Re: [OSM-talk] Toward resolution of controversies related to iD
Hi, On 6/9/20 02:53, nd...@redhazel.co.uk wrote: > Basically, can you please explain why do you think you should be able to > influence decisions of the iD maintainer without forking the code, > maintaining it yourself and in the end competing with iD on a level > playing field. I think that we (the OSMF) give the independent iD project a huge platform by making it the default editor that people are sent to when they click "Edit" on our web page. (Would anyone go to a web site called "ideditor.com" to edit OSM?) It is obvious that this comes with responsibilities. To pick an extreme example just for the sake of argument, if iD were to display an advertising banner to generate revenue, or transmit the activities of OSM mappers to another web site for harvesting, that would force us to drop iD from our web page immediately, and with that, the iD project or at least the part that deals with OSM would vanish into oblivion. So there is a contract here: The iD team makes a good editor, and the OSMF defines the decision making envelope for the iD team - some things they can just do to their liking because they don't affect the "iD is the official OSM(F) default editor" status, but other decisions they might want to make are outside this envelope and OSM needs to be given a say. That is not meddling with their affairs or "crippling down a good tool", it is just a necessary sharing of responsibilities. > The success of iD > is a proof their vision for the tool development and its feature set are > working very well (perhaps too well, which is why we are having this > discussion). We are having this discussion because the assumption that if someone is a good programmer they will also be good with gauging the will of the OSM community has proven wrong; iD is a good editor but the iD team has too often treated the community with contempt (to the point of openly violating the code of conduct that the iD team had given themselves) and ignored valid concerns. The relationship hence cannot continue on trust alone. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Examples at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
Hi, On 5/25/20 00:36, Arne Johannessen wrote: > The default motor_vehicle=* of Norwegian forest roads [1] by law [2] depends > on physical criteria such as tracktype=*, surface=*, smoothness=*, width=*. > The law makes this a judgement call in each and every case. [3] Same with cycling in forests in some parts of Germany, I think that legally it automatically becomes bicycle=no if width<2m but there's often discussions about just how much of the way needs to be <2m to make it off limits for cyclists. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] mspray stealth organized mapping
Hi, the "mspray" accounts were blocked in July 2019 for problematic edits and failing to document properly. The project leader has contacted DWG on 15 May 2020 asking what needs to be done to unblock the accounts, and was informed by us that: > the "mspray" users have only been blocked until they read the block > message; the accounts can be used again now. But they will be blocked > again, and their edits potentially reverted, if they continue to > disregard OSM rules. > > To re-iterate, the issues were: > > * accidentally "squaring" water areas > * no proper changeset comments > * no documentation of the project > > As a general rule, someone encountering an edit by an "mspray" user > should be able to see (through a link from the user profile for example) > what kind of project this is, who is running it, and what the goals of > the project are. Ideally, such project should be discussed with the > community before they commence. And changeset comments should explain > the concrete action, for example "tracing buildings in XY region". Also > the frequent mention of "evwhsdigitalglobe" is puzzling; this is not a > well-known source in OSM. Sometimes users deleted a large number of > buildings e.g. here https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=72427535 > without giving a clear reason (the changeset comment "reveal enumeration > # malaria elimination" is not enough to explain why you deleted dozens > of buildings). If you feel they are disregarding that message, we are happy to block them again. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] our Q site help.openstreetmap.org is dying
Hi, On 5/20/20 17:37, Tobias Wrede wrote: > I wouldn't worry too much about migrating past material to the new site. > Of course that would be a plus but not doing so shouldn't stop us from > migrating to something new and lasting soon. We've taken great care to write our replies in a generic fashion where possible, with the aim of collecting knowledge that others can profit from (instead of asking the same question over and over again). Not copying past answers, at least the last two years or so, would mean we'd have to write all these answers again because the questions will inevitably be asked. I think it would be rather disrespectful to those who have invested a lot of time into building a good body of knowledge in the old system to say "let's throw away this content, main thing is we get a shiny new system". And the alternative of having to keep the old system around in a read-only fashion is not super attractive either. Bye Frederik (frequent provider of answers on help.osm) -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] admin_level and COGs, MPOs, SPDs, Home Rule
Hi, On 5/15/20 23:12, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > I also think that it makes sense to have counties as admin_level=6 in > Connecticut and Rhode Island, if local people still know their counties > and the governments still recognize them for geographic, statistical and > some other legal purposes. I didn't even want to weigh in on the discussion, mine was more a comment on process. You shouldn't delete something that has been there for 10 years and then say "btw let's discuss" ;) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] admin_level and COGs, MPOs, SPDs, Home Rule
(3d attempt, apologies if you should get this several times) Hi, I am tempted to revert stevea's removal of the admin_level=6 from counties (where this was in place for the last 10 years or so, eg https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1839542/history) until a consensus is found that they should actually be removed. It is clear that there is a need for discussion, and I feel that such a discussion should take place *before* a change is made and not *after*. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Moderation?
Hi, has someone switched on moderation for this list, and if so, why? I sent a message 6 hours ago and re-sent it one hour ago and neither seem to have gone through. Have I overlooked an announcement? Or is it just broken? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Let's talk Attribution
Hi, On 13.05.20 14:33, Simon Poole wrote: > as obvious from this thread, it > does confuse people as to what the actual facts are. I know it is tedious, but this thread could certainly benefit from someone providing a recap of the facts, i.e. the core points of the proposed attribution guideline. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Quality and the Openstreetmap value chain
Colin, you're lumping in a few different things together I think. The scarce resource in this project are still mappers, not consumers. The mappers certainly want to make a good and usable map; but if you are faced with a choice of either making mapping more difficult or making using more difficult, I would still argue for ease of mapping any time - especially as, for reasons of diversity, we're trying to extend the "long tail" of mappers who might not be willing and able to learn the ins and outs of public transport relation mapping. So yes, let's give mappers the tools they need and let us have a dialogue with users about what they find useful, but if anything the users want means more complexity for mappers, I'm skeptical. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-us] Someone near Big Bend, TX?
Hi, DWG has received a report from a hiker about a mistake on OSM regarding the "South Rim Trail" / "Boot Spring Trail" at Big Bend in Texas. Is anyone familiar with the area and willing to attempt a fix if I forward details? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-it] Village / Town
Please, feel free to continue this discussion in Italian, I only started in English because I don't speak any ;) Bye Frederik On 02.05.20 22:58, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > >> On 2. May 2020, at 22:08, Andrea Musuruane wrote: >> >> I strongly disagree. The title of "città" is not relevant to the >> classification of a place because it's an honorary title. > > > I am aware of this. And I admit, looking at some examples of the list in the > OP, there are some non-città places that might merit a town status in > OpenStreetMap, going by functional categorization (I find it harder to go the > other way: tag a place as village which has the città title, although there > are some examples of città with less than 1000 inhabitants who have it, > IIRR). I agree with Fintocubano that the presence of amenities like > highschools and universities, courthouses and other important public > functions, important churches, marketplaces, theatres, shops with slightly > bigger importance than just locally, and others are indicators of “town”, > especially if there is a combination of them, and more than just one, while > on the other hand, a big factory or shopping mall can also occur in a village > or outside of a village, just like an airport, which is actually serving a > different city but happens to be within the administrative territory of a > village. > > Ciao Martin > ___ > Talk-it mailing list > Talk-it@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it > -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
[Talk-it] Village / Town
Bibione (VE), frazione (!!!) di San Michele Al Tagliamento, > importante centro turistico estivo con spiaggia di sabbia kilometrica, ha > 2400 ab. ma e' taggata ''town''. > > - Casalbordino, 6200 ab.? Town? Forse si/forse no. E' centro agricolo > importante (vino), con scuole superiori e santuario famoso, vicino a Vasto > che e' piu' hub. Pero' vedi esempio di Palmanova con meno abitanti e di Borgo > Val di Taro. > > - Gissi, 2700 ab. Town? Forse no, anche se e' centro geografico di una certa > importanza per i paesi del medio vastese, con ospedale e scuole superiori > nonche' la zona industriale della Val Sinello nel suo territorio dove > lavorano 5000 persone. > > Stesso discorso per i centri del Molise (e uno del Sannio beneventano) qui > sotto: > > - Trivento > - Agnone > - Montenero di Bisaccia > - Campomarino > - Bojano > - San Martino in Pensilis > - Larino > - Guglionesi > - San Bartolomeo in Galdo > > che sono secondo me citta' - tra i 5000 e 7000 ab - per la loro importanza > geografica, storica, industriale (casearia) e agricoltura (vino, olio) e > essere punto di riferimento per i paesi limitrofi, con scuole superiori, ed > alcuni con tribunali, diocesi ed ospedali. > > Ricordiamoci, inoltre, che buona parte di questi centri hanno il titolo di > citta' conferito dalla Legge Italiana <>, come > recita il TU sugli ordinamenti locali. Anche questo e' un criterio > fondamentale, piu' forte delle nostre valutazioni soggettive, perche' e' il > legislatore che decide. > > Se vuoi ne possiamo ancora discutere in questa sede, ma nel frattempo ti > chiedo di rimuovere cio' che hai cancellato delle mie modifiche, ed in > seguito valuteremo assieme quali tenere e quali rimuovere. Altrimenti mi > vedro' purtroppo costretto a segnalarti al Board di OSM. Grazie. -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-at] Lime Betriebsgebiet Wien
Hi, On 26.04.20 11:45, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: > Können tut man viel, aber so etwas hat in OSM nichts verloren. Lime ist > eine Firma und ihr Betriebsgebiet im Prinzip nur ein Vertragsbestandteil > zwischen der Firma und ihren Kunden, genauso wie Tarifzonen von > Verkehrsbetrieben, Zustell- und Telekomunterunternehmen oder in welche > Bezirke eine Pizzeria gratis liefert. On 26.04.20 11:52, realadry wrote: > Meiner Meinung nach hat eine virtuelle Zone eines privaten Anbieters > auch nichts auf OSM verloren. Diese "Bediengebiete" können sich auch > täglich ändern und sind nicht wie z.B. politische Grenzen gesetzlich > verankert oder in der Realität ersichtlich. Volle Zustimmung zu beiden - ich würde sowas auch nicht mappen. Die Erklärung unter https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/84119500 hätte etwas freundlicher ausfallen können (z.b. dass landuse nicht passt, weil es im Grunde nur für eine Flächennutzung ist, wenn überhaupt müsste es boundary sein, aber auch das ist für OSM nicht passend, und man kann ja umap nehmen, wenn man eine Bediengebiet-Karte machen will). Ich hab das mal angefügt. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
Re: [Talk-de] Dienste für virtuelle OSM-Stammtische - Firefox
Hallo, On 23.04.20 14:22, Markus via Talk-de wrote: > Welche Browser habt Ihr getestet? mit welchem Ergebnis? Ich selber habe Firefox und Chrome benutzt, das ging in der Regel gut, aber unsere Meetings haben auch immer nur 5 Leute. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Dienste für virtuelle OSM-Stammtische
Hallo, On 22.04.20 19:37, Michael Reichert wrote: > Die Geofabrik betreibt seit einiger Zeit für den Eigenbedarf einen > Jitsi-Server. Diesen darf die OSM-Community zum Austausch für > Stammtisch-Ersatzveranstaltungen usw. gerne nutzen. Weil das bei der ganzen Video-Konferenziererei (Stichwort "Zoom") immer wieder ein Thema ist, noch zwei Worte zum Datenschutz. Was wir auf dem Server haben, ist eine Standard-Jitsi-Installation ohne irgendwelche Spezialitäten. Der Apache-Webserver ist von uns so konfiguriert, dass er nur die ersten 24 Bit der IP-Adresse loggt. Jitsi selber scheint die Namen der verwendeten Räume zu loggen, nicht aber, wie die Nutzer heissen, die darin sind. Man kann also sehen, dass ein bestimmter Raum existiert hat und dass sich da so-und-so viele Leute drin aufgehalten haben und aus welchem IP-Adressbereich die kamen (also z.B. "Telekom-DSL-Nutzer" oder "Vodafone-Handy-Nutzer" oder so). Diese Logfiles löschen wir komplett nach 7 Tagen und heben auch keine Kopien auf. Wir schauen die Logfiles in der Regel nicht an und werten sie auch nicht aus (nicht mal um zu zählen, wie viele Leute den Server nutzen oder so); lediglich im Falle einer Störung würden wir vielleicht versuchen, anhand der Logfiles herauszufinden, was passiert ist. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [OSM-talk] Help needed: OBS tutorial for Windows and Mac
Cassandra, On 4/5/20 21:28, Cassandra McCarthy wrote: > I have a Windows install. Should I basically recreate the linked > tutorial, but for Windows? I cannot say how big the differences are. If it's "basically the same" in Windows then it might be better to add comments to the existing tutorial (I did it in my user space because I wasn't sure what the final location should be - don't shy away from editing in my user space). If, on the other hand, things are vastly different on Windows to the point that the tutorial I made will confuse people more than it's good, then by all means do a separate tutorial! Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-ca] Tagging sidewalks as separate ways and issues with bicycle routing
