Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways
On Sun, 2011-07-10 at 15:02 +0100, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
I think it's reasonably obvious by now that the two sides in this debate
aren't ever going to be reconciled.
I guess that depends on your definition of reconciled.
It's not exclusively an .au problem, but it is mostly. If you look at
any of the analysis done recently, Australia simply hasn't taken to
ODbL+CT in the way that other countries have.
... [ODbL figures] ...
That's pretty stark.
Steve and Sam might have between them put their finger on why it's
different
(http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2011-July/008268.html). I'm
sure personalities also have something to do with it, as they do with
any open source project. Regardless, it's unquestionable that it _is_
different in .au.
I think the biggest problem people in .au had was that there were some
issues which were specific to the Australian usage of OSM (imports of
gov data, etc). Those who sought to change the licence claimed to be
listening to people, but when Australian mappers raised issues, we were
simply told 'bad luck youre only a tiny percentage of the data'.
Part of the problem that has arisen is that our data would be affected
more than most by the removal of CCBYSA imported data. Some people
looked at this as simply a data loss in a remote part of the world, the
same way most of us wouldnt care if a big import from Africa was due to
be removed for the same reason.
The OSMF has always accepted that some users wont accept the licence
(whether on principle or because of the sources they wish use) and this
loss of mappers will be acceptable for the future progression of OSM.
From the OSMF perspective, they feel this is a required step to move on.
From the Aussie perspective, it feels like its acceptable to lose our
contributions, or at least easier to remove them than to work to resolve
any minor attribution issues that we ('we' meaning a few users
knowledgable about the licence) have raised.
So, I think, we need to get away from this idea that a fork is a bad
thing. It isn't. There are two divergent communities, and it doesn't do
either side any good to try and hold them together when they're so opposed.
It doesnt do either side any good to cut ties and drift our separate
ways either. Just because you dont get along with someone on a desert
island, it doesnt mean you isolate yourself on the other side, your
strength together will be much more than your individual strength.
FOSM appears to be slowly becoming established, both technically and as
a brand, and that's good. Benefiting from all the OSM code and
ecosystem, plus the free gov.au data, is a pretty good headstart for a
new forked project and I'd be amazed if it couldn't succeed given that.
The problem for OSM will be when all the incompatible CCBYSA data is
removed, and that 'headstart' is more like fosm being a late starter in
the race while the other runner is contemplating cutting his foot off at
around the time the two racers are level.
So please, let's stop hitting each other over the head with this. OSM
can exist with ODbL, FOSM can exist with CC-BY-SA; people will choose
which one to contribute to (or, indeed, both).
You are covering one point of the equation, the contributors. What
about the map users? Sure, its great to have a massive network of
contributors, but if the data being contributed isnt being used or isnt
complete enough to be used, then you'll lose the masses. The masses
dont want to add nodes and new roads, they want to replace garmin maps
with OSM maps, so they can drive for their job or their holiday. They
dont care about what licence is on the maps, they just want the most
complete maps they can get. If that means a choice of OSM or OSM - 52%
who in their right mind would choose the smaller dataset?
The fact that you might lose 100 mappers, might not really affect the
project, the fact of losing a whole country of consumers, might.
David
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways
On Mon, 2011-07-11 at 06:53 +0200, Mike Dupont wrote: Besides all the flames and smoke, what are the real issues here? I think that we dont need to continue this endless discussion. Lets just stop the fighting and do something more productive. I think a main issue here, comes down to what services do we need to fork away from the ODbL OSM but still retain the community that exists. Both groups can utilise the same community (mailing lists, IRC, even mapping parties) for discussions regarding tagging or international mapping variances, infact I think they are some of the most interesting discussions here. Both groups can pretty much share the same toolsets. ie just because you favour fosm over osmf or vice versa, that doesn't mean you should stop using and contributing to things like mapnik, osmosis and mkgmap. I think there needs to be a clear statement made by one of the 'democratically elected' members that despite any forks in the licence, the project and community share a common goal and can share some resources, even if we're unable to share data. I also think that a lot of the arguers on these lists need to understand this too. I find that now we have the fosm going, there should be less reasons to fight, everyone has basically what they need. Of course it could be better. I only hope with time that feelings will ease and each branch of the fork will become successful on its own strength. I think both projects serve their own market of users and will continue to build on their individual strengths. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways
Hi Nick, Just a quick note that my understanding is those figures are generated based on v1 history, none of the bot edits would have been v1 unless they created a new entity, not just a new/modified tag. David On Mon, 2011-07-11 at 15:09 +1000, Nick Hocking wrote: Hi Mark, Yes if we were to revert out the non compliant imports, the bot that just added the maxspeed tag on a HUGE number of ways, and also the maxspeed:source tag, and also revert out the bot that modified that last tag to be source:maxspeed, then the numbers may be completly different. cheers Nick ___ 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] missing messages
You may have messages filtered, but I indeed have noticed a lot of missing messages, and often messages that are missing but arrive a few hours late, after Ive already seen the responses to them. I have no blocks or filters, that would be stupid since I am actually interested in following all sides of this issue. I can think of a number of people who dont offer much to the conversation (sorry Fred), who possibly would be worth filtering, but I think everyones opinion is worth reading, even if I might disagree with it. I agree it is difficult as you point out when messages are missed, to keep up with all the important points in the conversation. This seems to be one of the problems with using email and mailing lists for this form of communication, when it works its great, but its easy to miss one message and not be aware of it until everyone else has replied to it. David On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 23:18 -0700, Steve Coast wrote: It's been pointed out that I'm not replying to hundreds of messages from John Smith, Anthony and friends. I don't see them as they're automatically deleted. I find life is better without having the trolls fill my inbox. However, if I have missed any reasonable points in there then feel free to repost them, just don't put those guys email addresses in the to/from/cc fields... Steve ___ 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] ATTN Steve Coast st...@asklater.com RE Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Fri, 2011-07-08 at 00:51 -0700, All Blokes wrote: I would not in any way presume to speak for any other Australians other than myself, but I object most strenuously to the implication that I have in some way been perverted by 80n or any other person at all. FWIW, Id like to point out that after 3 years mapping with OSM, I knew of fosm for several months before I learned who 80n is, and that he ran it. I was disgruntled with the OSM process and was looking for alternatives. Many names were thrown around, fosm being one of them. Several weeks after becoming a member, the first I became aware of the fact that 80n ran the server was after asking for help and someone directing me to him. I think your threat to come out to Australia and debate this in the pub with 80n as if that would sway people frankly is pretentious I think Steve has some understated feeling of how important 80n is. Steve may feel that with himself being the 'figurehead' of OSM, he feels that 80n is the figurehead of everyone against the change. He is not, he is simply one of many who didnt just dislike the change, he actively did something about it. If you care to come out you will be welcome but if you want to debate 80n this forum is your best chance and It does not appear, to me FWITW that you are doing so well at making your points against him. Seriously, Id like to see that. We could even arrange for a few copyright lawyers to come along, so that maybe Steve will understand the law is different in different places, he apparently needs to hear it from a lawyer or he wont believe it. I wonder how many lawyers it would take to convince him. David You've been very successful at perverting certain sections of the community, Australia being a good example as the checks and balances of normal community communication are harder because of the timezone differences and costs of flying. Essentially, people in Australia don't get to hear from the rest of us on the phone or in the pub and we let you spam the lists for a long time. So to an outsider it can look like you're this rational guy who used to be on the board and so on. I've heard about the various conspiracy theories you've been peddling personally off-list too. ___ 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] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 08:11 -0700, Steve Coast wrote: Why did you stop then? Is there no aerial imagery where you are other than nearmap? Theres this thing in Australia called loyalty. You seem to understand very little about Australian culture. Its almost the height of rudeness after someone sets up a business to donate goods to your project, to then turn around and say 'unless you change your business model, we dont want anything to do with you anymore'. With the amount of effort that has been gone to to secure the data used in Australia to be suitable for OSM, only to have some UK mob make changes to spit in the face of all our donors, its very little wonder why the masses here have little respect for those who cause trouble after we'd gone to such lengths to ask everyone to be compatible with OSM. David On 7/7/2011 8:03 AM, waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote: ...I believe we should spend energy enlightening aerial providers (or wait for them to catch up) Yup, I'm waiting... (I just wanted to point out why I have stopped contributing - it's not in protest, and not because I've been perverted by 80n. Thanks for your responses anyway.) ___ 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] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
As others have said.. 1) Ive moved to fosm since the lockout 2) Im feeling pretty disillusioned at the whole thing, and seriously wonder if its not worth just paying 5 bucks for a map that I cannot share, rather than deal with the politics of a staggered mapping project 3) Ive made a couple of edits, but really am feeling like theres so much duplicated work now that its almost just not worth bothering Sadly, I think others are starting to fall into these groups too, which is a pity as Ive just discovered some huge unmapped areas around the snowy mountains that I have lots of GPX tracks from (but unfortunately almost zero aerial imagery, from nearmap, bing, any of them). Its hard to get motivation to do work, in the knowledge that either a) work will be deleted or b) someone will have a huge headache trying to merge any work if it is duplicated. David On Wed, 2011-07-06 at 22:35 +1000, Chris Barham wrote: Hi Andrew, On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 21:29, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: snip Are you moving to the fosm db? If so, great! Less problems with trying to merge your data into fosm, and we can all get back to mapping. Do you have any concerns over the switch? I have concerns. The FAQ here gives valid reasons to fork an open source project: http://fossfaq.com/questions/52/what-does-it-mean-to-fork-an-open-source-project and the multiple forks of OSM may have ignored the advice to only fork When you have exhausted all other options. Forks are not a guaranteed success. They may have good reasons, ideals and differing opinions, but the parent project has a brand, and for OSM it's a powerful one. As an example everyone has heard of MySQL, but what about Maria? Mysql - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysql#Forks_of_MySQL Personally I don't care about the licence. I feel that the forks and this resulting dilution of effort will become a drain on all the projects (united we stand/divided etc etc), and have become a shouting match where the 'political' goals of the forked projects are trumpeted over the stated reason for the thing being there - an open map. Cries of We're more open don't help when you can't rustle up the hosting fees or development volunteers. So a fork must become popular. More popular than other forks or the parent project. Was this the real reason for your post with mention of FOSM (and no other OSM spin-offs), and seeding fear uncertainty and doubt regarding *possible* data deletion.. you were recruiting? I'd like to think all this rather dull licence bickering will play out and OSM will continue and strengthen. It's sad that people with agendas are talking up the 'possible' deletion of data, and rushing off to fork. That energy could have been used towards working on ways of keeping or replacing the data in OSM. A satisfactory local example where things turned out well is where Nearmap made it's generous offer to allow pre-existing data to remain under the new licence. However on this list there was little rejoicing, there was a lot of picking over the actual wording of their offer; looking at the legal-eze, hairsplitting terminology or imagined loopholes in order to justify the fork projects existence. Have fun. Cheers, Chas ___ 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] Very cheap Garmin Vista Hcx - legit?
