NAD83-SCRS reference system. Context: For what I understand, The difference between NAD83-SCRS and WGS84 is 0-2 meters. To get a rigorous transformation from NAD83-SCRS to WGS84 we need to use shift grids describing the shift between NAD83 and NAD83-SCRS. These grids should be available through provincial agencies but I have been told that not all provinces have them available. Question1: Do I understand it properly? Question2: Considering that provided coordinates value/reference numbers can be read directly from their web site, it make sense for me to use NAD83-SCRS directly even if there is a 0-2 meter offset. Does it make sense for everyone? Cheers, Daniel ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] [OSGeo-Discuss] CommonMap in Canada
Hi Bob. Service node? Maybe I can explain it another way. Once I have Canada's implementation with enough momentum, I will be quite happy to add other countries to the map. Or from another perspective, I'm also quite happy to load share the underlying PostgreSQL database with another (independently-maintained) system node. Thanks, Brendan On 15/03/2011 12:43 AM, Bob Basques wrote: Brendan, Have you figured out how other entities (like countries or ??) might implement a similar service node that could interact with your framework design? bobb Brendan Morley morb@beagle.com.au wrote: Hi all, I just wanted to let you know that the CommonMap initiative is still alive, as am I. To recap, CommonMap will be a collaboration and repository of liberally-licensed geodata (without share-alike) - accessible though an OpenStreetMap-style interface. We will accept Creative Commons Attribution, CC0 and public domain geodata contributions, depending on your jurisdiction. We expect it will find fresh acceptance in the Gov 2.0 movement, since it allows governments to redistribute contributions from the community. We also are quite happy to accept OpenStreetMap contributors who find themselves dissatisfied with its default licence. We want to focus on a particular country at first, which is Canada. Why? * It has quite a comprehensive open data catalogue; * It appears to have a compatible licence; * It also has a rigorous foreign key model, which bodes well for roundtripping back to government; * It's the home of Refractions Research, the custodian of PostGIS which is a good friend of mine; * Finally, it helps that Sam Vekemans is our enthusiastic man on the ground over there. We want to get as much of Natural Resources Canada's GeoBase and Canvec publications into the CommonMap database as we can, and use Canada as a showcase country for what CommonMap can uniquely do. The proof of concept API instance is currently at http://api.development.i386.commonmap.org/ It is hosting an overlay of: * Natural Earth Data; * Some sample Geobase National Road Network, National Hydro Network and Land Cover datasets. (Hint: look up Victoria, British Columbia[1] for an example of all 3 datasets together.) Next comes the challenge of ramping up to a public launch. The core of CommonMap is a web-facing API and its one true database, a download site for XML full copies of that database, and a map tile server with its optimised database. To run this at public scale will demand about 8-10 CPU cores and associated storage, or about US $10,000 per year. Let's face it, we will require a higher rate of donations to do this. If you believe in the idea of CommonMap, a good way to show your support is to donate to CommonMap Inc. (CommonMap Inc is the non profit body that operates the CommonMap internet resources.) Potential donors, please head this way: http://www.commonmap.org/page/donate Even if you can't spare the cash, perhaps you can spare your skills or tools, whether they be in geodesy, obtaining or converting geodata imports, running up database or tile servers, or developing applications? Let us know. Please feel free to forward this news to whoever you wish. I welcome all comments: You can make further enquires by return email, the commonmap.org website, or CommonMap at LinkedIn, Facebook or Twitter. Sam Vekemans also has a group blog for CommonMap set up at Posterous. Thanks, Brendan [1] http://api.development.i386.commonmap.org/?lat=48.821lon=-123.574zoom=9layers=BFTF -- Brendan Morley President, CommonMap Inc. morb...@commonmap.info http://commonmap.org/ Queensland Incorporated Association 37762 Also find us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn -- ___ Discuss mailing list disc...@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
[Talk-ca] CommonMap in Canada
Hi all, I just wanted to let you know that the CommonMap initiative is still alive, as am I. To recap, CommonMap will be a collaboration and repository of liberally-licensed geodata (without share-alike) - accessible though an OpenStreetMap-style interface. We will accept Creative Commons Attribution, CC0 and public domain geodata contributions, depending on your jurisdiction. We expect it will find fresh acceptance in the Gov 2.0 movement, since it allows governments to redistribute contributions from the community. We also are quite happy to accept OpenStreetMap contributors who find themselves dissatisfied with its default licence. We want to focus on a particular country at first, which is Canada. Why? * It has quite a comprehensive open data catalogue; * It appears to have a compatible licence; * It also has a rigorous foreign key model, which bodes well for roundtripping back to government; * It's the home of Refractions Research, the custodian of PostGIS which is a good friend of mine; * Finally, it helps that Sam Vekemans is our enthusiastic man on the ground over there. We want to get as much of Natural Resources Canada's GeoBase and Canvec publications into the CommonMap database as we can, and use Canada as a showcase country for what CommonMap can uniquely do. The proof of concept API instance is currently at http://api.development.i386.commonmap.org/ It is hosting an overlay of: * Natural Earth Data; * Some sample Geobase National Road Network, National Hydro Network and Land Cover datasets. (Hint: look up Victoria, British Columbia[1] for an example of all 3 datasets together.) Next comes the challenge of ramping up to a public launch. The core of CommonMap is a web-facing API and its one true database, a download site for XML full copies of that database, and a map tile server with its optimised database. To run this at public scale will demand about 8-10 CPU cores and associated storage, or about US $10,000 per year. Let's face it, we will require a higher rate of donations to do this. If you believe in the idea of CommonMap, a good way to show your support is to donate to CommonMap Inc. (CommonMap Inc is the non profit body that operates the CommonMap internet resources.) Potential donors, please head this way: http://www.commonmap.org/page/donate Even if you can't spare the cash, perhaps you can spare your skills or tools, whether they be in geodesy, obtaining or converting geodata imports, running up database or tile servers, or developing applications? Let us know. Please feel free to forward this news to whoever you wish. I welcome all comments: You can make further enquires by return email, the commonmap.org website, or CommonMap at LinkedIn, Facebook or Twitter. Sam Vekemans also has a group blog for CommonMap set up at Posterous. Thanks, Brendan [1] http://api.development.i386.commonmap.org/?lat=48.821lon=-123.574zoom=9layers=BFTF -- Brendan Morley President, CommonMap Inc. morb...@commonmap.info http://commonmap.org/ Queensland Incorporated Association 37762 Also find us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn -- ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
[talk-au] Brisbane Flooding on NearMap
Folks NearMap's flood run of Brisbane is partially online. e.g. in the CBD through to Oxley Creek at least. Sam Vekemans has expressed interest to me in helping trace the flood line. All I can say to that right now is please trace not just to the level of the visible floodwater but also the traces of where it's been. For example, it's fairly obvious on most of the roads where the high tide of the silt/sludge has been. This will be an invaluable resource in, essentially, where not to build. I have no idea what to tag it, I'm sure you'll work something out. Brendan ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] license change map
On 21/11/2010 12:18 PM, Andrew Laughton wrote: In my opinion OSM will never recover to the same point that it is at today if data is removed for the simple reason that most, if not all government data will need to be removed, Why would government data need to be removed? Australian government geodata, for example, is definitely migrating to CC BY (no SA). Last I looked this is compatible with CC BY-SA and (in spirit) ODbL. It is a bit like BSD and Linux. Not many people are even aware that Apple use BSD as their foundation, while Linux, Apple and anyone else can use any part of BSD, BSD is by itself. Linux started long after BSD, yet it is very much stronger because of its license. This result won't necessarily translate to geodata. Software is subject to patents, rightly or wrongly. In contrast, the collection methods for geodata are pretty much all covered by prior art. Also, would you argue that Apple has a more polished product than anything in the Linux family? Brendan ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] CC-BY geodatasets now appearing on Information Queensland
Hello Australian Mappers, I've just noticed a few of the datasets on Information Queensland now have the CC BY endorsement and not just the DERM Open Short Licence (which for example prohibits redistribution). They seem to be just the datasets that DERM and GA have exclusive IP rights to, e.g.: Locality Boundaries LGA Boundaries Place Names Gazetteer Ordered Drainage Examples still on DERM Open Short Licence: Property Addresses Property Boundaries Elevation Contours Brendan -- Brendan Morley President, CommonMap Inc. morb...@commonmap.info http://commonmap.org/ Queensland Incorporated Association 37762 Also find us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn -- ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[OSM-talk] Blue sky API: Branching function
