Re: [Talk-us] Retagging hamlets in the US
Randy, I just want to point out that there is an existing and well established OSM-based service that already supplies worldwide boundaries in a number of formats https://osm.wno-edv-service.de/boundaries/ . Further the operator runs daily quality checks on changes in the boundaries. Simon Am 11.06.2015 um 14:54 schrieb Randy Meech: On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 8:05 AM, Randy Meech randy.me...@gmail.com mailto:randy.me...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 11:00 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us mailto:cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote: Seattle has very defined neighborhoods and even sub-neighborhoods. The prior discussions kept us from adding the boundaries. Maybe it is time to reconsider. The Mapzen effort to produce a boundaries overlay is a promising solution to the problem, but I haven't heard anything from Mapzen for a while. We've changed course to publish existing OSM boundaries in different formats, similar to the metro extracts [2], although this is not live yet. The theory is that if we make the data more accessible to people for visualization, they'll improve it. Just an update on this, last weekend we launched Borders, which is similar to Metro Extracts, but just publishes GeoJSON files of all the admin levels for every country from OSM. We hope that making this data more visible accessible will lead to its improvement. Data: https://mapzen.com/data/borders/ Blog: https://mapzen.com/blog/total-perspective-vortex Code: - https://github.com/pelias/fences-slicer - https://github.com/pelias/fences-cli - https://github.com/pelias/fences-builder Additionally, Nathaniel Kelso of Natural Earth and Quattroshapes will be starting at Mapzen on Monday (yay). Among many other things, we want to focus on this area both within OSM and in other data projects. If anyone is interested in helping, drop us a line. -Randy ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Retagging hamlets in the US
It supports at least down to level 11, simply click on the entries and it will display sub-boundaries and so on. Not that there isn't room for further parallel services, but this wasn't actually a vacuum :-). In particular anything helping improving boundaries in the US is a good thing. Simon Am 11.06.2015 um 17:20 schrieb Randy Meech: On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch mailto:si...@poole.ch wrote: I just want to point out that there is an existing and well established OSM-based service that already supplies worldwide boundaries in a number of formats https://osm.wno-edv-service.de/boundaries/ . Yes -- unless I'm mistaken, this only supports admin_level=2, meaning country borders? This new project exposes all the other admin levels as well, in order to display cities, neighborhoods, etc. We saw demand for this in feedback on Metro Extracts and elsewhere. -Randy signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] (licence of wikidata) was: Can wikidata links help fight name inflation?
It is not quite so simple - wikipedia articles: clearly each on its own a creative work covered by copyright. Distribution licence not compatible with the ODbL, but that is not of any consequence for OSM since nobody (I hope) is proposing to include Wikipedia articles in OSM. @Eugene a DCMA notice against 3rd party text in a wikipedia article would make sense and I suspect that the WMF would and has honoured such. - individual facts extracted from wikipedia articles. From a WMF pov unproblematic since facts can't be copyrighted, from an OSM pov problematic because they might have originally been extracted from a 3rd party source and might be from a database rights pov, a substantial extract of that source (for example POI data from google) if included wholesale in OSM. - wikidata data: the WMF claims no database rights in the collection of individual facts and the reasoning for CC0 is based on the facts can't be copyrighted doctrine. In other words, we could wholesale import wikidata in to OSM from a WMF pov, however as already said, the provenance of the data is unclear and has the same issues as facts extracted from wikipedia articles. @Eugene I doubt if the WMF was actually thinking of DCMA requests against wikidata content in the published policy, as following one would damage their stance on facts not being copyrightable. In any case it is clear that they have not been policing their sources as SomeoneElse points outs. I should point out that part of the differences in the WMF and OSM stance is due to differences in the business models. The WMF, together with google, are the main (if not sole) distributors of W* content and at least the WMF clearly takes the stance that it is domiciled in the US and that is the only thing it cares about (that is the polite version). OSM on the other hand distributes its data to third parties all over the world for further use and to be useful the dataset needs to be free from rights of third parties that would limit its use in at least all regions we consider important. Disclaimer: I speak neither for the OSMF nor the WMF, nor does the above touch on the ethical aspects of copying from a third party, potentially a competitor, without explicit permission and potentially in violation of contractual terms of use/service. Simon Am 07.06.2015 um 18:40 schrieb SomeoneElse: On 07/06/2015 12:43, Simon Poole wrote: - while superficially the licence of wikidata is claimed to be CC0 That does raise an interesting question - while the source of wikidata is claimed to be CC0 the source of wikipedia isn't: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights A side-issue here is that that as I understand it* isn't compatible with ODBL, so those people using: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/source=wikipedia probably shouldn't be using that as a source. However the bit that I really don't understand is that, to take an example wikidata page: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q23098 the source of that is from other, non-CC0-licensed places - how can the result be CC0? Cheers, Andy * but please feel free to explain where I'm wrong here, in the jurisdiction in which OSM is based. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Can wikidata links help fight name inflation?
Two remarks on the the discussion: - the standard point: adding translations of names to OSM is (naturally) nonsense, adding names commonly in use in a language for places isn't. I somehow suspect that Frederiks suggestion is actually an attempt to offload the dealing with the nonsense aspect to wikidata. - while superficially the licence of wikidata is claimed to be CC0, the WMF does not actually warrant (warrant as in they would cover any costs and damages if there was trouble) that this is the case. Which is naturally a concern for OSM for content derived from third party sources (typically google). Matter of fact it is a bit of a circular argument because the licensing of CC0 is based on the WMF legal marketing statement that they believe facts are not copyrightable. However we know this is not necessarily correct (using copyright in a loose sense for any similar rights) for collections of facts. tl;dr version: linking to wikidata is probably ok, including wikidata could be a minefield. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Can wikidata links help fight name inflation?
Am 07.06.2015 um 14:12 schrieb Eugene Alvin Villar: .. So the advice of being wary of Wikidata's CC0 license should also be the same advice for OSM's ODbL license. The difference is that while we don't warrant that the OSM dataset is completely free of incompatible data, it is the intent and such data will be removed if identified. This isn't a panacea, but given the US DCMA and similar laws in other countries, probably good enough. There is AFAIK no such policy by the WMF, and as I said their (marketing) policy is that the problem can't exist. SImon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] (licence of wikidata) was: Can wikidata links help fight name inflation?
