Re: [talk-au] nearmap LWG minutes
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: I'm a bit late to the game but the one of the LWG minutes talks about nearmap... It isn't apparent from the link, but for the information of those reading them here without checking the original document, the minutes that you quote are from 14 September 2010 From part 4 of the LWG minutes https://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_83gvxm3xgdpli=1 - Automated deriving [ ... ] Nor would I want to see them limiting CC-BY-SA derived works to those only uploaded to OSM (just like Microsoft is doing). The Microsoft image donation did not happen until about two months later. It was great to have Ben join us on the call to discuss Nearmap's concerns. Thanks for raising this topic again, Andrew. ___ 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Re: [talk-au] Nearmap badly out of date
On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 20:00 +1000, Nick Hocking wrote: A nearmapper has decided that badly out-of-date nearmap imagery was more authorative than my GPS traces (taken last weekend) and has For anyone interested in the area, NearMap imagery of the new suburbs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Re: [talk-au] Nearmap badly out of date
IMHO definitely put source=survey if it is. (e.g. from a gps track) It can be difficult to determine this later. E.g. I can see that there is a GPS track log nearby, but did the person use it? - Ben. Sent from my HTC -Original Message- From: Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com Sent: Saturday, 14 May 2011 14:28 To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: [talk-au] Nearmap badly out of date No I didn't though maybe I should have. There have been discussions (on these lists) for a fer years now and the consensus opinion was that if you upload gps tracks (and mine are all still there and identifiable) then source=survey was not necessary. Maybe this opinion has changed over the years, I'm not sure. this is mapped as highway=construction so will not be routable any way. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap badly out of date
On 14/05/11 16:35, Ben Kelley wrote: IMHO definitely put source=survey if it is. (e.g. from a gps track) It can be difficult to determine this later. E.g. I can see that there is a GPS track log nearby, but did the person use it? This brings up a point which I'd like clarification on. When I input data from my own GPS, I tag it as source=survey. But what if I use the JOSM download of Raw GPS data to plot the way? What should the source tag say then? As long as there have been more than a handful of passes logged, This seems the most accurate way by far to get the true path of a winding road. The false points (when individual GPSs can't decide whether a corner has come up, or accuracy has gone down) get nicely averaged out. John H ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap badly out of date
On 14/05/11 14:28, Nick Hocking wrote: Ross wrote Did you tag your ways with source=survey so that it would show them that you had actually surveyed it? No I didn't though maybe I should have. There have been discussions (on these lists) for a fer years now and the consensus opinion was that if you upload gps tracks (and mine are all still there and identifiable) then source=survey was not necessary. Maybe this opinion has changed over the years, I'm not sure. The consensus was that all input should have a source=tag whether it's from survey, nearmap, bing whatever. Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap badly out of date
On 11/05/11 20:00, 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. So did you put in barrier=bollard or similar at the end of the way? Did you tag your ways with source=survey so that it would show them that you had actually surveyed it? 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. As David pointed out this is mapped as highway=construction so will not be routable any way. 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. And so it's obvious that it should then be oneway and has been mapped as such. 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. So where are we talking about so we can see if your surveying skills are up to the task? Cheers Ross ___ 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, May 11, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com 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. You're not serious. Nearmap is the best resource OSM has ever had in Australia. For every kilometre of road where Nearmap shows something contradicted by more recent surveys, there are probably 100+ kilometres of roads that no one could ever have been bothered surveying. In the case you mention, you could consider mapping the (now abandoned) road as highway=abandoned, abandoned=residential, source=survey 2011 or whatever. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap badly out of date
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 1:24 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: That's before you consider the resolution, it's so high that railway lines and switching tracks are mapped so accurately people were suggesting to those that make train games they could use OSM data as the basis of their track data for more realistic simulations. Yeah, I've wondered for a while if people couldn't make interesting RTS type games using OSM data. Would be pretty cool to do a military/economic simulation on an area that you know... Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap badly out of date
On 13 May 2011 15:38, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 1:24 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: That's before you consider the resolution, it's so high that railway lines and switching tracks are mapped so accurately people were suggesting to those that make train games they could use OSM data as the basis of their track data for more realistic simulations. Yeah, I've wondered for a while if people couldn't make interesting RTS type games using OSM data. Would be pretty cool to do a military/economic simulation on an area that you know... I think at least 1 flight sim already uses OSM data. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap badly out of date
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 3:48 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 May 2011 15:38, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 1:24 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: That's before you consider the resolution, it's so high that railway lines and switching tracks are mapped so accurately people were suggesting to those that make train games they could use OSM data as the basis of their track data for more realistic simulations. Yeah, I've wondered for a while if people couldn't make interesting RTS type games using OSM data. Would be pretty cool to do a military/economic simulation on an area that you know... I think at least 1 flight sim already uses OSM data. XPlane has the X-VFR project: http://xvfr.beomuex.org/ Will place (open licenced) 3d models on POIs like Radio towers, Churches, Cranes, Gasometers, Water towers, Windmills, Fossil power plants, Coal power plants, Nuclear plants, Wind turbines, Industrial factories. ___ 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] Nearmap resolution in JOSM
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Nathan Odgers n.p.odg...@gmail.com wrote: Apologies if this has been discussed before, but I use JOSM (3966) on OSX (10.6.7) and the high-resolution Nearmap imagery over Sydney is very poor quality compared to what I get in Merkaartor. Nearmap in Merkaartor is nice and sharp at high-zoom, whereas it's much more pixellated at about the same zoom level in JOSM. Not quite sure why this is, in JOSM, because as far as I can tell, I've configured everything correctly, and I have the maximum zoom level set to 26. Not sure if this happens in Windows or other OSs. Any ideas? Is this a known issue, or am I just doing something wrong? There are two max zoom level settings. In Preferences, under the Imagery Preferences (left tab), under Settings (top tab), under TMS Settings make sure the Max zoom lvl is something larger than or equal to 24, then under the Imagery providers tab make sure the zoom in the zoom column is again = 24. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap
On 7 April 2011 15:58, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 April 2011 12:57, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: 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? This really needs to be done. Is wonder if this is just due to a shortage of time that the LWG hasn't included this as yet? It would be nice to think that seeing this issue primary affects Australians, that we could take the lead in doing this. However, I don't know how many on the OSM-AU list are ready to help in this kind of endevour? Ignoring Nearmap's strong preference of SA for a second, the issue of attribution effects a lot more than just Australians and so far none of the CTs published addresses this sufficiently. Certain people involved in shaping the CT are strongly in favour of PD, which means a very weak or non-existent SA and Attribution clauses now exist. Attempts have been made to readdress this within the CTs but those same PD proponents have blocked or watered down things to the point that it makes things significantly worst for everyone, not better. On the Nearmap side, there is clearly in my opinion a business benefit to Nearmap of having the OSM data closely aligned to the Nearmap images. It gives them an accurate, free and up-to-date streetmap layer, and for the foreseeable future attribution within the OSM data. And lets face it, the value in Nearmap's business proposition is accuracy and currency. If OSM went off the rails (and scrapped ODbL) in a way Nearmap didn't like, withdrawing OSM support from that moment onwards would see the data quickly lose currency. Considering the amount of people in favour of strong attribution and share a like requirements I highly doubt that Nearmap will be at a loss of up to date data, and efforts to vectorise Bing imagery automatically and Nearmap's possible in house coders will probably make this further of a non-issue for Nearmap. On the OSM side, I recognise several of the top contributors list as being nearmap mappers, and I'd hazard a guess that we are looking at possibly over 20% of the Australian data possibly impacted by this, so working this through has large benefits to OSM. At the most extreme end it could make the difference whether a viable OSM community continues in Australia under the OSM banner. There is a strong case if all else fails to allow at least the current nearmap data to be imported under a very ephemeral set of contributor terms just for this purpose, allowing the nearmap derived data to survive as long as the the attribution model persists. After all Nearmap are only objecting to a possibility of a future licence change, not the ODbL itself - and that may be many years distant. Jeopardising OSM in Australia at this juncture doesn't seem worth it when by the time we come to consider the next licence change the world of aerial image will likely have evolved dramatically. IMHO OSM-F is at the point where the OSM community won't just fork, but will completely splinter if the community views of mappers is ignored like it seems to be presently. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap
On 7 April 2011 06:58, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 April 2011 12:57, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: 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? This really needs to be done. Is wonder if this is just due to a shortage of time that the LWG hasn't included this as yet? Absolutely and it is a important to LWG too. We have had discussions with NearMap in the past. Last discussion with NearMap was passing the revised Contributor Terms 1.2.4 to NearMap for their legal review, we are currently waiting on them. Regards Grant LWG Member. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 08:19:39 +0100 Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote: On 7 April 2011 06:58, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 April 2011 12:57, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: 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? This really needs to be done. Is wonder if this is just due to a shortage of time that the LWG hasn't included this as yet? Absolutely and it is a important to LWG too. We have had discussions with NearMap in the past. Last discussion with NearMap was passing the revised Contributor Terms 1.2.4 to NearMap for their legal review, we are currently waiting on them. Regards Grant LWG Member. Grant, that sounds like here are the terms, take it or shove it you may or may not understand the vernacular, we will but I don't see any evidence of cooperatively trying to reach a solution. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap
On 7 April 2011 12:57, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: 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? This really needs to be done. Is wonder if this is just due to a shortage of time that the LWG hasn't included this as yet? It would be nice to think that seeing this issue primary affects Australians, that we could take the lead in doing this. However, I don't know how many on the OSM-AU list are ready to help in this kind of endevour? There are a range of approaches we could look at from both the Nearmap and the LWG perspectives. On the Nearmap side, there is clearly in my opinion a business benefit to Nearmap of having the OSM data closely aligned to the Nearmap images. It gives them an accurate, free and up-to-date streetmap layer, and for the foreseeable future attribution within the OSM data. And lets face it, the value in Nearmap's business proposition is accuracy and currency. If OSM went off the rails (and scrapped ODbL) in a way Nearmap didn't like, withdrawing OSM support from that moment onwards would see the data quickly lose currency. On the OSM side, I recognise several of the top contributors list as being nearmap mappers, and I'd hazard a guess that we are looking at possibly over 20% of the Australian data possibly impacted by this, so working this through has large benefits to OSM. At the most extreme end it could make the difference whether a viable OSM community continues in Australia under the OSM banner. There is a strong case if all else fails to allow at least the current nearmap data to be imported under a very ephemeral set of contributor terms just for this purpose, allowing the nearmap derived data to survive as long as the the attribution model persists. After all Nearmap are only objecting to a possibility of a future licence change, not the ODbL itself - and that may be many years distant. Jeopardising OSM in Australia at this juncture doesn't seem worth it when by the time we come to consider the next licence change the world of aerial image will likely have evolved dramatically. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 10:49:07 +0800 Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com 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. http://www.nearmap.com/?ll=-35.082167,147.302565z=21t=hnmd=20101207 Cheers Ben 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. I'm not into twitter, facebook or anything similar - I can spend enough time on the net now without any other distractions. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
The nearmap.com twitter feed (or Facebook, if you prefer) is your friend... we announce flight starts, flight ends and publication of new surveys. http://www.nearmap.com/?ll=-35.082167,147.302565z=21t=hnmd=20101207 Cheers Ben 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
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] NearMap
Deducing the URL was left as an exercise :) You might also like to know that we try and hashtag the updates with the areas that are affected by surveys and flights, if you don't want to have to read them all. b On 20 December 2010 11:11, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: 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 -- Ben Last Development Manager nearmap.com ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
Has any progress been made on this front at all? I noticed in the latest minutes[1] that the LWG has no plans to address the section(s) that Nearmap objected to, and previous minutes[2] didn't show any resolution either. [1] https://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_87d3bmhxgc [2] https://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_83gvxm3xgd ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On 15 September 2010 23:46, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 September 2010 08:38, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: Sure. Aren't there AU gov't sources that would be nice to have permission to use? You keep seeming trying to divert attention from the major issue, the CTs won't allow anything other than PD data, almost no AU govt will accept anything less than guaranteed attribution, the 2 goals are completely in conflict. Point 4 of the Contributor Terms provides a guaranteed mechanism for Attribution. http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms Regards Grant ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On 16 September 2010 18:35, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote: Point 4 of the Contributor Terms provides a guaranteed mechanism for Attribution. http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Contributor_Terms/Open_Issues#Incompatibility_with_CC-BY_.2F_Attribution_Data ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.comwrote: On 15 September 2010 23:46, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 September 2010 08:38, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: Sure. Aren't there AU gov't sources that would be nice to have permission to use? You keep seeming trying to divert attention from the major issue, the CTs won't allow anything other than PD data, almost no AU govt will accept anything less than guaranteed attribution, the 2 goals are completely in conflict. Point 4 of the Contributor Terms provides a guaranteed mechanism for Attribution. http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms Is the ODbL attribution viral? For produced works the only requirement is to include the following text: Contains information from DATABASE NAME, which is made available here under the Open Database License (ODbL). How does this constrain a recipient of the produced work to keep the attribution intact? It's not a license for the recipient and if the produced work was published as PD, for example, then the recipient can do whatever they like. I don't understand how that binds the recipient or even how that satisfies the claim in the CTs that OSMF agrees to attribute You. Can you explain please? 80n Regards Grant ___ 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] NearMap
- Original Message - From: Richard Weait rich...@weait.com To: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 11:11 PM Subject: Re: [talk-au] NearMap On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 5:48 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 September 2010 07:31, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: I don't think that your recommendation is in the best interest of OpenStreetMap or OSM contributors. Actually how can you or anyone else make this statement in good faith when most of the contributors have never been asked what they want? This old saw again, JohnSmith? Every time the community is asked, they support progress in the form of ODbL rather than the inappropriate CC-By-SA. Here is the latest feedback for you. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:ODbL_Supporter http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Users_Rejecting_ODbL So you can help too. Would you like to contact a CC-By or CC-By-SA data publisher and request permission to contribute their data to OSM under ODbL / CT? Since the CT's are in the process of being revised [1] any agreeement currently given by a publisher will surely be invalidated if the new CT's are adopted. So asking a data publisher now to agree to the CT's is quite possibly a pointeless and possibly counter productive task. David [1] https://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_81272pvt54 Would you like to participate in the discussion of exactly how and which data should be excluded when OSM proceeds? http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/dev/2010-August/020124.html Would you like to recommend to other mappers to avoid problematic sources until things are settled in the long term? Would you like to meet with, coach and encourage new mappers? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 18:15:11 -0400 Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: And how many years must we wait before they'll be concluded? It will take forever if you never start the discussion. ;-) That will vary by publisher. The permission from the Canadian government took a couple of days but others might be faster. the likelihood of any Australian government agreeing to anything in the next 3 years is actually very low, and low priority things like using data under a never before used licence isn't going to be near the top of the list. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 18:11:31 -0400 Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: Every time the community is asked, There are plain Strine expressions for this The community has not been asked at all so your statement is meadowdust. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
Thanks Emilie, Regards, Michael Hampson Ph: 02 4739 4938 On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:18 PM, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.comwrote: On 15 September 2010 14:16, Michael Hampson mc.hamp...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, Does anyone know if we have lost the use of NearMap as a background or is there an issue with Potlatch 1.4? Nearmap withdrew their support for the people using the new contributor terms. The OpenStreetMap foundation is currently working to resolve the issue with Nearmap. Such a discussion happened yesterday evening with Ben last Emilie Laffray ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On 15 September 2010 14:28, Michael Hampson mc.hamp...@gmail.com wrote: Does anyone know if we have lost the use of NearMap as a background or is there an issue with Potlatch 1.4? Nearmap withdrew their support for the people using the new contributor terms. The OpenStreetMap foundation is currently working to resolve the issue with Nearmap. Such a discussion happened yesterday evening with Ben last Just to clarify, we have not concluded discussions with NearMap and discussion is still positive. The removal of the NearMap option in Potlatch was prompted a few weeks by back, but was only actioned today. Regards Grant ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
Bloody Hell. They have even blocked the custom field. I have a lot of choice words to say right now but shall refrain until I calm down! All over a bloody licencing dispute (which I don't like getting involved in unless I have to, which that time has now come) On 15/09/2010, at 11:58 PM, Grant Slater wrote: On 15 September 2010 14:28, Michael Hampson mc.hamp...@gmail.com wrote: Does anyone know if we have lost the use of NearMap as a background or is there an issue with Potlatch 1.4? Nearmap withdrew their support for the people using the new contributor terms. The OpenStreetMap foundation is currently working to resolve the issue with Nearmap. Such a discussion happened yesterday evening with Ben last Just to clarify, we have not concluded discussions with NearMap and discussion is still positive. The removal of the NearMap option in Potlatch was prompted a few weeks by back, but was only actioned today. Regards Grant ___ 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] NearMap