Hi all, Firstly, put this in the blue sky dreaming bucket. But I am interested in the latent demand out there. Some of us will be familiar with subversion or git, which are source code version control systems. We also know that OSM API v0.6 contains some Changeset semantics. However, I don't think v0.6 has the concept of branching? And http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/API_v0.7 doesn't mention it either? I'd like to introduce the concept of branches in the OSM API. Branches in the OSM API would be similar to branches in a more traditional VCS. You would use them to stage a set of changes that you hope to have eventually merged into the main map. Now, consider these use-cases - somewhat contrived but not by much: 1. Several importable datasets can cover a particular region - e.g. a national dataset at low level of detail and a provincial dataset at a high level of detail. Both are compatible with the licence of the day (CC BY or CC BY-SA, etc). And we want to convert and present them to our userbase in the form they've come to know and love. Right now, we can only feasibly pick one or the other. To pick both would mean the major Ways would have a doubled-up representation. An alternative is to go through the 2 datasets and manually merge them before uploading to the API. If a concept of branching occurred, we could run a trunk/master (similar in concept to what we have today) and then 2 additional branches, e.g. ca-gov and ca-gov-provincial. Load them all up and then merge the branches into the trunk at a more leisurely pace. Get your friends to help out. The gov branches could also be a staging point for community changes to be accepted back into government repositories. 2. For what-if scenarios. For example, to illustrate a proposal for a new motorway or something. I suppose this could be extended to complete fantasy scenarios (though if this were the case I would discourage hosting them on the main OSM website). Any plan would be to firstly achieve svn-like functionality and stabilise it; then secondly to try on a full DVCS scenario, like git, in an additional release (which would make the fantasy mappers happy). I think we could introduce it in a way that doesn't break 0.6 XML parsers. You might introduce a new XML attribute in Changesets, such as branch name or parent (I'm not sure how git does it). Anything lacking the new tag would continue to be assumed as a implicit trunk/mainline change. The API database schema itself would also have to be mutated. I haven't yet worked out if this is trivial, either in the schema itself or its likely performance impacts. There is an implied semantic being broken that I can think of: You could no longer assume that the change history is ordered by ID or timestamp. Thoughts? Brendan ref: http://book.git-scm.com/1_the_git_object_model.html ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Anonymous edits on OpenStreetMap through Tor
On 7/10/2010 7:57 AM, Emilie Laffray wrote: On 6 October 2010 22:46, Niklas Cholmkvist towards...@gmail.com mailto:towards...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, is anyone contributing to OpenStreetMap by using Tor? (the onion router) Is there any opinion from anyone about this? Tor is used to strengthen ones privacy by the technology trying to prevent revealing the ip address of the user. Since the project doesn't log IP Addresses as far as I can tell, there is no privacy gain by using TOR. It will be good to check for sure. Certainly in my CommonMap project it's a different story, I'm using Apache httpd as the web server. Out of the box httpd logs IP addresses in the access_log. I think OSM is also using Apache httpd now as well. It's likely that the sysadmins would almost never use the logging results, but it could still be a problem if, say, the hardware got seized for investigation. Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Fwd: CommonMap Mediawiki and Drupal sites
The following may be of interest to: * Those who wish to contribute to CommonMap in future (i.e. adventures in non-Sharealike mapping) * Tracking how well a Drupal site integrates with an OSM-like Rails website * Those who also have experience in Drupal sysadmin Thanks, Brendan Original Message Subject:CommonMap Mediawiki and Drupal sites Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2010 11:20:30 +1000 From: Brendan Morley morb...@commonmap.info Organisation: CommonMap Inc To: frie...@commonmap.info, osm-f...@googlegroups.com Friends of CommonMap and OSM fork group, As you may know I have a Mediawiki site up at http://www.commonmap.info/ and an evaluation Drupal site up at http://demo.commonmap.org/drupal/ I think the Drupal site is good enough to fork into the flagship position at http://www.commonmap.info/ And I would like to move the current inhabitant of http://www.commonmap.info/ to something like http://old.commonmap.info/ I would like to do this in the next few days. However as a sanity check I'd like to check in with the community, see if you can see a flaw in my plan. So, a little bit of background behind my motivation: The intent of evaluating the Drupal software was to determine if it could take over the wiki role, as well as the user diary, issue tracking, etc. In OSM this is either covered by bespoke software (User Diaries) or spread over several point solutions. In contrast, Drupal brings the User diary (or in Drupal terms, per user blogs) function into a larger community of developers. Wrapping in the other functions (like issue tracking) should allow for much richer hyperlinking within the CommonMap community. Other nice things that Drupal gives us: * ReCAPTCHA spam deterrents * Larger development community generally * Filter by communities of interest (Professional vs Amateur, by region, etc) * Event posting and reminders * Forum * User profiles and friending I can post the full list of Drupal modules I intend to enable, if anyone is interested. Generally the intent is to let OSM's rails code only handle the stuff that unique to OSM-style projects (e.g. the REST API, and the metadata browsing pages like http://www.demo.commonmap.org/browse/changeset/113) - and let Drupal do the things that can benefit from a wider development community. As for timing, well I really would like to launch this CommonMap thing much more publicly and a big remaining part of that is getting all the hyperlinks set up between the Rails site and the Drupal site. I'm not sure what else requires explanation at this time, so please ask away... Brendan -- Brendan Morley President, CommonMap Inc. morb...@commonmap.info http://commonmap.info/ Queensland Incorporated Association 37762 -- ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Are there any other projects in a similar fork situation? (Slightly OT)
Hi Serge, On 2/10/2010 12:04 PM, Serge Wroclawski wrote: Now my opinion of any potential OpenStreetMap fork. I think such a project would fail, and here are my reasons why: If failure is the opposite of success, what are your criteria for success? 2) The forkers don't agree on the reason to fork True. Others want a whole new map that's (effectively) public domain (whether that's CC0 or CC-BY, or something else) Yes. If you believe strongly in public domain geodata, you won't find BY-SA acceptable, Is this really the case? I actually investigated the use of public domain principles - however Australian copyright law does not allow it. The best we can do is a CC BY with zero attribution. If there's anyone out there who can let me know why zero attribution is not a good enough substitute for public domain, I'd like to get in contact with you. 3) OSM has external organizational support OSM now has organizational, government and commercial support. That's something none of the forks will have. I beg to differ. CommonMap (the CC BY of which you write) definitely has Australian Government interest. CC BY-SA suffers from a flaw that government cannot take back anything from the community. And any support given by government (from what I've seen) applies equally to CC BY repositories as well. I haven't seen anything from the forkers that gives the average user a compelling reason to switch. The average contributor doesn't care about whether the license is CC-BY-SA or ODbL. And since OSM has the mindshare, developer mindshare and financial resources backing it, it's likely to remain ahead. Again, all depends on your criteria for success. Just having a one stop shop for public sector geodata would be achievement enough from a personal perspective. The ability for all the local knowledge to be fed back to government is certainly icing on the cake. Thanks, Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[talk-au] Fwd: CommonMap Mediawiki and Drupal sites
The following may be of interest to: * Those who wish to contribute to CommonMap in future (i.e. adventures in non-Sharealike mapping) * Tracking how well a Drupal site integrates with an OSM-like Rails website * Those who also have experience in Drupal sysadmin Thanks, Brendan Original Message Subject:CommonMap Mediawiki and Drupal sites Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2010 11:20:30 +1000 From: Brendan Morley morb...@commonmap.info Organisation: CommonMap Inc To: frie...@commonmap.info, osm-f...@googlegroups.com Friends of CommonMap and OSM fork group, As you may know I have a Mediawiki site up at http://www.commonmap.info/ and an evaluation Drupal site up at http://demo.commonmap.org/drupal/ I think the Drupal site is good enough to fork into the flagship position at http://www.commonmap.info/ And I would like to move the current inhabitant of http://www.commonmap.info/ to something like http://old.commonmap.info/ I would like to do this in the next few days. However as a sanity check I'd like to check in with the community, see if you can see a flaw in my plan. So, a little bit of background behind my motivation: The intent of evaluating the Drupal software was to determine if it could take over the wiki role, as well as the user diary, issue tracking, etc. In OSM this is either covered by bespoke software (User Diaries) or spread over several point solutions. In contrast, Drupal brings the User diary (or in Drupal terms, per user blogs) function into a larger community of developers. Wrapping in the other functions (like issue tracking) should allow for much richer hyperlinking within the CommonMap community. Other nice things that Drupal gives us: * ReCAPTCHA spam deterrents * Larger development community generally * Filter by communities of interest (Professional vs Amateur, by region, etc) * Event posting and reminders * Forum * User profiles and friending I can post the full list of Drupal modules I intend to enable, if anyone is interested. Generally the intent is to let OSM's rails code only handle the stuff that unique to OSM-style projects (e.g. the REST API, and the metadata browsing pages like http://www.demo.commonmap.org/browse/changeset/113) - and let Drupal do the things that can benefit from a wider development community. As for timing, well I really would like to launch this CommonMap thing much more publicly and a big remaining part of that is getting all the hyperlinks set up between the Rails site and the Drupal site. I'm not sure what else requires explanation at this time, so please ask away... Brendan -- Brendan Morley President, CommonMap Inc. morb...@commonmap.info http://commonmap.info/ Queensland Incorporated Association 37762 -- ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [OSM-talk] Duplicate nodes generally