Am 07.06.2015 um 22:56 schrieb Christoph Hormann: ... *Individual* facts are never an issue, neither under copyright nor database rights, it only becomes a problem w.r.t. database rights once you systematically transfer data on a larger scale. In other words a single source=wikipedia is not a problem, it only becomes an issue when it occurs in larger numbers. It is of course somewhat difficult to draw the line here. Yes that is the problem. But no mapper should feel required to refrain from looking into wikipedia while mapping IMO or ban copyrighted books from his/her library out of fear for license problems. The difficulty is even -if- every mapper only ever copied one individual fact from a source into OSM, for the lack of a better example lets say google, which in isolation would be unproblematic, it is extremely unlikely that a court would consider that unconnected to 500'000 other mappers doing the same. I would suspect that any court worth its salt would always consider the OSM contributors as one entity and any substantial vs. non-substantial considerations to always consider the complete body of data from the same source. Now while this is naturally just speculation, most of the times courts try to avoid creating gigantic legal loopholes and it is unlikely that they would rule an activity illegal for one entity, legal for many just because the Internet makes it possible to split it up over a very large number of people. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Neat use of OpenStreetMap
It is not clear to me what isn't free about MLS, but in any case openbmap has been around for quite a while. The main issue with -all- of these alternative location services is that they currently can't be seamlessly be integrated in to mobile OSs without the cooperation of the manufacturers which kinds of makes them redundant. Simon Am 28.05.2015 um 11:21 schrieb Paul Johnson: OpenBMap http://radiocells.org/ It's similar to Google's location services or Mozilla's location service, but free. You can make use of it as a location provider in Android using the OpenBMap plugin https://f-droid.org/repository/browse/?fdfilter=unifiednlpfdid=org.openbmap.unifiedNlp for microG unified NLP. And you can contribute data as well using the Radiobeacon app https://f-droid.org/repository/browse/?fdid=org.openbmap. Seems to be in it's very early stages right now, but could be a real powerhouse with a little extra effort. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki link to Mailing lists and IRC on Get Help Page
While not totally on topic, I would like to point out that the Help tab on openstreetmap.org contains direct links to the mailing lists, forums etc. (since a couple of weeks) making having them far up in the hierarchy on the wiki less of an issue. Simon Am 25.05.2015 um 15:30 schrieb Clifford Snow: Mailing Lists were removed from the Get Help page of the wiki. The article still exists but is not longer referenced in the Get Help page. Instead mailing lists are referenced in Contact Channels along with IRC. I'd like to propose we add them back to the Get Help page. I suggest that when people are looking for help that we limit the number of pages they need to search to a minimum. I'm not proposing to modify Contact Channels. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for users/casual mappers (Re: Tagging FOR the renderer)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 I'm roughly just outside the 1000 largest mappers and am, in my experience, at least not atypical for mappers of that rank. With exception of building outlines pre - survey and some updates I'm doing to old stuff in Zurich that's about the limit of arm chairing and mechanical edits for me. Yes there are a few mappers up there with the bots but I don't believe that they are particularly relevant. On 19. Mai 2015 01:57:31 MESZ, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 9:14 AM, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote: You must have misunderstood something there, the top 50'000 (roughly 10% of all) or so mappers have contributed essentially all (roughly 95%) data to OSM. The long tail is not unimportant, but from a pure volume point of view OSM is very dependent on its core contributors. Not that this is a surprise or different than any other similar enterprise. Keep in mind the type of contribution is different. This year I edited 250,000 trees with a bad tag. That's a huge number of nodes, but not a significant contribution of knowledge. The long tail editors on the other hand may be supplying data in unique ways requiring local knowledge. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk - -- Written with a pen on a Galaxy Note 10. I -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: APG v1.1.1 iQE6BAEBCgAkBQJVWv8VHRxTaW1vbiBQb29sZSA8c2ltb25AcG9vbGUuY2g+AAoJ EEchcRCS4oLqXeAH/RKvy3SbLYfST0VamZGM4BZzGzvJHHNo0xJww2J/uLu1wLOe Vdl47ZRoX5Qpo4DX/KF1hozIAE/B2CsQY/ySPcIBfwzbeNqzydWtMmvEkqpj4cE4 YD3PK1PsvPLCxW60JrKRMlcqd+ExORU/QUJrxH2a4BrdgMoH5SLvP5BU3hGJFWmP M6/DOwkpC1J5lo5QQwEPSzuBHKvFfCqOKTJndJA+O0rVbTbc3LkesN8KMp/3YBDI imNn9Z1fMJxipN45y2a5ykfI7dpjSddSFITZy8RRxdMTQmmS9MZmztS6/g2CBqKg Auq0cLaljCst4QBypiCriJNDC8eDLKaAy523Vro= =Fjl8 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for users/casual mappers (Re: Tagging FOR the renderer)
Am 18.05.2015 um 15:18 schrieb Daniel Koć: ... The most of the work in OSM is done not by the few hundreds of advanced users, but by much more casual mappers. ... You must have misunderstood something there, the top 50'000 (roughly 10% of all) or so mappers have contributed essentially all (roughly 95%) data to OSM. The long tail is not unimportant, but from a pure volume point of view OSM is very dependent on its core contributors. Not that this is a surprise or different than any other similar enterprise. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging FOR the renderer
Am 17.05.2015 um 21:36 schrieb Daniel Koć: . I also don't think we should let anybody do anything on default map, however the general idea is good if we split the problem: 1. We should have some tools to let people render their own style, no matter how crazy. It's possible of course from the technical point of view (the data and tools are available and the licenses are open), but that is far too complicated for average Joe or Jane. I suspect kind of P2P tools would be great, but have no clear ideas about it. The positive output would be more people can edit map style and we have more experts for working with default style. There is a reason that maps are protected by copyright, making a aesthetically pleasing and useful map (in any respect) is difficult, and in the digital world it hasn't become any easier. As has been pointed out there is no lack of tools that make editing a/the style easy, that just doesn't mean that the actually crafting a good map is easy. 2. But default map style is still underused. Reluctance to show everything on merits that it's impossible, because it should be a mess, probably does not take into account that some features may be rendered only on highest zoom levels. For example we have trash cans and benches from the latest version of osm-carto and that is not a problem, because they are rendered on z=19! OSM for a long time -had- a show essentially everything map style and there wasn't a lot of protest when it went away, nor did anybody feel strongly enough about it to invest the effort to keep it around. I know you'd love to have a map that renders everything but you will not get that from OpenStreetMap. As all the data is available there is nothing to stop you setting up your own map renderer and doing as you please (although good luck making it look anything other than a mess). As I said in 1. - for nerds it's not a problem at all, but for the most of OSM mappers (see the long tail thread) that is not the option until they have as easy to use tools as iD for editing. Showing your favourite objects on a map with uMap is reasonably easy and in the mean time something fairly popular even with people without a deep technical background. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Widespread (but oldish) wiki spamming needs fixing
See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/BardicMa Due to the age of the edits they cause conflicts so need to be undone manually. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] iD name suggestion index - asking non-English-speaking mappers to review
Th other question is: do we actually want to support (as in suggest spelling) non-chain names or not? Currently the majority of at least the restaurant names do not belong to chains, they are simply frequently used names. Simon Am 16.05.2015 um 20:07 schrieb Michał Brzozowski: https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index So this index is used in iD and it's supposed to suggest names of shops/amenities that are part of some chain. (like: McDonald's, Aldi, ...). But due to how it works (counting occurrences) there are generic nouns that end up here, which is bad tagging (like shop=bakery name=Bakery [1]) and could form a feedback loop that proliferates them even more. I ask non-English speakers to find anything they are sure it's a noun and not a proper name. name-suggestions.json specifies name suggestions and filter.json specifies what non-names should be filtered. Some examples I found that need confirmation: Аптека Apotheke Boulangerie Пекарня Зоомагазин Обувь Стройматериалы Салон красоты [1] For the sake of example, as Bakery is filtered already ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] What extra permissions are needed to include CC-BY data in OSM
Am 13.05.2015 um 22:00 schrieb Tom Lee: .. Nope. I was referring to collective databases in the ODbL which are roughly the equivalent of collective works in early versions of CC licenses and only require the OSM derived part to be subject to the ODbL terms. This is the part I think I could use help understanding. My impression is that a collective database can contain ODbL and non-ODbL content side-by-side. Are you saying that CC-BY 4.0 makes this impossible because its attribution requirements would attach to the non-ODbL content as well? -- Roughly yes. Though my concern is not mainly about the requirement itself, it is simply that the concept of a collective database seems to be incompatible with the current text of CC by 4.0. Now I know how I would weasel myself out of this if I was CC, but I'm not, so lets see what they say. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] What extra permissions are needed to include CC-BY data in OSM
Am 06.05.2015 um 16:42 schrieb Tom Lee: ... I think the vast quantity of CC-BY licenses data is too important a resource to ignore given the slightness of this limitation, but I understand the need for conservatism. One of Creative Commons' US affiliates is located at a law school here in Washington, DC -- I've reached out to see if they might be able to help. Any sucess/feedback? Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Icons for most popular items on default map
Have you looked at http://osm-icons.org/ at all for inspiration? While some of them maybe a bit too detailed, I've used them together with the original SJJB ones for https://github.com/simonpoole/beautified-JOSM-preset with quite good results. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] [Wiki Talk] Why OSM and not another collaborative mapping service?