Hi, On 4/3/20 19:45, Martin Chalifoux via Talk-ca wrote: > This morning I checked some large cities namely New-York, Paris, Amsterdam, > London, Berlin. Since OSM is best developed in Europe these capitals make > sense. I just checked Tokyo, Shangai, Seoul, Sydney to sample Asia. None of > them have this sidewalk mapping as separate ways. There are pockets here and there in Europe as well. Mostly what happens is this: 1. Someone wants to make a cool pedestrian/wheelchair/schoolkid routing project 2. The person or team has limited programming capability or budget, and hence must attack the problem with a standard routing engine 3. Standard routing engines do not have the capability to infer a sidewalk network from appropriately tagged streets (i.e. even if the street has a tag that indicates there's sidewalks left and right, the routing engine will not generate individual edges and hence cannot do something like "follow left side of X road here, then cross there, then follow right side" or so 4. Hence, tons of sidewalks (and often also pseudo-ways across plazas) are entered into OSM, to "make the routing work". (5. often people will then find that the routing engine generates instructions like "follow unnamed footway for 1 mile" which leads them to copy the road's name onto the sidewalk geometry... to "make the routing work"). (6. In some countries a pedestrian is allowed to cross a street anywhere. Happily I haven't yet encountered people cris-crossing the streets with footway connections to "make the routing work" in these countries. If you're in a country where you are only allowed to cross at marked crossings then that is easier.) All this is a sad state of affairs; if we had routing engines that could work well with simple "sidewalk" tags (and also make standard assumptions about which road types in which countries would usually have sidewalks even if not explicitly tagged), then we could save ourselves a *lot* of separately mapped sidewalks that really do not add valuable information, and just serve as crutches for routing engines. Personally I am very much opposed to the separate mapping of sidewalks, though I recognize that unless we have routing engines that work without these crutches, I will have a hard time convincing people to stop doing that. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-de] Relationen für Stromladenetzwerke von Ladestationen
Hallo, On 3/22/20 17:42, SteMo wrote: > gibt es Relationen für Stromladenetzwerke von Ladestationen für Kfz? Ich > konnte zumindest bisher weder im Wiki noch über die OSM-Website etwas > dazu finden. Relationen sind auch nicht gedacht, um Gruppen von Objekten zu bilden. Wenn ich eine solche Relation beim Mappen entdecken würde, würde ich sie vermutlich löschen. Bitte fange sowas gar nicht erst an. Wenn jemand gern alle Ladestationen des "Stromnetz Hamburg" sehen will, kann er das allein anhand des an der Station angebrachten Operator-Tags mittels Overpass machen. Dazu ist keine Relation notwendig, im Gegenteil, sie würde nur den Pflegeaufwand erhöhen. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[OSM-talk] healthsites.io breaks OSM data, do not use
Hi, the "healthsites.io" web app allows you to contribute data to OSM, however if you modify existing OSM objects, it throws away all tags it does not know of. Until this bug is fixed, please refrain from using healthsites.io! You can track progress here https://github.com/healthsites/healthsites/issues/1357#issuecomment-602068556 Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] OSM is not the place for dissemination of authoritative data sets
Hi, a propos a recent statement from our friends at Facebook in which they make plans for the future of our project, https://tech.fb.com/map-with-ai-updates/ > Beyond AI-based data sets, one of the biggest challenges for OSM is importing > even readily available authoritative data sets > ... > our hope is that RapiD can become a tool that’s simple enough for anyone to > import and verify new data sets and to make use of these powerful tools I would like to reiterate that the "challenge" is not that it is difficult to import "authoritative data sets"; the problem is that authoritative data sets are fundamentally incompatible with the way we operate in OpenStreetMap. To quote just an obvious example, the government of India certainly has an authoritative data set about where their boundaries are, it's just that this does not align with facts on the ground and hence our data is different. The past has shown that petrol station chains also have "authoritative" data sets about their stations but they are riddled with bugs, and not suitable for wholesale import. I think that someone who cannot respect these basic tenets of OpenStreetMap - that mappers on the ground have the last word on what gets into OSM and what not - shouldn't be allowed to publish software that interacts with our database. I think we should disallow any contributions made with RapID/map-with-ai and friends. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Changeset Governance [was: Announcing Daylight Map Distribution]
Hi, On 3/10/20 18:48, Sören Reinecke via talk wrote: > *Spirit of Changeset Governance:* Basically it introduces a way to > distinguish a changeset made during a survey from a changeset made > during armchair mapping using information received from imagery or > external data. In the spirit of more professional Quality Assurance a > way for us and the performers to better control validation processes and > to take actions more precisely. Nothing against the idea but what happened to the good old source tag where source=survey would point to mappers on the ground, and source=XYZ aerial imagery would point to armchairing? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The benefits of cross-linking OSM and Wikidata
Hi, On 05.03.20 15:25, Sören Reinecke via talk wrote: > couldn't we do a vote about that? Would it be possible for the OSMF to > maintain and coordinate such a voting. No. The OSMF is not at liberty to grant *anyone* exceptions from the ODbL. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSRM-talk] Shared memory with one process
Hi, On 2/27/20 20:45, Rohit Sivakumar wrote: > Is there any benefit to configuring osrm using shared memory when I'm > only running one osrm process per server ? The benefit of holding the routing graph in shared memory is that you can (provided you have enough memory) spin up a new shared memory segment to hold a new, updated routing graph, and then switch from old to new in an instant, whereas not using shared memory means you have to terminate routed, move the files around, and start it up again which can mean a service interruption of a few minutes. Other than that I am not aware of any benefits (even if you *were* running several routing engines on the same server using the same routing graph, which also is not something that makes sense to me). Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ OSRM-talk mailing list OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] nomoj de internaciaj objektoj / nazwy obiektów międzynarodowych / names of international objects
Hi, On 26.02.20 13:13, Maarten Deen wrote: > Will it be nothing in the name tag and are we then going to complain > that the opencarto style falls back to name:en? Increasingly, I think the absence of a name tag wouldn't even be noticed. JOSM already shows the name tags in the editing user's language; other editors might do that too. If a fallback to name:en were added to OSM Carto (or more precisely, a fallback to a configurable language which would be configured to be English on openstreetmap.org) then you could probably remove the name tag from oceans with hardly anyone noticing a change. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] MapRoulette - cryptic tasks
Hi, a user started adding "trace_zoom" and "trace_zoom:range" tags to objects in OSM, and closer inspection led to this MapRoulette task: https://maproulette.org/challenge/12836/task/42414493 It claims to be created by "MappingHuman" and carries these instructions: --- snip --- use your most preferred imagery has to be familiar with Solving Multiple Tasks Together before forwarding completions improveWay tracing, lock zoom level add trace_zoom=* if non-exist, ensure to match zoom add trace_zoom:range=* if non-exist, to indicate approx. trace_zoom levels add source on Object or changeset freely include comments Changeset comments please consider including hashtags/comment-words: mappinghuman #M.H #alongside_A.I #maproulette for changeset analysis --- snip --- I am at a loss here. Who is "Mapping Human" and what is their goal with this? Which objects have they selected for editing and according to what criteria? Why are they apparently instructing users to add unusual tags (trace_toom, trace_zoom:range) to OSM? Why do they request to "add source on Object or changeset" when adding source tags on objects is generally recommended against? What are the cryptic changeset comments "#M.H #alongside_A.I"? Is there any way to find answers other than sending a private message to the pseudonymous "Mapping Human" through MapRoulette? How many other equally cryptic tasks are there on MapRoulette? Is there even any quality control when people create new MapRoulette tasks? Or at least some sort of four-eyes principle? Or at least a transparency "best practice" that would lead to people explaining who they are, what they want to achieve with a certain task, how many tasks they're running and what instructions they are giving to users? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] nomoj de internaciaj objektoj / nazwy obiektów międzynarodowych / names of international objects
Hi, On 23.02.20 23:38, Alan Mackie wrote: > This conversation is petty, repetitive and tedious in the extreme It is tediuos but not without merit. Yes the project was founded by white Englishmen but in other departments we're trying to extend our reach and make sure that we are also interesting for non-white non-English non-men. It is not, in principle, wrong to question some of our existing assumptions, values, or decisions. I think that while in this particular case the question was asked by someone on a mission to propagate an aspirational "international language", it *is* worth discussing if (or why) the "name" tag on a body of water bordered by a number of countries neither of which has English as an official language, should contain the English name. We're currently using English in such situations "by default"; none of our existing written policies can explain why we do that. If the result of this discussion is an agreement in the community that using the English name in the "name" tag whenever a feature is bordered by two or more countries using different languages (or whatever) is "the rigth thing to do in OSM", then the discussion will have been valuable. We're not there yet though; we're kind of shouting down Tomek because he's aggressively questioning the status quo, but we haven yet managed to come up with a rule that would fortify the status quo. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-us] Changes for USA data on Geofabrik Download Server
Dear US OSMers, for historical reasons, the layout of data for the USA on the Geofabrik download server has always been a bit peculiar: There wasn't a file for "all of the US" - there was a file for North America (including Canada and Mexico), and then there were files for the "Census Regions" (US Midwest, US Norhteast and so on, and for individual states. (The concrete historical reason is that there used to be a time when due to TIGER imports the US extract would have been about 95% of the North America file anyway, and not much would be gained by clipping Canada. And Mexico was initially not even part of North America on the download server, due to my own lack of geographic competence.) I'm in the process of straightening that out, so that there will be the standard structure (one file for North America, below that a file for USA and its neighbours, and below that the different states) in the future. In detail, this will mean the following changes: (a) for download links (pbf, bz2, diff directories etc) * North America remains unchanged. * US states (and Norcal/Socal) remain unchanged. * new http://download.geofabrik.de/north-america/us-latest.osm.pbf and ancillary files * the five census regions (Midwest, Northeast, Pacific, South, West) will be demoted by one directory from currently /north-america/us-midwest-latest.osm.pbf to /north-america/us/us-midwest-latest.osm.pbf - but I will set up redirects so that the old locations still work for a while. (b) for HTML pages * http://download.geofabrik.de/north-america.html will drop the US states and Census regions and instead list just three sub regions (Canada, USA, Mexico) * new http://download.geofabrik.de/north-america/us.html to list US states and census regions. I will make these changes incrementally over the coming days. On the whole, this should cause minimum disruption; the only thing that will stop working is when someone has written instructions somewhere that go like "open the North America download page and select Iowa from the list" but I hope that people would then be able to guess that maybe they need to click on USA first. If this has any unintended consequences let me know and we'll find a way to fix it. Bye Frederik PS: Just like with other countries, the "all of US" file is cut out of its parent continent file (North America) which means that those bits of the USA that lie outside North America will not be included. This mainly affects Puerto Rico. I'll be making a standalone Puerto Rico file available in the Central America section. -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution guideline update
Hi, On 19.02.20 14:38, Simon Poole wrote: > As a thought experiment consider planning a trip around your fav place > boundary with OSM, going for the walk with an OSM based map in your > hand so that you stay on course, and then writing a a blog post about > your experience. For the purpose of the argument forget about > substantial vs. non-substantial and Produced Works vs. Derivative Databases. > Is the blog post a derivative of OSM? In my mind I always ask the question: How essential was OSM for what is being done? How much of your hike remains if you remove OSM from the picture? How much of a trained AI remains if you remove OSM from the picture? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution guideline update