On a similar topic... What is the problem with duplicate nodes, exactly? Thanks, Brendan On 30/08/2010 12:05 AM, Nakor wrote: Please do not run automatic merge tools in the US. Doing this you will connect entities that should not (e.g. river with road). This is due to the source of the imports that have duplicate nodes for different type of entities. If you want to fix duplicates in the US you need to review your changes one by one. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-ca] Fwd: GeoBase vs CanVec
Also, I assume if I were to import GeoBase data into CommonMap, I should follow closely the rules implemented in http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/utils/import/geobase2osm/geobase2osm.py ? Brendan On 21/08/2010 9:52 AM, Brendan Morley wrote: Hello Canadian mappers, Sam Vekemans suggested I ask the following here: What is the relationship between CanVec data and GeoBase data? To this layperson they seem to be two initiatives hosted by the same government that seem to have similar objectives. Almost like the left hand not talking to the right hand. Can anyone explain briefly the differences? For example, it seems to me that GeoBase is closer to the data authors, and CanVec feeds from that, and CanVec concentrates on having complete coverage at particular scales (like 1:50k). Am I on the right track? Is there a government document that goes into detail? My interest is to pick out the best bits to seed CommonMap with. I'm looking for accuracy and timeliness. Brendan ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Fwd: GeoBase vs CanVec
On 21/08/2010 10:46 AM, JOHN SMART wrote: G'Day Australian Mapper Perhaps someone from Natural Resources Canada (the Federal mapping agency) could give a better answer, but my understanding is: - CanVec originated from the NTDB (National Topographic Database) which is essentially the same data as is used for the (sometimes quite out of date) 1:50 000 scale National Topographic Series maps. That is all Federal data. - GeoBase is an initiative which aims to reduce duplication of work / costs by having Provinces (equivalent to Aus. states) or other entities supply best data to the Feds. Thus GeoBase would actually be an example of the left hand working in partnership with the right hand. So it seems like CanVec is a top down approach (originally built on national scale acquisition approaches) and GeoBase is a bottom up approach (originally built from local government property tax / parcel surveying approaches)? I believe CanVec is being updated with any better sources as they become available, e.g. National Roads Network (NRN) gets migrated into new editions of CanVec. I believe there are many data themes that are in CanVec which are not in GeoBase, and presumably never will be in GeoBase unless the initiative is extended to include agreements for those themes. So perhaps I can adopt a try GeoBase first, CanVec second approach? If I have misunderstood anything I'd be delighted to be corrected. Now, what is CommonMap? I had never heard of that until now. A quick web search gets me here: http://commonmap.info/w/index.php/Main_Page It looks to me like it is a very similar concept to OSM, apart from licensing perhaps. So it makes me wonder if we have a left hand - right hand situation there? We're a bunch of people (now incorporated) dissatisfied with the OSMF licence change, to the point where we realised the Share Alike provision actually isn't a good fit for us at all. (There is also a different fork in the works for those who believe in -SA but are happy with today's OSM licence.) From my own perspective I don't mind having my contributions used anywhere, and I want to build roundtripping opportunties with traditional mapping agencies. Both of which OSM is limiting by design. Mind you, one hand (CommonMap) will be able to talk to the other hand (OpenStreetMap) because our CC BY / PD licence is compatible with CC BY-SA. It's just that the other direction is not allowed by the -SA provision. Brendan ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [OSM-talk] NearMap Community Licence and OSM Contributor Terms
On 19/08/2010 9:37 PM, Nic Roets wrote: On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Chris Browet c...@semperpax.com mailto:c...@semperpax.com wrote: Let's keep the Talk-List clean from Legal discussions. Anybody is welcome to join it on Legal-talk. Sorry, but I've seen those kind of invitations, too. I'm not subscribed to Legal-talk and have no interest in the obscure legal details. General discussion about the new License/CT belongs to Talk. The future of the OSM project as such is at stake, here... Chris, It is possible to change the legal status of something without affecting the community. For example the gold standard was removed making the dollar a Fiat currency without an economic meltdown. Um, what happened in October 2008? Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] NearMap Community Licence and OSM Contributor Terms
On 19/08/2010 9:58 PM, Chris Browet wrote: On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 13:29, Pierre-Alain Dorange pdora...@mac.com mailto:pdora...@mac.com wrote: Chris Browet c...@semperpax.com mailto:c...@semperpax.com wrote: I've seen often that the reply to this argument is that we must trust OSMF, that it will make sure OSM is under good care. Honestly, in this world, who would trust a foundation whose members he doesn't know personally? Even if he would, what about future members? No one can know, but there is limitations in the Licence and CT. OSMF can change licence to a free and open one not a closed one it can't be done. They definitely need to define that, it would help. an OSI endorsed free and open license, maybe... - Chris - Then you'd be trusting OSI rather than OSMF. Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] CommonMap for CC BY and PD geodata
Hi everyone, I just wanted to remind contributors who are happy with PD or CC BY conditions that we are establishing an alternative at CommonMap. We're not quite ready for prime time yet but we'll be sure to announce it when we do. In the meantime, please register your interest on your social network of choice (as long as it's Facebook, LinkedIn or Twitter) - just look us up at CommonMap and say hi! Thanks, Brendan (morb_au) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[talk-au] NearMap for Ipswich
Hi Ipswich mappers, NearMap finally have the imagery up for Ipswich ... and through to Gatton! Brendan ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: Community Notification- Services Relocation
When I read the flier my first reaction was cool, that looks like a Mapnik rendering. This is in the context of previous fliers variously using Google Maps or Whereis renders to provide the context. Who knows what licencing arrangements BrisConnections has with those providers. Perhaps the NearMap commerical arrangement implies that attribution doesn't need to be carried over. Everyone's allowed to make the same mistake once. I agree with John, let's be gentle with them, at least the first time. Another opportunity for BrisConnections is for us to encourage editing the basemap so that it can provide up to date road configurations. After all, the roads get shifted around every few weeks. It would a good case study. Brendan On 10/06/2010 3:03 PM, John Smith wrote: On 10 June 2010 14:26, David Deandd...@ieee.org wrote: Looks like NearMap or us need to talk to BrisConnections about attribution. It might have been better to contact them privately about this before resorting to making a fuss publicly, I'm not sure of Nearmap's take on it but it'd great if more people used OSM data for this and we could even help them to some extent by marking it as a construction zone, or the dates it will be, yes we'd like the recognition of our hard work, but we don't want to embarsses people into a corner so in future so they go off and use gmaps imagery instead. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [OSM-talk] How is there not any creative-type (US) copyright in OSM data?
On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 13:56:46 +1000, John Smith wrote: 2009/12/13 Anthony o...@inbox.org: On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 8:17 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: The problem I have with that is my labour is used to commercially benefit others and in turn nothing they do would have to be returned to the community. So you want to be given something in return for your labor? Nothing wrong with that, but you're more likely to be successful if you choose a non-free project to contribute to. If your labor is valuable to commercial interests, don't give it away for free. Get those commercial interests to pay you, and then, if you'd like, you can donate your pay to the community. That's the issue I have, I have no problem giving back to the community, but I don't want commercial companies just sucking up all the data and not giving hardly anything back in return if they extend the map, it's not fair to me or anyone else who chooses to donate our time for the greater good. John, What is *materially removed* from you if your labour is used to commercially benefit others and/or commercial companies [are] just sucking up all the data and not giving hardly anything back in return if they extend the map? Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Dual/Multiple licencing
Maybe I missed something in the discussion but... Why must there be migration to the new licence? Why can't we run both indefinitely? Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Yahoo-derived edits under OdbL
Another question that didn't seem to be addressed: What is Yahoo's stance towards the OdbL? In regards to its imagery? Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How is there not any creative-type (US) copyright in OSM data?