The URLs you sent didnt work here, but personally Ive bought a few GPS receivers from dealextreme.com Theyre a hong kong based business but have free shipping and low prices. I think my GPS data logger cost about $15 there. Most of their LCD GPS units simply run windows CE so you simply have to root them and install your choice of nav software. Much cheaper than buying a brand-name Garmin. Infact, my dealextreme GPS has outlasted 2 navmans and a garmin that have given up over the years. David On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 10:05 +1000, Christopher Barham wrote: Hi Is anybody good at spotting eBay scams? This dude has 64 new Garmin Vista HCx's on eBay for about $120 less than comparable offers. Apart from zero feedback and the price, it looks legit to me. Hmm - any thoughts on a possible GPS bargain? (I was thinking it could be ok as Canada is awash with Garmin's and it's paypal protected.) iPhone URL: New Garmin Etrex Vista Hcx Handheld GPS Receiver Browser URL: New Garmin Etrex Vista Hcx Handheld GPS Receiver Chas ___ 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] Fwd: Yahoo aerials will not be available after September 13, 2011
Maybe someone should suggest to SteveC if he's looking for spots Bing can update, is the parts that yahoo are removing. Oh well, as long as OSM still has Microsofts products to help, everythings all good.. Microsoft will never change/shutdown their service once theyve burned the bridges with every other provider. Hopefully it wont be a complete failure when all the OSM eggs in the MS basket fall apart. David On Sun, 2011-06-26 at 02:11 +1000, John Smith wrote: -- Forwarded message -- From: Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com Date: 26 June 2011 00:22 Subject: [OSM-talk] Yahoo aerials will not be available after September 13, 2011 To: Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com Cc: t...@openstreetmap.org, annou...@openstreetmap.org On 6/25/2011 10:05 AM, Grant Slater wrote: On 25 June 2011 15:00, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote: On 6/25/2011 9:59 AM, Grant Slater wrote: On 25 June 2011 14:56, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.comwrote: Andrew-2 wrote: It says Yahoo is the main imagery source but it isn’t beginners’ level material any more and soon won’t be available at all. First I've heard of this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Yahoo!_Aerial_Imagery The aerial imagery being available or that Yahoo is retiring their aerial imagery service/API? The latter. I would have expected something on the talk list. Yes makes sense. Go ahead. I would also recommend CC'ing announce@. You know as much as I do. But read the linked: http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/ydn/posts/2011/06/yahoo-maps-apis-service-closure-announcement-new-maps-offerings-coming-soon/ / Grant Done, though I'm not subscribed to announce so it may not go through. ___ talk mailing list t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ 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] JohnSmith edits on 19 June 2011
On Mon, 2011-06-20 at 09:29 +1000, Mark Pulley wrote: Quoting John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com: On 20 June 2011 02:11, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: Please clarify for us the sources of these edits? What does it matter since I'm never going to agree to the CT... Now you're being rude. Actually, I would suggest it is Richard who is being rude in this situation, or is this a new policy to ask people publically to confirm any sources for edits they have made without a source tag (or with a source tag that I doubt). In the interests of consistency Richard, would you also like to contact the following members who have made edits on June 19th around Sydney and who also failed to include a source tag for their edits: Franc, gopher, dexgps? It does matter - if you don't put a comment Are you also raising this issue with everyone who uses potlatch in live edit mode, or is JS just easy pickings today? then it could be construed that your edits were copied from other sources. If you actually did survey it, then why not say so? Also, if you abandon OSM for FOSM, if this data is contaminated, it will also contaminate FOSM (assuming FOSM will be using OSM CC-BY-SA data). One can only assume that the edits were copied or derived from some source, otherwise it would be a creative art and out-of-place for OSM. What do you mean 'contaminated'? It may surprise you to know that some data that 'contaminates' OSM with regards to the ODbL, can safely exist in current OSM and FOSM with no legal problems. If this data came from a CC-BY-SA source and he hasnt accepted the CTs, then where is the problem? Can you seriously sit there with a straight face, while OSM data is on the edge of being devastated in this country and find the most pressing issue is someone not adding a source tag for a single barrier node (plus some other minor edits)? One wonders whether you would raise the same issue about any other users if they hadnt dissented so much against the foundation, political trolling at its best. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rationalising administrative boundaries
On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 11:14 +1000, Steve Bennett wrote: On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:15 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: The current boundaries will be removed in the near future, so if I were you I wouldn't spend to much time fussing over them. Oh? Do tell? All ABS boundaries (infact all .au government provided data that has been imported.. toilets, bbqs, hospitals/police stations) will be removed because theyre all distributed under CC licence, which is not compatible with the licence OSMF are trying to introduce at the moment. That is the reason why very little effort has been expended mapping Australia lately, until we know what skeleton of data we'll have left to work with after the changeover. If you want to map for OSM at the moment, your best bet is to map offline using something like JOSM, then save all your edits to be uploaded when the licence issue has been sorted out, otherwise you might find youre spending hours fixing up the map only to find all your work removed or broken when other users data is removed. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Statement from nearmap.com regarding submission of derived works from PhotoMaps to OpenStreetMap
On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 14:21 +1000, Nick Hocking wrote: Ben said, I say again: that's exactly what it was intended to achive and it was written by our lawyers to do just that. :) Thanks Ben, That makes it crystal clear that nearmappers can accept the CT's. Well, mappers who exclusively used nearmap anyway. Unfortunately, as Ben has pointed out many times, the problem isnt that NearMaps terms have created a problem, it is the fact that the new OSM terms are incompatible with the licence most commonly used for this information. While its great that NearMap sourced data can be used, this doesnt mean the incompatibility problems of other data sources are no longer relevant. CC-by-SA data continues to be incompatible with the new terms, and that is not the fault of people who have given their data to be used in the OSM project. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] [OSM-legal-talk] Statement from nearmap.com regarding submission of derived works from PhotoMaps to OpenStreetMap
On Wed, 2011-06-15 at 10:39 +0800, James Andrewartha wrote: On 15 June 2011 09:36, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote: Hi all As promised, with apologies for the delay, here is the statement from NearMap regarding submission of derived works of our PhotoMaps to OSM. Dear Ben, Thank you for providing this clear statement, for NearMap's contributions to the OpenStreetMap community, and for the generous decision to allow current NearMap-referenced data to remain in OSM. Does it? I haven't agreed to the CTs, therefore my NearMap tracings are CC-BY-SA, and hence will be purged from the database in Phase 5. Bens statement said: may be held and continue to be used by OSM under the terms in place between OSM and the individual In other words, nearmap allows you to make your own mind up in regards to derived data youve contributed. If you havent agreed to CTs, then your work will be removed, but if you wish to agree you are now not breaching any existing rights. So I guess that cuts down the amount of dirty data OSM will have in their DB, it doesnt remove it completely, but there seems to be no interest in a 100% clean db, as long as 99% is good enough. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap badly out of date
On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 20:00 +1000, Nick Hocking wrote: A nearmapper has decided that badly out-of-date nearmap imagery was more authorative than my GPS traces (taken last weekend) and has For anyone interested in the area, NearMap imagery of the new suburbs (taken the Friday before Nicks 'authoritive' GPS traces) is now online. This new imagery also shows a lot more new roads in the new development, which no-doubt will be traced in the coming days as people discover the updated imagery covers undeveloped suburbs. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap badly out of date
In other news, someone somewhere did something, and someone somewhere should deal with it. Would you care to point out what the problems are, or heaven forbid fix them yourself? We've got this wonderful interface that anyone (even you) can use to change data in the database that people have incorrectly put in. Out of interest, what nearmap imagery is out-of-date? If someone has 'completed' a road which doesnt exist, then how did you map it as a new road? If youre going to talk vague cryptic hints, what exactly are you expecting out of it, since youre obviously not expecting anyone to give an opinion on the changes nor an opinion on the currency of imagery? Maybe youre expecting that a certain unnamed user will (if they happen to see your message) go through their recent edits looking for anything that doesnt match what youve mapped? If you dont educate new users who made mistakes, then what use are you, just a complainer with no interest in rectifying the situations? David On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 20:00 +1000, Nick Hocking wrote: A nearmapper has decided that badly out-of-date nearmap imagery was more authorative than my GPS traces (taken last weekend) and has completed a road that is not there any longer. It has been completely grassed over so that cars can not travel along it, for some time to come, and barricades have been placed at the ends. Well done guys, you are well on the way to making OSM as good as google maps. This reinforces my belief that imagery (whether Bing or nearmap) should never be used for anything that needs to be routable. I hope the user has the gumption to quitely revert his incorrect changes. I don't suppose anyone wondered why I would go so far out of my way to map all the new roads and then fail to drive the last bit of this one. He also found a bit of pavement that I has missed mapping so that was good. He used a bit of poetic licence to mark it one way. Even though there are no one way markings on the road itself, the topography indicates that it can ONLY be one way, so I think that this action was entirely appropriate even though it departs from map only what is on the ground. Nearmap ( near enough is good enough) Sorry Nearmap - I'm not having a go at your excellent imagery, just the way some people choose to use it. PS - I drove back out there again this morning to check on a street sign where I was sure I had a typo (and I did, although I now can't fix it). There were some more new roads open so I have mapped them as well. Sorry guys, nearmap will have to fly and process Canberra every week to keep up with an interested local mapper (and thats only for the road topology - names are something else again). ___ 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] Canberra mapping - nearly up-to-date.
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 17:03 +1000, John Smith wrote:
On 9 May 2011 01:28, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
These current edits are of value to OSM, newly developed roads in
developing suburbs ('some of which already have people living on them').
How can newly developed roads be mapped from Bing?
The newly developed roads he has done by survey, including street names.
I have extended and verified this coverage with the available nearmap
imagery. The same area in bing is shown as grassed paddocks. Check
around the following way and you can see the difference between
bing/nearmap for this area:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/41119687
David
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Canberra mapping - nearly up-to-date.
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 21:53 +1000, John Smith wrote:
On 8 May 2011 21:41, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote:
As usual - non trolls are welcome to let me know if I've missed anything (or
made some mistakes).
So people asking difficult, but honest questions are labelled trolls
so you don't have to answer?
All this looks like is vandalism and half baked edits that should be
reverted as you aren't adding value to the map, if you continue to do
so any one of several of us will start reverting all your change sets.
These current edits are of value to OSM, newly developed roads in
developing suburbs ('some of which already have people living on them').
The map looks a bit funny because what is mapped is all that is on the
ground currently. There are more roads planned which is obvious from
recent aerial imagery, even to the point of driveways being paved before
the roads however the roads are currently just dirt tracts at last view.
One comment I will make though, is that it appears from comparing your
edits with nearmap imagery of nov-2010, some new streets you mapped
continue on past the extent you mapped them. Did you consider mapping
the newer unopened streets with construction tags so theyre still
visible but unroutable?
New NearMap imagery was taken over the weekend in Canberra, so within a
week or two expect to see new high-res imagery of the new developing
suburbs and even more areas to map while our data is still of interest
to some.