Hi, On 19.02.20 13:14, Christoph Hormann wrote: > the document then almost exclusively presents > supposed exceptions from the attribution requirement of the ODbL. I've just read the document for the first time this morning, so I don't have the context of prior discussions and I think your wholesale dismissal isn't justified. > Or in other words: It is the preemptive surrender of the OSMF in front > of massive corporate interests. I think that the document has quite a few bits that do not exactly sound like a surrender, for example: * "compliance with these guidelines today does not mean that we will not propose or ask for different attribution in the future if it promotes our shared goals" - a good assertion of our rights. * "Except for small maps or multiple data sources, as described below, attribution must be visible without requiring the user to click on an icon or similar interaction." - Your critique focuses on the exceptions, but saying clearly that an "(i)" is *generally* not sufficient is a good and necessary step. On the whole, I find that the document does a good job at fleshing out the "reasonably calculated to make ... aware" from the ODbL. > Not to mention the most blatant attempts at sneaking corporate wishlist > items into the guideline are all still there - like the 1 m^2 map > area limit that has been conjured out of thin air True, this is a bit strange, it would have to be replaced by "an area of up to 1,000 inhabitants" as per the "Substantial" guideline - though I don't find the difference outrageous, in fact the 10.000m² will only be *friendlier* towards non-attribution than the "1.000 inhabitatants" in densely populated urban areas. I guess that 100m x 100m is simply easier to check than whether the area has 950 or 1050 people living there! > the > section on machine learning models which is completely out of place in > an attribution guideline and which indicates that some corporate data > user wants this kind of "blank check" really badly. I agree that the attribution guideline should not be the place where we discuss what does and what does not constitute a derivative database. Perhaps the section should be removed altogether. In my opinion, if you train your AI black box with OSM data then everything that comes out of your AI black box later is a derived work and must come under the ODbL. I welcome the acknowledgement about "over-trained" systems creating ODbL output, but I think it doesn't go nearly far enough. Everyone and their dog are crawling over OSM with their AI stuff in order to build machines that can "map automatically", but essentially it is our brainpower that allows them to train their machines so it's our license. I acknowledge Kathleen Lu's recent remark about the ODbL being very clear on a derived product having to "contain" OSM in some way which would not be the case here; but I think this calls for working on ODbL 1.1 to rectify the issue, rather than sitting back and saying "uh, guess there's nothing we can do then". Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] IME no proposals needed | Re: Creation of "Data Items" by bot for undocumented tags
Hi, On 19.02.20 07:33, Rory McCann wrote: > I don't know what your experience with the OSM wiki is, but I've created > new wiki pages for new tags, without bothering with proposal pages. I have occasionally moved such pages into the user's name space when I found them to (by content, if not by name) to be proposals for something, rather than a documentation of something already established. I felt that was ok since there's no rule against moving stuff into user name spaces ;) Anyway, I'm fine as long as we agree that data items shouldn't be created for tags that don't have a human-readable page, and human-readable pages should be created by humans not bots. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Creation of "Data Items" by bot for undocumented tags
Hi, On 18.02.20 18:28, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > Therefore, I propose that Yurikbot be changed to only add new data > items for documented tags which already have a wiki page in at least > one language. I do not see a benefit to creating date items for > undocumented tags. Agree, and I would also request that *any* automated change to the Wiki be discussed before it is implemented. The use of bots puts too much power in the hands of those who write them, and this must be balanced by a requirement to involve the non-bot-writing part of the community before launch. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] nomoj de internaciaj objektoj / nazwy obiektów międzynarodowych / names of international objects
Hi, On 17.02.20 21:43, Tomek wrote: > Object 1: > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jardin_El_Capricho_Bench_at_Plaza_de_los_Emperadores.jpg > Bench with no writing, mapped to OSM as: > amenity = bench > name = Bench > Is it right to remove the label "name" according to the "I'm mapping > what's on the ground" rule? Yes, I think it is ok, mainly because benches don't usually have names and if they do, the name will not be "Bench". (This applies to removing the name while you're mapping in the area anyway - if you were to search for all amenity=bench name=Bench and remove the name, that would be a mechanical edit in need of prior discussion.) Some benches could have names that might perhaps not always be marked by a sign, just as e.g. some very old trees have names. It is unusual for a bench or tree to have a name but not generally wrong. > Object 2: > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Turquoise_Water.jpg > Water, certainly no writing indicating its name. > Local name: nobody, because nobody lives there. > Mapped in OSM as: > place = ocean > name = Pacific Ocean > But Poles call it "Ocean Spokojny", French-speaking "Océan Pacifique", > so it would be fair to add the tags name:pl, name:fr, etc. > Is it OK to remove the "name" tag according to the same rule? It is a different case from the above (to be comparable with the above case the name would have to be "Ocean"). I don't have strong feelings about this but for the sake of usability I think I'd leave the name in place. Even though English is not my mother tongue I have absolutely no problem with having a name tag on an international thing in English. In fact I believe I have a bigger problem with people for whom this English name is a problem, because I would regard that attitude as fundamentalist and quarrelsome. I'd prefer if they find other battlegrounds to fight for justice than OSM. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Is OSM Anti-Fascist? (was: Cease use of OpenStreetMap/Antifa logo)
Hi, I agree that OSM should remain un-political where possible, just so that political squabbles do not interfere with mapping. At one "Local Chapters Congress" at one of the recent SotM conferences, I remember someone from an African country saying that they already faced difficulties setting up an OSM organisation in that country because other people believed OSM was something subversive that would threaten established powers and values. And what we do is of course subversive when viewed from an authoritarian perspective (what, everyone to make their own maps that are not government-sanctioned, how dare you). I agree with Florian that OSM is deeply anti-Fascist in what it does, but that is as far as it goes: The things we do go against authoritarianism, against Fascism - we as a group or we as and organisation do not, and we do not endorse political organisations, be they pro or anti Fascist. Our official position should be that we are apolitical, even if our activities might not be! On the other hand, where governments propose or make laws that would make it harder for us to map, I think we should oppose that in a structured way, as an organisation - provided we have the time and energy for that. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OTG rule, borders & mountains existing | Re: Crimea situation - on the ground
Hi,
On 2020-02-12 10:28, Colin Smale wrote:
> Where a boundary coincides with the centre line of
> a road for example, and there is a discrepancy in OSM between the
> locations of the two, there should be a recognition that the
> professionally surveyed locations are more likely to be correct
I disagree.
What you are requesting here is that we blindly defer to authorities. "I
cannot verify this - but a professional surveyor with his $10k equipment
claims it is so - hence I guess I have to believe it."
I think this is not how OpenStreetMap should be operating. I can see how
to a professional surveyor the idea must be painful that someone comes
along with their rubbish equipment and makes a change, but we *are* a
project of hobbyists and volunteers, and something that a hobbyist and
volunteer cannot verify ("don't touch this unless you invest $10k in
equipment first!!!") should not be in OSM, and we should not worship
precision that we cannot create ourselves.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Crimea situation - on the ground
Hi,
I don't want to discuss this issue in detail but the on-the-ground rule
is an important cornerstone of what we do in OSM. If anyone wants to use
the Crimea situation (and any possible exceptions made from the OTG rule
because of it) to get rid of the OTG rule, or if anyone because of
political reasons wants to argue away the OTG rule ("has never existed"
etc.etc.) then I would fiercely oppose that.
Whatever your feelings are regarding Russia and Crimea (I notice that
Tomas hails from a country sandwiched between Russia and a Russian
exclave where being illegally occupied by Russia is a realistic fear,
whereas Martin happily fans the flames from a safe distance of over
2,000km away from the nearest Russian tank) - don't sacrifice the OTG rule.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] "OSMUK-in-a-box"
Hi, On 06.02.20 13:29, Jez Nicholson wrote: > I come from a database background, and when a question isn't easily > answered with Taginfo or Overpass Turbo I jump to my trusty local > postgres database of UK data. I have a script that downloads the British > Isles from Geofabrik, loads it with osm2pgsql, adds some useful indexes, > and then removes Eire. Thereafter I can run SQL queries across the whole > database to get 'UK-wide' result I would recommend using --hstore-all instead of just --hstore because this gives you *all* tags in the "tags" column and therefore makes some analyses easier (cf. some of the examples below). It is certainly a good approach to answer complicated questions, and also an excellent training ground for people to hone their SQL skills. Some scribbles from a recent training: "what are the most frequently used key on a polygon": select count(*) as c, (each(tags)).key as k from planet_osm_polygon group by k order by c desc limit 10; or "what are the most frequently used key-value combos": select count(*) as c, each(tags) as k from planet_osm_polygon group by k order by c desc; or "which are the longest hiking routes": select osm_id, st_length(way::geography) as l, tags from planet_osm_line where tags->'route' = 'hiking' order by l desc; Having said that, for the easier questions there's also the per-region taginfo on Geofabrik (it's a bit beta still but good enough) - it doesn't actually feature the UK as an area but you can do England/Scotland/Wales separately: http://taginfo.geofabrik.de/europe/great-britain/england/ Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-de] State of the Map in Kapstadt - Unterstützung für Reisekosten
(Crosspost mit Forum) Hallo, das "Scholarship"-Programm der State of the Map-Konferenz ist nicht nur dazu da, um mittellosen Mappern aus "armen" Ländern die komplette Reise zu finanzieren; es soll durchaus auch mit kleineren Reisekosten-Zuschüssen dafür sorgen, dass Mapper aus "reichen" Ländern, für die es sonst zu teuer wäre, eine Teilnahme erwägen können. Man kann sich bis zum 15.2. um eine Unterstützung bewerben; Details hier: https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2020/01/18/sotm2020-applications-for-scholarships-open/ Da kann man (leider erst auf Seite zwei eines Google-Formulars, nicht hauen, ich hab mir das nicht ausgedacht) dann eintragen, welche Art von Unterstützung man brauchen würde, um teilzunehmen: * Admission (freier Eintritt) * Accommodation (Unterkunft) * Full travel costs (komplette Reisekosten) * Travel grant covering a portion of your costs (Zuschuss zu den Reisekosten) und bei letzterem gibt man dann an, welchen Betrag man brauchen würde, um sich die Reise leisten zu können. Ich schreib das nur, um dem häufigen Missverständnis zu begegnen, dass man allein weil man vielleicht aus einem "reichen" Land kommt, automatisch ganz hinten in der Schlange steht - auch Mapper aus Deutschland können Unterstützung kriegen. Antrag stellen kostet nichts, ausser ein bisschen Zeit. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #497 2020-01-21-2020-01-27
Hi, On 04.02.20 14:10, Colin Smale wrote: >> The Geofabrik download server has full history files for every region it >> offers. Unlike the non-history extracts. these files are only available >> for users who log in with their OSM user name. > Aah, thanks Frederik, I didn't know about this. But the text on the site > seems to imply that it is only for "internal use" and I cannot use this > data for a public service, e.g. a website to animate changes in admin > boundaries. Can I get round that by cleaning out certain data? Hm, the wording is a bit unfortunate really. Of course this "internal use only" applies to the personal data in the file which according to (the LWG's interpretation of) the GDPR is ok to use for OSM's own purposes but not for blasting it out into the world. The non-personal-data history is free for everyone to use, and Geofabrik *could* actually make two different history files available, one with and one without user data, it's just that these files are a niche interest anyway so we thought one version is sufficient. This means that if you derive anything like an animated map from the data, that's totally fine; only if you were to publish something that involves user data should you think twice about your data protection regulations. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #497 2020-01-21-2020-01-27
Hi, On 04.02.20 13:22, Colin Smale wrote: > Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't remember ever seeing > regional full history files. The Geofabrik download server has full history files for every region it offers. Unlike the non-history extracts. these files are only available for users who log in with their OSM user name. > that will be millions of API calls to get the full history > of every node, way and relation involved. If it has to be, then it has > to be. Famous last words before being blocked on the API ;) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] When is your doctor a clinic?
Hi,
On 1/23/20 22:42, Paul Johnson wrote:
> There may be a disconnect with what the US (or that spammer) means.
> Could I get a clarification on the difference between "doctors" and
> "clinic" as you understand it?
Personally (and in my country - Germany) there's precious little I would
tag as a clinic; in everyday language we use the (german version of) the
word clinic more or less synonymous with "hospital", with the possible
exception that we'd also apply clinic to something that deals
exclusively with non-illness-related things like e.g. a beauty clinic or
a drug rehab clinic. In my language, a clinic would always be something
where you can (and usually do) have a bed and stay for longer until the
treatment is over. A building with a couple of different medical
practitioners might be a "Gemeinschaftspraxis" ("shared practice") or
perhaps an "Ärztehaus" (doctors' house) but not a "Klinik". Then again
these would hardly ever be open 24/7...
I'm not trying to apply my understanding of medical establishments to
the US - just asking what the general understanding is on your side of
the pond. Does Jmapb's distinction sound more or less ok for others too?
He wrote:
> amenity=doctors:
> * are usually operated by (and even named for) a particular doctor (or a
> small partnership)
> * are usually either a general practice or specialize in a small number of
> areas
> * often require an appointment
> * usually have typical daytime business hours
>
> amenity=clinic:
> * are usually named like a business
> * feature a larger medical staff, often rotating
> * offer treatment for a wide variety of issues
> * generally accept walk-in patients
> * often have extended hours, including 24/7
Is this "usually named ..." really a thing - I have a feeling that
especially with dentists, even (what seems to me like) one-doctor
practices will often be called some thing like "Bay Area Smiles Family
Dentist" or something like that.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] When is your doctor a clinic?