I'm really not sure what this discussion is doing on tagging and have redirected follow ups to talk (it has in the matter of a few mails already gone substantially off-topic though). The page in question is actually a fork of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Google_Map_Maker which was written as a response to the introduction of MM. I personally consider it dangerous to base such a comparison on anything but general principles. On the one hand you are always in danger of being out of date and at least in a legal grey zone if not already out side of it, on the other hand it tends to degenerate in to political/point of view material, are all commercial companies actually evil as Xxzme version seems to imply? Simon Am 07.05.2015 um 03:59 schrieb jgpacker: I call people to review the wiki page Why OSM and not another collaborative mapping service?. link: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_OSM_and_not_another_collaborative_mapping_service%3F It was written by a single user as a generic page to compare other collaborative mapping services to OSM. My issue with this page is that it's not generic at all. Am I the only one that thinks this? I didn't want to bother with this until it started being recommended elsewhere in the wiki as official. Cheers, John -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Wiki-Talk-Why-OSM-and-not-another-collaborative-mapping-service-tp5843604.html Sent from the Tagging mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Tagging mailing list tagg...@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] What extra permissions are needed to include CC-BY data in OSM
Am 05.05.2015 um 11:27 schrieb Andrew Harvey: ... My question was does CC-BY 4.0 have the same issue? Could CC-BY 4.0 data be included in OSM. ... My, very conservative, reading of CC-BY 4.0 would indicate that it has additional issues over just the attribution problem for databases. CC-BY 4.0 contains the following (4.b): if You include all or a substantial portion of the database contents in a database in which You have Sui Generis Database Rights, then the database in which You have Sui Generis Database Rights (but not its individual contents) is Adapted Material; and Adapted Material is essentially a derivative Work, or using ODbL terms a derivative database. The CC-BY terms would however seem to make it impossible to create an ODbL collective database from an OSM dataset including CC-BY material. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] What extra permissions are needed to include CC-BY data in OSM
Just as a clarification, versions of CC-by prior to 4.0 do not have this issue, however do not address the issue of database rights at all. All of the CC-BY licences -do- have the further issue, just as the ODbL, that they do not allow sub-licensing (which I consider a defect), however that aspect does not seem to be very high on the priority list of anybody. Simon Am 06.05.2015 um 11:25 schrieb Simon Poole: Am 05.05.2015 um 11:27 schrieb Andrew Harvey: ... My question was does CC-BY 4.0 have the same issue? Could CC-BY 4.0 data be included in OSM. ... My, very conservative, reading of CC-BY 4.0 would indicate that it has additional issues over just the attribution problem for databases. CC-BY 4.0 contains the following (4.b): if You include all or a substantial portion of the database contents in a database in which You have Sui Generis Database Rights, then the database in which You have Sui Generis Database Rights (but not its individual contents) is Adapted Material; and Adapted Material is essentially a derivative Work, or using ODbL terms a derivative database. The CC-BY terms would however seem to make it impossible to create an ODbL collective database from an OSM dataset including CC-BY material. Simon ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] What extra permissions are needed to include CC-BY data in OSM
Am 06.05.2015 um 16:42 schrieb Tom Lee: .. I think things are getting a little mixed up. The ODbL refers to Derivative Databases and Produced Works but not Derivative Works (well, except one, but I think that line exists because of poor drafting, not a deliberate choice). I *think* you are gesturing toward Produced Works and how the full ODbL does not attach to them, and conflating this idea with CC-BY's Adapted Material. ODbL Produced Works lose license restrictions; CC-BY Adapted Material may gain them. Perhaps this contrast is confusing the situation? Deeming something to be CC-BY Adapted Material gives the creator *more* control over its license status, not less, because CC-BY is not designed with virality in mind. This is implicitly affirmed in 3(a)(4), which mentions the application of other licenses to Adapted Material. Nope. I was referring to collective databases in the ODbL which are roughly the equivalent of collective works in early versions of CC licenses and only require the OSM derived part to be subject to the ODbL terms. The portion of the license following the and in your excerpt simply points to CC-BY's attribution requirements, which must follow the contributed content through into the Adapted Material. These attribution requirements are extremely generous: You may satisfy the conditions in Section 3(a)(1) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode#s3a1 in any reasonable manner based on the medium, means, and context in which You Share the Licensed Material. I think the vast quantity of CC-BY licenses data is too important a resource to ignore given the slightness of this limitation, but I understand the need for conservatism. One of Creative Commons' US affiliates is located at a law school here in Washington, DC -- I've reached out to see if they might be able to help. The actual requirement is in 4(c): You must comply with the conditions in Section 3(a) if You Share all or a substantial portion of the contents of the database. which is a bit more than just 3(a)1, Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] GeoHipster comment on OSM
Am 04.05.2015 um 00:50 schrieb moltonel 3x Combo: ... I can't help but draw a parallell between OSM and PostgreSQL, which has the same actual product is only owned by a community, but lots of companies offer commercial support structure. Nearly all other big databases are backed by a single company, and PG regularly gets feedback about people turned off by the lack of an official PG company. No matter how many companies offer high quality support, and that this setup is demonstrably better for the project as a whole, some potential users will always be turned off. It is completely clear that from a marketing and branding pov a different business model (aka the WMF model, see my diary post from last week) would be simpler, more effective and less confusing. It would however not be more geo-business friendly. So I feel that we don't have a problem with the current structure, but perhaps we could present that structure better. Compare for example http://www.postgresql.org/support/professional_support/ to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Companies. Gary's OSM for business consortium also has a nice ring to it (if anything, because the members would be self-selected, it'd avoid a wiki edit war or a complicated OSMF-led selection process). I'm not sure what utility such an organisation would have (not even touching on the obvious back lash it would provoke), the OSMF and the community already point to the consulting and services companies in OSMspace where ever possible (for example on switch2osm.org), And if OSM would ever choose to change its business model, see above, it would be defunct anyway. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] GeoHipster comment on OSM
See https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/963 for the PR. Simon Am 01.05.2015 um 11:26 schrieb Simon Poole: I was actually going to suggest something along such lines given that both the Help and About pages are not particularly well used. But didn't want to get in to the bike shedding trap, so if I get around to it I'll submit a couple of PRs. Simon Am 01.05.2015 um 10:52 schrieb Tom Hughes: On 01/05/15 09:25, Simon Poole wrote: I'm fairly sure that it has been discussed before (for a while pre-redesign we had such a link at least on the German version which we really should still have for legal reasons). I suspects the designers issue is using screen real estate for stuff that is not that often used. It is simply the small matter of producing the code and a test instance of the rails port with the corresponding changes. I don't think a new link is necessary - how about just beefing up the current extremely minimal Help page with some nice text and including a section with contact details for various use cases? Tom ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] BBC License Violation?