David
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Canberra Mapping - out of date
On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 21:22 +1000, Nick Hocking wrote: Unfortunately this has meant that Canberra OSM data is now badly out of date. I have recently heard of a situation where up-to-date Canberra data could have been *extremely* usefull to somebody. Just out of interest, I noticed youve been 'realigning' some nearmap sourced ways to bing imagery recently in my area. You claim to be making the map up-to-date, but are you aware that the Bing imagery for Canberra is from March 2001, while the latest nearmap source (which they were traced from and which you claim to be out-of-date) was acquired November 2010? This could almost be considered vandalism, what you are doing to the quality of the map data available for Canberra. Please dont touch any of my 'out-of-date' edits from the past 6 months to realign them with 10 year old aerial imagery. Also, if youre going to trace ways from Bing, why tag them as source=nearmap? Are you delibrately trying to muddy the waters? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Canberra Mapping - out of date
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 12:19 +1000, John Smith wrote: On 6 May 2011 10:47, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: You mentioned previously that Bing was out of alinement by up to 100m, if this is the case it is a clear case of vandalism since he should be at the vest least realigning Bing imagery to GPS traces. The few times Ive used it, Ive found the accuracy to vary anywhere from 0-100m. The accuracy varies in local regions too, so while one part of a suburb might be offset 50m north-east of reality, another part of the suburb might be offset 50m south-east of reality, this means you constantly have to realign the imagery while working with it. I remember hearing once about someone writing some sort of plugin or database which kept a track of how offset parts of the bing imagery are, but never heard if it was successful or how extensive the coverage is. Given its age (over 10 years old in Canberra), and these nasty accuracy limitations anyone would be crazy to use it in preference to NearMap. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Canberra Mapping - out of date
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 14:02 +1000, Ian Sergeant wrote: On 6 May 2011 10:47, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: Given its age (over 10 years old in Canberra), and these nasty accuracy limitations anyone would be crazy to use it in preference to NearMap. Was surveying around Casey on the weekend. Impressed by the OSM coverage as always of the new areas. Casey was one of the areas I was talking about wanting to survey last year but it was already done before the construction fences were even taken down, street names and all (and a single GPS trace, now covered by dozens more). Still a just a cleared area on the bing imagery, but I still would have put it more recent than 10 years. Maybe 3 or 4? The Bing aerial imagery analyzer gives different results for different areas, youre right, some of the newer parts of gungahlin are only 3 years old, but the imagery around Tuggeranong which I quickly checked is showing as March 2001. Bing and Nearmap both seemed well aligned, but Nearmap with far superior imagery. In related news, NearMap are flying Canberra as I write this, so expect even more superior (and up-to-date) imagery online in the next couple of weeks, hopefully with a little more coverage of unmapped areas to go and explore. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Reassurance and Licensing
On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 15:31 +1000, Ian Sergeant wrote: This is the Australian list, in case you didn't realise Ah, so you are speaking for all Australians! Well, I have yet to hear any Australians complain about the freedom of the data, other than being incompatible with the new one-of-a-kind licence that OSM is wanting to use. As I said, I'm glad you have such faith in your government institutions, but OSM was largely formed because of government restrictions over the use of its data (i.e OS copyright), and I think the OSM community has the demonstrated capacity and capability to make its own decisions, rather than having to follow what the Australian government or any other government specifies. A lot of data has been imported to the Australian OSM map from freely (as free as OSM has always been anyway) given government sources and datasets. I always assumed that it was groups like google, yahoo, bing and the like that we were trying to be more open than, not those who actually opened access to their data. So at least this Australian born, Australian resident, 5-year Australian OSM contributor doesn't necessarily think whatever is good enough for the Australian government is necessarily good enough for us all. What legal expertise do you have which you believes makes you think youve found problems that the government copyright lawyers didnt with the licence they chose? Do you also disagree with the licence that OSM has been distributed under for the past 5 years? After all, it is the same licence the Australian government (and apparently now NZ government) are using, and will continue to use. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Reassurance and Licensing
On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 20:29 +1000, Ian Sergeant wrote: I'm not objecting to freedom of data. The comment I objected to is the one that said if it is good enough for the Australian government, then it must be good enough for all Australians, with no need to examine it further. That may be valid as someone's opinion, but to say it is the opinion of all Australians is just plainly false. It doesnt have to match the opinion of all Australians, as long as it matches the opinions of those who matter and would be deciding on these things (copyright lawyers, judges, etc). I always thought that in Australia we question our government's decisions, we don't always accept what they are doing is in the national best interest. They have given away valuable data under an internationally used licence. How is it not in the best interest? I'm sure they have considered the available licensing options, and given the current state of the law and licensing have given it their best shot. The government has a different decision making basis to what OSM does. I imagine there are more lawyers and legal advisors in the Australian government than there are involved in OSM too. Heck, even just within some departments like ABS Im sure the legal numbers and minds outweigh the OSM collective legal knowledge. I'm not arguing for any particular licencing outcome. If you want to have that discussion, I'm sure you can find someone who feels more strongly on the issue than I do. Im arguing for an outcome which is compatible with as many users as possible and that people already know and understand and have tested. Im also arguing for an outcome which wouldnt see the complete splintering of the project in the long-term. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Canberra Mapping - out of date
On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 21:22 +1000, Nick Hocking wrote: Unfortunately this has meant that Canberra OSM data is now badly out of date. I have recently heard of a situation where up-to-date Canberra data could have been *extremely* usefull to somebody. As an active Canberra mapper, exactly which parts are 'badly out of date'? The only areas I can think of that you could be referring to are a couple of new land estates in Gungahlin. Since it was exactly this type of situation that prompted me to spend so much time mapping Canberra and keeping it very up-to-date, and despite my revulsion at having to work on a project while the three forkers are still in residence, this weekend I will bring Canberra up-to-date again. I may be wrong, but I think youll find theres more than 3 fork projects tentatively being planned. This data could not have been arm-chair mapped with nearmap (or Bing for that matter) but needs people out there actually mapping rather than incessantly bitching and moaning about things on these lists. Once again, can you suggest areas which arent covered by bing/nearmap that are out of date? Other than a couple of new land estates I cant think of any areas needing work, but it would be great if you could point some of us locals in the right direction, so that if there are unmapped areas there can be more than just your manhours spent alone on it, after all, that is a great thing about OSM is the teamwork to more completely map unmapped or out-of-date areas. I really wish that OSM-F would finalise the CT/licence implementation, (tomorrow would be good!) I think we've all been hoping for a finalisation one way or the other, or even a rough timeline which can be stuck to. The damage done to the project through this dragged out process and constantly moving the goalposts may be irrepairable. At best, only a few mappers may abandon the project, at worst we may have set precedent with data providers being wary of making concessions to open-data projects, having given away their data then be told 'thanks for your effort but were not interested anymore'. Not wanting to dishearten you, but currently the ODbL/CTs changeover is 2 weeks into phase 3 of 5. Phase 3 will take '5 or 10 weeks', Phase 4 will take at least 8 weeks (and apparently community consultation). If everything moves as quickly as is scheduled (considering its taken 12 months to reach this stage), the changeover might be complete by the start of summer. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NSW Dept of Lands aerial imagery...
On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 19:33 +1000, Andrew Harvey wrote: Sure if we can convince them to use more liberal licensing it would be great. Personally I would use it for areas not covered by nearmap. While not necessarily beneficial for future new OSM, it could be beneficial to any forks if they could be convinced to licence under the CC-BY licence they use for other data. In theory it should be a simple task for them to grant rights under a licence they already use in their department. I'm not sure how we can be heard from them though. I supposed we could try emailing bob.he...@lands.nsw.gov.au as it says on the page... Do we have anyone here (JS?) who has experience writing to these groups asking for permission? Im sure Ive seen template letters thrown around on here but cant remember who has been successful at it in the past. David On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 9:39 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: The NSW Dept of Lands seems to have quite a lot of aerial imagery (http://lite.maps.nsw.gov.au/), in their terms of use all copyrightable material is for personal or non-comercial use only, but doesn't seem to cover deriving data from their imagery, and what can be done with it afterwards. Does anyone have any thoughts on if they'd be favourable to allowing the community to derive map data at all? ___ 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 mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] How many NearMap users do you think have accepted the new CTs and ODbL?
On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 23:18 +0800, Andrew Gregory wrote: Thankfully, I've been careful to use source=nearmap. I've also been making a point to go around and survey streets I've traced, check their alignment, name them and set source=survey. Unless youve realigned the ways based on GPS tracks after you traced from nearmap, tagging the ways as source=survey is incorrect. You can add a source:name=survey or similar, but if youve traced from a source, just because you verify it with another source if you havent made any changes Id suggest leaving source tag as is. In any case, I expect that when it comes time to actually apply the new license, any source=nearmap data will disappear leaving behind all my re-licensable data. That is what one would hope, but no-one has been able to give a straight answer. The problem with this, is how many source= tags do they have to check for and remove? The problem isnt specific to nearmap, it is a general problem for all data derived from sources using differing licences (for example, ABS, yahoo or data.gov.au, just in Australia). It is easier to simply remove every edit from a user than for them to automate the process of figuring out what was sourced from where. I short, I don't see any problems. All my current data conforms to the current license, and the data that doesn't conform to the new license is easily identifiable and removable. Is it easily identifiable by you or by an automated process also? Have you tagged every single edit youve made, when sourcing nearmap, with their source? I know personally Im sure theres been times when Ive made a quick edit in potlatch and not thought about changing the source tag. Hopefully some general visualisation tools will be developed well before the license change takes place. Again, that is what one would hope, but as no-one is quite sure what will be affected or how. Part of the problem also is that depending on when you agreed to the new licence and CTs, they have quite possibly changed since then, meaning that any visualisation of your data that is impacted when you accepted it, would possibly look different now, if the new wording became more compliant with sources you might have used. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] How many NearMap users do you think have accepted the new CTs and ODbL?
On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 12:40 +0800, Andrew Gregory wrote: Unless youve realigned the ways based on GPS tracks after you traced from nearmap, tagging the ways as source=survey is incorrect. You can add a source:name=survey or similar, but if youve traced from a source, just because you verify it with another source if you havent made any changes Id suggest leaving source tag as is. Yes, it's all based on surveys where I've gone there in person. (How else would I get the name?) As I said, when you get the name, you should use source:name=survey and leave the source=nearmap tag in-place unless after you survey you not only enter the name but also realign all the nearmap-sourced nodes to your GPS trace. I just can't see that happening. The damage to the map would be too big! In any case, how do you select the people whose data is to be deleted? The same list of unacceptable sources that is too hard to determine in the first place? Whatever criteria that would be required to identify users could just as easily be applied to ways and nodes, in a much more targeted and far less damaging way. Youve basically summarised the whole problem here. The damage to the map is significant (figures range from between 50-80% loss of data in Australia). The method being used to select the data to delete is to ask users to allow OSM to relicence their contributions. Anyone who doesnt agree, has their data deleted. This also affects any revisions made to existing data by users who HAVE agreed. The 'unacceptable sources' isnt so much a pre-determined list, in general in Australia it is any data that is released under CC-BY or CC-BY-SA, which will soon be incompatible with the new licence that OSMF has drafted. One of the problems is that its not easy to determine which users are affected. Some data is obviously tagged as being sourced from somewhere, in these cases its easy to know if the data can remain or not under the new licence. But in Australia, a lot of users would have made edits (even minor edits) using CC-BY sources, such as the ABS data or simply using nearmap for a quick live edit on the OSM website, moving a toilet to the correct location without adding a source tag, for example. Well source=nearmap is easily identified by an automated process. It worked for you! As for ones I may have missed, well I will need to be trusted that I haven't missed any, in exactly the same way the other 3390-536=2854 users will have to be trusted that they've never used nearmap. My simple test was simply to demonstrate that a minimum of 25% of those who agreed are unable to. That figure might be higher, but it can be guaranteed that its not lower. The figures of 3390, 536 and 2854 represent total number of Australian mappers, total that have accepted and total that havent. This means that 2854 users' data wont be included in the 'new' OSM as OSM cannot relicence the data from the contributor. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Trolls
On Sat, 2011-04-30 at 20:09 +1000, Nick Hocking wrote: David Murn stated If anyone is interested, I can provide the simple C code I used to generate these numbers and/or a list of usernames/uids that are involved. Well. you'd be a right piece of work then. Right, get Nearmap to sue every OSMer in sight, that'd be real clever of them. Hang on.. maybe you were just tyring to outdo the other two aus-trolls in dispiciality inh wich case, congratulations... I believe that you have just taken a narrow lead. Im not sure what youre suggesting. NearMap has no interest in suing anyone, least of all OSM users since OSM is still under a compatible licence. What I was 'trying to do' was to point out that there needs to be a lot more care taken when asking users to relicence the data, and that the users whos names I could list should be taken off the list of those accepting the ODbL and CTs. PS - tomorrow I will find out all the ways in Canberra that I had to fix using nearmap, and replace them using compliant Bing imagery Make sure you also survey those roads then so you can replace the tags you delete while replacing the ways. If you delete a road which is tagged as maxspeed=60 and re-trace it from bing, youd better go survey it in person and re-add all the data youre removing, otherwise YOU are the one causing problems to the project. At the very least, can I ask that if youre going to trace from bing, that you keep an eye on the imagery alignment as in some parts of Canberra I have found the imagery to be upto 100m offset. One might almost consider your efforts vandalism, and a complete waste of time and effort when you could be tracing areas that arent mapped, and if you really want to replace all the work others have done, then at least wait until it has been removed (if it is removed) in future. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Tragedy of the commons...
On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 11:33 +0100, 80n wrote: There's no tileserver yet, that's a priority, there's no gratification if things are rendered. Is it possible to setup some sort of tiles@home-like system for fosm? That could be a way to reduce your load. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] How many NearMap users do you think have accepted the new CTs and ODbL?