Hi, hunting down spam in OSM I often stumble over medical establishments in the US that have maximum-length description tags exhorting just how beatiful your smile will be after your visit to that dentist, etc.; I also find many objects that sound like a simple doctor's practice but are entered as "amenity=clinic", e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4574659098 Especially in the US, when do you use amenity=doctors and when amenity=clinic - is this essentially self-determined by the business, or are there criteria that you as a mapper apply to select which to use? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Deleting template parameters copied to data items
Hi, On 15.01.20 14:03, Christoph Hormann wrote: > This is a move that has been a long time coming as part of a piecemeal > effort by some to establish a technocratic rule on the OSM wiki by > moving central content out of the control of the mappers into the > domain of data items with higher hurdles of participation due to poor > ergonomics (the whole concept of requiring human editors to deal with > numerical IDs for features that already have a unique identifier in OSM > by design never ceases to amaze me) and with an established ability of > the technocrats to control the crowd sourced editing work with bots. I agree with this sentiment whole-heartedly and have commented the wiki discussion accordingly. > The real discussion that needs to be done is how we can get to a better > documentation of the actual use of tags by humans for humans. We have > had some useful discussion on this at SotM last year and in a follow-up > here: Over the years, a couple of people have time and time again suggested that we get down and make a nice, curated, text-based catalogue of tags maintained by a team, potentially on a git-like system where pull requests can be submitted by everyone, but maintainers have to approve them. I was always on the fence about this, because it would install a maintainer team with more powers than the average user. But in the face of a wiki that is more and more moving into a direction where you need to have a degree in Wikidata to even participate, and where anything you contribute will be mowed over three times by this bot and that bot in order to fit into some structure that someone else has devised with practically zero community oversight, I think I'll prefer the git-based human-readable "tag atlas". Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-de] w...@noreply.openstreetmap.org
Hallo, diese Mails haben in der Regel den Betreff: "Benutzer so-und-so hat zu einem Änderungssatz kommentiert, an dem Du interessiert bist" - wenn Du uns das gleich gesagt hättest, dann hätten wir gewusst, worum es geht, nämlich um Nachrichten, die von OSM generiert werden, wenn jemand ein Changeset von Dir kommentiert. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[OSM-talk] international project communication (was: names of international objects)
Hi, so we've heard a broad range of opinions here, and no doubt many things have been said that will with pleasure be pulled out of context in years to come, proving how unwelcoming OSM is to anyone who doesn't submit to the diktat of English. I would like to stress: 1. You do not need English for normal everyday participation in OpenStreetMap. Our website and editors are translated into dozens of languages, and regionally you can do your mapping in your language without having to discuss with anyone from another country or continent. In fact, if you are local to a place, your local knowledge will trump that of overseas English-speakers in 10 of 10 cases. 2. By nature, once things require agreement between different groups speaking different languages, a pragmatic solution needs to be found that allows people from these groups to communicate. By default, this will be English; though if the involved parties agree to use a different language that's just fine. 3. It is a valid question whether something like a body of water bordered by 5 countries, none of which uses English, (a) should have a name tag with an English name in it, and (b) should be rendered on openstreetmap.org with its English name (both are independent of each other). 4. This is not a matter that should be driven by zealotry; we need to be pragmatic here. If a decision is made to change something, it might make sense to decide on "phasing something out" and "phasing something else in", or decide to make a change at a later date, so that map style makers etc. could prepare adequately. 5. The usual language on this list is English. If you cannot use English but want to make an important point, post in your language and we'll make an effort to understand, or those who share your language will translate. If you *can* use English but don't use it because you want to make the point that the reliance on English is giving an unfair advantage to those who can use English - your point is taken, but see #1... Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-de] Weihnachtskarten 2019
Hallo, im letzten Jahr konnten wir mit unserer "Weihnachtskarten-Aktion" vielen von Euch eine kleine Freude machen. Wir hatten auch unseren Spaß, und daher wiederholen wir das in diesem Jahr nach bewährtem Muster. Wir bieten Euch hier auf der deutschen Mailingliste und im deutschen Forum an, kostenlos eine große Karte von einem Gebiet Eurer Wahl auszudrucken und Euch zu schicken. Das Angebot gilt nur bis morgen (Donnerstag) mittag. Wir drucken alle Aufträge in der Reihenfolge, in der sie reinkommen, und nur so lange, bis wir am Donnerstag abend nach Hause gehen. Da bringen wir dann auch gleich alles zur Post. Wenn ihr eine Karte zugeschickt haben möchtet, brauchen wir von Euch: * entweder ein fertiges PNG (bzw Link zum Download desselben) * oder einen Link zu einer Karte, die ihr auf Hartmuts MyOSMatic-Seite erstellt habt (https://print.get-map.org/) * oder die Koordinaten eines Ausschnitts (alternativ Link zu einem Rechteck auf tools.geofabrik.de/calc), dann erzeugen wir ein Bild im Standard-Carto-Stil oder um deutschen OSM-Stil und außerdem * das Papierformat - wenn nichts angegeben ist, drucken wir "Super A0" mit 15035x10559 Pixel, ca 1,30x0,90m * die Adresse, wo es hingehen soll. Wir verschicken nur an deutsche Adressen, sonst wird der Spaß zu teuer! Das ganze per Email an weihnachtsdr...@geofabrik.de Wir drucken die Karte, falten sie, und verschicken sie in einem Umschlag im Format B4. Wir übernehmen alle Kosten, auch das Porto. (Wer die Karte gern gerollt und nicht gefaltet haben will: Das geht auch, aber dann müsst ihr uns eine DHL-Paketmarke "Paket bis 5kg" mit Eurer Empfänger-Anschrift als PDF generieren und zuschicken; das Porto von EUR 5,99 zahlt dann ihr. Die quaderförmige Packung passt in keine Packstation.) Die Aktion ist als Dankeschön für die unermüdliche Arbeit der Mapperinnen und Mapper in OSM gedacht. Bitte verzichtet darauf, das ganze in sozialen Medien weiterzuverbreiten - bis sich das rumspricht, ist die Warteschlange eh voll, und es gibt nur lange Gesichter. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] OSMF-Wahlergebnis
Hallo, das Wahlergebnis: 1. Guillaume Rischard 2. Allan Mustard 3. Mikel Maron 4. Rory McCann Die Satzungsänderungen sind alle angenommen, bis auf die 3. der drei Term-Limit-Abstimmungen, das bedeutet, dass jemand nach einer Pause wieder antreten kann, auch wenn er 6 Jahre im Board war. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data
Hi, On 14.12.19 06:41, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > Can you point me to legal definition > of "substantial part"? There is none, hence: https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Substantial_-_Guideline Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data
Hi, On 13.12.19 19:28, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk wrote: > “Derivative Database” – Means a database based upon the Database, and > includes any translation, adaptation, arrangement, modification, or any > other alteration of the Database or of a Substantial part of the > Contents. Interesting. I knew the ODbL text but I have always glossed over this definition, assuming that "well you know what derived means". I'll have to ponder this for a while, it changes some assumptions I had made. It would mean that, for example, a database that contains a count of all pubs in each municipality, or a database that contains the average travel time from a building in a city to the nearest hospital, or a heatmap of ice cream parlours, would not fall under the ODbL because these, while derived from OSM, do not actually contain a copy of anything in OSM (and neither could they possibly be used to reassemble OSM). I had until now assumed that such works would definitely fall under the ODbL but you are right, they don't really fit the "Derivative Database" definition. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data
Kathleen, On 12.12.19 23:40, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk wrote: > No, ODbL does not apply to any database that does not include OSM data. Are you sure about this? Let me give an example: > If I understand your usecase correctly, Matthais, you are essentially > checking your list against OSM boundaries. If something is both on your > list and within the OSM boundary, then you say 'yes, this goes on the > secondary list.' Then you want to publish your secondary list. There is > no OSM data in the secondary list so it is not a Derivative Database. Let us assume I have a list of all streets in Germany with their geometry, from a non-OSM source. I want to divide these into two groups: streets that have at least one pub, and streets that have no pub. Using OSM information about the location of pubs, I count the number of pubs along each street, allowing me to make the desired separation. I end up with a database of "streets that have at least one pub". This database does not include OSM data. In my eyes, though, it is still *derived* from OSM data. It is the result of an algorithmic process that has made use of OSM data; if you will, the OSM data residue is in the name/description of my new database: "roads with pubs". It is derived from OSM; it could not have been made without OSM. Do you disagree? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data
Hi, On 12.12.19 07:59, matthias.straetl...@buerotiger.de wrote: > I want to use polygons (district boundaries) from OSM dataset to select > points for a proprietary dataset. > The OSM dataset might be altered trivially (f.e. boundaries might be merged > where needed). > The proprietary data isn't allowed to be used freely and is incompatible with > ODBL. > > The result of the intersections is a geodatabase, which doesn't contain any > OSM data. In my NAL opinion, the result will be derived from OSM data and therefore inherits the ODbL license. This does, however, not mean that you have to publish it; but *if* you publish (or "publilcy use") it, then it has to be available under ODbL. If you just use it internally then it is still ODbL but that doesn't matter to you. As an exception to the above, if the number of boundaries you use is less than 100 - an crucially this could be after the trivial alterations you mention - then the extract you are making is considered not to be substantial (see https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Substantial_-_Guideline) and therefore does not have to be under ODbL. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
Hi, On 06.12.19 12:01, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > place=continent nodes make no sense at all True but there will likely be some great mind who, just to get a nice "AFRICA" label on zoom level 2, will create a multipolygon encompassing every single piece of coastline around the continent and call that multipolygon "Africa". Every time some poor soul splits up the coastline somewhere in Africa they will wonder why the upload takes five minutes, and soon the Africa multipolygon will be at version 12345... Seeing that this is the inevitable alternative, maybe the place=continent node is the lesser evil. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
Hi, On 06.12.19 11:46, Martin Constantino–Bodin wrote: > The question I would like to ask is about the relevance of having a > “name” tag in places where there is no default language—knowing that all > the “name:en”, “name:eo”, etc. are already there. I can imagine that > some renderers might expect to always be a tag “name”, and I wonder how > fixable this is (especially in the cases where there is a localised > name). I think that the absence of these features on standard maps would not hurt anyone. "European Union" or "Atlantic Ocean" aren't usually rendered anyway. And it would increase the incentive for map makers to use the name:xx values and make maps in the language requested by the viewer. I have reverted a recent edit in which the "name" tag was removed from some "international" objects by a user (on the grounds of "if I cannot have an Esperanto name then nobody shall have a name for that object!"), however in principle, if the community came to the conclusion that this was a good idea, I would not be opposed. At one point in the distant past, there were two groups edit-warring about the name tag for Jerusalem, and it was decided that Jerusalem should not have a name tag at all until they agree on one. Perhaps that idea could be rolled out globally. We've even had the radical idea of removing the "name" tag everywhere, and instead have some way of tagging the default language for regions, so that, if you wanted to emulate today's rendering of the "local name" for everything, you'd first have to look up the local language prefix and then use the appropriate name:xx - but this was considered too complicated. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] nomoj de internaciaj objektoj / nazwy obiektów międzynarodowych ? names of international objects
Hi, On 06.12.19 09:55, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > you should argue why it is a good idea to have _one_ standard language > in the project. IMHO it excludes many billions of people from > participating, Let's be careful with the word "exclude". Does the pizzeria around the corner "exclude" billions of people from eating there because its menu is written only in Italian? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM very old data
Hi, On 29.11.19 10:43, Tom Ka wrote: > What it > the meaning - deleted segments, so should I ignore those ways? I guess so. > 2) from 061205 the size increases, so I guess it contain some > reasonable data, but for older (planet-061128.osm.bz2 - > planet-060818.osm.bz2 ) there is size jump, which is strange. Is > there any reason for this? Possibly https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Old_TIGER_Import_2005/2006 Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-bd] Discussion: Issues with name localization for Bangladesh