Actually, I've decided I'm not going to release my data as PD. I prefer copyleft. I prefer CC-BY-SA. It keeps people from taking my data and incorporating it into data under more restrictive licenses. Like ODbL. I'm assuming this is your comment Anthony? (I'm starting to lose track of the thread). OdbL is meant to be copyleft for source data, as far as I can now tell. But what's the problem with people incorporating it into data under more restrictive licenses? The data under the original licence will (should!) still be made available, and competes with the data made available under the more restrictive licence. Brendan --Original Message Text--- From: Anthony Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 10:22:55 -0500 On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 1:02 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/12/13 Anthony o...@inbox.org: If geodata is not copyrightable, then Share Alike is meaningless. The original work is public domain, and the modified work is also public domain. Assuming public domains is a valid option, which isn't valid in all jurisdictions. If the data is not copyrightable, then it is by definition public domain. Even where PD is valid if you modify it and choose a license which can be upheld it is no longer PD any more. If the the data is not copyrightable, it is PD, and no license is going to magically make it not PD. The point is, whichever way it's decided, it'll be the same for the modified data as it is for the original data. If the OSM database is not copyrightable, neither will the modified database be. If the OSM database is copyrightable, then the modified database must be. Just because certain copyrights don't exists in some jursidictions doesn't mean they aren't valid in others. Which is the whole reason for ODBL, because geodata may not be considered copyrightable in some areas a new method of enforcing the same thing CC-BY-SA is needed. For the areas where geodata is not copyrightable, CC-BY-SA isn't needed. If you'd prefer that, fine. But please be honest about this - the ODbL is more than just a more enforceable version of the spirit of CC-BY-SA. The How is this different than the requirements of the GPL where you need to make changes available if you distribute binaries? Well, it's different from the GPL because it uses contract law, and not just copyright law. As explained in the GPL: The licenses for most software and other practical works are designed to take away your freedom to share and change the works. By contrast, the GNU General Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change all versions of a program--to make sure it remains free software for all its users. The ODbL falls into the former category of licenses. The ODbL *is* somewhat more similar to the GPL than it is to CC-BY-SA. But CC-BY-SA was chosen as the license for OSM, not the GPL. So stop saying the ODbL is in the same spirit as CC-BY-SA. Claim it's in the same spirit as the GPL, and then we can have that discussion. requirements go beyond requiring derivative works to be licensed under the same license. Most significantly, the ODbL requires people to offer copies of any derivative databases that are used in the making of the final derivative work. Among other things, that means having to keep copies of such databases, something which is not always done (if I want to alter the database, render tiles, and then throw out the altered database, I'm not able to do that, because I have to offer people copies of the altered database). Again, this is no different than requirements of GPL software. And again, I was comparing ODbL to the intent of CC-BY-SA, not GPL. If you'd like me to compare the ODbL to the GPL, please start a new thread, and I'll be happy to make the full comparison. I hope you first realize, though, that CC-BY-SA is not the GPL. CC-BY-SA does not require you to distribute source code when you distribute binaries. It is not *intended* to require that. And anyone who takes the time to read the simple one page description of CC-BY-SA ought to know that. There is no way everyone is going to be happy as a result of this, that's human nature, people are influenced and motivated by various things, a lot of people agree with the GPL, at lot of people don't which is why you end up with others using BSD and other similar licenses. I agree with the GPL. There's little chance I'm going to release my software under the BSD license. But software isn't geodata. If you want to push your data as PD that's fine, tag the change set as PD when you upload and problem solved then such data can be extracted regardless what other data is licensed as then everyone is happy, of course this only counts in countries that have a notion of PD otherwise people in those countries wouldn't be able to use such data either. Ain't it grand having lawyers make laws? :) Actually, I've decided I'm not going to release my data as
Re: [OSM-talk] How is there not any creative-type (US) copyright in OSM data?
On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 11:17:41 +1000, John Smith wrote: If people or companies are benefiting, why shouldn't there be some expectations to return the benefits to everyone, not just hoard it away for the benefit of commercial operators if they themselves are benefiting from it? The home page of the OSM wiki currently states, The project was started because most maps you think of as free actually have legal or technical restrictions on their use, holding back people from using them in creative, productive, or unexpected ways. And the copyleft mindset of the LWP continues to perpetuate substantial legal [...] restrictions on [...] use. So really, the OSM project has failed to deliver on this latent demand. And who else but government is in the best position (and has the most self interest) to determine exactly where the road was built? There is a lot of roads on paper that were never built so I don't see that as accurate either. It's in local government interest to keep it accurate, especially anything that requires a grader or roller to maintain. Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Why the BSD vs GPL debate is irrelevant to OSM
On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 18:48:17 +0100, andrzej zaborowski wrote: 2009/12/11 Shalabh shalab...@gmail.com: Ok, heres a question I have been meaning to ask for long. What is the big deal if the big, bad G takes a chunk of data from OSM and uses it? Do I care? No. If anything, I would be happy that we created something worthy to be used by a corporation. As long as they dont restrict me from using data on OSM, which they in no way cant, I dont have a problem. If they dont 'give back' to the community, big deal!! It is a big deal to me, it's some kind of dream of a better world where practically all geospatial data (also software if you're a FOSS programmer) has to be free if you want to tap into the huge knowledge base all humanity has built till now. You can already see big closed software companies stay behind because they can't use my favourite GPL-licensed library, they have to reimplement everything from scratch while everyone else uses the free version and adds their own creations to this ever-growing base. It's a virus. But it would appear that what is bad for closed software companies is also bad for government. (At least where there is a culture of corporations, I guess) government cannot be seen to be discriminatory to closed software companies or closed companies of any description really. Is government the good guys or the bad guys for you? Google has a lot of data and are good at getting more, be it official or crowdsourced. It would be a huge loss for the collective knowledge of everyone if this data escapes the virus. I can't afford that loss, maybe you can. What is being lost though? Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Dual/Multiple licencing
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 11:50:12 +, Matt Amos wrote: On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Brendan Morley morb@beagle.com.au wrote: Maybe I missed something in the discussion but... Why must there be migration to the new licence? mainly because the current license doesn't work. that is; in some jurisdictions it isn't able to enforce the attribution and share-alike features that most people expect. that's not the only reason, and you can find more information here: http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/File:License_Proposal.pdf http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Why_CC_BY-SA_is_Unsuitable http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License Why can't we run both indefinitely? for the same reason that, if your front door is broken and won't lock, you don't just double-lock your back door ;-) Hi Matt, thanks for your comments. As I mentioned in another email today, I got sold on the idea of The project was started because most maps you think of as free actually have legal or technical restrictions on their use, holding back people from using them in creative, productive, or unexpected ways. Therefore (subliminally) the intent of my edits were to free the data to the extent that my data sources would allow me to do so. I've seen the links and I trust I'm clear on what the LWP is up to. However that's not what I signed up for, to be honest. I mean it's an OpenStreetMap not a CopyleftMap or anything that unambiguous. I got sold on the blurb on that wiki page and didn't really notice the SA fine print. Maybe I should have, but why would I if the large print promised to address holding back people from using them in creative, productive, or unexpected ways? SA still holds them back somewhat. So why not put a wall down the middle of the house and protect that with a proper lock if you like, and leave the other half open for visitors to freely use in creative, productive, or unexpected ways with as little friction as possible? Also I'm not sure if share-alike is a feature that most people expect. The wiki homepage currently does not mention it. The main homepage mentions SA in teeny tiny 5 pixel high text. The main page also mentions much more prominently that OpenStreetMap is a free editable map of the whole world. It is made by people like you. So, cool, I assume free as in information wants to be free and then (apologies to the wiki homepage), I want to edit the mistakes I see on the maps; get out of my way!. I can appreciate that the founders definitely intended sharelike/copyleft principles. But IMHO it's certainly not marketed as a feature to fresh recruits! Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Dual/Multiple licencing
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 11:45:44 +, Peter Childs wrote: 2009/12/14 Brendan Morley morb@beagle.com.au: Maybe I missed something in the discussion but... Why must there be migration to the new licence? Why can't we run both indefinitely? Because there are things you can do with one that you can't do with the other, and there are things you must do with one and you don't need to do with the other. eg CCbySA says you must attribute where it came from, ODbl make no such demand. So by following ODbl you break CCbySA. and the law is about black and white not shades of grey. For the avoidance of doubt, ways/nodes/relations (and I suppose tags, to be rigorous) would be assigned one licence only. Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How is there not any creative-type (US) copyright in OSM data?