I was wondering this question tonight. How many OSM users have accepted the new terms, without fully understanding that sources they have used in the past prohibit them from doing so. So, I wrote a little script to find out and the numbers are surprising. Using my australian test extract from 21/03/2011, I found that 3390 users have made edits in the area of interest (the Australian extract available on osmaustralia.org). Of these 3390 users, 536 have used the tag source=nearmap at least once. Of these 536 users, 134 have agreed to the ODbL+CTs. So, approximately 25% of users who have attributed nearmap (and to be fair, a lot more data has probably used nearmap without proper attribution), have agreed to have their edits released under the new terms. Of 3390 total users in our region, 487 have agreed to the terms. Interesting numbers that show that a lot of users have been mislead or misunderstand the consequences of accepting the changes. If anyone is interested, I can provide the simple C code I used to generate these numbers and/or a list of usernames/uids that are involved. This only shows where there is clear evidence of licence violations without having to look past the data's tags. Im sure if similar figures were generated based on users in nearmap coverage areas, the numbers would be similar. These numbers were also generated from an extract, and not a full history dump, so there may well be cases where tags have changed and would not be counted here. Food for thought David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Reassurance and Licensing
On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 15:17 +0100, Grant Slater wrote: I am a volunteer member (like all the members) of the Licensing Working Group (LWG), OSM Sysadmin Team along with a few other OpenStreetMap groups. Does this mean we can ask (and receive definitive answers from) you the hard questions that have been asked numerous times and no-one has been in a position to ask? Or are you just another 'volunteer' who will pass the questions off to some hidden mailing list somewhere? The LWG is well aware of the NearMap licensing issue and we are trying to get it resolved as soon as we can but we are an all volunteer team with day jobs. I think youre looking at the problem too narrowly. Yes, the NearMap issue is a significant one to Australians, but it is only one of many numerous sources that all share the same common licence. The 'nearmap issue' is an issue affecting data from many sources, some private stakeholders and some government stakeholders. Are the efforts to 'resolve' the 'issues' looking at all Australian (and similarly NZ) data sources, or are efforts simply being used to sort out specifics with NearMap? The Contributor Terms v1.2.4 reduces the project's freedoms in an attempt to appease NearMap. Kind of like stabbing someone with a dagger, then pulling it out half-way and telling them they should be happy you even did that? Unfortunately there are some very vocal (anonymous) members of the Australian community who seem intent on creating a virtual Us vs Them conflict in the community with exaggerated claims and mistruths. We are one project and on the same team. I believe we all value the amazing project we have collaboratively built. Did you seriously write that with a straight face? Lets address the points.. There has been vocal opposition to the change to a licence incompatible with our data. This has come from government departments, businesses and educated users, not 'anonymous members'. The problem with the mistruths and claims, is that most people simply dont know, and in Australia if someone asks you a question, its generally polite to at least offer some advice rather than rudely ignore whoever is asking. There are people who are seeking to split the community, you are correct. These people are the ones who are bringing in a licence change and preventing those who dont agree from participating any longer in this 'amazing project we have *ALL* collaboratively built'. If youd followed discussions here from the past couple of days, youd see people actively encouraging the use of OSM services (in favour of forks) until the time at which we are permanently blocked from the collaborative project. The much-maligned OpenStreetMap Foundation (OSM-F, OSMF) is a not-for-profit company registered in England Wales as a legal entity to represent the project. The OSMF is not some nefarious entity out to steal all our precious geodata ZOMG. A non-for-profit company? It barely even legally qualifies as a non-for-profit (dis)organisation. Maybe youve also missed the detailed criticisms of the foundation from members here, who ARE involved with non-profits, things such as poor minute keeping and basic accountability. Your contempt for the citizens of this country and this region, while talking as a representative of a legal entity is part in parcel of what we are becoming used to. It is sad that people (or even entire committees) seem happy enough to tear this project apart from the inside, simply to achieve some goal which it seems even they cant quite decide upon. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Wiki + Data Sources + Licensing Categories
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 22:12 +1000, Ashley Kyd wrote: Hi all, Just trying to do a bit of research to catch up on the issues but found the wiki a bit unhelpful. I've started categorising data sources by license. If you have a spare moment or two and know of any I've missed, please pop by and see if you can tag a few more. Particularly, are there any other Australian data sources other than Nearmap that are CC BY-SA? Im pretty sure everything from data.gov.au and ABS is CC-BY-SA. Fairly sure most of the imports (such as BP and shell) were done from CC-BY-SA datasets too, although John Smith would be able to confirm/deny that. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Wiki + Data Sources + Licensing Categories
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 23:27 +1000, John Smith wrote: On 7 April 2011 23:03, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote: I contacted the nowwhere.com.au/MapData-Sciences who are managers of the BP and Shell data in October 2010... ... Also the locations have been fixed for numerous locations so if you ever get in contact with anyone please let them know about OSM having more accurate data than they offer, I think 30km out is still the worst case. When I travelled to Perth, I found (and fixed) some fuel stations that were marked upto 100km from home. 'Eyre Highway, Cocklebiddy' for example refers to a road almost 400km between 3 roadhouses. Ive fixed a few of these, but like others I have a lot of corrections I found and tagged in my GPS, but which Im unsure about processing and uploading. (And thats not just my excuse for not wanting to look at 35mb worth of .gpx and .osm files) David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 22:09 +1000, Michael Hampson wrote: So is Phase 4 the end for those that don't agree? What happens to the data if we don't agree? and the data built on top of that data? Well, it depends what you read. According to the wiki, stage 4 is when OSM asks the community what will should happen for those who havent accepted the licence. One has to wonder if any of the comments from the past year or two will be taken into account when those in power decide to ask us mere mushrooms what we think. For clarity: - This will only affect (77,000) contributors who registered before May 2010 and who have not accepted the new terms as part of the voluntary re-licensing program. For clarity: (according to odbl.de) In Australia: - This will remove 57% of users - This will remove 67% of nodes, 66% of ways and 86% of relations In UK: - This will remove 65% of users - This will remove 40% of nodes, 40% of ways and 10% of relations In Europe: - This will remove 61% of users - This will remove 20% of nodes, 20% of ways and 15% of relations It is fairly clear that the Australian issue has very little value to those in Europe in control of the project at the moment. The fact that the number of users lost is in the same ballpark while the amount of data lost is significantly higher in our part of the world, seems to show the regions and the users whos interests they are looking out for. - Once a contributor has Accepted/Declined the new terms, they may continue editting normally. Even if they decline, they may continue editting normally until and if Phase 4 kicks in. Maybe I missed the announcement, but is there now an option to record that you decline the licence? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OpenStreetMap] OpenStreetMap is changing the licence
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 09:17 +1000, Michael Hampson wrote: This came through over night. Is it a standard mailer going out to all? I received the same, so presumably yes. One has to wonder how many innocent users who dont want to be banished from the project, simply click 'agree' or follow the link, having no understanding of what theyre actually agreeing to, or whether they even have the rights to relicence their changes. To be done properly, there should have been a note added to that email to only agree to the terms if you know your edits are 100% clean, otherwise the liability falls back to you personally and not to the project if its found you have contributed infringing data. However, a note like this would only serve to educate the users and wouldnt be an encouragement to blindly accept, which some in control think is what should happen. David Original Message Subject: [OpenStreetMap] OpenStreetMap is changing the licence Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 16:09:39 +0100 From: wicking m-177534-5c8...@messages.openstreetmap.org To: mhamp...@fastmail.com.au Hi MCH, wicking has sent you a message through OpenStreetMap with the subject OpenStreetMap is changing the licence: == Hello MCH. As I’ve seen on http://odbl.de you’ve contributed quite a lot of data so I wanted to ask, if you already know, that OpenStreetMap is asking existing contributors to re-license their contributions under a new licence, which is more suitable for our data. (OSM wants to change the current Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 2.0 (CC-BY-SA 2.0) to Open Database License (OdbL) 1.0.) Maybe you’ve reasons why you did not accept it already. Perhaps you could tell me. You can read more about the licence change here: http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/We_Are_Changing_The_License You can accept the new licence here (if you’re logged in): http://openstreetmap.org/user/terms I hope to hear from you. Erik from Berlin, Germany == You can also read the message at http://www.openstreetmap.org/message/read/177534 and you can reply at http://www.openstreetmap.org/message/reply/177534 ___ 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] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 03:19 +0100, Grant Slater wrote: For clarity: (according to odbl.de) In Australia: For pete's sake! Stop making up blatantly untrue stuff. Those are likely the precentages if we moved *today* without even formally contacting/emailing anyone. I never made anything up. The closest I came to 'making up' was being creative with the summary of 3 relevant regions and rounding the numbers up. The figures I quoted came from the URL I gave, and anyone is welcome to research this themselves. The webpage suggests that these are the accurate percentages (with upto 1 week delay). It is fairly clear that the Australian issue has very little value to those in Europe in control of the project at the moment. The fact that the number of users lost is in the same ballpark while the amount of data lost is significantly higher in our part of the world, seems to show the regions and the users whos interests they are looking out for. Please stop making grossly untrue statements. What is untrue? Again, I only summarised what the statistics show. The fact that these statistics go against the ODbL propoganda, doesnt make them grossly untrue, it just makes them at odds with what some may believe. If you have figures for Australia which disprove the numbers on odbl.de then feel free to use them and cite your source, if you cant disprove the numbers and simply feel that theyre grossly untrue, then maybe you need to comprehend the statistics better. If the Australian issue is so important, as others have suggested why isnt OSMF seeking to make a rapid agreement with NearMap as was done with Bing? David - Once a contributor has Accepted/Declined the new terms, they may continue editting normally. Even if they decline, they may continue editting normally until and if Phase 4 kicks in. Maybe I missed the announcement, but is there now an option to record that you decline the licence? Read the original mail that Mike posted to the DEV mailinglist... it is about planning the changes to the editor software before main announcements. As far as I could tell, this email to the dev list is for what happens if people have chosen to decline the licence. The last Id heard, it was not possible to decline the licence, only to accept it. The issue of accepting/declining the licence is what Im talking about here, not the issue of what to do in the future if someone has declined (if such a mechanism is put in place). David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Splitting ways with ABS data, and the new OSM terms
On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 06:15 +1100, Ben Kelley wrote: Hi. I think this is an important question, but probably not something someone on this list can answer. I presume this issue is of concern more widely than Australia. Sadly, I dont think anyone can give a proper answer, whichever list the question was on. The Australian case is different because so much of our data has come from sources which arent compatible with the new terms. Basically almost anyone who has edited within Australia within the last couple of years (especially those edits with potlatch) has used the NearMap source or an ABS source, however they will agree to the terms under threat of not being able to continue to participate in the projcet, with no care for the licence of any edits they may have made. Generally people dont care about licence problems, they just get told they have to click a box to continue editing, so they do so. Honestly, how many people do you think that clicked the accept button, actually read the entire new licence and terms and checked that all their previous edits comply? The only purpose this serves, is to taint the project with data that may or may not have rights restrictions, but by the time that becomes an issue no-one will remember what was what. David On 12 March 2011 23:10, Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au wrote: As no-one has answered this question yet, I thought I'd better re-ask the question, as it will determine whether I can agree to the new terms or not. On 23/02/2011, at 4:27 PM, Mark Pulley wrote: Quoting Andrew Laughton laughton.and...@gmail.com: Anybody who has used nearmap or Government data sources for their mapping therefore cannot agree to the new terms, and all of their data is going to be removed on 1st April 2011. Presumably most of the current ABS data will disappear automatically (as a special user account was set up for the original uploading) but what happens if any of these ways are split? For example, if I split a way because part of the way follows a river, the new way will be counted as being created by myself, so if I agree to the terms, would I then need to delete them separately? (or go through all my edits to allow only some of them to be accepted?) Or am I prevented from agreeing to the new terms because I have split ABS ways? Mark P. ___ 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 mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bulk loading all the Australian Statistical Geography Standard into the OSM - a query from the Australian Bureau of Statistics [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 15:12 +1100, {withheld} wrote:
However I still hold the community should accept the offer and be
grateful. Carping about internal politics just looks bad. And whiny. And
doesn't encourage anybody else ever offering similar largesse ever again.
Well, to be fair, the community would accept his data, but in 4 weeks it
will be removed from the OSM database and it will be unable to be
included in any future OSM.
Whether you think this is internal politics or not, it is the law and as
Marcus clearly explained what terms the data would be released under,
the fact that some within the OSM project have chosen to no longer
utilise data sources such as his is the problem, and theyre the ones you
should be talking to, not us.
David
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bulk loading all the Australian Statistical Geography Standard into the OSM - a query from the Australian Bureau of Statistics [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 10:38 +0800, Andrew Laughton wrote: Hi Marcus Unfortunately OSM has recently forced a change to it's licence agreement to a version where attribution is not required on any copies that are made of OSM data, probably to appease Microsoft and Bing maps who will then be free to charge for these maps, with no attribution at all. Unfortunately, as stated by others, this is currently the situation. The powers-that-be dont really follow this email list, so you would probably be better off contacting the OSM-talk list or the OSM legal list. While those in charge may not listen to us little folk, an organisation such ABS might have more pull. Knowing that the project might lose the tracing of some small contributors to forked sites, isnt quite as devastating as knowing government departments will prefer to use CC sites in preference to their OSM site. However another important thing to remember, is that although this major change is happening in just over 5 weeks, the Contributor Terms still havent been finalised. Really your best bet is to contact the legal list or the OSM legal working group, as the best anyone here can offer, is what we've pieced together from what little the foundation and legal team have allowed us mere users to know. David Anybody who has used nearmap or Government data sources for their mapping therefore cannot agree to the new terms, and all of their data is going to be removed on 1st April 2011. As you can imagine there are a lot of upset mappers, and there are alternative sites being set up where the original licence and data will be retained. There are a number of sites doing this including; http://fosm.org Creating a new Layer for your data would be a good move from the point of view of mappers, who could not change this data either deliberately or accidentally, and it would therefore be more reliable. Unfortunately these changes are recent and the alternative sites are still a work in progress, and not yet ready to adapt to new requirements. Having said that, go to http://fosm.org/p2/potlatchFosm.xml, and look at the Background drop down menu. It includes a number of options for background layers from a variety of sources. Also try http://www.openstreetmap.org, open up the edit tab, and select the checkbox option in the bottom left hand corner of the potlatch window, which then shows background layer options. I think all other editors also have these background options, and there are a number of editors out there. I would suggest to you that you make your data available in a format that is compatible with these other background sources, and host the actual data on your own servers. This would also have the advantage that your data will always be up to the minute if and when changes are made. It would then not take much for the mapping applications to import your data as a layer, and you would not need to chase up the different mapping sites and get them to include your data. It would also be a relativity small step to host your own map viewer, which could include your data as a layer as well as the option of google maps, bing maps, open street map, fosm or whatever as a reference to where the boundary's are relative to roads and creeks or coastlines. I do not know what the API's are, or even where to find them, but the nearmap http://www.nearmap.com/; people are active and if they cannot help you then I am sure they can point you in the right direction. Andrew. On 23 February 2011 09:01, Marcus Blake marcus.bl...@abs.gov.au wrote: To the Australian OSM community, The Australian Bureau of Statistics has recent published the first part of a new statistical geography, the Australia Statistical Geography Standard or ASGS for short. The boundaries are based on a new basic spatial unit called a mesh block which have been aggregated to create efficient spatial units for the dissemination and analysis of statistical data. They have been released in advanced of the 2011 Australian census and are fixed for the next 5 years. The attached links and PDF file provide additional information. The ABS Geography section is presently investigating the possibility of loaded the new Australian Statistical Geography Standard into the OSM database. As a starting point, I'd like to start a discussion about how this could be achieved, if it is possible at all. From the ABS point of view the principle reason for doing this is that an the OSM database would hold a copy of the official version of the boundaries and that this point of truth would be available for all OSM users and downstream distributors. It would therefore become one of the channels by
Re: [talk-au] temp name change
On Sat, 2011-02-19 at 10:36 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote:
On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 9:17 AM, {withheld} pheasant.cou...@gmail.com wrote:
Please note the last line of that article: Both the town and Phil Down
will revert to their original names in a month.