Hello everyone, the Data Working Group has been made aware of this discussion. I am from Germany and I have very little knowledge about Bangladesh, so I would initially like to ask three basic questions that will help me understand the situation: 1. What is the status of English in everyday life in Bangladesh? Can everyone who uses the Internet also communicate in written English, or would a requirement of "please write your changeset comment in English" exclude certain parts of the population? Also, what about signage - will signs with street names or city names contain Bangla, English, or both names? For comparison, here in Germany, while nowadays most kids learn English at school, a significant portion of people who are 50 years or older would not be able to communicate in English unless they had higher education. 2. What is the relationship between the "OpenStreetMap Bangladesh Foundation" and the mapper community in Bangladesh? How many mappers are members in the OSMBDF? How can mappers join the organisation, and how do they democratically influence what the OSMBDF does? I checked the web site but I found no information about that. 3. A general question about mailing list etiquette. Is it usual, in mailing list discussions in Bangladesh, to refer to other participants with their last name? If you were to reply to my post with "Dear Mr Ramm", would that be (a) normal, (b) an expression of respect, or (c) an expression of "you are not part of my group so I will not use your first name"? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-bd mailing list Talk-bd@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-bd
Re: [Talk-at] OSMF-Mitgliederversammlung: Beschlussanträge | Aufruf zur Mitgliedschaft
Hallo, On 11/8/19 23:38, Michael Reichert wrote: > Es gibt eine Reihe an Anträgen, über die abgestimmt werden soll > (Nummerierung von mir). Ja, das wird jetzt etwas verwirrend, weil die Nummerierung in dem offiziellen Wahlzettel anders sein wird. Der Punkt 4: > 4. Feste Amtszeitbegrenzungen und -beschränkungen wird nämlich aus drei Abstimmungen bestehen, grob umschrieben so: 4. Festlegung der Amtszeit auf 2 Perioden (1 Peride = Abstand zwischen zwei Vorstandswahlen, also normal 1 Jahr), man kann beliebig oft zur Wahl stehen 5. Einschränkung von 4. auf "man kann nur zur Wahl stehen, wenn man innerhalb der letzten 8 Vorstandswahlen nicht schon dreimal gewählt wurde" - praktisch also eine Amtszeitbeschränkung auf 6 Jahre, die durch eine 2jährige Pause zurückgesetzt wird 6. weitere Einschränkung von 5 durch Streichung der "innerhalb der letzten 8 Vorstandswahlen", d.h. eine harte Amtszeitbeschränkung auf 6 Jahre Ferner wird es einen bisher nicht diskutierten Punkt 7 geben, das ist eine kosmetische Änderung am §81 (ersetze "Annual General Meeting" durch "General Meeting"). Die von Michael als Nr. 5 geführte Beitragsbefreiung ist dann Abstimmung Nr. 8; für "associate members" ist das die einzige Abstimmung, an der sie teilnehmen dürfen. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM very old data
Hi, On 25.10.19 16:18, Tom Ka wrote: > OK, one question that remains unanswered will be: what was the first > object in Czech republic :-) Nodes are generally numbered in ascending order, and have been from the start. Since anything that can be mapped either is a node or depends on a node, it should be possible to find the node with the lowest node id in the Czech Republic. I'll offer https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/172508 - the web site says "Version #1 · Changeset #209315 - edited Tue 06 Feb 2007". At the same time this node is already present in the file called "planet-060501-FromLA2.osm.bz2" which purports to be from May 2006. Subtract 8 from the node ID and you get a node where the API claims it was first edited in August 2005, so something is a bit fishy here with regards to the exact timestamps. Nonetheless, 172508 seems to be the lowest node ID in the country. Incidentally it is still the lowest node ID in the country today, but it is also the lowest node ID in that old planet file. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM very old data
Hi, On 25.10.19 09:52, Tom Ka wrote: > - any recommendation for tool/app/etc to process v0.3 data (up to > 01.05.2006 on planet/cc-by-sa) (and convert them to v0.6)? There's a perl script "04to05.pl" in SVN, this works for 0.3 data as well. > - is history before 01.05.2006 (easily) available (other archive or > local source) (Europe or CZ would be enough)? We didn't have history files at the time and those were times when we still used segments, so in today's history files these early times cannot be represented (at least not for ways). I am not aware of any older files. But the amount of .cz data in that old planet file is so small (7251 nodes and 7453 extremely short ways) that it probably wouldn't make a lot of sense to go back further. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-de] Moratorium beim Flächen verkleben
Hi, (kein Bedarf an Cc auf meine Firmen-Email, ich lese hier mit) On 10/22/19 22:08, Florian Lohoff wrote: > Doch - und er macht ungehindert weiter. In den letzten Stunden wieder 10 > Changesets mit massiver verklebeaktivität. Ich sehe das auch kritisch, muss aber zur Verteidigung des Mappers sagen: * seit Florians Beschwerde scheint mir das Verkleben auf Fläche+Fläche reduziert zu sein, statt wie vorher Fläche+Straße * wir haben eigentlich immer gesagt: Wer sich massiv "einbringt" in einer Gegend, der darf auch bestimmen, wie Flächen gemappt sind. Einigkeit herrschte darüber, dass niemand irgendwo mal eben "drübergeht" und alle Flächen so um-mappt, wie er oder sie es gerne hätte. Der User hier scheint neben seinen Flächen-Edits durchaus auch sinnvolle Daten neu zu erfassen. Genug, um ihm das Flächen-Gestaltungs-Privileg zu geben? Die relativ seltenen, und wenn dann recht barschen, Antworten auf Kommentare anderer Mapper sowie der wenig aussagekräftige Changeset-Kommentar sind natürlich nicht gerade der Stil, den man von einem Top-10-Mapper erwarten würde. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Licensability of an employee's work
Hi, On 21.10.19 12:31, Edward Bainton wrote: > If the employer is to give permission, do we have a way of capturing > that somehow? Is there a repository of PDFd emails authorising such > things, for example? When employees are asked by their employer to contribute data to OSM in the course of their employment, this is something we call "organised editing" and we have some rules around that (see https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines). One part of these guidelines is that there should be proper documentation of the project (who's running it, what's the goal, who's participating, etc.) on the OSM wiki. This documentation would be the natural place to also upload any statements made by the employer about permissions granted. In my naive legal understanding I would say that if the employer asks their employees to upload data to OSM, the employer has thereby automatically granted the necessary permission, but it can never hurt to have it in writing. Best Frederik PS: I would strongly advise against using a "corporate account" that groups the activities of many individuals as it makes communication between the group/company members and other members difficult, and good communication is a cornerstone of every successful organised editing activity. -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [Talk-de] Automatisches Hinzufügen von cash_withdrawal
Hallo, On 10/15/19 20:01, Michael Brandtner via Talk-de wrote: > du hättest es leichter, mich von meinem Vorhaben abzubringen, wenn du nicht > Argumente vorbringen würdest, die eher für statt gegen ein automatisches > Vorgehen sprechen. Denn gerade wenn die Obergrenzen angepasst werden sollten, > ist ein automatischer Edit von Vorteil, weil nur so verhindert werden kann, > dass händisch eingetragene Obergrenzen Monate lang falsch in der Datenbank > stehen. Wenn es die Möglichkeit automtischer Edits nicht gäbe, wäre halt jedem klar, dass es absoluter Blödsinn ist, ein technisches Detail des Programms an tausenden von POIs einzutragen. Das ist das, was ich meinte mit "die dadurch entstehende Verzögerung und der notwendige Arbeitseinsatz würden dafür sorgen, dass man sich gut überlegt, was Sinn hat und was nicht." Fällt dieser Schutzmechanismus weg, kann man sämtliche 14 Paragraphen des Rewe-Geldabheber-Endnutzer-Kleingedruckten als note_01 bis note_14 eintragen, denn wen juckt's, man kann es ja ganz leicht jederzeit ändern! Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Automatisches Hinzufügen von cash_withdrawal zu Rewe-Supermärkten
Hi, On 14.10.19 22:56, Michael Brandtner via Talk-de wrote: > Deine letzten beiden Argumente gehen meiner Meinung nach ein bisschen am > Thema vorbei. Redundanz haben wir ja ständig (jedes brand=McDonald's ist > amenity=fast_food) und dass Rewe den Service auch wieder abschaffen kann, ist > auch so, wenn wir den Tag manuell hinzufügen. Durch manuelles Vorgehen ist halt einer Tag-Inflation ein bisschen der Riegel vorgeschoben - die dadurch entstehende Verzögerung und der notwendige Arbeitseinsatz würden dafür sorgen, dass man sich gut überlegt, was Sinn hat und was nicht. Unwahrscheinlicher als die kompeltte Abschaffung ist z.B. die Änderung der Ober- oder Untergrenzen; wenn man die alle mit dran taggt, müssen die auch alle geändert werden usw. Redundanz ist dann willkommen, wenn redundante Information unabhängig erfasst wurde, denn dann hilft sie uns bei der Qualitätskontrolle. Wenn einer hinschreibt "das hier ist ein Fast-Food-Restaurant und die Marke ist McDonald's", dann soll mir das recht sein; ich kann dann einen Query laufen lassen, der alle McDonald's findet, die keine Fast-Food-Restaurants sind, und dann weiss ich, dass mit denen entweder was nicht stimmt oder man sie zumidnest mal genauer überprüfen muss. Eine Redundanz, die rein aus dem "eigenem Saft" kommt, wo ich also hingehe und blind alles, was einem bestimmten Suchausdruck entspricht, mit weiteren Tags anreichere, hat nicht einmal diesen Nutzen. Jeder Rewe-Markt hat vegane Produkte im Angebot. Soll ich deswegen automatisch allen Rewe-Märkten ein "diet:vegan=yes" verpassen? Bye Frederik PS: Ich hoffe, dass ich Dich von Deinem Vorhaben abbringen kann, aber falls nicht, solltest Du mindestens klären, ob Du nach "name" und nicht vllt. doch nach "brand" gehen müsstest. Eine Einschränkung auf einen geografischen Bereich hast Du vermutlich eh auf dem Radar (damit Du nicht https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2680914827 oder https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2688262407 erwischst), aber selbst innerhalb Deutschlands musst Du vor https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2261128043, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3805970015 oder gar https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/798553555 auf der Hut sein. -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Automatisches Hinzufügen von cash_withdrawal zu Rewe-Supermärkten
Hallo, On 10/14/19 21:47, Michael Brandtner via Talk-de wrote: > Damit wir diesen Tag nicht ??ber Jahre > nach und nach manuell zu den Superm??rkten hinzuf??gen m??ssen, m??chte > ich dies gerne automatisch durchf??hren. Was aber, wenn irgendwo in OSM ein Rewe getaggt ist, der inzwischen schon lang ein anderer Supermarkt, oder geschlosse, ist? Dann 1. fügst Du dem fälschlicherweise ein cash_withdrawal hinzu 2. erweckst Du Durch das Editieren des Objekts den Anschein, seine Existenz zu bestätigen (statt "zuletzt editiert vor 10 Jahren" steht dann da "zuletzt editiert vor 10 Tagen", und jeder glaubt, dann kann man sich ja drauf verlassen, dass es den Markt auch wirklich noch gibt) Das sind meine Standard-Argumente gegen automatisches Editieren. Im konkreten Fall kommt hinzu, dass Rewe sich das jederzeit anders überlegen kann. Dann ändert man alles wieder zurück. Die an das einzelne Objekt *allein* aufgrund von vorhandenem "brand" oder "name" angebrachte Information "hier kann man Geld abheben" ist redundant. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-at] OSM Nutzung in Buch ohne Nennung
Hallo, On 10/14/19 00:34, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: >> Jeder Mapper hat nicht exklusive Nutzungsrechte an seinen Beiträgen >> durch die Contributor Terms an die OSMF abgetreten. > > Nicht abgetreten, sondern gewährt. Der Mapper verliert seine Rechte ja > nicht. Er kann mit den von ihm gemappten Daten selber machen, was er > will. Z.B. unter anderer Lizenz nochmals veröffentlichen. Oder gegen > Urheberrechtsverletzungen vorgehen. Das ist richtig, aber für eine Urheberrechtsverletzung müsste eine geeignete Schöpfungshöhe vorliegen, der Mapper müsste also zeigen, dass er selbst einen für das Urheberrecht ausreichenden Anteil an der konkreten Karte hat; das reine Erheben von Fakten kann je nach Auslegung des Urheberrechts u.U. noch nicht reichen. Da kommt dann das europäische Datenbankrecht zum Tragen, denn auch eine große Sammlung völlig banaler und sowieso öffentlich bekannter Fakten kann, als Sammlung eben, dann doch wieder schützenswert sein. Hier ist der Rechteinhaber aber der, der die Sammlung anfertigt oder anfertigen lässt, und das ist bei OSM eben die OSMF. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
[talk-ph] Road reclassification / Edit war
Dear talk-ph mailing list, the DWG has been contacted because of an edit war between the users "TagaSanPedroAKo" and "rjamz26" in the greater Manila area. It appears that "TagaSanPedroAKo" has embarked on a large road reclassification project that started over a year ago. There was a little discussion in a ticket created by TagaSanPedroAKo here https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/38 but not much interest. He has also explained his view of things in great detail on the wiki on a page written exclusively by him https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Philippines/Mapping_conventions/Roads and he seems to generally approach this with a spirit of "this change is necessary and correct and I know what I'm doing". Now another user, rjamz26, has reverted some of TagaSanPedroAKo's edits in the Manila area, and this has led to an edit war and I have blocked both users and asked them to stop reclassifying roads until the matter is settled. The first thing I need to find out is if the edits made by TagaSanPedroAKo are actually wanted by the Philippines OSM community, or if they are the work of a "lone wolf" who is out of touch with what the the others do. TagaSanPedroAKo certainly sounds very sure that he's doing the right thing, but he wouldn't be the first person in OSM to be doing "the right thing" against the wishes of almost everyone else! If the local community thinks that TagaSanPedroAKo is going over board with his reclassification projects, then I could revert these changes, or I could make a list of these changes for the community to review. (The total number of ways where the highway tag was changed by TagaSanPedroAKo is about 4,200.) If, on the other hand, the community agrees with the changes, then we should find out why rjamz26 has reverted some of them, and ensure it doesn't happen again. Any light you can shed on this is helpful. Thank you Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-au] Discussion I: Quality is the coherence of four things
Hi, I am concerned by the high frequency of reference to "laws and regulations" and "Australian Tagging Guidelines". If it is true that "95% of paths to do not comply with Australian Tagging Guidelines" then I would suggest to adapt the guidelines to actual practice. After all, hundreds of users have made meaningful contributions to the path network but only a handful of people have made meaningful contributions to the wiki page section on paths! OSM is generally not a project where some people think up guidelines and others then follow them; most guidelines are more of a "best practices" document. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [Talk-GB] Import UK postcode data?