Correct link worked now. I'm not aware that anybody in the LWG has a BBC contact, but Harry Wood from the CWG (and HOT) should have one. It is one of the cases were more benefit is likely to be had by getting the BBC to do a piece on OpenStreetMap, KLL and the volunteers that are supporting the aid efforts by remote mapping. Getting attribution in an article that will be somewhere in the archives tomorrow doesn't really help anybody, and will potentially just end in disagreement because the provience of the data is likely difficult to actually trace, better strategy to have BBC owe us one. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] GeoHipster comment on OSM
Am 01.05.2015 um 02:29 schrieb Nicholas G Lawrence: Exactly why this is necessary is a mystery to me. If business wants to make use of OSM data, they can download the planet file just like anyone else. If business wants to contribute data, or donate equipment or sponsor events, those things are also possible. It should be pointed out that during 2012 and 2014 and continuing with at least the LWG till today, dozens of companies and organisations (outside of the geo-industry) with questions have had no problems contacting the OSMF and getting an answer back, typically within less than 24 hours. The OSMF even has a published and working postal mail address (contrary to certain other organisations). Maybe we should run a workshop on how to use google and an e-mail program for the moaners in the geo-industry. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] GeoHipster comment on OSM
Am 01.05.2015 um 08:56 schrieb Colin Smale: I wonder how a marketing department would react if their (potential) customers complained they couldn't find the store. Gary knows very very very well who and how to contact if he actually had a question. Just as the handful of others in the geo-industry moaning, it is simply a meme for you don't conform to our industry norm for a number of things and we think you should. It is a very particularly silly meme, because as pointed out, at least in modern times, I have yet to find anybody having issues or questions THAT REALLY WANTED AN ANSWER and was not purposely fumbling to make a statement, not finding out about the OSMF (or for local stuff one of the local organisations) and getting a response. Could it be easier? Sure, but google doesn't really care about our tendency to hide information behind multiple links (for example it takes two clicks from the main map page to find that the OSMF is the licensor of the data instead of one) so while not super convenient it is not HARD to find out. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] GeoHipster comment on OSM
I'm fairly sure that it has been discussed before (for a while pre-redesign we had such a link at least on the German version which we really should still have for legal reasons). I suspects the designers issue is using screen real estate for stuff that is not that often used. It is simply the small matter of producing the code and a test instance of the rails port with the corresponding changes. Simon Am 01.05.2015 um 09:54 schrieb Colin Smale: How about a new page on www.openstreetmap.org behind a new item Contact in the top row menu (which has Help and About)? I am thinking of a page which forwards users according to their scenario: If you would like to contribute to the map as an individual, click here If you would like to partner with OSM to improve the map, click here If you would like to re-use OSM data or have questions about licensing, click here etc etc The current Help page is all about mapping, and the About page does contain a link to OSMF but without any information about what the OSMF is or does in the ecosystem. On 2015-05-01 09:45, Simon Poole wrote: Am 01.05.2015 um 08:56 schrieb Colin Smale: I wonder how a marketing department would react if their (potential) customers complained they couldn't find the store. Gary knows very very very well who and how to contact if he actually had a question. Just as the handful of others in the geo-industry moaning, it is simply a meme for you don't conform to our industry norm for a number of things and we think you should. It is a very particularly silly meme, because as pointed out, at least in modern times, I have yet to find anybody having issues or questions THAT REALLY WANTED AN ANSWER and was not purposely fumbling to make a statement, not finding out about the OSMF (or for local stuff one of the local organisations) and getting a response. Could it be easier? Sure, but google doesn't really care about our tendency to hide information behind multiple links (for example it takes two clicks from the main map page to find that the OSMF is the licensor of the data instead of one) so while not super convenient it is not HARD to find out. Simon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] GeoHipster comment on OSM
Am 01.05.2015 um 10:48 schrieb Christoph Hormann: ... rant Of course big head at company A usually knows how to quickly get in contact with big head at company B, what really bugs them with OSM is that they are supposed to use the same channels as John Doe. /rant Well less that, because obviously given that we are talking about a small group of people, they will actually typically know each other in any case, the real irritation is that everybody gets the same usage terms and you can't haggle a special deal. I don't want to make the impression that from an OSMF business operations perspective everything is perfect, far from it. But the issues tend(ed) to be more internal cultural kind of things than customer facing. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] GeoHipster comment on OSM
I was actually going to suggest something along such lines given that both the Help and About pages are not particularly well used. But didn't want to get in to the bike shedding trap, so if I get around to it I'll submit a couple of PRs. Simon Am 01.05.2015 um 10:52 schrieb Tom Hughes: On 01/05/15 09:25, Simon Poole wrote: I'm fairly sure that it has been discussed before (for a while pre-redesign we had such a link at least on the German version which we really should still have for legal reasons). I suspects the designers issue is using screen real estate for stuff that is not that often used. It is simply the small matter of producing the code and a test instance of the rails port with the corresponding changes. I don't think a new link is necessary - how about just beefing up the current extremely minimal Help page with some nice text and including a section with contact details for various use cases? Tom signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] BBC License Violation?
Robert, the link doesn't seem to work (not just for me) Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-legal-talk] The Failover Issue and Publishing Derived Datasets
I've done some thinking on further aspects of the geocoding issue and have written a diary post on teh subject: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SimonPoole/diary/34858 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [Talk-de] Osmose QA available on Germany (english)
Am 26.04.2015 um 11:50 schrieb Frédéric Rodrigo: Hi, We have finish the coverage of Germany by Osmose QA. Osmose QA is a Quality Assurance tool. It detects and reports errors based on more than 200 rulesets. The major issue with osmose is that it invokes the notion of being authoritative when it is not, and by that motivates mappers to fix things (well actually break them) which are simply false positives. This is mainly a language issue in that you keep on using error all over the place instead of potential issue or whatever that is not such an absolute. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [OSM-talk] Sidewalks
As somebody that has mapped a fair amount of sidewalks as separate ways (for good reasons) I'm rather split on the issue (and as a tendency against adding names to objects that don't actually have them). The adding a tag to the street in question is all fine and dandy, if - it is actually a classical sidewalk with just a kerb or a thin strip of grass, - you don't need to model a route over the sidewalk or are only interested in automatic routing, - you are not adding extra tags for surface, width etc. In reality classical sidewalks might be the norm in suburbia where in turn detailed mapping is not such hot topic, but in urban areas (at least here) you will find easily find on -one- blocks length a combination, of classical sidewalk, separated by a flowerbed, a wall, being covered arcade and a couple of things I've likely forgotten. I don't believe splitting a sidewalk in to 10 different pieces just to model it to a very impractical doctrine makes any sense. A further problem is that we currently don't have any other way (than seperate ways) to model using sidewalks in route relations, which is particularly an issue if changing sides of the street in question is a problem (traffic, surface, other issues). Janko has already pointed out that mapping details of the sidewalks becomes rather cumbersome (both for mapper and consumer) for physical details and similar. In summary I don't quite see why we can't leave it up to the mapper to choose the appropriate solution. And a properly tagged sidewalk (highway=footway, footway=sidewalk) can always be ignored if the application is question is not interested. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-de] Schreibfehler in deutschem Copyright-Text
Es gibt ein Grund (eigentlich mehrere) wieso translatewiki für neue Projekte sehr unbeliebt ist. Zum Updaten muss ein Mitglied des translatewiki Teams die Strings extrahieren und ins OSM-Repo pushen. Wann das passiert hängt wohl hauptsächlich von der Verfügbarkeit des Mitarbeiters ab und ob er das gerade im Auge hat. M.a.W. manchmal geht es schnell, manchmal langsam. Simon Am 22.04.2015 um 12:36 schrieb Andreas Labres: On 16.04.15 10:24, Simon Poole wrote: Einfach in translatewiki ändern. Das habe ich schon vor geraumer Zeit getan (soweit ich mich erinnere), die Korrektur ist auch im Translatewiki sichtbar (grade gecheckt), nur wann diffundiert das zurück auf die tatsächliche Website? Braucht's da jemanden, der ein Update-Knöpfchen drückt? /al ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de 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] Using OSM for computer game terrain, what is the open derivative database?