Why bother?
Because it's fun.
The government making changes based on facebook polls, sounds scary not
fun.
David
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Unsuitable for caravans
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 08:02 +0100, waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: Make a new specific tag (unsuitable_for_caravans=yes; source:unsuitable_for_caravans=survey), and document it on the wiki (with a photo of a sign). At least that's explicit and clear. I see the problem with my HGV proposal. On my cross-country trip, I saw a lot of areas marked as 'RV friendly'. Maybe we could use access:caravan=yes/no/designated, with an agreed upon default, ie. whether untagged roads should be considered caravan friendly or not. David On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 2:58 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: Saw a couple of roads signed unsuitable for caravans which seems like council butt covering but I'm not sure how to tag it since it's a sign to discourage rather than to disallow. -- Sent from my mobile device ___ 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 mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Unsuitable for caravans
On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 11:43 +1000, John Smith wrote: I agree with the access suggestion, eg access:caravan=yes/no/designated/unsuitable I now regret using 4wd_only, this should have be an access: tag instead, eg access:4wd=only/yes/no etc This should be quite easy to script a change for, as I dont think theres too many places where 4wd_only is used for anything other than an access restriction. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Unsuitable for caravans
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 14:50 +1100, John Henderson wrote: On 17/02/11 12:58, John Smith wrote: Saw a couple of roads signed unsuitable for caravans which seems like council butt covering but I'm not sure how to tag it since it's a sign to discourage rather than to disallow. I've got at least one to tag also. Maybe access:caravan=unsuitable Presumably if its unsuitable for caravans, its also unsuitable for HGV? Maybe simply re-use the HGV access tags already in place? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 00:04 +, David Groom wrote: I just want to draw attention to the survey at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WFVK6XS , the link was mentionedn Richard Weait's email to this list on 1 Feb, but I have to admit that I missed it the first time I read his posting Out of interest, who runs this survey and who is (or when will we be) allowed to know the results? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 10:38 +1000, Stephen Hope wrote: On 3 February 2011 09:28, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: I also wonder how this works, using your example, if the user had entered street names and then another user came along and fixed a spelling mistake in one which they had surveyed themselves. When the changeset is relicenced, you have v1 of an object under a non-compatible licence, and v2 is compatible, so what happens to the object? It goes away. All objects get rolled back to the last valid state that have no unlicensed edits before them. So any object where v1 is unlicensed is gone, no matter how many changes have been done to it since. That was my worry, but I figured that the powers-that-be wouldnt push a change through that would devastate the map so much. This is one reason I have stopped doing any work around my area, until this mess gets sorted out. I suspect that all this area is going to go away, so any work I do in the meantime is wasted, whether it is in itself valid or not. I hadnt thought of that perspective. Id simply cut back on my mapping because the lack of nearmap basically made it fruitless. I do have to wonder though, how many mappers have dropped off their edits during this whole changeover period, for that reason or similar. The only consolation is that any work you do isnt so much 'wasted' because it will be maintained in the public export and the numerous forks. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] JOSM filtering image/map tile URLs
On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 11:26 -0500, Richard Weait wrote: On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 8:51 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: I was sent a link to this thread on the JOSM dev mailing list: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/josm-dev/2011-January/005185.html The jist is some people are pushing to put URL filtering into JOSM, currently the discussion is focused on Google images/tiles however it wouldn't take much of a leap for things to also block Nearmap URLs since those pushing for this change seem to want to make JOSM difficult to use for anything but OSM allowed sources. Thankfully the main author of the software seems to want a more general editor, not just one that works with OSM specific APIs etc. You aren't addressing the core question. Given that the new imagery plugin has made it much simpler to accidentally infringe, is a URL blacklist a suitable way to raise that barrier closer to where it was a few weeks ago? Exactly that is the core question. Why wasnt that question asked of the community before the change was made? It seems they dont even understand what the whole 'community' usage of their app even is, given their surprise when objections were raised and other alternatives suggested, such as flagging edits made when a certain background is used, and issuing warnings instead of simply blacklisting. Why not participate in the conversation? Im not subscribed to the JOSM dev mailing list. I guess we should we happy that it was even announced anywhere, but unless John Smith had posted the above link how many of us would have been aware of the changes in the software? I dont think anyone objects to raising barriers to block google images for tracing, as a specific case. If the code was changed to block 'google' then thats one thing, but for the code to be changed to download/use an arbitrary blocklist which (presumably?) can change at any time a handful of people dont like what youre doing. I think what they have a problem with is that its so open-ended, like we just have to trust the OSMF because they'll do no wrong. Hang on a second, this is sounding vaguely like some heated discussions from a few months back. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Emergency Markers
On Tue, 2011-02-01 at 09:33 +1000, John Smith wrote: On 31 January 2011 23:10, Luke Woolley lswool...@gmail.com wrote: There is already a tag set up for that purpose: highway=emergency_access_point http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Demergency_access_point The only problem I have with using highway=* for this is not all signed points are on highways. But also, not all highway=*'s are highways. Even if an emergency point has no vehicle access, theres obviously access to it from somewhere along a 'way', whether thats a highway=motorway or a highway=path. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] JOSM filtering image/map tile URLs
On Sat, 2011-01-29 at 20:58 -0500, Anthony wrote: On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 7:21 PM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: On Sat, 2011-01-29 at 23:51 +1000, John Smith wrote: Thankfully the main author of the software seems to want a more general editor, not just one that works with OSM specific APIs etc. This makes me wonder. Dirk has stated that he does not want the feature implemented, while Frederik has stated that he has already implemented it. Is that not the rudest form of vandalism in OSM (even worse than vandalising a part of the map)? To be fair, Frederik had already made the changes before Dirk stated that he didn't want them. Isnt it (maybe an unwritten) OSM policy that for a significant change, it should be talked about before making the change, rather than after? That would mean that Frederik's actions didnt just go against the maintainers wishes (who he didnt even ask about first seemingly), but also against the basis of which all major changes are made in OSM? So its not just vandalism against the package maintainer's position, its vandalism against the OSM policies. Isnt that why such policies are in-place, to prevent people making changes and dealing with complaints afterwards..? Its better to have the problems addressed before any change is made, and it can be implemented properly rather than a half hack that Frederik has done to achieve a certain goal. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] JOSM filtering image/map tile URLs
On Sat, 2011-01-29 at 23:51 +1000, John Smith wrote: I was sent a link to this thread on the JOSM dev mailing list: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/josm-dev/2011-January/005185.html Interesting thread. ... since those pushing for this change seem to want to make JOSM difficult to use for anything but OSM allowed sources. This worries me a little. It seems like there are some within the community who are adamant to split the users. It seems some people are trying to do the best they can, to achieve forks within the project, while others are running along behind them trying to repair the damage and lost morale. This wouldnt be such an issue, if those who were pushing to break the project up werent in the (perceived) highest levels of power. When people suggested that these tools might have uses other than for OSM, the response always came back as 'well, fork it and host the project yourself'.. which leads to... Thankfully the main author of the software seems to want a more general editor, not just one that works with OSM specific APIs etc. This makes me wonder. Dirk has stated that he does not want the feature implemented, while Frederik has stated that he has already implemented it. Is that not the rudest form of vandalism in OSM (even worse than vandalising a part of the map)? To force someone to take changes to their program because of your position. If an athiest decided to remove any references to religion/churches in JOSM, and forced the community to take their patch, what would happen? Are we expected to just lie down and take it, because we should respect one persons opinion, or should we look at the bigger picture and send OSM in the direction the community wants, rather than the direction a few foundation board members want. So, what happens now? Has Frederik appointed himself as top-dog in the JOSM project, above and beyond the maintainer? What would happen if the maintainer (or someone else following the OSM communities wishes) reverted that patch? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] BYO restaurants
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 13:55 +1100, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 10:58:04 +1000 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 26 January 2011 09:21, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: Upon doing a bit of research, the exact meaning varies depending on where you are. In [1]New York for example, a BYO establishment MUST have a liquor license. In [2]Victoria, a BYO license (actually a permit) is for places that dont have a liquor license. So what was your conclusion? Drink more or less? I think the patriotic thing to do would be to visit some more licenced premises before I reach a conclusion. However, I think that given the differences abound in different regions, Steve's suggestion of a binary yes/no for both licenced and byo would be the best option unless any further complications arise (eg, BYO beer or wine). Steves suggested: licenced=yes/no byo=yes/no The only issue I would have, is with the spelling of licence. Steve suggested licensed but as OSM is traditionally British English, shouldnt licenced=yes/no be used? taginfo shows licenced=yes has 2 usages where licensed=yes has 9, so its early enough to still rectify the discrepencies. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] BYO restaurants
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 15:33 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote: On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 10:08 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: amenity=restaurant licensed=yes/no/byo Yeah, but they're not mutually exclusive. All four combinations exist, including licensed *and* byo (with corkage, usually), and licensed *and not* byo. Upon doing a bit of research, the exact meaning varies depending on where you are. In [1]New York for example, a BYO establishment MUST have a liquor license. In [2]Victoria, a BYO license (actually a permit) is for places that dont have a liquor license. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BYOB [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_laws_of_Australia David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Massive flooding
On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 19:02 +1000, John Smith wrote: It might be worth while trying to get additional coverage for areas effected for humanitarian reasons, after all they're searching for bodies in Toowoomba not just people. Anyone have any ideas who could be approached for such imagery? Not that its terribly useful for the OSM project at the moment, but hopefully the nearmap guys might do some imagery as great as they did after the NSW floods in December. Anyone from NearMap got any reponses to when you might be flying affected QLD areas again? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] a local data compilation ruling that may be of interest
On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 13:53 +1100, Jim Croft wrote: or not... http://minterstmt.blogspot.com/2010/12/no-copyright-in-white-and-yellow-pages.html I can see how this ruling applies to White pages, as that is simply a listing of facts. Yellow pages however, is very different, with listings all sorted into categories (some listings into multiple categories), and a lot of the listings having artwork and other copyrighted materials like logos, etc. How can someone claim that theres no creative copyrightable work in the yellow pages? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 10:49 +0800, Ben Last wrote: The nearmap.com twitter feed (or Facebook, if you prefer) is your friend... we announce flight starts, flight ends and publication of new surveys. It appears you missed the URL: http://twitter.com/NearMap This URL also works as an RSS feed. David On 18 December 2010 08:49, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: New nearmap imagery from 7th December of flooding in Wagga I just noticed. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au -- Ben Last Development Manager nearmap.com ___ 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] Looks like Nearmap is gone from JOSM slippymap plugin
On Sun, 2010-12-19 at 09:49 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: I've put some details on how to add NearMap back in for the latest JOSM versions on the wiki, Why? Did you fail to read the minutes that were posted? Basically OSMF has given itself the ultimate authority to remove all non-compliant data by end of March. The foundation board also considered the loss of data and does not consider its removal a reason not to proceed with new terms. It appears the foundation have given a big screw-you to every contributor who has contributed and complained about very minor wording in their new licences, and considers that the removal of our contributed data, is acceptable. That its better to have a blank map than it is to have a project of happy contributors. So, whens the aussie fork coming? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] a mapping conflict in Sydney, help appreciated