On Wed, 15 September, 2010 11:28:29 PM, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote: Just to clarify, we have not concluded discussions with NearMap and discussion is still positive. The removal of the NearMap option in Potlatch was prompted a few weeks by back, but was only actioned today. Who was it prompted by? Did NearMap themselves request it? Why is the first we've heard of such a block, after it has been implemented? I don't see why should NearMap be blocked for users who have not accepted the new contributor terms. Is there some way to work with a local copy of Potlatch without such a restriction? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On 15 September 2010 15:14, Simon Biber simonbi...@yahoo.com.au wrote: Who was it prompted by? Did NearMap themselves request it? There was a specific question from a AU community member to NearMap if the option should be removed. They said yes. -- Third hand, I was not part of the discussion. I don't see why should NearMap be blocked for users who have not accepted the new contributor terms. My understanding of NearMap's point of view is they have some rights over the contributions made by OpenStreetMap'pers who use their imagery. I also understand they have no issues with the new license just the Contributor Terms. It is an awkward position. NearMap is also a user of OpenStreetMap data. Discussing of options and solutions with NearMap continues. / Grant ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On 16 September 2010 00:37, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: I believe John Smith initially suggested it to NearMap. Ben Last at NearMap No, I posted the question publicly to the legal talk list, my concern wasn't just about Nearmap but any source that may be too easy to access by new contributors that would be unaware that they would be breaching contract with OSM or the source or both. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2010-August/004069.html In addition I feel very strongly that copyright on imagery does not, and should not, 'transfer' to tracings from that imagery Copyright isn't transferring from imagery to tracings, Nearmap have terms and conditions (contract) to use their imagery, they are happy to donate the use of their imagery and other resources (bandwidth, CPU time etc) if the tracings are made available under certain licenses, if this is unsuitable they also offer commercial licenses. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 1:30 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 September 2010 00:37, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: I believe John Smith initially suggested it to NearMap. Ben Last at NearMap No, I posted the question publicly to the legal talk list, my concern wasn't just about Nearmap but any source that may be too easy to access by new contributors that would be unaware that they would be breaching contract with OSM or the source or both. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2010-August/004069.html In addition I feel very strongly that copyright on imagery does not, and should not, 'transfer' to tracings from that imagery Copyright isn't transferring from imagery to tracings, Are you speaking for NearMap, JohnSmith or just agreeing with Richard Fairhurst above that copyright on imagery does not, and should not, 'transfer' to tracings from that imagery? I don't speak for NearMap, of course, but the impression I had from the conversation with Ben, yesterday, is that NearMap argue that they have rights that _do_ persist in derived works such as traced vectors. If you have had previous conversations with NearMap that denied this strong persistence argument, I believe that they have changed their position. Legal argument aside. Frankly it makes my head hurt. If a vendor decides to stop allowing OSM use of their resources, we should say Thanks for what you did contribute, and fare well. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Luke Woolley lswool...@gmail.com wrote: Bloody Hell. They have even blocked the custom field. I have a lot of choice words to say right now but shall refrain until I calm down! All over a bloody licencing dispute (which I don't like getting involved in unless I have to, which that time has now come) Many OSM contributors want the license change to just be finished so that they can continue to map. There is a clear potential problem with using NearMap as a reference. Discussion between NearMap and OSMF is continuing and it may turn out that this was all just too much worry over nothing. Or it may turn out that NearMap will no longer participate in OSM by providing aerial imagery. I enjoyed the discussion with Ben and LWG yesterday and I'm looking forward to the next discussion. That said, there is no answer right now for what will happen regarding NearMap imagery in the future. Currently, OSM users may not use NearMap imagery for deriving data for OSM. You might choose to keep on mapping and enjoy your participation in OSM. You don't have to use NearMap imagery to map. Consider this. You may, if you choose, make another OSM account for yourself[1]. If you do that now, it will be a CC-By-SA and ODbL account. Then continue mapping from your ground surveys, and or other permitted sources. Whatever the resolution with NearMap, it won't affect your new account. [1] OSMF LWG have issued a clarification that contributor terms apply per account, not per user. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 1:59 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 September 2010 03:48, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: Legal argument aside. Frankly it makes my head hurt. If a vendor decides to stop allowing OSM use of their resources, we should say Thanks for what you did contribute, and fare well. In this case it is OSM that is changing the rules of the game, not Nearmap, if it was the other way round I'd be much more inclined to agree with you. NearMap have requested that their imagery not be available in Potlatch, and have changed their license on their web site to remove explicit permission for OpenStreetMap. That is their right and their decision. They have the right to end their support or to withhold it while negotiations continue then reinstate it. That doesn't make NearMap bad. This isn't a competition with a winner and loser. The fact is that NearMap don't want OSM users using their imagery right now. So we shouldn't. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On 16 September 2010 04:02, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: That said, there is no answer right now for what will happen regarding NearMap imagery in the future. Currently, OSM users may not use NearMap imagery for deriving data for OSM. Only users that have agreed with the new Contributor Terms can not use Nearmap as a source, everyone else isn't restricted. Which is the biggest problem with the new CTs it shifts the ability for contributors to use sources of data to very few, while giving commercial end users much more freedom, to me this stinks and the contributors didn't even get much say in the matter, yet they will be the ones to suffer the most. You might choose to keep on mapping and enjoy your participation in OSM. You don't have to use NearMap imagery to map. Consider this. You may, if you choose, make another OSM account for yourself[1]. If you do that now, it will be a CC-By-SA and ODbL account. Then Actually it can only shift to dual license once CC-by-SA data is removed. continue mapping from your ground surveys, and or other permitted sources. Whatever the resolution with NearMap, it won't affect your new account. No, but it will effect the quality and quantity of map data available in Australia. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On 16 September 2010 04:12, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: bad. This isn't a competition with a winner and loser. The fact is that NearMap don't want OSM users using their imagery right now. So we shouldn't. This isn't true, they don't want to allow their data to be submitted under the new Contributor Terms, they are happy for it to be submitted under cc-by-sa, which anyone that has not agreed to the new CTs is able to do. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 23:16:34 +1000 Michael Hampson mc.hamp...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, Does anyone know if we have lost the use of NearMap as a background or is there an issue with Potlatch 1.4? There are other editors, assuming that you have not agreed to the new Contributor Terms. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 2:15 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 September 2010 04:12, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: bad. This isn't a competition with a winner and loser. The fact is that NearMap don't want OSM users using their imagery right now. So we shouldn't. This isn't true, they don't want to allow their data to be submitted under the new Contributor Terms, they are happy for it to be submitted under cc-by-sa, which anyone that has not agreed to the new CTs is able to do. I'm trying to understand your recommendation to keep mapping from a problematic source. I'll try to put this in your terms. Do you agree that: 1) There is a chance that OSM will adopt the ODbL and CT 2) There is a chance that NearMap derived objects would have to be removed when ODbL and CT are accepted And yet you would recommend continuing mapping from this and other problematic sources, rather than mapping from ground survey and first principles? I don't think that your recommendation is in the best interest of OpenStreetMap or OSM contributors. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On 16 September 2010 07:31, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: I don't think that your recommendation is in the best interest of OpenStreetMap or OSM contributors. You left off 3, there is going to be a fork as cc-by-sa and any such contributions from Nearmap will be happily accepted. Also you seem to over look the obvious, unless such problematic data is removed sooner rather than later, people will become even more upset when their changes are lost because of the short sightedness of this ongoing relicensing debacle... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On 16 September 2010 07:31, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: I don't think that your recommendation is in the best interest of OpenStreetMap or OSM contributors. Actually how can you or anyone else make this statement in good faith when most of the contributors have never been asked what they want? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On 16 September 2010 07:58, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: Or did you mean CommonMap? http://commonmap.info Unlikely, since CommonMap is cc-by, not cc-by-sa... Or did you mean SharedMap? http://www.sharedmap.org At this stage this is run and used by a single person, perhaps this will expand in future, although others have expressed similar sentiments about running their own personal repositories, so perhaps he's on to something. You overlook the obvious, that discussion can lead to additional rights grants from publishers. And how many years must we wait before they'll be concluded? In the interim, those tired of listening to license-chat, can go mapping. They can decide that they don't care about a few loud, Or keep arm chair mapping from existing sources, for those that are allowed to. repeated voices[1] haggling over non-mapping matters, they can get a new account, and map from ground survey and direct observation, Why exactly do they need a new account just to do ground surveying? Or are you making the assumption that there could be a great deal of data lost because they have edits mixed with Nearmap or other sources of data, I wonder how many that will upset when they figure out you've just wiped out 1-2 years worth of work... knowing that their contributions will be able to carry forward with OpenStreetMap. Perhaps you may come to realise that some don't care that their contributions to go elsewhere, regardless where they go in the interim, they just care about getting on and mapping in their usual work flow until such times that that is no longer possible, at which point they'll either give up completely or go on to another project that has kept all their existing edits. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 5:48 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 September 2010 07:31, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: I don't think that your recommendation is in the best interest of OpenStreetMap or OSM contributors. Actually how can you or anyone else make this statement in good faith when most of the contributors have never been asked what they want? This old saw again, JohnSmith? Every time the community is asked, they support progress in the form of ODbL rather than the inappropriate CC-By-SA. Here is the latest feedback for you. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:ODbL_Supporter http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Users_Rejecting_ODbL So you can help too. Would you like to contact a CC-By or CC-By-SA data publisher and request permission to contribute their data to OSM under ODbL / CT? Would you like to participate in the discussion of exactly how and which data should be excluded when OSM proceeds? http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/dev/2010-August/020124.html Would you like to recommend to other mappers to avoid problematic sources until things are settled in the long term? Would you like to meet with, coach and encourage new mappers? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 6:05 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 September 2010 07:58, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: You overlook the obvious, that discussion can lead to additional rights grants from publishers. And how many years must we wait before they'll be concluded? It will take forever if you never start the discussion. ;-) That will vary by publisher. The permission from the Canadian government took a couple of days but others might be faster. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On 16 September 2010 08:11, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: This old saw again, JohnSmith? Every time the community is asked, they support progress in the form of ODbL rather than the inappropriate CC-By-SA. Here is the latest feedback for you. Yes and how many said they haven't even been asked when this came up on the legal talk list, and shared a similar sentiment to mine, most of those straw polls only include a few hundred participants at most, where as most data has been contributed by at least 12,500 people... Hardly indicative of what most people want, in fact this thread started off because people were unhappy they could no longer use Nearmap imagery in potlatch... Would you like to contact a CC-By or CC-By-SA data publisher and request permission to contribute their data to OSM under ODbL / CT? Which is a pointless activity, since the CTs prohibit anything but PD data, ODBL data is *NOT* compatible with the CTs. Would you like to participate in the discussion of exactly how and which data should be excluded when OSM proceeds? http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/dev/2010-August/020124.html I thought it would be pretty clear that the CTs exclude everything except PD sources... Would you like to recommend to other mappers to avoid problematic sources until things are settled in the long term? It seems my previous emails would suggest otherwise... Would you like to meet with, coach and encourage new mappers? Sure, and at the same time I can tell them how foolish some people are being about relicensing just to appease commercial companies... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On 16 September 2010 08:15, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: It will take forever if you never start the discussion. ;-) I was under the impression the LWG was already talking to Nearmap, however I don't have a problem with the current license, so I don't see a point in wasting it to further the agenda of commercial entities... That will vary by publisher. The permission from the Canadian government took a couple of days but others might be faster. I'm suspicious that the data is going to be compatible with the CTs, but of course these little details are swept under the rug... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 6:20 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 September 2010 08:15, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: It will take forever if you never start the discussion. ;-) I was under the impression the LWG was already talking to Nearmap, Sure. Aren't there AU gov't sources that would be nice to have permission to use? however I don't have a problem with the current license, so I don't see a point in wasting it to further the agenda of commercial entities... This bogeyman again? Which commercial entities? What agenda? Moving to and Open Data License from an Open Creative Content License is the right thing to do for an Open Data Project. Using CT to make adapting to the future easier for the future OSM community is the right thing to do for our future selves. That will vary by publisher. The permission from the Canadian government took a couple of days but others might be faster. I'm suspicious that the data is going to be compatible with the CTs, but of course these little details are swept under the rug... Nope. Explicit permission to contribute to OSM with CTs. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/2010-August/003292.html ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:38 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 6:20 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 September 2010 08:15, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: It will take forever if you never start the discussion. ;-) I was under the impression the LWG was already talking to Nearmap, Sure. Aren't there AU gov't sources that would be nice to have permission to use? however I don't have a problem with the current license, so I don't see a point in wasting it to further the agenda of commercial entities... This bogeyman again? Which commercial entities? What agenda? Moving to and Open Data License from an Open Creative Content License is the right thing to do for an Open Data Project. Using CT to make adapting to the future easier for the future OSM community is the right thing to do for our future selves. That will vary by publisher. The permission from the Canadian government took a couple of days but others might be faster. I'm suspicious that the data is going to be compatible with the CTs, but of course these little details are swept under the rug... Nope. Explicit permission to contribute to OSM with CTs. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/2010-August/003292.html Richard, can you explain how section 4 of the Geogratis license [1] works with respect to the CTs please? My understanding is that 4.3 requires the Licensee to indemnify Canada against damages etc? Is this compatible with section 6.2 of the Contributor Terms? If I understand it right 6.2 excludes any liability. Isn't this contrary to Geogratis's stipulation in 4.3? Can you explain please? 80n [1] http://geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/geogratis/en/licence.jsp ___ 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] NearMap
Some datasets are ok to use, what the CT fails to mention is the fact that the OSMF can made the decision on weather or not to accept a dataset. Specifically because the humble contributor cannot guarantee that they represent or have the exact 'direct permission' as it could have been just a coffe chat sure you can use it (when the actual dataset copyright holder doesnt fully understand the CT, nor has hired a lawer to answer the question 'officially'. *** You agree to only add Contents for which You are the copyright holder (to the extent the Contents include any copyrightable elements). You represent and warrant that You are legally entitled to grant the licence in Section 2 below and that such licence does not violate any law, breach any contract, or, to the best of Your knowledge, infringe any third party’s rights. If You are not the copyright holder of the Contents, You represent and warrant that You have explicit permission from the rights holder to submit the Contents and grant the licence below. ** However, if the OSMF authorizes a working group who can act on behalf of the Foundation, they can approve of data sets, and directly do the conversion, so then the overall community does not need to be concerned. And just wait for the OSMF to announce that data is available as small .osm files hosted on the osmf server so the community can work at copying the data in. Like many other datasets, we have direct permission to use it. (Someone from NRCan gave direct permission and wants OSM to use the map data) Plus the OSMF voted in favour to use it. (back in 2008) Therefore, this sets a president for all other datasets with a similar license, that if it receives 1 - a positive vote from the OSMF AND 2 - Direct permission (in writing) from someone who can act on behalf the source. Then it's ok to use. (So the actual text of the license doesn't matter when the 1st 2 points are provided). So then a vote can happen for if OSMF wants to retain whatever tainted data they choose to accept. I have already specifically requested the OSMF to have a Imports Working group, so then can look at all of the datasets and vote on each. Thus, fulfilling the requirements of Formal Discussion Required [1] Unfortunately, it seems that the OSMF is not interested in directly ensuring the quality of the database as a 'pure odbl' dataset. The work required to create a new empty dataset, and directly copy in all of the 'Officially supported' data, can be simply crowd-sourced. Tagging can be fixed with the more correct tags, and there will be no duplicate nodes, and no messy imported data, as all datasets will require the OSMF to approve it (and probably should be only the OSMF appointed people to copy in the bulk data directly). This will ensure 100% compliance. (this is an obvious solution, that everyone can be happy with), so those who choose not to accept ODbl can continue and work on another project (outside of OSM) with a minimal interruption for actual mapping for everyone (whatever 'actual' means to the contributors). :) The final planet.osm file will be made available, where users can copy in data that has approval. (and even trace over the old map, (where the non-compliant data is removed kept in another planet.osm file for others to use) The alternate, is that after the changeover, the OSM map will be a tainted dataset with no way to filter out the data. My toonie, Cheers, Sam p.s. here's the chart i mention in the below message. (it's open access editing) https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=0Am70fsptsPF2dERHb1RkcXIwMUU1TDR3NF9NbWQxS3chl=enoutput=html [1] -- Forwarded message -- From: Sam Vekemans acrosscanadatra...@gmail.com Date: Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 5:09 AM Subject: imports working group To: board Board bo...@osmfoundation.org Hi, Does OSM Foundation not have an 'Imports Working Group', where this commitee can have the final say in any data that can be used in OpenStreetMap? I am creating a database chart, for just this purpose, and can include a column 'OSM Foundation approved' with a link. This way, there will be no question on if a dataset is Ok ... regardless of the licence... the OSMF has the power to make a decision on the datasets. since OSMF owns the api and main servers. Unlike small-time contributor edits .. bulk data (of any size) should go through the OSMF - imports working group... and pubmit it to the board for an approval vote for each dataset. ... ps. this is why i recommend converting the data to .osm 1st... then let the community look at it an examine it. We did this for CanVec and geobaseNHN and statscan... and it works just fine. Thanks, Sam -- Twitter: @Acrosscanada Blogs: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/ http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans Skype: samvekemans IRC: irc://irc.oftc.net #osm-ca Canadian OSM channel (an open chat room) @Acrosscanadatrails *** On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at
Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On 16 September 2010 02:12, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: NearMap have requested that their imagery not be available in Potlatch, and have changed their license on their web site to remove explicit permission for OpenStreetMap. That is their right and their decision. On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:18 PM, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com wrote: Nearmap withdrew their support for the people using the new contributor terms. The OpenStreetMap foundation is currently working to resolve the issue with Nearmap. Such a discussion happened yesterday evening with Ben last Just to clarify; we haven't actually *changed* anything at all in our licence terms; the licence has remained the same since we first launched. It states that you can derive work from our PhotoMap images, you own that work and can distribute it under CC-BY-SA (which at the time we lauched, made it compatible with OSM). When the new CTs were introduced, we had to remove the asscoiated statements on the licence page that referenced OSM because the new CTs mean that our licence is no longer compatible. As Richard W and others say, we're in discussions to try and find a solution; I very much appreciate the opportunity to talk with the LWG and hope the discussions continue. I asked Richard F to remove NearMap support from Potlatch, since we didn't want to encourage anyone to add data to OSM which might be, or become, incompatible with the CTs. That's all; there is no block. The fact is that NearMap don't want OSM users using their imagery right now. So we shouldn't. Again to clarify; we do actually want very much to make it possible for OSM'ers to use our PhotoMaps. But right now there's a licence incompatibility issue, which we hope we can solve. Regards Ben -- Ben Last Development Manager (HyperWeb) NearMap Pty Ltd ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap Community Licence and OSM Contributor Terms
- Original Message - From: Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com To: OpenStreetMap Learned Discussions t...@openstreetmap.org; OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 9:09 AM Subject: [talk-au] NearMap Community Licence and OSM Contributor Terms Hi all As you may have noticed, if you follow the mailing lists, there's been a certain amount of discussion about using NearMap aerial imagery (which we call PhotoMaps) as a source for generating OSM data, in the light of the current Contributor Terms (CTs, as currently shown at http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms). We've been looking at the CTs (or rather, our lawyers have), and as a result of this, we need to make a couple of points clear. We should emphasise first that *you still have the same rights to use NearMap images that you always hadhttp://www.nearmap.com/products/community-licence *; you can use them to derive information that you own and may distribute under a CC-BY-SA licence. We've also been looking at the ODbL in detail and, pending a final word from the lawyers, we would be able to allow derived works from our PhotoMaps to be distributed under ODbL/DbCL. We'd also be prepared to make this explicit on our site, to avoid any issues with explicit permissions (see para 1 of the CTs). However, there are a couple of problems with the CTs. First: paragraph 2 of the CTs requires that an OSM user grants the OSMF a very wide ranging licence (a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable license to do any act that is restricted by copyright over anything within the Contents, whether in the original medium or any other. These rights explicitly include commercial use, and do not exclude any field of endeavour). We can't grant a licence to derive data from our PhotoMaps that would allow the derived work to be submitted to OSM under that clause; it introduces yet another licence (above and beyond CC-BY-SA and ODbL/DbCL). Second: paragraph 3 of the CTs allows the licence to be changed to another free or open licence, which isn't further defined. We can't grant a licence to derive data from our PhotoMaps that would allow the derived work to be submitted to OSM under that clause, since that other licence might not be CC-BY-SA or ODbL/DbCL. To summarise: under the terms of our Community licence ( http://www.nearmap.com/products/community-licence) you can't use our PhotoMaps to derive data in a way that allows you to license that data under the current Contributor Terms. Data already derived from our PhotoMaps remains under CC-BY-SA, which again means that it can't be licensed under the CTs. Because of this, we're making the following changes to our website: - Changing the wording of the page that explains the Community licence so that it says you may Use the Licensed PhotoMaps or Modified PhotoMaps to obtain information which you can then use, under the Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike (CC-BY-SA)http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ licence, to populate or update community street mapping projects rather than referencing OpenStreetMap directly. - Removing the Edit button that links directly to OpenStreetmap (opens Potlatch with NearMap images). I have to say that we're doing this very reluctantly; we're big supporters of OSM (many of us here are active members) and we're still committed to doing whatever we can to support it directly. We've put a lot of effort (actually, a very large amount of development time and money) into building parts of our system to support OSM, and that's now having to be modified or put on hold. We're going to continue to talk to the Licence Working Group about this, and to try and find a way around the issues we have. Our concerns aren't based on any philosophical objections, just on incompatibilities between our use of a share-alike licence and the current CTs. We very much hope that there'll be a resolution that will allow us to get back to actively and positively encouraging mappers and others to use our PhotoMaps to enhance and build OpenStreetMap. Finally, as ever, I want to make it clear that it's not our place as a company to try and direct or influence the direction of OSM. That's for the community and OSMF to debate and decide. Regards Ben Ben Thank you for the time, and presumably money, that NearMap have expended investigating this issue. It is a disappointing, but totally understandable decision. Lets hope that OSM find a way to resolve it so that Near Map imagery can continue to be used in the future David -- Ben Last Development Manager (HyperWeb) NearMap Pty Ltd ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap coverage plan
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com wrote: That said, having had a look at the new coverage in the Hunter Valley, there is a huge amount of detail you can get from Nearmap that would be practically impossible with surveying. I've also been finding the opposite. It's almost impossible to follow a signposted walking track from Nearmap. Even when you have a fair idea where the track goes, there are all kinds of red herrings that look just as visible from the air. Not to mention the difficulty of even seeing singletrack through dense bush. It is however great for getting the rough fire-trail network in the bush. I've done a lot of these around sedgwick and kinglake in victoria. All of which gives me a strange sense of pleasure, and more motivation to go out and map. It just means that my surveying efforts will be very much focused on this kind of thing, rather than roads, towns etc. I'm with you Steve. I love mapping things which are not on google maps. So for me I get real pleasure of mapping bush walks, mountain biking trails, location of postboxes, rivers, etc., etc. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap coverage plan
On 17 July 2010 13:02, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: I've also been finding the opposite. It's almost impossible to follow a signposted walking track from Nearmap. Even when you have a fair idea where the track goes, there are all kinds of red herrings that look just as visible from the air. Not to mention the difficulty of even seeing singletrack through dense bush. I know what you mean :) I'm not big on bushwalking (hey, I'm a Brit, it'll take time) but I have found NearMap very useful for looking out tracks in the parks and beach areas near where I live, which I can then later check out on foot to see where they really run (as opposed to what it looks like from the air). Cheers b -- Ben Last Development Manager (HyperWeb) NearMap Pty Ltd ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap coverage plan
No worries! The new coverage they have set out for Victoria including the Mornington Peninsula, Phillip Island, Ballarat and the Yarra Valley is great news for me! All they need to plan to fly now is Pakenham then i'll be happy! Oh wait, then the Latrobe Valley, then you all get the idea! On 16 July 2010 12:08, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks to Lakeyboy for pointing out Nearmap planned coverage areas PDF: http://www.nearmap.com/assets/pdf/coverage/NearMap-PhotoMap-Coverage.pdf ___ 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] Nearmap coverage plan
While Nearmap for Tamworth and Armidale would be nice, surveyors have been hard at work in both. That said, having had a look at the new coverage in the Hunter Valley, there is a huge amount of detail you can get from Nearmap that would be practically impossible with surveying. - Ben. On 16 July 2010 15:51, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 July 2010 15:35, Babstar babsta...@gmail.com wrote: While we're on the requests, please an an extension from Mittagong west If we're on to requests :) I'd still like Tamworth, NSW the area has 55k+ people according to wikipedia, and Armidale, NSW isn't far away with another 20k+ people... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap coverage plan
On 16 July 2010 15:35, Babstar babsta...@gmail.com wrote: While we're on the requests, please an an extension from Mittagong west If we're on to requests :) How about some more of North Qld. I notice Mackay and Cairns are on the plan but what about areas in between, (Whitsunday's, Bowen, Townsville). Or Rocky, Gladstone and down to the south. As Steve said, doesn't matter how much coverage, we'd always like to see more, or more up to date :) Ditto -- Cheers Ross -- ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap coverage plan
On 16 July 2010 16:29, Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com wrote: While Nearmap for Tamworth and Armidale would be nice, surveyors have been hard at work in both. Aerial imagery can do things like landuse, not just roads, which is a lot harder to get or even see from ground level... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap coverage plan
If you want to make requests, http://forum.Nearmap.com/ :) Cheers b On Friday, July 16, 2010, Babstar babsta...@gmail.com wrote: While we're on the requests, please an an extension from Mittagong west south west to cover Bowral, Moss Vale, Exeter Bundanoon as well as the Hume Highway. Population approximately 42,000 in this district and a significant number would be covered in this narrow sweep. --Babstar -- Ben Last 0423 475 673 Development Manager (HyperWeb) NearMap Pty Ltd ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap coverage plan
On 16 July 2010 20:31, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote: If you want to make requests, http://forum.Nearmap.com/ :) I did some time ago :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap coverage plan