Hi,
On 10/4/19 20:51, Mark Goodge wrote:
> The reality is that people expect postcodes to be a functional search term on
> online mapping, at least in the UK,
You *are* ware that UK post codes are fully findable on the OSM website
and any site that runs the Nominatim geocoder? It must have been
mentioned somewhere in this thread. This means that our web site and
anything that uses Nominatim for geocoding already knows UK post codes
without importing them to OSM.
This discussion, therefore, is not about improving the OSM web site or
indeed most web sites that use OSM ("functional search term on online
mapping"), but only (quoting Richard) "Osmand and maps.me and Fred's
routing app and Jo's OSM-based game" insofar as these don't use
Nominatim or directly ingest the available open data.
> With an automated import, OSM can be
> as up to date as the latest release of CPO/ONSPD. And that's a positive
> selling point for our data.
The notion that automated imports could set OSM apart from the
competition flies in the face of what many of us believe to be OSM's
unique value proposition. We don't usually brand ourselves as "the
database with the better imports" and we're unlikely to ever be a match
to the giants on the field of engineering.
(Maybe you're right and Google have a glitch somehow that makes them
ingest new data with a delay but that sounds like an engineering problem
that can and will be fixed.)
Richard makes a good point (that if anything, a manual process that
allows our human editors with local knowledge - who are what really sets
us apart - to verify and improve the data would be preferable) but also
a questionable one (in suggesting that there are 195 countries in the
world having some form of post codes that is also available as open data
- the number is probably one-digit).
I would like to applaud Ken for his roll-up-sleeves approach. It
shouldn't be too hard to find one house for each of the post codes in
your local area and add the post code to that, which will ultimately
make every post code findable without actually having to add something
as synthetic as a centroid.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [talk-au] Discussion H: public transport – the end game
Ewen, thank you for trying to be constructive in this matter. Herbert seems to have considerable difficulties with the medium It sounds like he has been collecting issues for a while and now tries to resolve them all at once, which can overload the capacity of the mailing list for reasonable discussion, as well as his own. Reaching out in the way you have done it here is commendable and I hope that Herbert will take you up on the offer. I would like to appeal to those who are already calling for a "mailing list ban" to have more patience. Mailing lists can be difficult to handle for someone who is new to the game and has perhaps spent a lifetime using other, more formalised forms of communication. Yes, there can be times when we need to kick someone out because productive discussion is not possible, but I feel that it we should try and be welcoming even to people who don't "get" us at their first attempt. They can turn out to be valuable members of the community, bringing different views to the table and broadening our horizon. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[Talk-us] Opinions on micro parks
Hi, the DWG has been called upon to mediate a conflict between mappers, and one small part of this conflict is the question of "when is a park a park". Some of you know the persons involved and some of you might *be* the persons involved but I would like to discuss this not on a personal level and have therefore tried to separate these examples from any changeset discussions or usernames, and I'm not providing direct links to OSM either, to avoid clouding anyone's judgement by mixing up personal and factual issues. I have prepared four examples on which I'd like to hear the opinion of a couple people (if you are one of the mappers in conflict here, please refrain from participating) but there are more like this. --- Case 1: http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/case1.png Two small coastal areas that look a bit like rock outcroppings. I believe they might originally have come from an nmixter import with a "zone=PR-PP" which was then interpreted as meaning it's somehow a "park". It has temporarily been leisure=park AND natural=beach and park:type=county_park and now it is boundary=protected_area and leisure=nature_reserve and park:type=county_park and protect_class=7, without any indication where that protection comes from (and looking at the aerial imagery it will be difficult to verify anything). --- Case 2: http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/case2.png The tree-covered green area in the middle of the image is a leisure=park, the woodland all together (sharing the eastern border of the "park" but otherwise much larger) is a natural=wood area. In the south and west the "park" connects to "residential" areas (that are partly covered by the natural=wood), in the north the park connects to a landuse=industrial (also partly covered by wood). One mapper says "not a park", the other mapper says that according to CPAD 2018a and SCCGIS v5 this is a park (none of these are listed as a source though) and then proceeds to say: "It is a park in the sense of American English as of 2019. Whether it is a park according to OSM may be debatable, as it is an "unimproved" park, meaning it is under development as to improvements like restrooms and other amenities. However, it is an "urban green space open to public recreation" and therefore does meet OSM's definition according to me." --- Case 3: http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/case3.png The highlighted area in the middle of the picture straddles a street and parts of an amenity=parking north and south of the street and seems to rather arbitrarily cut through the woodland at its northern edge. Mapper 1: "This isn't a park. It's just a small fenced off grassy area.". Mapper 2: "It is a park according to County Park as it meets the leisure=park definition of "area of open space for recreational use" and contains amenities (parking)." It is currently tagged leisure=park. --- Case 4: http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/case4.png Red highlight is a "leisure=park" "zone=PR" (the latter probably left over from an import). Larger, green area that is mostly overlapping this "park" but also cutting an edge in the NW is natural=wood. Mapper 1: "This park doesn't exist." Mapper 2: "It is undeveloped land managed by County Parks in a sort of proto park state. How would YOU map this?" --- I find that both mappers here make valid points. Generally, in times where every teenager maps their back porch as a park in the hope of attracting Pokemon, I am leaning towards being careful with parks; I would love to have a rule of thumb that says "if it doesn't have a name (or if it's not more than sq ft) then it's not a park, it is just some trees" or so. Just because an area of a few 100 sq ft is technically a "park" in some county GIS system, doesn't mean we have to call it a park in OSM, and the idea that any patch of earth with three trees on it and two cars parked on it is a "park" because it is "open to the public" and "has amenities" sounds very far-fetched to me. Also, mapping micro-protected areas on a rocky shore seems to be of limited value to me and puts a big burden on anyone who wants to verify that. But I'd like to hear others chiming in. (This particular mapper conflict has other dimensions that just parks and DWG's further actions towards the mappers involved will not depend on the outcome of this discussion.) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[OSM-talk] Birthplace of artist - how to map with Wikidata?
Hi,
I passed a building today that had a plaque saying that a famous writer
was born there ("on the first floor of this house") in 1901.
I could add a note to the building in OSM (but that would not be machine
readable), or I could add a separate object for the plaque, again with a
note tag. But I think that this particular information is perhaps a bit
too much for OSM. Perhaps it would be better to model this in Wikidata.
But how? The building itself is nothing of note. I guess that if I
wanted to express "person P was born in building B" in Wikidata, I would
have to create a representation of B in Wikidata, and could *then* link
to B in Wikidata from the OSM building. But this item representing B in
wikidata would be totally featureless (linked FROM osm, and linked FROM
from the author's entry, but not itself linking anywhere, nor having any
properties other than "is a building"). Is that even possible, or would
it quickly be deleted in wikidata as not making sense on its own?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Subject: Re: Thomas Cook shops
Hi, On 24.09.19 16:42, Dave F via Talk-GB wrote: > Something has happened. The company went into liquidation (not > administration under which, I believe, they could still operate) & the > shops have closed. If you walk past your local shop and they are closed, by all means delete them or replace with "disused:shop" or "shop=vacant" if you want. (Though, if my local chippie had just closed yesterday and there was a rumour of someone else taking over the business next week I might be tempted to tolerate the incorrectness for a little while.) Just don't take the lawnmower over the database and assume that everything that is called Thomas Cook is now closed without even looking ;) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [talk-au] What are the Facts?