On Sun, 2010-12-05 at 18:43 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: I think that this http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/6545161 should be reverted on the grounds that my source tags were deleted with no better replacement... Previously I asked this user directly about data that appeared very much like that from Google Maps, they said they may have copied directly from a Google Map... If you check the history of the original node, youll see that it came from ABS data. Was there a reason you deleted the original ABS data, and replaced it? The original element was tagged as natural=coastline, the one you added, removes natural=coastline in-favour of place=locality. Did you check when you deleted the natural=coastline way from ABS data, and replaced it with your source-tagged way, that it didnt break the coastline data? Maybe the revert from this user was correct. I also notice the node you added with the source tag, was not part of the Sydney Harbour National Park relation, which the original node was. I think theres been a bit of data-tampering on both sides here, so it would be good to get both sides of the story to know who did what and why. Cheers David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] MS imagery
On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 19:22 +0800, 4x4falcon wrote: On 01/12/10 18:46, Andrew Laughton wrote: you must use the imagery as presented in the API, you cannot modify or edit the imagery, This part implies that you cannot use it as a layer, by modifying the imagery with map overlays. No, it means you can not modify the original imagery. (or use it in any way other than as presented by the API) Does this mean you can only load (and trace) the images in this SilverLight app? Does it mean that a TMS/WMS layer cannot be setup, even to re-write URLs? If you trace the imagery you are creating a new image and therefore are not modifying the original image. If you put an overlay on-top, this does modify the original image. Unless they mean its illegal to gain access to their servers, and actually modify their original images, Im trying to see what other meaning this could have. What about resizing the images? I know merkaartor for example loads background images with a custom zoom, so it often scales images to properly fit the resolution being used, is this now against MS's rules? All these things REALLY matter now. With groups like NearMap, if we broke the letter of the licence, while still following the spirit of the licence, they'd overlook it or seek to fix their licence. If the same happens with Microsoft, I dont see MS saying oh well, you followed the freeness of the licence, it doesnt matter if you breached our terms. The sole reason theyve gotten so large as a company, is due to the creation (and enforcement) of licences that benefit them in favour of another party. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSMF elections
On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 08:30 -0500, Richard Weait wrote: On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 11:48 PM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 15:12 -0800, Richard Fairhurst wrote: In 2010, OSMF transitioned from chair serves two year term and others serve one-year terms, to 1/3 of board stands for election each year. Thanks for the explanation, someone else provided the simple two-year explanation off-list, which makes the elections make more sense. Interestingly, I notice the number of foundation members is dropping over previous years, 2009 numbers were over 250, where 2010 numbers were only 130. Has any effort been made to find out why so many former members decided not to rejoin? Those numbers surprise me. Where did you get them? 145 valid votes were cast for the most recent election, so your 130 does not match the election results found here. I found the numbers in the minutes, but from a quick look through now I cant remember exactly which ones. Unfortunately a lot of them dont have membership reports, and those that do often dont state the number of members. Im not sure what the association laws are like in the UK, but from my experience of minuting meetings (and openness of documents and reports) under Australian law, these wouldnt come close to muster. Im happy enough to be corrected if youre actually able to find minutes somewhere that do have the relevant numbers from points in time. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSMF Fwd: license change map
On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 15:12 -0800, Richard Fairhurst wrote: OSMF is a democratically elected body. Candidates welcome. I guess 2011's elections will take place at the start of July as usual. (Last year's election: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/AGM10/Election_to_Board ) Out of interest, how come only 3 names are shown as 'elected' on that page, but the foundation page lists 7 members? Is the entire board required to stand down every year, before elections are held? Having been on the board of a non-profit for many years, looking at the minutes, the election process either seems wrongly done or wrongly minuted. Interestingly, I notice the number of foundation members is dropping over previous years, 2009 numbers were over 250, where 2010 numbers were only 130. Has any effort been made to find out why so many former members decided not to rejoin? I note in minutes from October, that an action item enquired why so many people have unsubscribed from osmf mailing list dating back to May which Mike was to follow up, which is still pending. Id be interested to know these reasons too.. is it because these members (or former members) are feeling the OSMF is moving in one direction regardless of the influence they try to have, and are simply leaving the group and possibly even the project feeling that even though its an open project, theres a one-track minded foundation at the helm? It is revealing seeing some of these details, as being secretary of a non-profit I can only imagine what would happen if our minutes were sparsely written like these, action items were simply deferred until forgotten, and important tasks passed off to 'working groups' whos outcomes arent published back into the minutes. Do the various working groups publish their own minutes or decisions, or do we just find out what they decide after the changes have taken place, such as the JOSM/Nearmap issue recently? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: license change map
On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 22:50 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote: But I also haven't yet seen any reasons, other than sheer bloody mindedness, why a person who was happy to contribute under a CC-BY-SA licence would be unhappy to do so under ODbL, assuming they were able to do so. The problem occurs because people have one account, with which they do edits. Some of those edits are likely to come from different sources. A very good reason why someone wouldnt wish to accept the new terms, would be that they could have contributed data from different sources. You know, we can do this without the inflammatory language. So you're happy with ODbL, but not happy with the some future free licence voted on by our members clause? Agreed - it's problematic. I get the impression some people are unhappy with the change to ODbL *per se* though. If not, I've just misunderstood again. So, we both agree that its a problem that will cause people to not wish to sign up unless the powers that be make some clarifications. I think everyone agrees that is the case, the problem is that the powers-that-be dont seem to want to address the problematic terms and simply tell people the decisions have already been made, and to cease discussion. Hardly the way to run an open community project. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] license change map
On Sun, 2010-11-21 at 15:13 +1100, Alex (Maxious) Sadleir wrote: I would think the better solution is to have the attribution simplified like Google Maps does. eg. Google Maps for canberra says Copyright PSMA, MapQuest etc. Hang on a second... you mean you goto google maps, and some of the data displayed is coming from MapQuest (which as I now understand, through their hiring of SteveC, have rights to a big chunk of free data?)? Is that a typo, or is that basically exactly what we DONT want to happen, when groups like google start using our data as a base, but wont even consider giving us access to their data? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] license change map
On Sun, 2010-11-21 at 17:35 +1100, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 21:59:42 -0800 (PST) Neil Penman ianaf4...@yahoo.com wrote: Wouldn't this problem be easier to manage if each CC-BY data source was kept in separate data store which is combined as a layer on the client or tile server? I think it is reasonable to suggest alternate methods of keeping and displaying data, and to consider moves away from the monolithic world database. We can come to agreements then about licences Maybe that is a solution for us aussies, since it appears Australian map data will be affected more than data in the rest of the world, and since it appears that mappers on the other side of the world dont care either way about the loss of our data, that Australia's OSM starts its own fork. We're unique enough that we have no land borders to worry about, we dont have to connect into any other map in the same way that the European/American continental maps have to connect to other. This would mean that Australia should be able to fork much more easily than other groups/nations, if it eventually came to it. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: license change map
On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 17:29 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote: But maybe I misunderstood the target of the email. I guess there are three possible outcomes of the licence debate: 1) The CTs get sorted out so that NearMap etc are happy with them, and OSM switches to ODbL. However, some people refuse to accept the CTs anyway. Thats fine for data that is sourced from NearMap. What about other data sources, such as imports and the like? Having said that, if the CTs are accepted by one group, Im sure theyll be accepted by most, as it seems that everyone has the same problems with it. I had thought Nick's post was talking about scenario 2, and the work that would be lost. But judging from other people's comments, it looks like it was aimed at 1, and particularly people who decide not to relicence their own work as ODbL. I confess to not having a lot of sympathy for the latter. This is fine for your own individual GPS traces and your own work, but what about derived work? Should everyone elses data be relicenced to ODbL? What about if another project decided to use work youd done, and then relicenced it under their own licence? Should they have no sympathy for the work you did and respect your rights? Why are data sources not entitled to be treated the way youd like yours to be treated? Why should someone spend resources to collect data, then release it freely, only to have it relicenced under terms they may not even know about, letalone agree with? The proposed CTs are simply broken. But presumably people like Stephen Hope and me will sign up as soon as that incompatibility is resolved - it's not a philosophical objection, which people like Liz Dodd seem to have. Would you write OSM a contract, have it signed and witnessed, but leaving a big blank spot for OSM to fill in with whatever they may see fit to put there in the future (but dont worry, they wont change the contract to their favour against yours, because theyre an 'open' group.. now part owned by a private business).. THAT is the 'philosophical problem' I think Liz and a lot of us others have with the current proposal. Although Im happy to be corrected by Liz if this isnt the case. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Project of the Week / Month
On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 12:33 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: Like putting a way down the middle of each lane and then tieing that back to the road, or like just adding a lane:n:feature = value to the existing road way? Then you could do something like lane:0:restriction = rightturnonly. The problem with lane:n:feature, is say youre approaching traffic lights and you have a right-turn light with a long slip lane and a short left turn lane to avoid the lights, how do you tag this? When you go from lanes=2 to lanes=3, how does a renderer know which side the extra lane is on? If you have a 3-into-2 merge, how do you indicate which lane merges easily? Sometimes you might have a single slip-lane which joins a 2-lane road and becomes 3-lane. Another possibility for this tag, is an extra lane for pick-up/set-down at transport hubs or pull-in bus-stop lane, which doesnt have a barrier to the main way. In which case the lane might have psv tag or something. These are the sort of situations I think were being referred to as not having a standard tagging method yet. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Project of the Week / Month
On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 10:55 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 10:37 AM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: One question.. lit=yes is fine for ways where you want to indicate that a way is lit, but how does one tag individual lights that arent on a way, for example wanting to tag lights around a park, shopping area or parking area. What about adding lit=yes to the node/way/relation that has the leisure=park, amenity=parking,... tag? A parking area may have lit/unlit parts, and most of these areas are too large to simply tag the whole area as lit/unlit. Ive had a look through wiki and there doesnt seem to be anything documented, and a few searches have only turned up a few dozen or so various uses such as street_lamp or lamp as various values/keys or the like. With aerial imagery, its quite possible to accurately tag the exact location of the light itself, and even a lot of street lamps have unique ref codes which could be tagged also. Id be quite happy to start tagging street lamps if there was an agreed upon tag. One thought, is that often street lights can share the same pole as power lines, so maybe utilising the existing pole/pylon/tower tags could be used in some way? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Project of the Week / Month
On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 10:33 -0400, Richard Weait wrote: I had a look at the PotW proposals[2] today and saw one for lit=yes. Now we haven't had a project for lit before, and it strikes me as fitting the goals. There are lit roads in a lot of places. Where there are few lit roads it might be even more interesting to have data on where the lights exist. One question.. lit=yes is fine for ways where you want to indicate that a way is lit, but how does one tag individual lights that arent on a way, for example wanting to tag lights around a park, shopping area or parking area. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Is the RTA making their own fork..
From the NSW RTA website.. http://www.mybikeroute.info/ ‘My Bikeroute’ is the first step in a NSW Government program to improve the availability of information about bike-riding in the State. In this first, 10-week phase we are asking cyclists to help us map the ‘bikeable’ street network in Greater Sydney – not the bike lanes, shared paths or marked bike routes that make up the existing cycleway network, but those links in the local street and path system that are good places to ride, being quieter, more direct, less hilly or simpler to navigate than a busy road. We are also collecting information on bicycle hazards. Maybe they should be encouraged to use existing OSM data, and contribute their data back.. if there werent so many issues with licences, maybe they would? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Dislike the new wiki skin?