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com wrote: That said, having had a look at the new coverage in the Hunter Valley, there is a huge amount of detail you can get from Nearmap that would be practically impossible with surveying. I've also been finding the opposite. It's almost impossible to follow a signposted walking track from Nearmap. Even when you have a fair idea where the track goes, there are all kinds of red herrings that look just as visible from the air. Not to mention the difficulty of even seeing singletrack through dense bush. All of which gives me a strange sense of pleasure, and more motivation to go out and map. It just means that my surveying efforts will be very much focused on this kind of thing, rather than roads, towns etc. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap coverage plan
...which we're going to keep updated... Cheers b On 16 July 2010 10:08, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks to Lakeyboy for pointing out Nearmap planned coverage areas PDF: http://www.nearmap.com/assets/pdf/coverage/NearMap-PhotoMap-Coverage.pdf ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au -- Ben Last Development Manager (HyperWeb) NearMap Pty Ltd ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap coverage plan
I just wish the area between Ballarat and Bendigo extended a bit further west. It's a very interesting area of Victoria, full of little dirt tracks through the old gold digging area. Creswick is half covered, Clunes is off the map... But to be honest, no matter how much coverage there was, we'd always want a bit more... Steve On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 12:08 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks to Lakeyboy for pointing out Nearmap planned coverage areas PDF: http://www.nearmap.com/assets/pdf/coverage/NearMap-PhotoMap-Coverage.pdf ___ 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] Nearmap coverage plan
While we're on the requests, please an an extension from Mittagong west south west to cover Bowral, Moss Vale, Exeter Bundanoon as well as the Hume Highway. Population approximately 42,000 in this district and a significant number would be covered in this narrow sweep. -- Babstar ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap coverage plan
I'd like a bit more.. Tasmania has NONE :( Neal On 16/07/10 2:48 PM, Steve Bennett wrote: I just wish the area between Ballarat and Bendigo extended a bit further west. It's a very interesting area of Victoria, full of little dirt tracks through the old gold digging area. Creswick is half covered, Clunes is off the map... But to be honest, no matter how much coverage there was, we'd always want a bit more... Steve On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 12:08 PM, John Smithdeltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks to Lakeyboy for pointing out Nearmap planned coverage areas PDF: http://www.nearmap.com/assets/pdf/coverage/NearMap-PhotoMap-Coverage.pdf ___ 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] Nearmap coverage plan
On 16 July 2010 15:35, Babstar babsta...@gmail.com wrote: While we're on the requests, please an an extension from Mittagong west If we're on to requests :) I'd still like Tamworth, NSW the area has 55k+ people according to wikipedia, and Armidale, NSW isn't far away with another 20k+ people... There is also Dubbo and surrounding locations west of Sydney... As Steve said, doesn't matter how much coverage, we'd always like to see more, or more up to date :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap support for OSM editing
On 8 June 2010 16:09, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote: Without giving too much away, I'm letting you know that NearMap are looking at/working on adding support for some basic OSM editing operations to our website. We're doing this to more directly address some of the weaknesses of OSM; in particular, absence of street names and building numbers. I'd be interested in your opinions on what we're doing: as ever, our aim here is to improve and support the OSM data :) Do you know about the mapzen editor cloudmade produced? http://mapzen.cloudmade.com/ ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap support for OSM editing
On 8 June 2010 14:27, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: Do you know about the mapzen editor cloudmade produced? http://mapzen.cloudmade.com/ Yes, we do, and whilst it's an interesting piece of work, it's still too complex for general users (in our humble opinion!). It would also require users to register with CloudMade to use it, and we wouldn't get visibility of their edits (until they came down the feed from OSM). Cheers Ben -- Ben Last 0423 475 673 Development Manager (HyperWeb) NearMap Pty Ltd ___ 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, 8 Jun 2010, Ben Last wrote: On 8 June 2010 14:27, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: Do you know about the mapzen editor cloudmade produced? http://mapzen.cloudmade.com/ Yes, we do, and whilst it's an interesting piece of work, it's still too complex for general users (in our humble opinion!). It would also require users to register with CloudMade to use it, and we wouldn't get visibility of their edits (until they came down the feed from OSM). Cheers Ben 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. ___ 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] NearMap support for OSM editing
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. Personally I would not like to see much more than this and I don't think being able to reclassify a street is suitable without strict guidelines and/or limits (eg an untagged way). For issues with these have a look around Fremantle at the moment and you'll see a number of oddly classified roads (secondary - trunk - secondary - trunk in the space of a few blocks). Anything more than this and it would lead to easy vandalism and I can see lots of nearmap staff time being occupied with reverts rather than other things (like imagery of North Qld ;)). The POI's should be select and choose, with the only text option being the name and addresses. All up though it would be great to have extra street names added and address as well. -- Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap support for OSM editing
Sounds good. Clear simple support for adding addresses would be especially useful. This is probably the area that OSM is furthest behind other online maps and its not improving very quickly at the moment. --- On Tue, 8/6/10, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote: From: Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com Subject: Re: [talk-au] NearMap support for OSM editing To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Received: Tuesday, 8 June, 2010, 6:40 PM 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. Personally I would not like to see much more than this and I don't think being able to reclassify a street is suitable without strict guidelines and/or limits (eg an untagged way). For issues with these have a look around Fremantle at the moment and you'll see a number of oddly classified roads (secondary - trunk - secondary - trunk in the space of a few blocks). Anything more than this and it would lead to easy vandalism and I can see lots of nearmap staff time being occupied with reverts rather than other things (like imagery of North Qld ;)). The POI's should be select and choose, with the only text option being the name and addresses. All up though it would be great to have extra street names added and address as well. -- Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap support for OSM editing
On 9 June 2010 06:27, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: In particular, how will you ensure that contributors via Nearmap agree to the OSM/OSMF contributing terms/license? Good point. We'll need to include this in TCs that a user must accept before editing. Since we're going to keep the edits for reverting/tracking/whatever, I think John's suggestion of us passing the same rights to OSM works; we'd have to agree to do that anyway when we sign up the -- Ben Last Development Manager (HyperWeb) NearMap Pty Ltd ___ 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, Jun 8, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote: the NearMap site). We do have our own registration system, and we're going to require that a user be registered with us before we allow them to make edits. Because of the above, edits applied to the OSM data would be submitted by a nearmap user. We're planning to tag edited OSM entities with information sufficient to identify the NearMap user who made the edit. We'll also be tracking the history of edits by users in our core database. I suspect this approach will prove controversial. Is there really no way you can integrate user registrations? I do like the idea of tagging addresses though. In particular, it would be great if your system made it easy to tag corner addresses, and interpolate between them (using the current interpolation scheme - which I'm not very familiar with). One issue that occurs with allowing street name changes is that you may need to allow users to split streets. Also, you may want to point out to them that one (previously unnamed) street/way runs into another unnamed street/way. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap support for OSM editing
On 9 June 2010 09:13, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: I suspect this approach will prove controversial. Is there really no way you can integrate user registrations? There's no convenient way. We could bounce a user off to the OSM site to register, but this is complex because they then need to confirm an email, and after the signup there (appears to be) no convenient way to bring them back to our site. We'd then have to ask them to enter their OSM username and password since we can't easily tell whether they are registered/logged in with OSM (the OSM login cookies are for the openstreetmap.org domain). In short, the OSM site doesn't appear to have been designed with the intention of supporting login integration with external services. There are ways around many of the issues, but we'd end up doing a fair amount of work to integrate closely with an external site that may then change the way it works, breaking the flow for our users. I do like the idea of tagging addresses though. In particular, it would be great if your system made it easy to tag corner addresses, and interpolate between them (using the current interpolation scheme - which I'm not very familiar with). Yep; getting numbers for corners of blocks is a pretty effective way to boost geocoding accuracy with minimal data. Though it works better in a US-style block system than in, say, rural areas of the UK :) One issue that occurs with allowing street name changes is that you may need to allow users to split streets. Also, you may want to point out to them that one (previously unnamed) street/way runs into another unnamed street/way. Splitting streets may fall into the area where the edit gets more complex than we want to support (at least for the first release). But yes, there is an issue there, depending on how farsighted the person was who originally traced the street :) Cheers b -- Ben Last Development Manager (HyperWeb) NearMap Pty Ltd ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap support for OSM editing