The wiki is the wiki ... aka anybody can edit it. You should likely not be relying on it as primary source for legal advice for your company. Specifically the page in question has a header that reads: This wiki page was used for discussion and development of the move to the Open Database License. It is not legal advice, and is likely to be inaccurate or incomplete. Please do not use this page as a reference for what you can or can't do. That is meant seriously. Please have a look at http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Community_Guidelines for current clarifications and guidelines (likely horizontal layers and trivial transformations). While I'm sure cloud storage providers would love us to do so, we do not require essentially unmodified extracted OSM data to be provided separately. Simon Am 20.04.2015 um 23:34 schrieb Carey, Dan: I've read the section here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Use_Cases#Embedding_OSM_data_into_other_products.2Fapplications and the response: OK as long as the games company also provides an offer of the open derivative DB free from technical measures in parallel (see Section 4.8b). Otherwise, its explicitly disallowed. My use case is very similar to the linked example as my product is very similar to a video game. My confusion is what open derivative DB and free from technical measures means in my situation. My use case is the following: 1. Selectively import OSM derived vector files for geographic map area. 2. Import other raster source data for elevation, 3rd party vectors, models, etc. 3. Massage source data, fixing collisions, artifacts. 3. Use rendering software to create a 3D terrain using all imported data. 4. Process the 3D terrain to extract proprietary formatted data that runs in a publicly sold application. My questions are: 1. What is the open derivative DB free from technical measures in my case above? 2. Besides offering the open derivative DB, and acknowledging OSM as a source, are there any other restrictions on selling the final proprietary format? Thank you for your time, Dan The information contained in this email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [Talk-de] Schreibfehler in deutschem Copyright-Text
Am 16.04.2015 um 09:29 schrieb Volker Schmidt: .. Habe keine Ahnung, wer diese Seiten kontrolliert und aendern kann. .. Einfach in translatewiki ändern. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-us] Am I doing this right? Houses w/ addresses
Long press. press, press ... typically less than 5 seconds (depending on the situation I might not even stop walking). Simon Am 14.04.2015 um 01:32 schrieb John F. Eldredge: That depends, in part, on how long you want to stand there pecking away at your device, and how suspicious folks are likely to become if you stand in front of each building for up to several minutes before moving on. On April 13, 2015 4:02:24 AM CDT, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote: IMHO if you are actually entering stuff in to a mobile device, you may as well use vespucci and just do it properly the first time. But hten I'm biased. Simon Am 12.04.2015 um 18:50 schrieb Greg Morgan: On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Harald Kliems kli...@gmail.com mailto:kli...@gmail.com wrote: In areas with detached houses, the Android app Keypadmapper has worked pretty well for me. Once house numbers get too dense (worst case: Montreal, where each apartment in a duplex or triplex will have it's own house number) it starts getting tricky assigning the number to the correct building. And yeah, Mapillary imagery can definitely be useful for address data. Keypad mapper is wonderful because you are not as conspicuous when using pen and paper. I've tried using ranges were I drop the leading two digits while entering five digit numbers. There's a bunch of post processing when you actually enter the data. With any technique that I use, I always feel like Billy in the family circus. It is amazing where people put addresses. Commercial buildings can be the worst case to try and find the number. http://familycircus.com/comics/april-5-2015/ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. -- Martin Luther King, Jr. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Am I doing this right? Houses w/ addresses
Am 14.04.2015 um 20:42 schrieb John F. Eldredge: If all you are doing on the spot is recording the house number, then what is the advantage to using Vespucci instead of a simpler tool? No further processing step, upload and you are finished. Other stuff, POIs and so one will tend to take longer since you typically will want to at least type in a name, however that is likely to be an universal issue. The alternative: taking a geo-referenced photograph (after many 1000's of voice notes I've given up on them) tends to not be very inconspicuous either. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Am I doing this right? Houses w/ addresses
IMHO if you are actually entering stuff in to a mobile device, you may as well use vespucci and just do it properly the first time. But hten I'm biased. Simon Am 12.04.2015 um 18:50 schrieb Greg Morgan: On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Harald Kliems kli...@gmail.com mailto:kli...@gmail.com wrote: In areas with detached houses, the Android app Keypadmapper has worked pretty well for me. Once house numbers get too dense (worst case: Montreal, where each apartment in a duplex or triplex will have it's own house number) it starts getting tricky assigning the number to the correct building. And yeah, Mapillary imagery can definitely be useful for address data. Keypad mapper is wonderful because you are not as conspicuous when using pen and paper. I've tried using ranges were I drop the leading two digits while entering five digit numbers. There's a bunch of post processing when you actually enter the data. With any technique that I use, I always feel like Billy in the family circus. It is amazing where people put addresses. Commercial buildings can be the worst case to try and find the number. http://familycircus.com/comics/april-5-2015/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Facts about the world
Am 07.04.2015 um 16:51 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: ... is this something the OSMF lawyers have had a look into? Is the issue really copyright or is this about trademark (regarding the names GR PR etc.)? Currently it seems we are accepting what the Fédération Francaise de la Randonnée Pédestre claims, without questioning whether their claims hold up. ... The wiki already explains: they hold a trademark for GR which makes using the official names of the routes essentially impossible in and for material they hold protection for and further they seem to claim copyright on the routes themselves, which is not particularly far fetched and can't be dismissed out of hand. AFAIK the OSM FR has never asked for formal support in the matter, and I very much doubt the OSMF would become active in the matter of its own accord, except if directly approached by a rights holder and even then the likely response is to delete questionable material. This doesn't mean that the OSMF is completely inactive wrt such matters, for example the LWG has been in contact and discussion with the WMF on freedom of panorama issues. E.g. why can't you do a survey and publicly say: You are requesting somebody to argue the case of Fédération Francaise de la Randonnée Pédestre, which I would do, if they paid me :-). .. Also, we are mapping roads and buildings, but the projects leading to these constructions are normally protected by copyright, and also a building can be protected (architectural work). None of these do stop us to map them in other fields, what is the particularity why GR cannot be mapped? Because us mapping them has never been challenged? Particularly in the case of 3d building models there is obviously potential for conflict, which however has AFAIK never actually happened up to now. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Facts about the world
Am 08.04.2015 um 15:23 schrieb Russ Nelson: Simon Poole writes: The wiki already explains: they hold a trademark for GR which makes using the official names of the routes essentially impossible in and Perhaps French trademark law is different than US trademark law, but in the US, you can *always* use a trademark truthfully. Thus, you can call Coke-a-Cola Coke-a-Cola all day long and they can't stop you. Yes, but we are using their trademark on a competing product, aka Pespi labelling their bottles with Coke-a-Cola (made by Pepsi). signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Facts about the world
Am 04.04.2015 um 14:57 schrieb Kate Chapman: ... Small reality check (not saying that this is anybodies fault, just how it is): - the US community shapes how the project is perceived by the media globally - US based companies control the majority of funds spent on OSM development and have a major influence in OSM related formal bodies - the US community has a large (far far larger than the relative and absolute size of the community would indicate) presence in essentially every policy discussion in an OSM context. I don't think pretending that the US is an unimportant, negligible player, best left on its own, is going to work particularly well and just as a lot of other people follow closely what is going on in the US and feel entitled to voice my opinion when necessary. Its the price you have to pay for global dominance. And the other part of the puzzle is, while we don't and likely can't have unified quality standards for OSM, there is a certain expectation of usefulness, at least for 1st world countries. That might not be a concern for everybody in the US community, it is a concern for people outside of the US wanting to use OSM based data for the US (revisit Richard Fairhurst numerous posts on the topic) and I don't think you can negate that such an interest is quite valid. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Facts about the world