On Tue, 2010-08-10 at 07:54 +1000, 16 wrote: ... In a perverse moment yesterday I did a bit of a local test to find out the impact of removing nodes touched by people known to be anti-ODbL, and discovered that (for example) Ballina nearly completely disappears if you, me and Rosscoe's edits were removed, and renders Lismore more or less completely dependent upon Brenton (Biogenesis_). Amazing how fragile some areas are. As John pointed out, you need to check the entire history, not just the last editor. As John recently ran a script which modified every single residential street in the country (without a maxspeed limit set), this means if you exclude the streets with his name attached, youd be wiping out almost every residential street, even though someone else might have maintained the area for years before the change was made. Also, there are many mappers around, just because one or two people didnt map an area, doesnt mean it wouldnt be mapped. If a mapper sees an area filled in, they wont work so closely on that area, but if those 2 or 3 users you mentioned, hadnt mapped the area they did, someone else would have. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Wineries
On Mon, 2010-07-26 at 09:37 +1000, John Smith wrote: Not a single reply to Liz's request, so either these are limited to Australia or nobody else cares that much what the tag would be called, Just a thought, but you do realise this is the -au list? While the readership of the list isnt limited to aussies, its fairly keen to suggest others outside aus dont have an opinion on it, because they dont comment on this list. Maybe send the question to talk@ or tagging@ lists? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] How to tag a church without its own building
On Mon, 2010-07-05 at 17:39 +1000, Steve Bennett wrote: On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: IMHO, No - I don't like the idea of using separate/duplicate features (e.g. an extra node) to describe something at the same physical location. ... So right now, I see four remaining options, IMHO all pretty crappy and unsupported: The only reason you gave against creating multiple nodes was you didn't like it. Seems fine to me. Especially since the church and school in this case are not really co-located: the centre of the school will not be the same as the centre of the church, so two nodes is appropriate. What about.. draw the school as an area/building, then simply put a single node for place_of_worship in the hall, maybe with opening_hours or something similar. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] How to tag a church without its own building
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 02:21 +1000, John Smith wrote: On 6 July 2010 02:08, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: What about.. draw the school as an area/building, then simply put a single node for place_of_worship in the hall, maybe with opening_hours or something similar. So if there is 10 uses/users of the hall, we need to place 10 nodes? Well, I was thinking that. One school I went to, had a public library attached, while another had a child-care run out of a dis-used wing of the school building, I believe both of these could/should be tagged. Maybe there needs to be a tag for multi-use hall, which could be used for even wider applications than this example of a church in a school hall. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Sydney Wiki page actively discourages mapping pubs
On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 08:16 +1000, Tom Brennan wrote: On 27/06/2010 8:38 PM, John Smith wrote: It's the Cloudmade layer. Even with a cache refresh it's still months out of You have to force the tiles to be redrawn by viewing the tile and putting /dirty on the end, otherwise you see the cached tiles. Like this ? http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-33.7127lon=150.4666zoom=15layers=000BFTF/dirty No, load the map in your browser, then right click on the map image tile you want to refresh, click 'view image', then when the single image loads, add /dirty to the end. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Attributing points and/or areas
Wiki sort of suggests your GPS hat is correct, leave the node as it is, map the building and concourse, then map with building=yes or surface=paved and highway=service. Also, do you have highway=service ways leading from the road to the concourse driveways? You can also tag the building entrance too, if you know that detail. David On Fri, 2010-06-18 at 21:33 +1000, Craig Feuerherdt wrote: I am starting to map landuse areas across Bendigo. I am wondering what to do when (for instance) a petrol station has been mapped as a point with all the attributes attached. I have now mapped the polygon representing the actual area of the petrol station. Which attribute(s) should go on which feature? Should both feature (point and polygon) be kept? Thinking from an OSM perspective I'd say move all the attributes from the point to the polygon and delete the point. With my GPS hat on I'd say attribute the polygon as amenity=fuel but leave the point and all its attributes so it shows up on the GPS as a POI. Is there a general consensus on what to do? This same scenario arises with pubs, restaurants etc Cheers, Craig ___ 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] The nearmap effect
On Thu, 2010-06-10 at 10:56 +1000, Steve Bennett wrote: On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 8:39 PM, James Livingston li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote: Did you select Nearmap from the background-image setting, or use Edit on the Nearmap site? Yech. Who to blame, the way Nearmap launches Potlatch, or the way Potlatch handles being launched externally? Personally, Im glad that potlatch remembers the settings from last time. I dont want to have to go and select my background layer everytime I reload potlatch. Not all potlatch users like the default settings, and Im glad to know that if I make custom changes, such as typing in a background layer URL, that it will be saved for next time. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap support for OSM editing
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 17:13 +1000, Liz wrote: On Tue, 8 Jun 2010, Ben Last wrote: Yes, we do, and whilst it's an interesting piece of work, it's still too complex for general users (in our humble opinion!)... we had a conversation on one of these lists about what would be wanted in a bog_basic editor once and i think it came down to name and classify a street and add a single point to be a POI, name and classify it. Sounds like the editing features in gosmore, add node/way, add name/type to highway, and add one of a preset number of POIs (fuel is the only one that comes to mind at the moment). David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Things that would be nice if they rendered...
One thing Id like to see tagged in some way, is railway ends. These are tagged as railway=buffer_stop, but dont have any indication on the rendered map. This makes it difficult sometimes to know if a track ends at the node, or if it simply hasnt been mapped any further. All it would need is a single black dot, or an X or something at the end of the line. How do we go about getting these ideas added to the map? Interestingly, my example of railway=buffer_stop isnt mentioned on the railway= page, but it is listed on the map features page. There are almost 1400 occurances according to osmdoc. David On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 06:58 +1000, John Smith wrote: Mapping a few things locally and noticed some things don't render, so I filed bugs about them: Rendering waterway=drain areas, these are now very mappable anywhere Nearmap has made imagery available, but only ways currently render: http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/3041 Rendering operator=* tags if name=* is missing, currently nothing is rendered but operator shows up in JOSM http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/3042 Generic shop icons, I think it's important that something renders on the map, even if it's just the name and a generic icon for points of interest like shops, currently on a select subset of shops are rendering http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/3043 Does anyone else have any thoughts on what else should be rendered? ___ 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] [Fwd:[OpenStreetMap] Tagging Tidal Ways]
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 17:29 -0700, Simon Biber wrote: David wrote: In summary, it is 21km long and is one-way for 10.5hrs, dual-way for 1.5hr, then one-way in the opposite direction for 10.5hrs and dual-way again for 1.5hr. Then just for fun, on weekends, the day/night pattern is reversed. David, as a local resident I can tell you the Southern Expressway is never dual-way. In between the one-way periods, it's closed for changeover (access=no), while operators review video cameras covering the whole length to ensure no vehicles remain on the road. I dont live in the area, and only found the way due to its funny tagging (ie. 'How on earth do i tag this'), hence why I threw the query out to the mailing list for any advice on how to fix the situation. Also, it's not just weekends but also public holidays which use the reversed pattern. John wrote: Sorry, forgot about weekends: oneway:forward=Mon-Fri 00:00-10:30; Sat-Sun 12:00-22:30 oneway:reverse=Mon-Fri 12:00-22:30; Sat-Sun 00:00-10:30 John, the start time is 2am, not midnight. As mentioned in my original email. I only summarized the email that I also attached to the end of my original email, to give the concept between a one-way that changes at different times. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mini Roundabouts.
On Sun, 2010-05-02 at 22:37 +1000, Steve Bennett wrote: On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 2:46 PM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: While I agree that its useful to represent curves and bends properly in the traffic flow, this seems a bit excessive. Youre going from having 9 roundabouts with 36 nodes, to having 9 roundabouts using 162 nodes, for no reason other than so it renders a little bit nicer? It's not just rendering - it also affects how it appears on a GPS. Presumably more accurate circles mean more accurate distance calculations, too. The distance difference between a diamond and a circle is about the same as using the inside/outside lane, ie. unless you were looking at the distance over a road with a high number of round-abouts in a very short distance, I dont think youd really notice a couple of meters here or there. One question I do have though, is why put the roundabouts in, and not split up the entry/exit ways? Individual lanes mapped as separate ways considered harmful. Aussie tagging guidelines say (and Ive checked, no wikifiddling of this part for over 12 months): # Roundabouts should be drawn out in full, make the way go clockwise, # and the correct direction of movement is then shown on the map. Mark # it junction=roundabout # # Please read the following page as well. Tag:junction=roundabout # # Note: each entry and exit way should join the roundabout at a separate # node. Where is there discussion about the 'harmful' effect of tagging each entry/exit way? Ive had a quick look but only came across that comment. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mini Roundabouts.
On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 10:47 +1000, Ross Scanlon wrote: 1) They're clearly mini roundabouts. I go straight over them on my bike. They are concrete circles from Nearmap as far as I can tell. 3) Why an octagon shape? Ugh. At least use the tidy function in JOSM or Potlatch to make them circles. An octagon is the smallest number of nodes to accurately describe a circle. And they have been tidied using JOSM's circle function. I just had a quick look and noticed that too. In the small area linked, I counted 9 roundabouts. Turning them into a circle, has given them 18 nodes each. Given that each round-about has 4 entry/exit points, this means for a diamond shape, youre using no extra nodes, for an octagon youre using 36 extra nodes and the current method (18 nodes) has created 126 extra nodes in this area. While I agree that its useful to represent curves and bends properly in the traffic flow, this seems a bit excessive. Youre going from having 9 roundabouts with 36 nodes, to having 9 roundabouts using 162 nodes, for no reason other than so it renders a little bit nicer? One question I do have though, is why put the roundabouts in, and not split up the entry/exit ways? From looking at the nearmap imagery, the entry/exit lanes are divided at each round-about. There also appears to be a lot of footpaths in the area if youve got plenty of time to kill :) David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Wikifiddling
On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 11:12 +0100, Emilie Laffray wrote: I personally don't use the wiki so I am not going to make much comments about what is going on... Just out of interest, if you dont use the wiki to figure out what tags to use, how DO you decide how to tag items? Do you just make things up, or are you referencing some other non-wiki source, which may also need to be kept up-to-date with Aussie specific comments. but I can see why it would be very annoying to someone, especially while they are some very country specific elements sometimes, and that by definition tags are not absolute but relative to the country where you live. The tags can be whatever values you wish to put in, but only the agreed upon tags are rendered currently. If someone in Germany tags highway=autobahn or someone in Italy tags it as highway=superstrada (relative to the country where they live), it wont render. Just like if someone decides to tag a way as highway=dirt-road, sure you CAN tag it like that, but it wont render how it would if it were tagged properly. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Wikifiddling
On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 22:30 +1000, John Smith wrote: The tags can be whatever values you wish to put in, but only the agreed upon tags are rendered currently. If someone in Germany tags highway=autobahn or someone in Italy tags it as highway=superstrada (relative to the country where they live), it wont render. Just like if someone decides to tag a way as highway=dirt-road, sure you CAN tag it like that, but it wont render how it would if it were tagged properly. That's not true, anyone can ask for anything to be rendered... There is nothing stopping people mass mapping a new tag type, and then requesting it gets rendered or they render their own map tiles, in any case this isn't just about the documentation on specific tags. If you read what I said, you'll note the end of the sentence 'are rendered currently'. Yes, anyone can ask for anything to be rendered, but Im wondering how someone can tag stuff without bothering to read the wiki. Then again, people not knowing about the existing tagging system might explain some of the weird things Ive found in keepright, such as the aforementioned 'highway=Dirt-track' tag I found a couple of times and tagged properly. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] What to do with fixme=not_reviewed
On Tue, 2010-04-13 at 11:30 +1000, Ken Self wrote: I'm seeing loads of fixme=not-reviewed tags for bulk uploads of service stations, centrelink and police stations. Is it enough to check the location of the node (easy) or should I leave the fixme tag until the address, phone number, fax number etc are also all verified (rather more difficult)? And if I leave the tag how do I indicate to others that the location is OK? Wiki answers all... http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_BP_service_stations David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Tamworth, NSW
On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 07:54 +1000, Ben Kelley wrote: Hi. Just a quick note to say that the street mapping for Tamworth, NSW is now largely complete! http://osm.org/go/uY9yYCV-- This includes Westdale and Calala. On the todo list are: * Fix the odd missing street. (I keep finding them) * Fix a few missing street names If youre still adding streets, then the mapping is hardly complete. How do you define complete? Do you include the foot/bike paths? Do you include tracks in the area, such as firetrails? What about slip lanes, one-way streets, no right/left turns, crossings, etc? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing Motorway names
On Fri, 2010-04-09 at 22:24 +1000, Richard Colless wrote: No, it's called the M5 motorway from where it starts near the airport right through to a point a few kilometres SW of Liverpool. There are signs saying M5 motorway right along this section, and at the end of the motorway there is a sign that says Thank you for travelling on the M5. Do you wish for the Hume Highway to be referred to as M31 too? What about the princes highway being referred to as M1? If you dont like how your software works, then change it... At that point, its designation changes to F5 - F for Freeway, meaning no toll. Why do some people have such difficulty with the meaning of the word 'free'? It *CAN* mean you pay no money, but (and especially in the OSM context), 'free' means freedom. From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeway consequently, the term freeway is sometimes used to refer to a toll-free road as opposed to its original meaning – in which the component free implies freedom from traffic interference rather than at no cost – still used in other countries and in parts of the U.S. So, in other words.. yes, in some parts of the United States, freeway is implied to mean no toll, whereas in most of the US (and the rest of the world), freeway means the traffic flows free from restrictions, regardless of tolls. The section east of King Georges Rd is referred to as M5 East, but only for traffic reports. Im sure traffic reports also talk about 'congestion in the city' rather than 'congestion in haymarket and wynyard'. That doesnt mean we should change suburb boundary names for the area to 'City' instead of 'Haymarket'. The M4 motorway has just ceased to be a toll road (a few weeks ago), but as far as I know, there are no plans to change its numerical description. I was under the impression that road number designations were moving TOWARDS the Mx (plus A/B/C) standard, not away from it. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Missing Motorway names