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:06:36 +1000, John Smith wrote: 2009/12/14 Brendan Morley morb@beagle.com.au: What is *materially removed* from you if your labour is used to commercially benefit others and/or commercial companies [are] just sucking up all the data and not giving hardly anything back in return if they extend the map? I'm not a source of free labour for multinational corporations to abuse, if they want to hire me that's fine, but I choose to not work for them for free unless they want to contribute back as well. I suppose you would have hated contributing to Linux then. National corporations are OK then? Where do you draw the line? All other things being equal, they give back by being able to make a profit at a *lower* selling price than what they otherwise would if they had to commission their own additional survey. You didn't answer the question about what of yours is materially removed btw. Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How is there not any creative-type (US) copyright in OSM data?
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:08:15 +1000, John Smith wrote: 2009/12/14 Brendan Morley morb@beagle.com.au: And the copyleft mindset of the LWP continues to perpetuate substantial legal [...] restrictions on [...] use. So really, the OSM project has failed to deliver on this latent demand. I've seen the same comments regarding GPL v BSD licenses, free and open are rather ambiguous. I agree! (-: When pondering this earlier today I realised one of the fundamental ambiguities is: Is freedom/openness enforced on the dataset *itself*? Or Is freedom/openness enforced on your right to *use* that dataset? I'd always assumed the second option. Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Dual/Multiple licencing
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:43:38 +1000, John Smith wrote: 2009/12/14 Brendan Morley morb@beagle.com.au: the large print promised to address holding back people from using them in creative, productive, or unexpected ways? SA still holds them back somewhat. I disagree, it doesn't hold you back from any of those uses, it just requires you give back if you make changes, and so if you don't make changes to the data there is no limitation on what you can do with it, or how you can use it, and so on. And that requirement has a chilling effect (holds you back) on some productive ways. Hypothetical example: I want to put my fast food joints on a map. If I licenced from a typical commercial provider, I pay a one time consideration, produce my mashed up work, and be done with it. If I licenced from OSM contributors under OdbL, I would have to make my working notes for my fast food locations available to anyone who wanted them for perpetuity. So I'd have to establish a role in my company to keep those working notes safe. I think. I'd better hire a lwayer to be sure. I can appreciate that the founders definitely intended sharelike/copyleft principles. But IMHO it's certainly not marketed as a feature to fresh recruits! Again, lets not confuse 2 issues here, are you talking about using, or extending, I assume the latter, but the former has no intended restrictions. Extending/editing. Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Dual/Multiple licencing
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:43:38 +1000, John Smith wrote: 2009/12/14 Brendan Morley morb@beagle.com.au: So why not put a wall down the middle of the house and protect that with a proper lock if you like, and leave the other half open for visitors to freely use in creative, productive, or unexpected ways with as little friction as possible? Lets not mix 2 issues up into one big ball, there is no limitations on using said house, however if you want to extend the house that's a different matter, the neighbours might want to copy the blueprints so they can build a similar extension and so the knowledge is passed on rather than hoarded. Well it got mixed up as soon as most maps you think of as free actually have legal or technical restrictions collided with the existence of ShareAlike. But to continue your blueprint analogy, the neighbours will build a similar extension to their display home and now they're obliged to take care of the blueprint alterations in perpetuity ... or at least while they're using their display home to try to sell houses ? I think I'll call it a night, I'm not sure I understand this line of reasoning. Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How is there not any creative-type (US) copyright in OSM data?
Well I RTFM (i.e. the CCBYSA and OdbL licences) and this is what I got: CCBYSA only compels you to share the derived work, not the steps you followed to create the derived work. i.e. CCBYSA never asked people to share the steps they followed. So John, given you wish to don't want commercial companies just sucking up all the data and not giving hardly anything back in return if they extend the map - - CCBYSA (in mature copyright jurisdictions like Australia) will compel them to share the published work, also under CCBY(SA), therefore there is some data interpretation and re-entry involved to get it back to the OSM schema. This is probably little different to tracing off a paper map or image. - OdbL intends to compel them to share the steps they followed e.g. the modified database before rendering. Mind you, there was nothing I saw in the OdbL that compelled the modifying body to share back in the same database *schema*, so we could still have a big data re-entry problem - the only difference being that there is a hope of a scriptable solution. The interesting bit (that I couldn't satisfy myself by a first read of the licences) is enforcement. Given the fear of a 10^100 just sucking up all the data ... OdbL intends to exploit copyright, database and contract rights. Since it seems the US is a weak copyright jurisdiction when it comes to factual data. It would seem OdbL will not compel 10^100 by copyright law. Database law only applies to European Union, right? So that mechanism is out too. So then we appear to rely on US contract law, such that it may exist in a form that supports OdbL. Well that's my amateur analysis. Has anyone actually done a desk check to see if OdbL can compel 10^100 or other US-domiciled corporates to follow the spirit of the licence? The OdbL FAQ also seems to allow you to choose the jurisdiction that enforcement is carried out under. So as an Australian citizen perhaps you can persue 10^100 in the Australian copyright law context. This doesn't help our US bretheren however, so I'd hope if they wanted to enforce SA on their edits, that the OdbL plays well with US contract law. Hope this helps, Brendan On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 15:12:34 +1000, John Smith wrote: 2009/12/13 Anthony o...@inbox.org: On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 10:56 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: That's the issue I have, I have no problem giving back to the community, but I don't want commercial companies just sucking up all the data and not giving hardly anything back in return if they extend the map, it's not fair to me or anyone else who chooses to donate our time for the greater good. It's perfectly fair. You agreed to license your contributions under CC-BY-SA. CC-BY-SA doesn't require that you give anything back to anyone. It only requires that you give credit to the authors and license any derivative works that you distribute under CC-BY-SA. That isn't the debate, the debate is if CC-BY-SA can enforce it or not, some people claim it can't in some countries even Australia to some extent or other, so ODBL is being presented as an option to close loopholes that CC-BY-SA has. ___ 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] How is there not any creative-type (US) copyright in OSM data?