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote: There's no convenient way. We could bounce a user off to the OSM site to register, but this is complex because they then need to confirm an email, and after the signup there (appears to be) no convenient way to bring them back to our site. We'd then have to ask them to enter their OSM username and password since we can't easily tell whether they are registered/logged in with OSM (the OSM login cookies are for the openstreetmap.org domain). In short, the OSM site doesn't appear to have been designed with the intention of supporting login integration with external services. There are ways around many of the issues, but we'd end up doing a fair amount of work to integrate closely with an external site that may then change the way it works, breaking the flow for our users. Oops, could have been clearer. By integration, I meant asking the OSM developers to make some changes to make it easier, too. But yeah, if not possible, not possible. Yep; getting numbers for corners of blocks is a pretty effective way to boost geocoding accuracy with minimal data. Though it works better in a US-style block system than in, say, rural areas of the UK :) Some parts of the US are pretty crazy too. My favourite though is a scheme I saw in Dallas (and I'm sure exists elsewhere) where the numbers are independent of the street, and uniquely identify a house within some region. So a tiny cul-de-sac can have street numbers in the thousands, and an address can effectively be 41029 Dallas. Splitting streets may fall into the area where the edit gets more complex than we want to support (at least for the first release). But yes, there is an issue there, depending on how farsighted the person was who originally traced the street :) Speaking as a tracer, it's very hard to guess where to break a street. You don't want to break them too short either, because then people down the track are more likely to only label half the street... Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap support for OSM editing
On 9 June 2010 11:28, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: Oops, could have been clearer. By integration, I meant asking the OSM developers to make some changes to make it easier, too. But yeah, if not possible, not possible. I have and didn't get much of a useful reply... It would be so much easier for an API to allow people to sign up, and I fully sympathise with Ben's position. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap support for OSM editing
On 9 June 2010 11:28, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: Some parts of the US are pretty crazy too. My favourite though is a scheme I saw in Dallas (and I'm sure exists elsewhere) where the numbers are independent of the street, and uniquely identify a house within some region. So a tiny cul-de-sac can have street numbers in the thousands, and an address can effectively be 41029 Dallas. I thought that was pretty common for most/all of the US? They have an occasional thing on TV here where someone gets the fine for someone else because of similar names and street name/numbers, although if they couldn't make that mistake I'm sure others would be made :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap support for OSM editing
1. It's too hard to get Nearmap users to go through the signup process for OSM For a given value of hard :) Yes, right now we think it's too complex and there's also no easy way for us to tell if they're already signed up/logged into OSM. Yep. I guess it would involve asking them to sign up twice. Interesting point... is a given Nearmap user any less trustworthy than a given OSM user? :) Or are you thinking that this would be a result of us making it easier to make changes? A fair question. I'm working under the assumption that a nearmap user is most likely unfamilar with OSM or how to edit ways and POIs according to the agreed standards; otherwise you wouldn't be trying to make it easier for your users to edit OSM data :) That's a good idea, but it doesn't help us address one key requirement, which is that we want to allow users to make corrections on the map and see the results of those changes in very short order (preferably immediately). The OSM data structure is not well suited to us storing edits locally and using them to correct the data used for rendering, so our preference if to resubmit the edits back to OSM as soon as possible so that we can regenerate the maps from the OSM updates. I guess a compromise would be to display another layer that contains all the suggested changes that have been made by all the different nearmap users. People would be able to see oh someone's already flagged that for an edit, and see what the status of all the suggestions are (Accepted, Reviewed, In progress, Fixed, Won't Fix etc). Sort of like a GIS Bugzilla. -- Voon-Li Chung chun...@gmail.com.au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap Coverage
I am pretty sure they have not flown Ballarat yet. I haven't seen any forum posts or twitter updates about Ballarat, but it would be nice since the Bacchus Marsh area imagery (which unfortunately is quite cloudy in places) misses Ballarat by about 10km. I've been keeping track and updating the wiki page, and this is the current backlog of imagery being processed: Gosford, New South Wales (I assume this is all of the Central Coast) Newcastle, New South Wales Ballerat (sic), Victoria (Added by John but don't know where his source of info is) Anglesea, Victoria (Should cover Torquay as well and maybe down to Lorne and further) Kyneton, Victoria (Should fill the gap between Bendigo and Woodend) I'm quite interested to know what areas NearMap are keen on flying next (I should say we all are!) On 03/05/2010, at 6:38 PM, John Smith wrote: On 3 May 2010 18:28, John Kitchener johnkitche...@gmail.com wrote: Then they just need a few other capitals (Darwin, Hobart), missing sections of current cities (Ipswich, west of Brisbane) and regional centres (Dubbo, Tamworth, Toowoomba etc) and that would cover the majority of the population... Great work … then the Central Coast and Newcastle wud be real nice. J Like Ballerat they have announced they took imagery so I can only assume they are still processing it. ___ 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] Nearmap Coverage
On 3 May 2010 22:46, Luke Woolley lswool...@gmail.com wrote: I am pretty sure they have not flown Ballarat yet. I haven't seen any forum I could have sworn I saw them announce Ballarat on their forum, but I can't find it so I'll remove it... posts or twitter updates about Ballarat, but it would be nice since the Bacchus Marsh area imagery (which unfortunately is quite cloudy in places) They flew it twice, once for low res, onces for higher res, and there is some parts that are cloud free between the zoom levels... I'm quite interested to know what areas NearMap are keen on flying next (I should say we all are!) They keep information like this close to their chest, I don't remember them announcing the Bacchus Marsh imagery being active, so I'm not sure if there is other announcements that have been overlooked... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap Coverage
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 3:03 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: I was curious how much actual coverage Nearmap currently has, and since we have boundaries for Nearmap coverage I thought I'd make use of them. I rounded the area to 2dp, but here is the result... Sydney = 9054.79km^2 Carnarvon = 2352.25km^2 Perth = 32454.66km^2 Rottness = 34.49km^2 Adelaide = 10277.89km^2 Cenberra = 1176.01km^2 St George = 9786.45km^2 Melbourne = 48838.13km^2 Total = 113974.67km^2 Which is 1.5% of australias total surface area (7 692 024km^2) with victoria leading the way with 20% of the state having aerial coverage (237,629km^2). I think it's somewhat less as the melbourne coverage extends into NSW, but even so it's very impressive. If they fly ballarat then all the major regional centres of victoria would be covered which would be great. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap Coverage
On 3 May 2010 08:23, Peter Ross pe...@emailross.com wrote: Which is 1.5% of australias total surface area (7 692 024km^2) with victoria leading the way with 20% of the state having aerial coverage (237,629km^2). I think it's somewhat less as the melbourne coverage extends into NSW, but even so it's very impressive. If they fly ballarat then all the major regional centres of victoria would be covered which would be great. I think they already flew Ballerat, and yes the Melbourne imagery extends into NSW, we could split the polygon and get a more accurate answer we could also spend more time aligning the boundaries to be more exact as well, but I did this mostly out of curiosity. Then they just need a few other capitals (Darwin, Hobart), missing sections of current cities (Ipswich, west of Brisbane) and regional centres (Dubbo, Tamworth, Toowoomba etc) and that would cover the majority of the population... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap Coverage
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 1:49 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 May 2010 08:23, Peter Ross pe...@emailross.com wrote: Which is 1.5% of australias total surface area (7 692 024km^2) with victoria leading the way with 20% of the state having aerial coverage (237,629km^2). I think it's somewhat less as the melbourne coverage extends into NSW, but even so it's very impressive. If they fly ballarat then all the major regional centres of victoria would be covered which would be great. I think they already flew Ballerat, and yes the Melbourne imagery extends into NSW, we could split the polygon and get a more accurate answer we could also spend more time aligning the boundaries to be more exact as well, but I did this mostly out of curiosity. I wouldn't bother making it more accurate. I did the percentages because the raw numbers really didn't mean anything to me. Only took 5 minutes to google sizes and use calculator to give percentages. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap now have OSM opaque maps as well as overlays
I'm pretty sure that's the one we used. On 7 April 2010 09:18, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote: It doesn't look like the actual style files that the OSM site uses are available (or if they are, they're not easy to find). I'm guessing it's this one (?): http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/applications/rendering/mapnik/osm.xml As described on the wiki (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapnik): The version we use on the live slippy map is probably the osm.xml file in the SVN head:applications/rendering/mapnik/osm.xml -- Ben Last Development Manager (HyperWeb) NearMap Pty Ltd ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap now have OSM opaque maps as well as overlays
Actually, it's just the standard mapnik styles from the download as far as colours are concerned - we've not yet done any serious editing to it (except for hiding some overlays at some zoom levels). It doesn't look like the actual style files that the OSM site uses are available (or if they are, they're not easy to find). We will be making changes over the next few months as we tune things, though. Cheers b On 3 April 2010 10:51, James Andrewartha tr...@student.uwa.edu.au wrote: On 1 April 2010 16:04, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote: Thought you might like to know that NearMap now have OSM data as opaque maps as well as transparent overlays on our PhotoMaps. OSM data's in for the whole world (currently from the 17/2/10 planet file, now importing the 24/3/10 file). It looks pretty good, I like the colour scheme you've got going. Just a few things don't fit in though - highway=service is a dark grey that looks out of place, and is hard to see in PhotoMap w/StreetMap since it's a similar colour to bitumen It's also visible at lower zoom levels than highway=residential, which you can see best on the Terrain view with StreetMap. You've swapped the colours of bike paths and footpaths compared to the standard OSM Mapnik view. The colour of streams/rivers is a bit dark and not blue enough IMHO. James -- Ben Last Development Manager (HyperWeb) NearMap Pty Ltd ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NearMap now have OSM opaque maps as well as overlays
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote: It doesn't look like the actual style files that the OSM site uses are available (or if they are, they're not easy to find). I'm guessing it's this one (?): http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/applications/rendering/mapnik/osm.xml As described on the wiki (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapnik): The version we use on the live slippy map is probably the osm.xml file in the SVN head:applications/rendering/mapnik/osm.xml ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap Sunshine Coast imagery...