Am 03.04.2015 um 02:41 schrieb stevea: Facts about the world Simon Poole writes: Up to now OSM has drawn the line in such a way that stuff that is signposted and is observable on the ground is fair game (with some exceptions, I believe the GR issue is still unsolved). Yes, all of that is fair game. Though I don't know what the GR issue is, and ask you to please clarify. Sorry for the late answer, been on the road for two days and now are on a rather flaky network connection. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Walking_Routes#France for a very short synopsis of the GR issue. .. As facts about the world, these data belong to us, and when true, we can put them into OSM. (Sometimes such data, like airline routes, are inappropriate to put into OSM -- but that's another topic). I think where we differ is that I see OSM (not only) as a project that demonstrates (in practical use) what citizens can do with today's technology, in an area that just a couple of years back was completely controlled by government and industry. If by doing so, more government data becomes freely available then that is a nice side effect, but not a primary goal. I don't see it as a vehicle to promote any specific agenda outside of the relatively narrow goals of the project itself. In particular I don't see potentially impacting the primary goal of providing free (as in free of legal restrictions by third parties) geo data to everyone by becoming embrolied in legal fights just to prove a point. It is my subjective impression is that we are just on the brink of the project being unworkable because our contributors are too bold in using third party sources -not- the other way around (and yes when I get back home I have to deal with removing months of work by a mapper together with the DWG because they were too bold). Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Facts about the world
Am 04.04.2015 um 18:40 schrieb stevea: Re: [Talk-us] Facts about the world I respectfully and strenuously disagree. We still (and likely will) continue to have some predictable and manageable problems with import of data from third party sources, but we have procedures in place to make imports and third party data sources (two different things, but they do often overlap) better. Just as a a clarification the case in question is not an import, but actually exactly a they are only facts so I can extract them from the original source(s) and use them in OSM situation. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Facts about the world
Am 04.04.2015 um 17:03 schrieb Alex Barth: I just don't want to be called a couch potato in the course of it ;-) Couch carrot? :-P Seriously, I believe Frederik was more referring to how OSM is viewed by third parties and the impression outsiders could get from the image we tend to market. And however at odds with reality such an impression is, it probably can't be ignored and needs a conscious effort to correct. Aka no more rooms of people staring at computer screens, more people on bicycles or whatever :-) Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Am 02.04.2015 um 05:20 schrieb Russ Nelson: ... April Fools! Yes, you can. There are many kinds of public domain maps whose republication needs no license. For example, in the US all maps published before the magic date, whatever year it is we're up to now. Maps copyrighted but not renewed. Maps published without a copyright before 1988. Very true. Maps with insufficient creative content to be copyrightable. They may exist, but are you seriously saying that we (as in individual mappers and the OSM community as a whole) should make that determination? There are maps which are canonical sources of facts about the world, such as a BNSF map naming subdivisions. No one can own a fact about the world, because it's a fact. Just like you can't patent math. Same idea. You can copyright a collection of facts. You can copyright the arrangement of facts. You can copy the presentation of facts. But you can't copyright the individual facts. While is true that you can't own a fact in isolation, the problem is they are rarely presented in that form. Up to now OSM has drawn the line in such a way that stuff that is signposted and is observable on the ground is fair game (with some exceptions, I believe the GR issue is still unsolved). If you are using a collection of facts, be it a list, a map, a file on a computer or whatever, we have to now always taken the, fairly high ground, position that you either need explicit permission (by agreement, licence or similar) or that the use of the source is clearly not subject to copyright any longer. Forgetting about other rights, regulations etc that may exist for the purpose of this discussion. What you seem to be saying in your above statement, followed by stevea's battle call to actually do so, that wholesale extraction of facts from any source is unproblematic and is something that can be done without further consideration and the net result can be used in OSM globally with no expectation of problems. BTW you live in the country of software patents which -is- essentially patenting math. Alas I suspect you are kidding yourself in a big way. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM 243 now in English
I really have to second Richard on this, thank you to the weekly OSM team. However I do wish we could make it more accessible/known for non-insiders (this is less a failing of the editorial team and more a general issue). Right now you need to be at least subscribed to a mailing list to be made aware that it exists. Simon Am 22.03.2015 um 01:04 schrieb Richard Weait: On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Manfred A. Reiter ma.rei...@gmail.com wrote: The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 243, is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of all things happening in the openstreetmap world: http://www.weeklyosm.eu Thank you for assembling these! ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-de] PD oder ODbL
Es ist seit Jahren (wörtlich) und auch dir bekannt, dass a) der PD-Flag von Anfang an falsch konzipiert war, b) es widersprüchliche und über die Zeit sich ändernde Angaben zur Bedeutung gab, c) aufgrund eines Bugs eine grosse Anzahl von Leuten bei der Anmeldung nicht einmal die Legende zur Checkbox gesehen haben. und man deshalb keine belastbare Interpretation irgendwelcher Art aus den Zahlen ziehen kann (siehe auch https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2013/10/15/the-pd-checkbox/ ). In Ermangelung der leichten Verfügbarkeit von Zeitmaschinen wird nichts, aber auch gar nichts, irgendwas an obigen ändern, und deshalb ist jede Nanosekunde Diskussion über das Thema absolut und völlig sinnlos. Simon Am 15.03.2015 um 15:31 schrieb Florian Lohoff: On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 03:22:44PM +0100, Simon Poole wrote: Gar nicht und es wäre eh bedeutungslos (das ist doch sehr alter Kaffee der wieder aufgewärmt wird). Du sprichst von dir oder? Mir liegt der Lizenzwechsel immer nach massiv quer im Magen. Flo signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] PD oder ODbL
Gar nicht und es wäre eh bedeutungslos (das ist doch sehr alter Kaffee der wieder aufgewärmt wird). Am 15.03.2015 um 14:17 schrieb Markus: Wie kann man feststellen, ob ein Benutzer bei der Anmeldung - PD und ODbL angekreuzt hat - oder nur ODbL? Mit herzlichem Gruss, Markus ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [OSM-talk] Problem with usage of other values than yes for key building
Am 10.03.2015 um 21:35 schrieb Stefan Keller: Hi, I have a problem with the usage values other yes in key building. It seems to me that this any other usage of building=yes (for area type) is almost purely redundant. When looking at taginfo [1], building has following three top most key usages: yes 119260798 85% house 11592812 8% residential 3145218 2% ... I suspect the numbers are strongly biased due to building outline imports. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using OSM to geocode commercial data
Am 10.03.2015 um 20:07 schrieb Charles Henck: ... The public can access our system, but they only can see the responses to their own queries (with attached geocode). Based on your response, would that not be publicly conveyed? This likely boils down to who owns the rights to the data in question. If it is property of the person in question, aka you have simply provided the data processing then is probably not publicly used, see also item 7 here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uemhXWKwbu3RNjAWcG0R-nEFaN1FHjZl1McFwjXkNSc/pub Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal
Am 10.03.2015 um 02:10 schrieb Alex Barth: On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 11:52 PM, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch mailto:si...