[talk-au] JohnSmith edits on 19 June 2011
JohnSmith your four changesets today are missing descriptive changeset comments. http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/JohnSmith/edits The barrier here http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8480159 does not advise of the source you used. The connected way claims yahoo as source, but that seems unlikely at the Yahoo resolution there. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/35893671 The Warialda Creek edits http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8480260 also claim Yahoo as the source. Please clarify for us the sources of these edits? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] JohnSmith edits on 19 June 2011
What does it matter since I'm never going to agree to the CT... On 20 June 2011 02:11, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: JohnSmith your four changesets today are missing descriptive changeset comments. http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/JohnSmith/edits The barrier here http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8480159 does not advise of the source you used. The connected way claims yahoo as source, but that seems unlikely at the Yahoo resolution there. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/35893671 The Warialda Creek edits http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8480260 also claim Yahoo as the source. Please clarify for us the sources of these edits? ___ 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
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. It does matter - if you don't put a comment (and I happen to think that your usual fixed stuff comment is woefully inadequate), 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). Mark P. ___ 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] JohnSmith edits on 19 June 2011
Quoting David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au: 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). Maybe Richard should have asked him privately first - I was mainly responding to John's attitude that it didn't matter. It does matter - if you don't put a comment 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. Obviously there had to be some sort of source - the question is, what is it? Did he go there (quite possible, as I know John does go to that part of the country). 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? If that is the case, then there is no problem (and I'm not surprised) - that's why I included several ifs in my post. The possible contamination could be if he copied it from a copyright map. I am hoping that he didn't do this, but as his initial response to Richard's question was what does it matter, I thought that needed clarification. [snip] find the most pressing issue is someone not adding a source tag for a single barrier node (plus some other minor edits)? [snip] This wasn't initially raised by me, so I'll let someone else answer this. David Mark P. ___ 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 20 June 2011 14:49, Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au wrote: Maybe Richard should have asked him privately first - I was mainly responding to John's attitude that it didn't matter. Well, what does it matter now that they're going to start deleting non-CT data? Obviously there had to be some sort of source - the question is, what is it? Did he go there (quite possible, as I know John does go to that part of the country). A couple of the changes were from past surveys, but I just don't take as much pride or put as much effort in these days because community no longer seems to matter so why should I bother putting in extra effort? The possible contamination could be if he copied it from a copyright map. I am hoping that he didn't do this, but as his initial response to Richard's question was what does it matter, I thought that needed clarification. To the best of my knowledge, I've only used sources compatible with CC-by-SA. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