On Sat, 2010-04-10 at 09:12 +1000, John Smith wrote: On 10 April 2010 09:06, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: So, in other words.. yes, in some parts of the United States, freeway is implied to mean no toll, whereas in most of the US (and the rest of the world), freeway means the traffic flows free from restrictions, regardless of tolls. We're not in the US, typically in NSW freeway has been used to imply free from tolls and motorway means tollway As you might have noticed, in brackets there was a phrase 'and the rest of the world', meaning 'not in the US'. Can you point to any definition that freeway implies toll-free? The wiki page I referrenced seems to disagree. I was under the impression that road number designations were moving TOWARDS the Mx (plus A/B/C) standard, not away from it. So far in Sydney only the M7 has shifted, the other routes are still using the older scheme... So, in other words, they ARE moving towards the scheme? Im sure I remember seeing a linked article here the other day about roadnames changing to a lettered scheme. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Marsh shading in Osmarender
On Sun, 2010-03-21 at 07:55 -0700, Simon Biber wrote: It seems the shading for marsh / wetland is stuffed up in north-western Adelaide (Rosewater, Gillman, Wingfield, Pennington, Athol Park), with large areas marked as marsh that shouldn't be. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-34.8384lon=138.5531zoom=14layers=0B00FTF Is this a bug with Osmarender or a problem with the surrounding tagging? It all looks fine in Mapnik. If youre referring to the areas that look like marshland around Garden Island, there are a lot of ways around tagged with natural=wetland, wetland=mangrove, for example http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/27377526 If this isnt the area youre talking about, or if theres other areas you want to check, click the + symbol at the top/right of slippymap and turn on the data layer, this will show you all the nodes, ways and areas as black outlined areas that you can click on (even in view mode). David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Australia leads the way as Google cashes in on maps
On Thu, 2010-03-18 at 17:14 +1000, John Smith wrote: Australian web surfers yesterday became the first in the world to see advertiser logos on the Google Maps website, highlighting the locations of five companies -- NAB, Bankwest, JB Hi-Fi, LJ Hooker and Chemist Warehouse. I just checked around my area, JB hi-fi is shown the same as any other business. While looking around the area, I just found the NAB branch and a CBA ATM, both showing as located in a carpark, in completely the wrong location. The only one POI you mentioned that is actually placed correctly and standing out from any other items, is the chemist warehouse. Fitness First and BP are also understood to be preparing to launch advertising on the service. BP is shown at the correct location but the Shell about 100m up the road isnt even mapped. Fitness First, I found by accident clicking on various items on the map, labelled simply as 'Woden' (the suburb its in). Interestingly, the police station next-door (its not close at all, but theyre side-by-side on the google map) is labelled with the wrong suburb. Even the westfield is mis-located... one wonders did they even bother checking anything or if they simply mass imported a lot of data. For what its worth, all the above items Ive mentioned, are shown correctly on OSM, even down to car wash and ATM facilities at the Shell/BP. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Traffic Signals
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 23:50 +1100, Franc Carter wrote: Hi, I use to tag traffic signals at the intersect of the roads, however with NearMap I can see that for complex intersections this does not work as well as I would like, three things I can see to do are:- 1. tag at the intersecttion of roads 2. tag at the location of the signals 3. either (1) or (2) depending on the complexity of the intersection. What's peoples views on this ? From a routing perspective, its more useful to have the information on the road intersection. While it might render nicer if you put objects geographically where they are (separated from the road), from a routing perspective thats not much use unless you use a relation to relate the traffic lights to the roadway the traffic lights are on. Also, traffic signals arent only used for road intersections, traffic lights are also sometimes used to control pedestrian crossings between a footway/cycleway and a highway, which I feel is useful to tag. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Traffic Signals
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 09:52 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote: Put it this way: how would you render a single circle for any intersection that has a traffic light? That is, if there are traffic light nodes at one intersection, you still only want to render one circle. It's a pretty obvious use case. How would you count the number of traffic lights along a given route? The scheme that's been described here would return double the actual number. One thought that has been proposed here before, is adding all traffic lights at an intersection to a relation. That way, you simply count the number of traffic light relation groups along the way rather than the number of nodes. This means if you have two junctions close to each other in distance, but that are physically separate traffic light controls, that youd add each light of each group to 2 different relations. Perhaps we want to distinguish between an intersection with lights node and an actual traffic light node. The problem here, is that if you have an 'intersection with lights' that doesnt necessarily affect all ways going through the intersection. For example, some roads have traffic lights on the slip-lane where others dont, and as I mentioned in my first email, you also have to allow for the crossing=traffic_signals node used between foot/highway intersections. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] CC-BY-A data released for Victoria
Just out of interest, do these railway stations and airports, also come with a street address? What percentage of these items youre importing, are you bothering to check, 1 or 2? 1 or 2% 50%? None? Id be pretty sure that almost all airports and train stations are already in the database, and those that arent, are the exception, not the rule. Out of maybe 1000 airports, 995 might be on the system already, so is it really worth having to de-dupe and fix up 1000 nodes, just to get the 5 missing ones? I know I always seem negative about people who mass-import data, unfairly, but put it this way, would you trust a travel guide from someone who'd never been to the place the guide is about, or would you prefer to use a source which someone has actually visited, and documented accurately? David On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 01:22 +1000, John Smith wrote: Railway stations: http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/vmlite_rail_stations.osm.bz2 ___ 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] CC-BY-A data released for Victoria
On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 08:25 +1000, Roy Wallace wrote: On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 3:19 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: I've moved the previous files and all the rest of the files Mike converted here: http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/data.vic.gov.au/ Can you please explain if/how you would suggest regular mappers help with the importing of this data? 'regular mappers' shouldnt really be doing bulk importing. However, the job for regular mappers, is to re-visit those areas youve already mapped, and find/fix any imported items, such as duplicate nodes or nodes that have been misplaced. Theyre pretty easy to spot, theyre normally always tagged with a fixme tag. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] CC-BY-A data released for Victoria
On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 10:37 +1000, John Smith wrote: Actually there is some kmz files, does anyone know the easiest way to import this into OSM format or as a layer in JOSM? In Linux, gpsbabel is your friend. If youre in windows, well, good luck. Can you please make sure that if youre going to import another bulk dataset, that its actually accurate, without duplicating 99% of its data? These recent bulk imports have caused more mess and effort than would have been invovled in just placing nodes there manually, from GPS or nearmap. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Layers for landuse (Was: tennis court land)
On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 17:16 +1100, Luke Woolley wrote: Mainly because I normally give landuses a -3 layer and for things that sit just above or directly on the ground I give the next layer up. Probably doesn't need it, but it will do no harm being there. Until someone decides to map underground sewers or tunnels and gives them a layer=-1, then the tunnel is below everything at ground level and above anything less than -1. From the wiki[1]: Especially do not use it in these circumstances: * Do not tag areas like landuse, natural etc. with a layer. David [1] wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:layer ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] tennis court land
On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 18:20 +1000, John Smith wrote: On 22 February 2010 17:56, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not sure but being traced and annotated makes it much *easier* for people to retrieve information about your private property (e.g. through an API call). Yes, I can really see that happening... Agreed. A water supply company could be interested to know how many pools are in an area to know what areas might have higher demand during filling season. But, a pool cleaning business in the future might search on the map to find areas with potential customers, and be able to directly advertise to them by matching pool locations to street addresses. I can see both sides, but am interested in others opinions. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] tennis court land
On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 19:10 +1000, John Smith wrote: On 22 February 2010 19:07, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: A water supply company could be interested to know how many pools are in an area to know what areas might have higher demand during filling season. But, a pool cleaning business in the future might search on the map to find areas with potential customers, and be able to directly advertise to them by matching pool locations to street addresses. So what you're say is, we shouldn't do street addressing, because people can misuse it for marketing purposes? No, what Im say(ing) is, Im unsure if theres a privacy issue, and asking for others opinions or if theres any precedents to follow (other than the court cases brought against google for invasion of privacy). If I was saying we shouldnt be doing street addressing, why would I have said 'I can see both sides, but am interested in others opinions'? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] tennis court land
On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 08:20 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote: Personally I don't think it's reasonable to map anything on a residential property, particularly not anything that can't be seen from the street. Because, people in the air could be helped by being able to reference pools, power lines or tennis courts? Everyone using OSM isnt automatically at street-level. I imagine for example a farmer who owns a large property would be interested to know the exact location of the powerline towers on their block, to help plan things like irrigation or where to put crops. Ive started mapping a few large pools and powerlines anyway, so Ill see what comes of it. My basic rule has been if the pool is visible from the air, Ill map it. Some people have pools under canopys and so on, but as these arent much use for either navigation or firefighting I havent bothered to map them. I'm not sure why lakeboy did all this, but my preference would be to tag it these private tennis courts in such a way that they won't render in mapnik etc. 'Tagging for the renderer' comes to mind here. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] tennis court land
On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 20:43 +1100, Liz wrote: I'm concerned about marking what are actual terrorist targets (not the media frenzy type terrorists who are at airports) telephone exchange, communications tower, power lines things not usually well mapped in commercial offerings but which if destroyed cause havoc without large numbers of fatalities Havent you heard the new technique? These days the PR arm of the media-terrorists simply have to say 'were planning something at airport xyz' and the government machine will kick into action and cause chaos at the airport (or stadium or whatever), without anyone even having to visit a target site. Maybe they might use OSM to find the biggest airport or airport closest to a major highway, so they can inconvenience more people or something. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] answers to difficult questions
On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 05:16 +1100, John Henderson wrote: David Murn wrote: Ive laid out powerlines across most of the ACT and Queanbeyan, so feel free to do the line from the wind farm to the Queanbeyan sub-station. As well as the ways (power=line), shouldn't we be tagging the individual nodes (pylons) also (power=tower), as is done here: I toyed with that idea when I first started tracing them, but theres two things to consider. Main lines are generally tagged as power=line whereas suburban lines are tagged as power=minor_line. Main lines generally use towers and cross large areas of land, where minor lines often cross through areas already full of street data. Ive been tagging all nodes as power=tower where its evident from nearmap that there is a large metal tower, however rendered tiles only show the power=tower nodes, not the power=pylon nodes. I figured I was best off doing the line tracing then if renderers support it at a later date, its not too difficult to change the node to power=pylon. When I create the ways, I go from pylon to pylon, with no in-between nodes, so can depend on every node that isnt labelled as power=tower being a pylon. I havent seen many power lines drawn for Australia, but since they are relatively easy to trace on nearmap and can be useful when shown on maps at high zoom levels, I figured Id trace them in. Ive also traced a large number of powerlines from the Shepparton Nearmap, using the same method described above. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] answers to difficult questions
On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 23:02 +1100, Nick Hocking wrote: John Henderson wrote: Well I've done the Cullerin wind farm nearby Ive laid out powerlines across most of the ACT and Queanbeyan, so feel free to do the line from the wind farm to the Queanbeyan sub-station. That looks great!. It's a shame that the Nearmap imagery does not extent to Bungendore yet. I wonder if there are any plans to do so? It would be great to have nearmap imagery along the NSW coast, the same as is being done along the Victorian coast. I have no idea how to map the wind turbines. Do I need radar or survey tools or can it be done by photographs, or do I just nee to ask them nicely to let me drive around. Ive been using a couple of different techniques for doing power towers, but one that Im looking at for more remote towers is simple survey triangulation as you suggest. Youve got a GPS, all you need is a compass, pen/paper and a little bit of high-school maths. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Suburb boundaries
On Tue, 2010-02-16 at 17:32 +1000, Roy Wallace wrote: On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: Perhaps admin boundaries need to be locked from editing until people have a certain amount of mapping under their belt and/or ask for the ability to add/edit/delete admin boundaries, this might prevent or at least reduce some of the accidents and new accounts being created to shift borders for the wrong reasons. I hope you mean that *editors* should be improved to help prevent these accidents? (which I think is an excellent idea) ...as opposed to the suggestion of appointing an authority to hand out various levels of editing authorisation (which I think is crazy). I think theres merit to both sides of the argument. Ive seen a few areas that have been drastically changed by a new user who didnt understand entirely what they were doing, but on the other hand, Ive been mapping for over a year and though I never purposely touch suburb boundaries, I have accidently changed (then fixed) them from time to time. I think it would be good to have some way to lock the boundaries (and as has been suggested before, hiding the boundaries too). While I think its important that anyone should be able to edit the boundaries, I think some/most changes to them are accidental and the user should have to specify whether they wish to be able to make changes to boundaries, or whether theyd rather the system protect itself from accidental changes they might make. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] answers to the difficult questions
On Tue, 2010-02-16 at 21:41 +1100, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, John Smith wrote: On 16 February 2010 20:04, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: anyone decided how to tag a grey water or effluent dump? amenity=waste_disposal ? not clear that it is effluent being disposed of i put tourism=effluent_dump but I think I've used something else elsewhere What about.. amenity=waste_disposal waste=excrement Alternatively, there is also recycling:excrement=yes If the effluent dump is part of some sort of recycling facility, such as a boat pump-out station. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