@poole.ch wrote: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Geocoding_-_Guideline#.22Collective_Database.22_alternative 1. Why is the input data part of the Derivative Database? There is an underlying assumption that the input data will match, in the best case exactly, an object in the OSM dataset, and that you are extracting further information about it (aka its geographic location) from the OSM data. Note that in this model we are treating the input data as a key in to the geocoded dataset. Treating the geocoded results plus input data as a derivative DB sidesteps various issues. They have their roots in, on the one hand, the most popular OSM based geocoder not just returning a pair of coordinates and, on the other hand, us having no control over how geocoding is technically implemented. It further makes clear if that you are using more attributes to improve the geocoding that they are subject to the same terms. Not sure I follow here. The geocoded results plus input data in and itself would be in the most common cases not Substantial even by OSM's very aggressive definition of what's Substantial ( 100 features OTOH). A non-Substantial extract would remain non-Substantial. The cases I thought we were discussing here, are the real world requirements of 100'000 if not millions of objects that have to be bulk geo-coded. If these use cases are of no concern or don't actually exist, then it is not quite clear to me why we are having the discussion in the first place, given that: - on the fly geocoding is unproblematic (no database created) - a small number of geocoded results is non-Substantial and doesn't create share alike obligations. So it depends on how you'd store the results returned by the geocoder and whether you'd store the input data with it. The logic is fairly clear. Assume you have a database of restaurant reviews, besides the review related data, every entry has restaurant name and street address. - I create a table with name and street address extracted from my database. - I geocode name and street address with OSM, adding the coordinates (or building polygons or whatever) to above table - I can now use this table (subject to the ODbL) and the original data together as a collective database to for example create a map with the restaurant locations or run a service that calculate routes to the restaurants on the fly. The important bit is not arguing about how the database is arranged and so on, but more that it gives us a model with which we can define precisely which data is subject to being available on ODbL terms. And yes in above example a user could ask you to give out the list of restaurant names, addresses and coordinates, which assuming that, for example, names could be missing in OSM, would actually be useful to the community. Which brings us to point 2: 2. This language is not explicit about Geocoding Results from other databases that are stored in the same database. Would they be part of the Derivative Database? I believe that is a not an issue as formulated. You would need a clear way of keeping the data separate. For lack of a better example: two tables: addresses geocoded with OSM, addresses geocoded with here, but IMHO labelling the geocoding source could be considered enough (given that you may want to provide dynamically displayed attribution you would likely want to do this in any case). Now this interpretation together with the linked data concept of the same Collective Database alternative (below) would mean that only data directly retrieved from OSM would ever be covered by the ODbL. The ODbL would not extend to any data added to the same database. Right? As written in my original mail, the main issue is not so much that you can use similar data from a different source together with your dataset, the question is how do you do so without using information from OSM? Aka the fall back question. Re-visiting the example above: assume that the 2nd point is modified to be: - I geocode name and street address with OSM, adding the coordinates (or building polygons or whatever) to above table, if I don't find a match or the match in OSM doesn't fit my quality requirements, I geocode the name and address with a commercial database and store the results in a separate table. Is the 2nd table free of OSM rights? Not an easy question to answer. Note: http://osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Community_Guidelines/Horizontal_Map_Layers_-_Guideline currently, on a similar issue, takes the stance that this is not something that is supported. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using OSM to geocode commercial data
Am 09.03.2015 um 17:24 schrieb Charles Henck: ... Q: More confusingly, if we used OSM to get the geocode a latitude/longitude (or reverse geocode an address) for a dropped request, would the database of requests (and private responses) be open? ... I have difficulties understanding exactly what a dropped request is supposed to be. In any case the share alike terms of the ODbL only apply to a derivative database that has been publicly conveyed. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for outdoor mapping party
Now days there is quite a lot of on-device help for the not so obvious parts (not that there are many). I admit that that needs to be dumped on a website (is one of the things fairly high on the TODO list). Back on topic: naturally one of the interesting things about a mapping party -is- to see how other mappers work, even for contributors very much ingrained in how they do it. Simon Am 09.03.2015 um 20:23 schrieb Clifford Snow: On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch mailto:si...@poole.ch wrote: (obviously for nearly every thing except large scale geometry changes vespucci is the only reasonable solution :-)). Simon, Your are going to have to come to Seattle and teach us how to use Vespucci. We really struggle trying to use it. Maybe it has something to do with all the legal pot we have available :-) -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for outdoor mapping party
The real core question is: will you have newbies or not? Old hands will have their favourite method of mapping anyway and are unlikely to change (obviously for nearly every thing except large scale geometry changes vespucci is the only reasonable solution :-)). For them you simply need a reasonable way of splitting up the area in question, essentially any print out of OSM will do OK, field papers working particularly well. If you have newbies you need to think about if you want to pair them up with old hands or have them go out and learn the ropes on their own (I've tried both and there are likely an even number of pros and cons for both). Simon Am 09.03.2015 um 17:09 schrieb Harald Kliems: With help from the wonderful folks at Maptime Madison, we're planning on hosting the first Madison (Wisc.) mapping party on the Spring Mapathon weekend. Nobody involved has ever organized or even attended a mapping party, so we wouldn't mind some advice. From reading on the wiki and various user diaries, I've come up with the following rough plan: - Meet at coffee shop, distribute Field Papers maps of the area to be surveyed, GPSrs , cameras, calibrate camera clocks. Mention non-obvious things that can be mapped, e.g. diet, payment method, collection times, opening hours, backrests on benches. - Depending on the number of participants, start surveying all together or in groups of three to four people. Plan on about one hour of surveying. - Group works it way toward the final meeting point at the local public library. Have a least two hours to process data and get it into OSM. Laptops are available at the library. Does this sound reasonable? Anything else I should be thinking of? Harald. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] High load on the rendering servers?
Jon Burgess tracked the issue down to a way node being dragged from Japan to Brazil on the 3rd of this month, creating a very very long way that increased the rendering time for a large number of tiles at high zoom levels. Simon Am 07.03.2015 um 21:39 schrieb Grant Slater: Hi Andrew, Yes were are aware there is an issue. We haven't yet tracked down the issue. We have been discussing it in #osm-dev on http://irc.openstreetmap.org today. Kind regards, Grant Part of the OSM sysadmin On 6 March 2015 at 15:20, Andrew Guertin andrew.guer...@uvm.edu wrote: For the past few days, lots of things I've changed haven't had their tiles re-rendered, and I noticed that the servers are reporting very high load and lots of dropped tiles: http://munin.openstreetmap.org/renderd-week.html Based on my (completely uneducated) reading of the graphs there, it looks like something is filling the Priority Request Queue and keeping it full, and there's very little time for anything else. (It looks like the Request Queue and the Low Priority Request Queue are also being kept full). Anyone know what's causing this? --Andrew ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-de] Zahl der OSMer
Der Ort wo man die Zahlen findet hat sich seit Jahren (wirklich) nicht geändert: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Stats Und auch: http://osmstats.neis-one.org/ Simon Am 03.03.2015 um 09:17 schrieb Markus: In unserer Pressemappe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Press_Kit steht, dass wir derzeit 900'000 registrierte Benutzer haben. Wo findet man die richtige Zahl? (müsste bei 2 Mio liegen) Gruss, Markus PS: der Link in der Pressemappe: http://usergroups.openstreetmap.de/ führt in eine Sackgasse. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de 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] new use case
Am 02.03.2015 um 21:51 schrieb Jennifer Bauman: Thank you all for your responses. I apologize for the vagueness - this is a highly confidential project. I suspect you will be better served by asking your question on legal-questi...@osmfoundation.org Just as here we can naturally not dispense formal legal advice, but at least you can give us enough information so that we can point out issues, if any, with your plan. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] new use case
Am 02.03.2015 um 18:08 schrieb Jennifer Bauman: Hi, I'm thinking of using OSM in a way that I believe is different that the use cases discussed at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/License/Use_Cases and I would like to know what the license requirements would be for this use case. The use case is: A company uses the OSM API to gather data for certain routes. They then perform internal calculations of this and other data from other sources. OSM data is a small portion of the data used. The result of their calculations is used in a vehicle application (i.e., displays a value on a dashboard or changes how the vehicle operates). 1) Is this allowed? Taking what Martijn has already answered in to account (that you can't actually use what we understand as the OSM API in that fashion, but I expect you didn't actually want to do that in the first place), why wouldn't you be allowed to? The current OSM distribution licence does not restrict who or how you can use OSM data, except that you may have have some obligations that you need to fulfil in certain use cases (without knowing details it is difficult to detail what they would be, if any). 2) If so, how would I give credit if nothing is displayed? Or would I not have to give credit since no map or direct data is displayed? Naturally the obligation to attribute OSM does not go away just because you are not displaying a map. In you case showing it on a splash screen on start up of the application/car/whatever could be a possible solution. You simply need to make the consumer/user of your application aware of the source of the data. Simon Thanks, Jen Bauman -- Jennifer Bauman Director, Vehicle Modeling | CrossChasm Technologies** Phone: 519.342.7385 Toll-Free: 1.800.975.2434 Email: jbau...@crosschasm.com mailto:jbau...@crosschasm.com Web: www.crosschasm.com http://www.crosschasm.com ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [talk-au] Early OpenStreetMap references/events in Australia