Oh, and I realised one of the main reasons the Australian Government lawyers are happy about CC* licences is that they prefer CCBY only, therefore avoiding the whole Sharealike-enforcement question. --Original Message Text--- From: Brendan Morley Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 20:31:59 +1000 Well I RTFM (i.e. the CCBYSA and OdbL licences) and this is what I got: CCBYSA only compels you to share the derived work, not the steps you followed to create the derived work. i.e. CCBYSA never asked people to share the steps they followed. So John, given you wish to don't want commercial companies just sucking up all the data and not giving hardly anything back in return if they extend the map - - CCBYSA (in mature copyright jurisdictions like Australia) will compel them to share the published work, also under CCBY(SA), therefore there is some data interpretation and re-entry involved to get it back to the OSM schema. This is probably little different to tracing off a paper map or image. - OdbL intends to compel them to share the steps they followed e.g. the modified database before rendering. Mind you, there was nothing I saw in the OdbL that compelled the modifying body to share back in the same database *schema*, so we could still have a big data re-entry problem - the only difference being that there is a hope of a scriptable solution. The interesting bit (that I couldn't satisfy myself by a first read of the licences) is enforcement. Given the fear of a 10^100 just sucking up all the data ... OdbL intends to exploit copyright, database and contract rights. Since it seems the US is a weak copyright jurisdiction when it comes to factual data. It would seem OdbL will not compel 10^100 by copyright law. Database law only applies to European Union, right? So that mechanism is out too. So then we appear to rely on US contract law, such that it may exist in a form that supports OdbL. Well that's my amateur analysis. Has anyone actually done a desk check to see if OdbL can compel 10^100 or other US-domiciled corporates to follow the spirit of the licence? The OdbL FAQ also seems to allow you to choose the jurisdiction that enforcement is carried out under. So as an Australian citizen perhaps you can persue 10^100 in the Australian copyright law context. This doesn't help our US bretheren however, so I'd hope if they wanted to enforce SA on their edits, that the OdbL plays well with US contract law. Hope this helps, Brendan On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 15:12:34 +1000, John Smith wrote: 2009/12/13 Anthony o...@inbox.org: On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 10:56 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: That's the issue I have, I have no problem giving back to the community, but I don't want commercial companies just sucking up all the data and not giving hardly anything back in return if they extend the map, it's not fair to me or anyone else who chooses to donate our time for the greater good. It's perfectly fair. You agreed to license your contributions under CC-BY-SA. CC-BY-SA doesn't require that you give anything back to anyone. It only requires that you give credit to the authors and license any derivative works that you distribute under CC-BY-SA. That isn't the debate, the debate is if CC-BY-SA can enforce it or not, some people claim it can't in some countries even Australia to some extent or other, so ODBL is being presented as an option to close loopholes that CC-BY-SA has. ___ 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] Opinion poll about the new licence Odbl 1.0
Anthony, I realise no analogy is perfect. In this case a problem is that if somebody breaks into the OSM data, he is not depriving the previous owners of it. And it is an Open street map after all - we're *inviting* people into the house! By the way I'm not sure why Copyright law is the big huge window sitting next to the locked door. If possible could you explain further or just google it for me or tell me where to find more info? Thanks, Brendan --Original Message Text--- From: Anthony Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 09:55:26 -0500 On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 5:05 AM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote: Brendan Morley wrote: All for addressing, as far as I can tell, a theoretical problem, with no real-world exploits. I understand that actual exploits would make the problem more obvious, but I find the underlying logic questionable nevertheless. No one has broken into my house for 5 years now. Does this mean my door locks are secure? No, it might easily just mean that * most people are honest enough not break into my house * the stuff I have in here is not valuable enough * I was simply lucky Of course, it doesn't necessarily mean that the locks are insecure either, it's just that you need experts checking the locks to decide this. Unless you're living inside a bank vault, I highly doubt your locks are secure or that you'd be willing to pay to secure them. Especially not when they're sitting next to a big window that can probably be easily broken with a nice brick. Good analogy, actually. ODbL is the fancy million dollar lock (which is brand new and has been tested much less than your previous $50 one). Copyright law is the big huge window sitting next to the locked door. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [talk-au] Fwd: Re: Why PD is not better for business
The momentum within Australian Governments is now to foster an environment of 99% free with 99% coverage. Best of both worlds, but requires a shift to CCBY thinking. On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 01:56:12 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote: On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 1:47 AM, Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org wrote: From having seen it in quite a few Open Source projects, it would be a death sentence. I'll have to take your word for it. From my point of view, I think I'd rather see a 70% free project with 100% coverage, than a 100% free project with 70% coverage. I imagine there is a wide range of views on this topic. 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] How is there not any creative-type (US) copyright in OSM data?
Arc would make a certain amount of sense since the design of the built environment (e.g. road construction) is basically broken down into segments of lines, arcs and spirals (i.e. the transition from straight to curved sections). But then all associated tools would have to start acting like CAD applications, not just relying on the concepts used in say the OpenGIS Simple Features Specification. In the longer term, road engineers could (should?) just be able to load their as-built engineering drawings straight into OSM. Awesome... Brendan --Original Message Text--- From: Anthony Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 11:59:31 -0500 We could, however, introduce a arc tag. And if I was better at making proposals (and/or the OSM processes were better at accepting proposals), it would probably already be introduced. To represent an arc, you only need three points (start, end, and any third point on the arc uniquely defines a triangle which is circumscribed by exactly one circle). This could even be made backward compatible. Just split the way at the beginning and end of the arc and put arc=yes. Renderers that don't know about arcs would use three points (or four, or five, or whatever). Renderers that do know about them would use as many as is necessary for the resolution of the image. (In the case of an arc=yes tag with more than three points ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How is there not any creative-type (US) copyright in OSM data?
If the intent of OSM is to represent the centerline of a road as accurately as possible (and presumably other land features too) then this is another reason to consider dropping the SA requirement - or dual licencing or dual databases or being able to assign a licence per-object. Australian Government is now quite happy to share using CCBY, but CCBYSA (and OdbL replicas) make it difficult for government to republish (e.g. it shouldn't be seen to discriminate against constituents that don't wish to accept the SA stipulation on contributed edits). And who else but government is in the best position (and has the most self interest) to determine exactly where the road was built? Brendan --Original Message Text--- From: Anthony Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 10:26:08 -0500 The intent of OSM is to represent the centerline of a road as accurately as possible. There aren't an infinite number of possibilities which we creatively choose from. (First of all, the number of possibilities that can be represented is finite, as the number of decimal places is finite. But more to the point, the purpose is to record exactly one result, and any deviation from that is simply an error.) Mistakes and inaccuracy do not represent creative input. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Measuring success of OSM
In the interests of healthy debate, I disagree with some of the sentiments around imports. In particular that imports reduce the amount of OSM contributors, and that that is a Bad Thing. IMHO success should be measured by the accuracy of the data (to reality) and to the pervasiveness of its use by people and corporates. What if suddenly Ordnance Survey merged all their excrutiating detail of data under OSM terms? Is that a good thing or a bad thing? I say good, because there will always be need for tracking of changes. Perhaps OSM would turn into a heads up service for government - you know, a local would identify a tree planted somewhere around this GPS reading and then an OS employee would know to come around and get a more accurate fix. I'm only speculating here, I don't know how OS actually detects changes to its dataset. If OSM ever reached that level of detail, then it'd be pointless for Google to steal our data, they'd always be playing catchup. Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [talk-au] Fwd: Re: Why PD is not better for business
I just assumed street maps was its original purpose that it outgrew as it became more popular. However, there's great value in having everything with a position on the Earth in the one true geofabric. Assuming the OSMF is happy to have the database be populated with said objects. I'm sure you can still run up a stylesheet that just shows streets if you want. (-: On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 13:30:15 +, Dave F. wrote: paul youlten wrote: But it is still a street map that we are making - administrative boundaries, top secret government installations, Al Qaeda training camps, water catchment areas and so on are fascinating (and probably great fun to map) but they are not necessarily part of a street map. PY Paul I think you have a slightly narrow perspective of OSM. Yes, it has street in the title yes, it says /such as street maps /in the tag line, but it doesn't say 'only' street maps. Do you think parks, pubs, recycling centres etc shouldn't be mapped? If it's a physical entity then it can be mapped. Cheers Dave F. ___ 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: [talk-au] Australia BP service station dataset - suitable for bulk import?