Hi, if I may offer two pieces of advice for a successful discussion on mailing lists. On 23.09.19 12:35, Herbert.Remi via Talk-au wrote: > What are the Facts? > I have decided to publish the discussion brief in two parts: “The Facts” > and then “The Issue”. This is me telling you I am going to do that. I > will send you the first part tomorrow. First, try not to "lead" the discussion. Open a topic, see what people have to say, digest, and reply a couple days later. Repeat that process. If you "drive" things by being very present and writing lots of things in a small timeframe, people will quickly tire of engaging and you will be talking to a brick wall. My second recommendation is, and I admit this is not always possible or easy, try to limit the number of discussions you open simultaneously to one, otherwise people will get confused easily and mix your different issues together ESPECIALLY if the subject is imprecise. Also, I have the impression that the message I am replying to might contain a mix of quoted material and your original writing but it is not obvious to me which are your words and which are copied from elsewhere. I case you have used text formatting to distinguish - e.g. bold, or color - it has not surived! Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] topic A: the platform itself
Hi, On 9/20/19 03:14, Herbert.Remi via Talk-au wrote: > I will post several concerns and information on several issues, but the > first is this platform itself. You call this platform a "forum" which is ok in the abstract sense, but note that there is actually an Australia forum in addition to this Australia mailing list (https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=24). The forum provides a slightly different user experience but is used less. In other countries, people have set up Slack channels or Facebook groups or even more esoteric channels of communication, in addition of or as a replacement for mailing lists - browse https://github.com/osmlab/osm-community-index if you want to get an idea. There's no strict rule about where the OSM community should discuss their issues, however media that requires prior registration with a third-party entity - like Slack or Facebook - are sometimes frowned upon as they give control over who can participate to that third party and might require the participant to agree to wide-ranging exploitation of their personal data by a commercial entity. In Germany where I hail from, the forum and the mailing list are used by about the same number of (but largely different) people, and since the total number of contributors is large enough to guarantee lively discussion on both, that's totally fine. Germany also has mailing lists for individual states but they are used very little, and even state-specific issues would often be discussed on the nationwide list to ensure they get enough attention. Speaking very generally, OSM has achieved the success it has with a "just do it" attitude: Instead of saying, 15 years ago, "BEFORE we start, let's come up with a good data scheme and a feature catalogue", people said "let's just start and then fix things as we go along". My recommendation would be to just stat discussing whatever needs discussing on the talk-au mailing list and branch out as the need arises. If something is worth discussing then a non-ideal UI should not be the blocker, and if it is, then maybe the issue is not so important. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [OSM-talk] MS GitHub? | Re: Tagging Governance
Hi, On 12.09.19 12:36, Valor Naram via talk wrote: > That's no reason to ban Markdown. Nobody wants to ban anything. I was just saying that Markdown, TeX, or Asciidoc will always exclude a good number of otherwise capable contributors - that the benefit of "easily version-controllable because plain text" comes at a price. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance
Hi, On 12.09.19 07:02, Roland Olbricht wrote: >> Changing to a github-like system of version management > > I thought of Git, not Github. Something I have witnessed in the context of maybe-making-our-book-into-an-open-source-project is that the first thing people try to tackle is technology, and inevitably because collaborative authoring is difficult, the land with something like "let's use a markup language like asciidoc, markdown, or TeX and underpin this with a version control like git, and everything is going to be great." Except that this often excludes everyone who can write and is *not* a computer programmer. It think this is what Christoph hinted at when he wrote: > Is there any mature and writer centric software that implements this > kind of model? I mean that from the perspective of a documentation > author offers a wiki like functionality with decent preview and > formatting but at the same time comes with a kind of version management > and functions to facilitate editorial review and discussion. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [talk-au] Paths in Illawarra Conservation Lands
Hi, On 12.09.19 09:29, Frederik Ramm wrote: > "Come for a serious bushwalk or a casual jog, visit a lookout in the > winter for whale watching off the coast, or break out the binoculars for > birdwatching. There are cycling opportunities on fire trails and plenty > of chances to cool off in summer by retreating to a rainforest track." Specifically for the Lower Escarpment Trail, I found this co-authored by the NPWS office: http://www.visitwollongong.com.au/uploads/308/illawarra-escarpment-trails-pdf.pdf "Lower Escarpment trail ... This unsealed vehicle-width trail traverses the lush middle slopes between Tarrawanna (Hawthorn Street) and Bulli (Bulli Pass) ... Ideal for: fit walkers, joggers and cyclists." Which clearly seems to indicate that cycling is allowed - would that include mountain biking? Unsure, this mountain biker web site https://www.trailforks.com/route/lower-escarpment-trail/ says: "Unlicensed motorbikes have resulted in a number of head on accidents with riders. ... This route is Unsanctioned, Ride at your own Risk!" Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Paths in Illawarra Conservation Lands
Hi, On 12.09.19 08:16, Andrew Harvey wrote: > Within the Illawarra Escarpment State Conservation Area, NPWS says the > only two things prohibited are Pets and > Smoking, > https://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/visit-a-park/parks/illawarra-escarpment-state-conservation-area/visitor-info#Prohibited. > > Normally for most National Parks and SCA's you're allowed to walk > anywhere unless otherwise prohibited. The link you posted contains the following wording: "Come for a serious bushwalk or a casual jog, visit a lookout in the winter for whale watching off the coast, or break out the binoculars for birdwatching. There are cycling opportunities on fire trails and plenty of chances to cool off in summer by retreating to a rainforest track." Would "serious bushwalk" be a term that NPWS could be using for walking only along pre-established trails, or is this a clear invitation to walk wherever you want? > In my opinion paths signposted or otherwise for walking should be > foot=designated to indicate there is signage saying this path is > explicitly for walking. That makes sense. > Any path they want people not to use > they'd need to put sinage and we'd tag as access=no That too, though if they were to say "mountainbiking on designated paths only", we might consider tagging all non-designated paths with cycling=no - that's essentially the old question of whether defaults should be tagged. > and any other path > with no sigage would be somewhere in the grey area between access=no and > access=designated (which I always saw access=yes as that middle ground tag). In my opinion a foot=yes, while not necessarily indicating that there is a sign, is more than a grey-area assumption. It is an assurance given by the mapper to others that "it is ok and legal to walk here", based perhaps not on signage but on local rules and customs. I would not use foot=yes for "well there is a path here and I've walked along it but I'm not sure what would have happened had I met a ranger". Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Paths in Illawarra Conservation Lands
Hi, On 12.09.19 06:27, Andrew Harvey wrote: > It's always better to have this mapped based on confirmations on the > ground, and it appears in this case that the local mapper Zhent, has > been mapping based on local knowledge. I have a feeling that Zhent's "foot=yes" might not mean "there is a sign here allowing access" but more "I walked here and wasn't arrested" ;) Question is, can we assume that any path leading into Conservation Lands that does *not* have a sign forbidding something, allows it? Probably not - NPWS can hardly be expected to continuously patrol the area for new "things that look like paths". Mind you, some of the paths that were added here have "sac_scale" and "trail_visibility" tags that do not sound like these are obvious trails actually prepared by NPWS for walkers. This might also tie in with the concept of "default rules" - for example, if "everyone knows that horse riding is only permitted on explicitly signed trails" in Conservation Lands then do we apply a blanket horse=no to everything else, or not... Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Paths in Illawarra Conservation Lands
Tony, On 9/11/19 21:31, fors...@ozonline.com.au wrote: > The construction and use of unauthorized trails is illegal with large > penalties (though I have never heard of a prosecution). Are there sources that are not restricted by copyright that we could use to determine which trails are authorized and which are not? > The policy in OSM to map everything that exists ignores the fact that > not all mapping is in the community interest. I would like to see a more > nuanced policy. There are indeed some nuances, for example there is general agreement in the community not to map the nesting places of rare birds (lest eggs be stolen), and a similar general agreement exists for things like women's refuges. This is in addition to the respect for privacy that is shared by most mappers - where the term "privacy" is generally interpreted narrowly to mean "things about your life that you cannot see from the aerial image". Some people come to DWG claiming privacy because someone has traced their driveway from aerial imagery; this is not usually a complaint we entertain. But the things I mentioned are not really codified anywhere, and there are often corner cases that lead to lengthy debates. A remotely related case for example was in Germany recently, where forest management and tourism authorities had agreed to a careful scheme of "trekking" camp sites in forests where camping would not normally be allowed. Their plan was to keep the exact location of these places secret, and require prior booking by users, who would only upon booking be told where exactly to find the spot. This was part of the compromise they reached - the forest authorities didn't want any people camping, the tourism people wanted to offer something for nature lovers, so they agreed on this scheme which at least promised that the places would not be overrun. You can imagine how the story went on - things being kept secret piqued the interest of mappers, and before too long all the places were mapped (tourism=camp_site, camp_site=basic, backcountry=yes). The authorities complained, but of course they have no legal recourse... still, this led to some discussion in the German mapping community in how far official wishes/demands for secrecy should be respected. We certainly cannot respect *every* local government law or else we'd likely have to purge our maps of all content in China, North Korea, and some Arab countries, delete all military areas in many others... It is an interesting topic for a general discusssion. Though in this concrete case I wonder how to determine whether what looks like a footpath in the Conservation Lands is legal to use or not... should *all* the trails drawn in the area be marked access=no? Should we ask the adminstration for a list? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance
Hi, On 11.09.19 17:27, Christoph Hormann wrote: > My concern is less that of centralized > decision making and control over an important resource but that it will > be difficult to find, motivate, select and retain qualified people to > work on this. Jochen and I, authors of the 2010 printed OpenStreetMap book, have unsuccessfully tried to morph that book into some kind of open source project; we were contacted by different people over time who wanted to have a go at and we played along it but it never came to a point where there was any hope of it becoming a sustainable project. Of course that book went far beyond just tagging, attempting to also document how various editors work and how to make maps. I've kind of lost hope that anything could ever become of that - it's a lot of work and it is very ahrd to do collectively in a "everyone just edits one tiny little bit and somehow a coherent whole will emerge" kind of way. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[talk-au] Paths in Illawarra Conservation Lands
Hi, the DWG was drawn into an edit war regarding several paths that were mapped in this area: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/-34.3740/150.8761 The argument is about in how far the (largely north-south running) paths are "illegal" and whether they need to be removed from the map because they would lead to people trespassing. The argument is two-fold; part applies to the paths that are on private land where, I understand, it is the land owner's prerogative to allow or disallow whatever they want, and another part applies to the paths that run into NPWS managed conservation lands. These paths were originally tagged "foot=yes" and with no further access descriptions; one had an "mtb:scale" added. From reading the Illawara Escarpment Plan of Management (https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/-/media/OEH/Corporate-Site/Documents/Parks-reserves-and-protected-areas/Parks-plans-of-management/illawarra-escarpment-state-conservation-area-plan-management-180505.pdf) I get the impression that mountainbiking on any paths not explicitly open for it is illegal. But what about walking - the plan says a lot about maintained walking tracks but it does *not* explicitly say that walking is limited to these. There's also a published "draft strategy" for mountain biking in the area, however I don't know in how far a draft strategy would influence the current legal situation. Anyway, for the time being I have added an access=no to the paths on private land because the landowner doesn't want people to use them and I guess it is their prerogative; and I've removed the explicit foot=yes on the other paths (becasue I'm not sure) and added a "bicycle=no" to close them for mountainbiking. My changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/74355243#map=16/-34.3750/150.8730 I would however be grateful for any input from the Australian community on this matter. I've also been told that NPWS were keenly looking to sue whoever publishes "illegal" trails or uploads them to OSM; in fact such a legal threat was the reason why DWG got involved in the first place. Bye Frederik DWG Ticket Ticket#201909011071 -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [Talk-de] Gültigkeit von Verkehrsschildern nur in eine Fahrtrichtung?
Hi, On 9/8/19 00:17, SteMo via Talk-de wrote: > Ich bin inzwischen auf mehrere Straßen und Wege gestoßen bei denen ich > von einer Seite Durchfahrtsbeschränkungen der Art "Durchfahrt verboten, > Land- & Forstwirtschaftlicher Verkehr frei", von der anderen Seite aber > keinerlei Schilder die Durchfahrt beschränken. Idee: Einfach bei der Gemeinde anfragen, ob Du denn jetzt von der anderen Seite aus durchfahren darfst. Schwupps stellen sie ein zweites Schild in und as Problem ist erledigt ;) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-GB] National Trust Paths organised edit page
Hi, On 02.09.19 15:30, Jez Nicholson wrote: > Following on from their talk at the OSMUK AGM, the National Trust have > now created an official 'organised edit' page for their footpath > project > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities/National_Trust_Paths It sounds like a well thought out plan. From a DWG perspective there's one small warning light that I have in my head, triggered by terms like "standard" and "validated": It must be clear to everyone involved that ultimate authority over what gets mapped and how does not lie with the National Trust, and neither does OSMUK have a mandate to enter into agreements on behalf of the OSM community that would determine exactly which ways may be mapped, and what tags to use. As long as everyone in this project is clear that it is ultimately local mappers who get to say what goes in, and that they don't need agreement from the National Trust or from OSMUK, then I guess all is well. At DWG, we frequently have issues where organisations like the NT (or smaller, local woodland trusts and the like) would like OSM to delete outright a track that clearly exists in reality, because they say it "leads to misunderstandings" or "is not official" or "is dangerous" or something. To which of course the usual reply is "let us tag the correct situation in OSM, but a track that clearly exists cannot be deleted". Sometimes they want us to add a "vehicle=no" to a track that has absolutely no signposts whatsoever locally, meaning that nobody can verify that vehicles are forbidden and no local motorist would be turned away - this is also a case where we'd usually say "put up a sign, or put up with cars". Sometimes the goals of these conservation organisations are opposed to those we have in OSM - they often want to direct human activity in a certain desired way, whereas we want to depict reality as good as we can and let humans make their choice based on that. A cooperation like the one described here can be beneficial to all sides if one is aware of exactly where the parties have the same goals, and where the goals might differ, and establish clear rules for these cases. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Anonymous comments on notes now disabled
Hi, On 8/30/19 3:16 PM, Dave F via talk wrote: > Can they close their own notes? They never could. Being anonymous, there was no way to verify that the user wanting to close something was also the user who created it in the first place. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Anonymous comments on notes now disabled
Hi, On 8/30/19 11:14 AM, marc marc wrote: > So an anonymous user now is unable to answer to a note he > create himself unless he decides to create an account to answer? ? Yes. But it has never been something that happened frequently to begin with. > since most anonymous notes lack information, we will be able > to close nearly all anonymous notes. This probably varies from region to region; I've seen many anonymous notes that did contain some useful information. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Anonymous comments on notes now disabled
Hi, after two years of discussing the pros and cons, a decision has now been reached to disallow anonymous comments on notes. Up until two days ago, anonymous (i.e. not logged-in) users could create notes and comment on existing notes; the only thing they could not do was close a note. Now, anonymous users can *still* create notes, but they cannot comment on or close existing notes. In the long discussions leading up to this decision (see https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1543 and https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/1926) we agreed that anonymous comments on notes are rarely useful, and when they are, they come mostly from users who have just forgotten to log in. This was weighed against recent massive spam and vandalism activities which rendered the notes system near unusuable in some regions. Perversely, it is much easier to fight a vandal creating new, useless notes (by just closing them) than it is to clean up their droppings from existing notes. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-de] Tags für brombeer sträucher
Hallo, On 26.08.19 17:14, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Da könnte man auch beim Mappen einer Bank behaupten, das würde zum Bankraub > verleiten. Wenn Du beim Mappen der Bank die Absicht hattest, den Bankraub zu erleichtern, und wenn Deine Aktivität dann tatsächlich auch den Bankraub erleichtert hat, dann bist Du sicherlich nicht ganz unschuldig. Aber wie ich in meinem Text geschrieben hätte - das muss Dir erstmal jemand nachweisen. Und während sich bei Bankraub oder Schlimmerem vielleicht jemand noch die Mühe machen würde, ist das bei einem Obstdiebstahl doch eher unwahrscheinlich. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Tags für brombeer sträucher
Hallo, On 26.08.19 11:17, Lars Schimmer wrote: > Wo habe ich mich nicht an Gesetze gehalten? > Taggen was man sieht, betreten des Geländes, das ich betreten darf. > Ob nun in osm.org oder auf mundraub.org. > Was sollte daran verboten sein, nach welchem Gesetz? Jetzt ist aber mal gut. 1. Bäume mappen, die irgendwo rumstehen, ist völlig ok. 2. Obst von Bäumen holen, die irgendwo rumstehen, ist in den meisten Fällen nicht erlaubt, zugleich aber in vielen Fällen geduldet. Das hat mit OSM nichts zu tun. Ist auch in verschiedenen Ländern unterschiedlich. 3. Leute mit einer speziellen Karte dazu anzustiften, den Rahmen der Duldung weit auszulegen, *könnte* zumindest einen Schadensersatzanspruch nach sich ziehen (aber dazu müsste jemand erstmal mundraub.org verklagen, und das ist dann eine Sache zwischen demjenigen und mundraub.org und hat mit uns nichts zu tun). 4. Wenn jemand extra bei OSM Obstbäume eintrüge mit dem erklärten Ziel, dass die dann auf einer Karte a la mundraub.org erscheinen (wobei mundraub.org ja dafür gar nicht unsere Daten hernimmt, oder?) und Dritte dadurch zum widerrechtlichen Ernten angestiftet werden, dann könnte ein Baumbesitzer eventuell auch einen Schadensersatzanspruch gegen diesen Mapper haben. Aber so weit muss es erstmal kommen, und vorallem müsste man dem Mapper erstmal nachweisen, dass er das ganze mit dieser Absicht gemacht hat. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Idee zum einfachen Baum Mapppen unterwegs?