So is new Melbourne Metro imagery for February 20. :) On 03/04/2010, at 10:57 PM, John Smith wrote: Imagery for the Sunshine Coast, and north of Brisbane not already covered in previous flights is now coming online... http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/a/ae/SEQld_Region_NearMap_April_3_2010.png ___ 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] NearMap now have OSM opaque maps as well as overlays
On 1 April 2010 16:04, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote: Thought you might like to know that NearMap now have OSM data as opaque maps as well as transparent overlays on our PhotoMaps. OSM data's in for the whole world (currently from the 17/2/10 planet file, now importing the 24/3/10 file). It looks pretty good, I like the colour scheme you've got going. Just a few things don't fit in though - highway=service is a dark grey that looks out of place, and is hard to see in PhotoMap w/StreetMap since it's a similar colour to bitumen It's also visible at lower zoom levels than highway=residential, which you can see best on the Terrain view with StreetMap. You've swapped the colours of bike paths and footpaths compared to the standard OSM Mapnik view. The colour of streams/rivers is a bit dark and not blue enough IMHO. James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap OSM data expanded
On 25 March 2010 16:11, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote: In case you're interested, Nearmap are now serving OSM data for the whole world, rendered from the 17/02/10 dataset. We also have the non-transparent map tiles, but haven't enhanced the map page to let you select those yet :) Awesome, we can finally see the fruits of the work based on Nearmap. Non-transparent tiles on nearmap.com has been something I've wanted for ages, is there a URL hack we can use for the moment? James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap OSM data expanded
Very nice. The new transparent tiles look great. The different road colours will take a little getting used to, but the map is so much more vibrant now. Keep up the great work! Maybe you can get the code to enable Australian Highway Shields from John so you can render them instead of the default OSM ones. Would make a nice touch. On 25/03/2010, at 7:11 PM, Ben Last wrote: In case you're interested, Nearmap are now serving OSM data for the whole world, rendered from the 17/02/10 dataset. We also have the non-transparent map tiles, but haven't enhanced the map page to let you select those yet :) Cheers b -- Ben Last Development Manager (HyperWeb) NearMap Pty Ltd ___ 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] Nearmap OSM data expanded
On 26 March 2010 10:40, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote: John, if you're reading, what's the change for Aus shields? The images are based on cc-by-sa imagery from wikipedia or from OSM's wiki, so free... The OSM wiki has SVG images: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Custom_Highway_Shields#Australia Although there is some tourism images on that wiki page that the Qld government has replied to me yet if it's ok to use commercially or not, if they don't hurry up soon I'm just going to take high res photos of the signs and make my own SVG images... The actual images I'm using can be grabbed from here: http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/symbols/shield_national.png http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/symbols/shield_nh.png http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/symbols/shield_nr.png http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/symbols/shield_state.png http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/symbols/shield_tourism.png ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap OSM data expanded
Most of the mountain villages along the Great Western Highway just west of Sydney are now included. Thanks Nearmap!! Michael Hampson Ph: 02 4739 4938 On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 12:09 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote: On 26 March 2010 10:40, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote: John, if you're reading, what's the change for Aus shields? The images are based on cc-by-sa imagery from wikipedia or from OSM's wiki, so free... The OSM wiki has SVG images: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Custom_Highway_Shields#Australia Although there is some tourism images on that wiki page that the Qld government has replied to me yet if it's ok to use commercially or not, if they don't hurry up soon I'm just going to take high res photos of the signs and make my own SVG images... The actual images I'm using can be grabbed from here: http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/symbols/shield_national.png http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/symbols/shield_nh.png http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/symbols/shield_nr.png http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/symbols/shield_state.png http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/symbols/shield_tourism.png ___ 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] Nearmap imagery now extends out to Katoomba in the Blue Mountains...
Thanks John, That's what happens when you get interrupted when sending and e-mail. Michael Hampson Ph: 02 4739 4938 On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 12:45 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=44122101 ___ 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] Nearmap imagery now extends out to Katoomba in the Blue Mountains...
On 26 March 2010 12:28, Michael Hampson mc.hamp...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks John, That's what happens when you get interrupted when sending and e-mail. There's nothing wrong with well placed enthusiasm... :) It looks like a lot of the places have been fairly well covered already, but the imagery will allow the map data to be refined... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap imagery now extends out to Katoomba in the Blue Mountains...
On 26 March 2010 10:49, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: It looks like a lot of the places have been fairly well covered already, but the imagery will allow the map data to be refined... Something that continues to amaze me is how much detail there is in very isolated parts of the world (or very isolated little communities, of which Australia has quite a few...). Now all we (Nearmap) need to do is capture with enough accuracy that you can read the street names... Cheers b -- Ben Last Development Manager (HyperWeb) NearMap Pty Ltd ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap made Channel 7 news
Well, I understand the resolution over Rottnest Island is better than anywhere else, so that ought to give an idea of what they can do. But I got the impression on the forums somewhere that they got that by flying lower, thus requiring more passes, though I may be wrong - I can't find it again now. I noticed when they did the line about you be the judge they showed a Rottnest island beach shot. Stephen On 18 March 2010 13:38, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.ipernica.com/IRM/content/Movies/Nearmap_ch7.html A couple of things that caught my attention, firstly the claim that they artificially limit the resolution, I wonder what they really are capable of producing. The reporter also asked if any of the big online mapping companies were interested, while the answer was a bit coy I wonder long term how this will fair for OSM. ___ 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] Nearmap made Channel 7 news
On 19 March 2010 11:22, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: Well, I understand the resolution over Rottnest Island is better than anywhere else, so that ought to give an idea of what they can do. But I thought Perth CBD was, since you can tell the direction of the switch points on railway lines, although I haven't compared other areas. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap made Channel 7 news
On 19 March 2010 10:31, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 19 March 2010 11:22, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: Well, I understand the resolution over Rottnest Island is better than anywhere else, so that ought to give an idea of what they can do. But I thought Perth CBD was, since you can tell the direction of the switch points on railway lines, although I haven't compared other areas. Both Rottnest surveys Perth CBD 15/5/09 go down to approx 3cm resolution. Or if you want to talk in slippymap terms, zoom 23 (scale 2m). Other surveys typically go down to zoom 21/5m. Cheers b -- Ben Last Development Manager (HyperWeb) NearMap Pty Ltd ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nearmap made Channel 7 news
On 19 March 2010 14:27, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote: Both Rottnest surveys Perth CBD 15/5/09 go down to approx 3cm resolution. Or if you want to talk in slippymap terms, zoom 23 (scale 2m). Other surveys typically go down to zoom 21/5m. To get the higher resolution do you fly lower than normal, or just process the data more? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