I'll bet internally they're associated with lots-on-plan land records... And if the public dataset is simply used address to geo lookups, then which geocoder did they use? And is BP allowed to publish the derived dataset? Brendan On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:43:08 +1100, Liz wrote: On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, Steve Bennett wrote: On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 1:39 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote: The 2 BP's along the Bruce Highway north of Brisbane aren't located properly either, it looks like they've simply used address to geo lookups and when the addresses are specific they co-ords go wonky, wonder if they want more accurate co-ords... Dear BP, We gather that you have misplaced several of your service stations. We are pleased to inform you that we have located them at the following locations: ... We trust this puts your mind at ease. Love, OpenStreetMap I think we should advise them of where their servos have gone ;) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [OSM-talk] Opinion poll about the new licence Odbl 1.0
On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 22:39:13 +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 20:36, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: For Australians it means the loss of the coastline, most of which has been re- edited from government data, and major rivers like the Murray If someone presents me with a boolean Do you allow relicensing under the ODbL I'll have to say no because some of my edits are derived from CC-BY-SA data I don't have permission to license (and I probably can't even recall what all of it is). First, I would appreciate if people could stop talking about nuking data. Fair enough, I hadn't had much sleep that morning. The non-relicensed data will sit in some kind of separate, possibly read-only server, from where it can be accessed, just like now, under the terms of CC-BY-SA. This server may or may not be made available by OSMF but it will certainly exist, and OSMF has already said that a full history dump will be provided. Fred, not a criticism of you in particular, as I appreciate your time in explaining the situation. I very tempted though to make this mean that instead of my data being nuked, it will be orphaned instead. This is still Hobson's choice for me. I'm just kicking myself that I naively assumed that the custodians of my data contributions had my interests at heart. Now I realise the *custodians* are a much bigger threat to the longevity of my contributions than any 10^100 megacorp. All for addressing, as far as I can tell, a theoretical problem, with no real-world exploits. Brendan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[talk-au] NearMap imagery, Brisbane Springfield, 21 November
Interesting, this view shows a latest imagery date of 21 November for me... yet no tweet ... http://www.nearmap.com/?ll=-27.671647,152.89602z=19t=k ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap PhotoMap imagery for OSM - JOSM slippymap plugin
Michael, Is there some way we can get this backported to -tested? JOSM r2405 has two frustrating quirks for me in it (you can't add an additional download to your first download, and some ways become unselectable after you upload). r2255 was quite nice in comparison, except for the zoom level 18 restriction (which seems to stem from getMaxZoom() in http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/viewer/jmapviewer/src/org/openstreetmap/gui/jmapviewer/OsmTileSource.java) Brendan p.s. My other frustration was downloading your patched alternative. Rapidshare seems to specialise in 41kB web pages telling me I can't download the 41kB file yet )-: Took me several retries before I got it ... On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:21:40 +0100, Michael wrote: Peter Ross wrote: I tried this plugin with the latest josm-tested.jar from the josm website and got the following exception. Ah, I'm sorry. I should have mentioned that I'm using -latest. I can try to compile a patched version of the plugin for -tested. I think that when you send me the version number this corresponds to an SVN revision that I can check out. The latest version doesn't compile against -tested. Attached is an updated patch that does not try to do the load balancing by itself and enables zoom levels up to 21. The corresponding download for -latest is @ http://rapidshare.com/files/303178932/slippymap.jar.html Michael ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] How to tag a non-existent road
Yes I have an objection. From what I can tell, roads are generally not gazetted in Queensland. The exceptions seem to be State transport routes (i.e. those under control of Main Roads). All roads are registered as part of survey plans and the like. By way of illustration: http://www.toowoomba.qld.gov.au/index.php?option=com_docmantask=doc_downloadgid=1301Itemid=71 states in its section 5: PROVISION OF ACCESS TO PROPERTIES ON DEDICATED ROADS (UNMADE, UNFORMED, or FORMED) DEFINITIONS: Dedicated An area of land dedicated to public use as a road; or an area roadthat is open to or used by the public and is developed for, or has as one of its main uses, the driving or riding of motor vehicles; but does not include a State-controlled road under the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994. Formed A dedicated road that does not have gravel paving but which is roadformed using a grader so that stormwater will drain off laterally. Gravel paved A dedicated road that has been formed and surfaced with gravel roadpaving material (usually transported to the site). Unformed A dedicated road that has been cleared and open to, and roadcustomarily used by the public. UnmadeA dedicated road that has had no capital improvements including roadclearing, formation and gravel paving. Notwithstanding, an un- made road may be trafficable or un-trafficable in all weathers. So according to Toowoomba City Council's definition, we'd be looking to use highway=unmade. I wouldn't mind knowing how other jurisdictions categorise it. Brendan On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 02:43:04 +1000, John Smith wrote: Unless anyone has an objection I propose that we tagged non-existent roads from DCDB Qld as: highway=gazetted_road Anything that hasn't been surveyed can be tagged as highway=road which is consistent with current usage, these will also be rendered enough to indicate they need to be surveyed and hopefully this will encourage people to participate even if they don't have a GPS. I updated the wiki as well to reflect this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#What_about_using_meta_information_from_the_DCDB_Qld_date.3F ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Queensland Wetland Systems - building an empirical data dictionary
Some of you have expressed interest in cracking the data dictionary for the Queensland Wetlands mapping data. I've spent a few hours this weekend going through the web literature. Hopefully I can distill the main concepts in a useful manner. Firstly, the Wetlands/Streams layer at http://data.australia.gov.au/97 is borked - there is no shapefile included in the ZIP archive, therefore no geography to use or translate! For the polygon area I have started a wiki page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data.australia.gov.au/Queensland/Wetlands If nothing else, I have listed the reference documents that should shed some light on what each column means. I've only started to write up the meanings myself. I'll keep on updating these as I have time. Also useful is a reference rendering, being the set of Qld EPA PDF maps available from http://www.epa.qld.gov.au/wetlandinfo/site/MappingFandD/WetlandMapsAndData/PDFMaps.html As part of the wiki page I'll also add in some recommended transliterations between the attributes in the original dataset, and a tagging scheme in OSM. The data seems to support the following OSM features quite faithfully: natural=wetland (duh - these are the Wetland Regional Ecosystems on the PDF maps) wetland=* (this can be mapped from the RE (Regional Ecosystem) type, e.g. a wetre attribute of 12.1.3 is basically equivalent to mangrove coverage) natural=water (these are the Water Bodies on the PDF maps. Larger reservoirs also seem to distinguish between full supply level and a typical level) natural=spring (the literature refers to a springs layer but this does not appear to be CC-BY yet) natural=coastline and maybe =beach (I can never remember if natural=coastline is supposed to mean high water or low water, doesn't matter, the wetlands dataset typically deliniates the intertidal area anyway) Good luck everyone, Brendan ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Adding highway=road from property boundary centreline geography
Sam, May I respectfully disagree? A reason I'm putting in highway=road ways is that even though I may never have the petrol or time to get out to most of these places, others might. And if others might, they may have a GPS logger. If they do, great, they can adjust my naive centreline ways to the true geography of the street. If not, they can still contribute by tagging my generic ways with the on-site name or adjust the highway= tag. Having the highway=road ways pre-populated means the field mappers only need to carry around the OSM way files with them rather than a full property boundary dataset. I have a cheap and cheerful eee PC to assist in my field mapping. The difference in the dataset size pretty much made the difference in whether I can fit it on the eee PC. Brendan --Original Message Text--- From: Sam Vekemans Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 13:00:43 -0700 Cool, Just one comment. If it was me working on it, i would hesitate on adding in roads where they are 'estimated' because it is not known as a fact. Once all the property boundaries are in there, i think that will cause a natural 'growth' in OSM activity, and people would want to help out ... by going along that way with a GPS, and getting some tracks. so not even listing a highway=road, might be the best way to go. IMO Once a few tracks (even 1 will do) whoever is tracing there own tracks will have a 'guide' to work with already. This way, we will know for sure that roads exist where they do in real-life. It will also give an opportunity for that local area mapper to add in other POI along the way. :-) Another note, is bigtincan hosting a planet-dump and diff/load for your slippy map? ... and what do you think of my way of conducting the import (just making the .osm files available (hosting them on mediafire.com), and letting local are mappers drop-in the data at their leisure? and organizing it all with a Googledocs chart? (itching for feedback here) http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Am70fsptsPF2dG1ZN1YwMmZCVDhDOHZpbUNmOGlvWGchl=en .. and BTW, bigtincan is awesome :-) Is BTC mapper going to add Garmin Maps to that list? Cheers, Sam Vekemans Across Canada Trails P.S. Yup, i knew that the government would open up, it was just a matter of time. :-) ... i guess the rest of the common wealth countries might be next. Only, if the Queen says so. ;) http://www.geobase.ca/geobase/en/licence.jsp (Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada (Canada) as represented by the Minister of Natural Resources Canada.) Twitter: @Acrosscanada Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 9:56 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: Using the property boundary WMS tiles I managed to redo a largish chunk of the Condamine river near Chinchilla, the property boundary data isn't 100% perfect for this purpose but it is certainly much better than the low res sat imagery. http://maps.bigtincan.com/?z=12ll=-26.824,150.662layer=BTT ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Correct attribution for Queensland CC-BY datasets