Hi, On 8/21/19 9:42 AM, pbnoxious via Talk-de wrote: > Es gibt ein paar wenige Mapping-Apps für Mobiltelefone. Neben den > Karten-Applikationen wie OsmAnd oder Maps.Me die auch (kleinere) Edits > unterstützen, würde ich dir hier vor allem Vespucci [1] empfehlen (nur > Android). Der unterstützt auf jeden Fall auch Presets und hat einiges an > Funktionsumfang. Ich habe neulich mal mit Vespucci Bäume gemappt. Es gibt da ein paar Features, die ganz brauchbar sind. Einmal den "preset filter", wenn Du den auf "Baum" stellst, werden (a) nur noch Bäume auf der Karte angezeigt und (b) wenn Du irgendwohin auf die Karte tippst, um was neues anzulegen, geht er gleich in das Baum-Preset. Das andere sind die "validator settings", da kannst Du konfigurieren, dass z.B. Objekte, deren Preset ein "height"-Tag enthält, bei Fehlen dieses Tags nochmal extra mit einer Markierung versehen werden. Ich habe versucht, alle Bäume mit height (Höhe) species (was für'n Baum) diameter_crown (Durchmesser Baumkrone) circumference (Stammumfang) zu taggen, aber das ist natürlich ne Menge Arbeit. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-at] Import von BEV Adress- Stichtagsdaten Österreich
Hi, Bestandteile eines ordentlichen Imports sind unter anderem: * Prüfung, ob die Lizenz der Quelldaten geeignet ist. * Dokumentation, wie der Import handwerklich erfolgen soll - mit welchen Programmen werden die Daten konvertiert, welche Tags dabei verwendet, mit welchem Tool wird hochgeladen, wie wird dabei sichergestellt, dass bestehende Daten nicht kaputt gehen, und so weiter. * Wie wird die Community einbezogen. Sitzt irgendwo einer an seinem Rechner und überzieht das ganze Land, inklusive Gegenden, die er noch nie gesehen hat, mit Importen (eher schlecht) oder bereitet einer Daten vor, die dann von Ortskundigen sorgfältig eingepflegt wrden können (eher gut)? * Dokumentation auf einer Wikiseite (Das ist alles in den schon mehrfach zitierten Guidelines festgelegt.) Wenn alle diese Aspekte fest stehen und auf dem Tisch liegen, dann kann die Community entscheiden, ob sie den Import gutheisst oder nicht. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
Re: [Talk-at] Österreichs Hausnummern in OpenStreetMap unvollständig
Hallo, On 14.08.19 12:17, realadry via Talk-at wrote: > Das Adressregister ist öffentlich zugänglich und ist rechtlich gesehen > die Datenquelle für Adressen. Somit kann jeder Eintrag überprüft werden. In OSM erfassen wir die vor Ort überprüfbaren Adressen; wenn jemand an sein Haus eine 15 klebt, dann erfassen wir die, selbst wenn die "Amtlichen" sagen, es müsste die 5 sein. Aber es ist ja gut, wenn das amtliche Adressregister offen ist, dann kann jeder, der *amtliche* Adressen will, sie sich ja dort holen, und wir müssen die nicht nach OSM kopieren. OSM ist schliesslich keine "praktische Verteilplattform für anderer Leute Daten". Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
Re: [OSM-talk] Announcing the Tabang-AI initiative
Eugene, do I understand correctly that you and your local partners aim to recruit new mappers to OSM, who will not learn the "old fashioned" workflow of tracing stuff from imagery by hand, but be mainly taught to work with pre-processed Facebook road data? How will you ensure that your partners give those new mappers a training that is good enough to know when to *not* trust the pre-processed AI data? All too often people automatically assume that "the computer is always right", and this would be especially the case in a mapathon setup where time is limited. Will local new recruits be taught to amend the raw machine-generated data with their own knowledge, like street names, road classification, surface...? I think that while it is good to have quality measures in place, recent experience with mapathons of all sorts have shown that quality assurance for newbie-contributed stuff takes approximately as many person-hours as contributing the stuff in the first place. How will you ensure that you do not generate more contributions than you can ensure the quality for? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution guideline status update
Hi, I wonder if we could perhaps get rid of the "Contributors" mention altogether. The term "OpenStreetMap Contributors" is the unwieldy; it just sounds strange to say "this is a map made by OpenStreetMap contributors" when what we really want to say is "this is OpenStreetMap". When translated into German, you would have to say "OpenStreetMap-Beitragende" or, more correctly, "Beitragende zu OpenStreetMap", which to the un-initiated sounds a bit strange and kind of dilutes the OpenStreetMap brand by adding things before or after. I am pretty sure that there are languages where grammar in fact requires that the "contributors" be placed before OSM (as in my "Beitragende zu OpenStreetMap" example) and where no grammatically correct way exists to place OSM first. I know, OpenStreetMap is not a legal entity and therefore cannot be said to own the copyright. Then again, "(c) OpenStreetMap contributors" is not technically correct either, as there are many ways in which you can contribute to OSM, but only some of them will earn you a share of the copyright in the map. Someone who contributes to OSM by giving us money, or writing code, or organising meetups, is not part of the group that holds the rights in the map. I would find a simple "(c) OpenStreetMap" better, more snappy, more recognizable than if we demand that the "contributors" are mentioned. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-de] OSM-Geburtstag (und Party in Karlsruhe)
Hallo, morgen wird vielerorts https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenStreetMap_15th_Anniversary_Birthday_party gefeiert. Hier bei uns in Karlsruhe treffen wir uns um 10:00 auf einen Sekt im Geofabrik-Büro, dann wollen wir mappen gehen, ab 16:00 gibt es dann (aller Voraussicht nach) Geburtstagstorte und später Pizza sponsored by FOSSGIS e.V. Wer nicht den ganzen Tag Zeit hat, ist gern auch spontan nur zum Sekt am Vormittag oder nur zu Kaffee+Kuchen/Pizza am Nachmittag willkommen. Bye Frederik PS: Das Büro hat inzwischen auch eine Klimaanlage ;) -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [OSM-talk] Survey on global and local communities in OpenStreetMap
Hi, On 08.08.19 00:52, Christoph Hormann wrote: > By speaking directly and publishing my responses i risk being challenged > and criticized personally. While i don't mind this there are > definitely a lot of people who don't want or can't do this. And many > of them probably would not mind their answers being published > anonymously. So essentially all you want is a fourth option in the initial "Permission" question that is called "Publicly, anonymized" ? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Survey on global and local communities in OpenStreetMap
Hi, On 8/7/19 23:24, Christoph Hormann wrote: > In other words: What the survey says is you are welcome to provide your > ideas through the survey but we, the creators of the survey, reserve > the right to interpret your answers as we see fit and neither you nor > anyone else may correct us if we do not correctly interpret what you > wrote. I think that part of the motivation for doing surveys is that there was a belief that some people don't want to say something in public e.g. on a mailing list for fear of their opinion being challenged. Of course, if you say your opinion through an intermediary, there is *always* the risk of the intermediary deliberately or accidentally misinterpreting our opinion. That's the downside, and the upside is you get so say what you think without anyone challenging you about it. It's a deal that you can take if you want; and if you don't want it then you can *still* post your opinion on a mailing list or forum or your user diary, where you can speak directly without being interpreted by an intermediary - or even post your survey responses publicly like you did. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook mapping highways using AI in collaboration with OpenStreetMap
Hi, On 29.07.19 11:57, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Almost a week has passed by. Have their been attempts by the board or a > working group to get rectifications of the media outlets in order to > make clear that there is no collaboration between OSM and Facebook for > this ai project? The board has neither discussed this nor taken any further steps. I don't know if any working group has. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-at] CS Kommentar durch Problemuser
Hallo, der Wunsch von JH, die von ihm "ganz normal gemappten" Edits wiederzubekommen, ist verständlich und ich denke, das können wir auch umzusetzen versuchen. Ich kümmere mich darum, wenn ich von ihm entsprechende Infos bekomme (z.B. "alles Edits in St. Johann, die nicht Hausnummern betreffen" oder so). Der Revert war ja recht großzügig, vorallem halt, weil er die gleichen Accounts für Importe/mechanische Edits und für "normale" Edits genutzt hat. Den beleidigenden Kommentar habe ich entfernt. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook mapping highways using AI in collaboration with OpenStreetMap
Mikel, On 26.07.19 11:49, Mikel Maron wrote: > I for one would not say anything if I did not personally believe it. I > am not here representing corporate interests (at this very moment I'm > writing this from the middle of Nairobi's largest slum working on OSM, > rather than a comfortable room in Europe). You can still draw whatever > conclusions about me you like. But you are a rare exception. You were "in OSM" long before it was economically fashionable. And I guess that if you were to quit your job tomorrow and go herding sheep in New Zealand, you would still be doing something with OSM. When Christoph and I speak of corporate appropriation, we think of organisations encroaching OSM without any interest other than their own commercial goals. We think of people who do this *purely* as a job and who will immediately quit if their employer tasks them with something else. OSM, by itself, does not need anyone to "turbocharge mapping". This is purely a concept driven by the commercial motives of Facebook et al; OSM didn't scale up quickly enough for them because OSM valued first-hand contributions from hobbyists on the ground. And you know how global capitalism works these days - it depends on exploiting people in one part of the world to produce stuff for people elsewhere. Almost every rule-violating import or mass edit these days is done by low-paid, exploited workers somewhere in Asia or South America on behalf of US American companies. And now Facebook gives us another tool whereby someone with money in country A can pay a poor person in country B a few peanuts to add a couple thousand roads in country C because that's where they want to develop new business or whatever. One thing that Karl Marx was banging on about with regards to Capitalism was the concept of "alienation". I don't agree with many of his ideas but I do kind of buy this idea, that people are disenfranchised by capitalism driving a wedge between the worker and their product. Where we used to have craftspeople who made a thing and sold it, we now had people who just add a little thing to something on a conveyour belt and never get to see the final product. This is what happens with this "turbocharged" mapping. We used to have mappers survey and add something, and be the author of it. Facebook and Co are edging us towards a situation where most of the map will be made by exploited micro-taskers with the help of AI. Nobody will have the pride of ownership any more; people will be alienated from the map. I really struggle to see anything good in this whole project, even if it didn't come from Facebook and even if it weren't crassly over-sold to the press. I think that we are allowing corporate interests to take over the soul of OpenStreetMap, wring it dry, and spit it out in a couple of years when they find something else to play with. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook mapping highways using AI in collaboration with OpenStreetMap
Hi, On 25.07.19 22:03, Frederik Ramm wrote: > This press release is on the same level as "Cloudmade's > OpenStreetMap Project" so many years ago. In case anyone doubts that - https://www.digitalinformationworld.com/2019/07/facebook-ai-is-supercharging-the-creation-of-maps-around-the-world.html "Recently, Facebook released a statement about its new effort to create an OpenStreetMap project to not only benefit from mapping data but also making this platform an open-source navigational source for users." And the rest of the article is about how Facebook's only purpose is to bring comfort to people's lives etc. This is probably normal for corporate PR people, but for me it's just disgusting. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