Talking about the appropriate attribution, The http://data.australia.gov.au/152 webpage indicates the citation as Queensland Department of Environment and Resource Management. This is incorrect and DERM is actually chasing up the website editor to get things changed. (Trust a gov2.0 initiative to respond at web 1.0 speeds.) Just to confirm, the correct minimum attribution is State of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource Management) 2009 for the following datasets: Property Boundaries Annual Extract Queensland (Lite DCDB) Original dataset home page: http://data.australia.gov.au/152 Local Government Boundaries Annual Extract Queensland Original dataset home page: http://data.australia.gov.au/157 Surface Water Gauging Stations Queensland Original dataset home page: http://data.australia.gov.au/148 Groundwater Observation Bore Sites Original dataset home page: http://data.australia.gov.au/142 Drainage Basins Queensland Original dataset home page: http://data.australia.gov.au/134 Queensland Wetlands Mapping Estates Layer including National Parks, Conservation Areas Forest Reserves Original dataset home page: http://data.australia.gov.au/127 Queensland Wetlands Data Wetlands Original dataset home page: http://data.australia.gov.au/119 Queensland Wetlands Mapping Streams Original dataset home page: http://data.australia.gov.au/97 or http://data.australia.gov.au/114 There might be an equivalent problem with the other state and territory datasets but I would need to hase up to confirm. Thanks, Brendan (morb_au) On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 23:58:15 +1000, Ross Scanlon wrote: On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 23:46:22 +1000 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/10/3 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com: On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 22:29:13 +1000 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/10/3 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com: Using the Qld govt boundaries information it's possible to work out where streets are, although some streets have been consumed and the boundary information doesn't reflect this. Does anyone know how roads drawn from this information should be tagged? I plotted out the missing streets in Maleny, Qld, as a test case to figure the attributation tags out: http://maps.bigtincan.com/?z=16ll=-26.761,152.849layer=BFF I've left everything as highway=road so I can easily work out what I did. Looks good. Leaving it as highway=road also gives the rest of us an indication that more needs to be added, way type, name, etc. I intended to fix it as soon as I could work out what tags were needed, but I thought I'd give an example of what is possible thanks to the new data becoming available. The tags here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data.australia.gov.au/Queensland Look appropriate for the attribution and source. I'd probably leave them as highway=road as above. -- Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] New CC-BY datasets due Monday 28 September on Government 2.0 Taskforce website
John, How do you mean consumed? Is this related to the comment you made on my diary entry at http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/morb_au/diary/8140 ? I've also added my own tagging examples at a new page at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data.australia.gov.au/Queensland if that helps. Brendan On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 19:06:45 +1000, John Smith wrote: Using the Qld govt boundaries information it's possible to work out where streets are, although some streets have been consumed and the boundary information doesn't reflect this. Does anyone know how roads drawn from this information should be tagged? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] New CC-BY datasets due Monday 28 September on Government 2.0 Taskforce website
On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 23:25:44 +1000, John Smith wrote: 2009/10/3 Brendan Morley morb@beagle.com.au: How do you mean consumed? Some land owners have taken over the land when it's probably still crown land. For example: http://maps.google.com.au/?ie=UTF8ll=-26.158115,152.64636spn=0.007184,0.013937z=17 Horswoord Road mostly doesn't exist, yet the land isn't listed as a property boundary at all, so the land has probably been squatted by nearby land owners. Yes, that often happens when a row of lots has multiple road frontages. The back frontage is often left au naturel, presumably less maintenance for the council. But if you want to subdivide later, you don't have to resume somebody else's backyard as well. Just build the back road when you actually need it. If you look closer (allowing for the photographic offset in that area) there's a bushier strip of vegetation about where the road casement passes through. That's one of the reasons why I'm tagging DCDB-derived roads with note=DCDB indicates a right of way in this location. Needs a field survey to confirm highway type and actual alignment. Sometimes the road formation does not exist! In that case I'm actually intending to remove the highway tag completely, but leaving the way included in the database. This would indicate that somebody evaluated that the legal right of way existed and that somebody visited the location and found no transportation infrastructure. Maybe there is a highway tag after all that fits? In some other datasets it's seems to be either called unformed or a construction line - not sure which definition fits here though. Another alternative is to add an area rather than a way and tag as natural=grass or =wood (and maybe access=yes?) Yup, the errors are based on paper boundaries verse real world boundaries. But the real world can be legally forced to match the paper boundary in this case. Admittedly the absolute positioning can be out at times in the DCDB (I've seen a 15m error in a previous edition, since corrected) but the relative arrangements are meant to be a direct reflection of the thousands of individually- lodged survey plans since the dawn of time. So there's should be nothing stopping you from traversing the length of Horswood Road, formed or not. If you get challenged, just say you're intending to follow Horswood Road. Having an easily-attainable copy of the DCDB map in your hand may help, which is another reason why having a CC-BY DCDB is such an epic win. Brendan ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] New CC-BY datasets due Monday 28 September on Government 2.0 Taskforce website
On Sun, 4 Oct 2009 00:15:21 +1000, Ross Scanlon wrote: Ok, so now a quick description of how you did this. Brendan has set up a WMS server of property boundaries, and things that aren't boudnaries show up as black areas and it's possible to guess which is roads depending how straight the gaps are between boudnaries. So how did you get it into josm then? Some of this is by memory... 1. Open JOSM 2. Get the 'wmsplugin' by a. Menu item Edit Preferences b. click the tab that looks like an american power socket c. Select Download List button d. Tick wmsplugin e. Select OK, the plugin should download and install f. restart JOSM 3. Set up WMS server by a. Menu item Edit Preferences b. click the tab that has WMS written on it c. click Add button d. Enter Menu Name of your choice (e.g. Qld DCDB Lite) e. Copy and paste WMS URL: http://206.123.75.6/cgi/ms/mapserv?service=WMSversion=1.1.1 request=GetMaplayers=dcdb_lite_geometrysrs=EPSG:4326format=image/pngmap=../../mapserv/wms.osm.au.qld.map f. click OK and exit out Preferences box 4. Open up an area of interest within Queensland (how to do this is an exercise for the student) a. Make sure the zoom bar shows less than 280 m, for example adjust it to about 100 m. b. (I've put a limiter on it so that no one can DoS it by trying to draw all 2.1m polygons in Qld at once.) 5. Add the WMS layer by: a. Menu item WMS Qld DCDB Lite b. Wait a few seconds (maybe 60 seconds if on dialup) c. (the WMS responses should come back in tiled delivery) d. (Tiles with the green background are good, tiles with bright red background mean something broke. If you ran JOSM from a command prompt, the error message should show up there). See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Image:Mapserv-wms-example.all-hallows.png for an example tile image. Please let me know how you go. Somebody can post this to the wiki if it's useful? Brendan ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] New CC-BY datasets due Monday 28 September on Government 2.0 Taskforce website
Hello Aussie OSMers, Those recently at the last OSM South Brisbane meetup may remember I was going to get onto our Department of Natural Resources people to see when they were going to release their datasets under a GILF (CC-BY compatible) licence. It turns out there's been a little-publicised initiative within Federal Government called the Government 2.0 Taskforce @ http://gov2.net.au/ Note the blog post: http://gov2.net.au/blog/2009/09/08/suggest-a-dataset-ideascale-competition-part-three/ We are seeking your suggestions for datasets to be made available under the open access to public sector information principle (such as the Australian Toilet Map). These datasets will form the basis for our upcoming mashup competition. Also: http://gov2.net.au/blog/2009/08/13/hack-mash-and-innovate-contests-coming-soon/ we are working to make some datasets from various jurisdictions available on open access terms and in formats that permit and enable reuse. If we find that an agency is willing to make data available but cant because of a legacy system, we will outline the technical requirements and post it as a challenge to build and open source a tool that will help that agency (and possibly others) liberate the data. And the followup: http://gov2.net.au/blog/2009/09/22/innovate-mash-camp-govt-2-0-contest-update/ This is the one that I personally am most excited about. We are on track for launching this, possibly as early as next week. The combined forces of the Secretariat and my colleagues at DBCDE (thanks Judi and James) have been hard at work securing the agreement of at least 12 (yep, count them) federal agencies and at least four (possibly more) out of our seven states and territories to release datasets for use in the contest (drum roll) in RDF, XML, JSON, CSV or XLS formats and under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Australia license. [...] We realise that data doesnt just mash itself up. We also want to bring the community together to share and collaborate. In an effort to do this, we are working on organising at least one mashup camp to be held in Sydney in late October/ early November. We also hope to hold one in Canberra in mid-October. Just to give yall a heads up that we are trying to give you a formal forum to get your innovative juices flowing to mashup the data that we have liberated. It turns out this competition is indeed due to launch on Monday. I can also say that the Queensland Government contribution to this competiton will be (data is in a range of formats, including DBF, PRJ, SBN, SBX, SHP SHX): 1. Queensland Wetlands Mapping - Streams 2. Queensland Wetlands Data - Wetlands Estates Layer including National Parks, Conservation Areas Forest Reserves etc. 3. Drainage Basins Queensland 4. Groundwater Observation Bore Sites 5. Surface Water Gauging Stations Queensland 6. Property Boundaries Annual Extract Queensland (Lite DCDB) 7. Local Government Boundaries Annual Extract Queensland Other jurisdictions will also be releasing a smattering of datasets, they won't necessarily be the same themes. Well I'm pretty excited to the point where I'm planning to host a WMS server for at least dataset #6. It's about 2.1 million polygons, bless'em. If you lot promise not to DoS the server, I might even tell you the address once I get the CC-BY version of the dataset (-: All we Qld OSMers need to do is use the attribution=State of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource Management) 2009 tag, as per CC-BY. I presume it will be similar for other jurisdictions. I'd like to acknowledge my contact at Qld DERM for this heads up. However I'll leave him to introduce himself when the time's right. Brendan (morb_au) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