Am 23.02.2015 um 00:33 schrieb Andrew Harvey: ... Just curious what's this used for? Firming up the trademark application in Australia, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trademark#Expansion_of_OpenStreetMap_Mark_Coverage Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Early OpenStreetMap references/events in Australia
The LWG is trying to document, preferably, early events with OpenStreetMap participation and press/media mentions or pieces on OSM in Australia. Typical stuff that we are looking for are: coverage of mapping parties, conferences and exhibitions that have had community participation, talks and so on. As said, preferably early material, but in the end everything will be of interest. I've already looked through the wiki but haven't found a lot, if you have pointers to any of the above, please respond to this mail or write directly to le...@osmfoundation.org Thank you Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal
Am 20.02.2015 um 08:52 schrieb Simon Poole: ... Treating the geocoded results plus input data as a derivative DB sidesteps various issues. ... I should have mentioned that the single biggest advantage is that it doesn't require us to supply a definition of what geocoding actually is. Trying to nail that down in a general and future proof way has been one of the larger roadblocks. Just imagine when OSM doesn't just have address data for everything, but it is attached to the corresponding entrance of office (indoor mapping). Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal
Am 03.11.2014 um 00:45 schrieb Alex Barth: I have two questions on the Collective DB alternative: The derivative database consists of the data that has been used as the input data for the geocoding process, as well as the data that has been gained from OpenStreetMap in the process. Any additional data that may be linked to this data, even sitting in the same logical database table, is however not considered to be part of the derivative database (instead it forms a collective database together with the derivative database) and therefore, does not have to be shared under the ODbL. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Geocoding_-_Guideline#.22Collective_Database.22_alternative 1. Why is the input data part of the Derivative Database? There is an underlying assumption that the input data will match, in the best case exactly, an object in the OSM dataset, and that you are extracting further information about it (aka its geographic location) from the OSM data. Note that in this model we are treating the input data as a key in to the geocoded dataset. Treating the geocoded results plus input data as a derivative DB sidesteps various issues. They have their roots in, on the one hand, the most popular OSM based geocoder not just returning a pair of coordinates and, on the other hand, us having no control over how geocoding is technically implemented. It further makes clear if that you are using more attributes to improve the geocoding that they are subject to the same terms. 2. This language is not explicit about Geocoding Results from other databases that are stored in the same database. Would they be part of the Derivative Database? I believe that is a not an issue as formulated. You would need a clear way of keeping the data separate. For lack of a better example: two tables: addresses geocoded with OSM, addresses geocoded with here, but IMHO labelling the geocoding source could be considered enough (given that you may want to provide dynamically displayed attribution you would likely want to do this in any case). The real underlying issue is the fallback issue: can a set of negative results (no geocoding result from OSM) form a derivative database? On the fly it is IMHO a non-issue, however in the bulk/permament geocoding scenario it is. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Merkaartor dead ?
Actually I believe it is slightly less dead, potentially a Zombie, now than it was a couple of months back, see https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/merkaartor/2015-January/thread.html However it should be noted that is had less unique users in 2014 than iD, JOSM, P2, vespucci, OsmAnd, Go MAp! and Pushpin, and as a consequence the wiki pages tend to over state its current importance. Simon Am 16.02.2015 um 15:50 schrieb colliar: Do not reach the homepage [1] and only found github [2] but no release the last two years. Did I miss something ? Should at least adjust the wiki page [3]. Cheers colliar [1] http://merkaartor.be/ [2] https://github.com/openstreetmap/merkaartor [3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Merkaartor ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to locate errors
Am 09.02.2015 um 11:24 schrieb Hendrik Hoeth: Hi, I hope this is the right place to ask ... I'd like to know how I can find a certain error in the map data. What I observe is the following: - Import planet-150202 into psql-database using imposm. Settings are at the bottom of this mail. - The Lake Geneva (Lac Leman, Switzerland) is missing. There is no polygon data for the lake in my database. Anything else I've looked at seems to be fine. How would I find out what to fix? If you had asked a month earlier the question would have been simple to answer because the multipolygon for Lac Leman was broken then, currently at least OSMI is not showing any issue. But just for sanities sake: are you sure you are importing recent data from this month? Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Galaxy S3 for Mapping
Just an addition to what Andrew wrote, the stock camera app should have an indication of when it has a fix. The OpenCamera app has a preferences that requires a fix before you can take a picture and the added bonus of storing compass information (needs to be set in a preference too). Simon Am 02.02.2015 um 05:04 schrieb Mike Thompson: I ensure I leave the app osmtracker tracking in the background, at least this way I can ensure that the GPS is constantly trying to get a fix, Thanks! That makes sense. I will try that next time. Mike ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] GNIS POI populations
Am 13.01.2015 um 21:29 schrieb Wolfgang Zenker: ... In Montana I have removed rather than changed these POIs, as they definitely no longer existed before the GNIS import. Removing these for all of the US would be a good thing, especially for hospitals. We definitely don't want people in an emergency to end up in the middle of an empty field because they followed their navigation device to Podunk Hospital (historical). ... According to overpass turbo there is the small number of 394 such nodes (historical hospitals) remaining in the US (excluding Alaska and Hawaii). Given that this is bad data that actually might have disastrous consequences, I would suggest that fixing these (and other GNIS junk that might be misleading) has a slightly higher priority than updating population numbers. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-de] Lizenzfrage: Zuarbeit für Papierkarte
Wenn ich eine halbwegs verlässliche Auskunft zu einer Lizenzfrage bekommen möchte, frage ich den Lizenzgeber, nicht eine x-beliebige Mailingliste. Fragen sollten an legal-questi...@osmfoundation.org gehen Zusätzliche Guidelines zur Lizenz (die in diesem Fall vermutlich die Fragen schon beantworten) finden sich hier: http://osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Community_Guidelines Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Lizenzfrage: Zuarbeit für Papierkarte
Am 27.01.2015 um 12:40 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: , danke für den Link, die Seite kannte ich noch nicht. . Siehe auch https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2014-April/thread.html Mail von Michael Collinson vom 7. April. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Umfrageplattform
Hmmm mir fehlt, zum Beispiel bei der Addressfrage, die Möglichkeit mehrere Antworten anzukreuzen. Generell gibt es ja bei Taggingfragen häufig nicht nur eine Antwort, sondern der Mapper wird situativ, dass machen was gerade am besten passt. Simon Am 21.01.2015 um 10:47 schrieb Harald Hartmann: Nachdem ich ein bisschen Zeit hatte, und mich mal wieder ein bisschen mit PHP beschäftigen, sowie auch einmal die OAuth Authentifizierung ausprobieren wollte, ist als Prototyp die Umfrageplattform für OpenStreetMap (http://osm.haraldhartmann.de/umfrage) entstanden. Der Begriff Umfrageplattform ist mit Absicht gewählt, und für den Moment ganz klar als Abgrenzung zur einer Abstimmungsplattform zu sehen ... deren Diskussion im Forum (http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=26031) wohl noch als ergebnisoffen zu bezeichnen ist. Ich habe in der Umfrageplattform zwei Fragen gestellt, die immer wieder für Diskussionen sorgen - so zumindest mein Eindruck nach fast einem Jahr aktiven Dabeiseins. Die Fragen sind auch so gestellt, dass sie fragen, wie man es aktuell macht, unabhängig von der Lehrmeinung, Wiki oder Diskussionen Je nachdem wie das Feedback (bitte ausschließlich über das Feedbackformular auf der Seite) ist, würden sich bestimmt Mittel und Wege finden lassen, den Prototyp auszubauen. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Umfrageplattform
Am 21.01.2015 um 12:11 schrieb Harald Hartmann: ... PS: Es kann mir doch keiner erzählen, dass er mehrere gleichgewichtige Präferenzen hat ... dann hat er nämlich überhaupt keine Präferenz/Meinung/wie auch immer ;-) Ich halte die Varianten Node im Umriss und Auf dem Umriss für de facto gleichwertig und brauche was auch immer schon vorherrschend ist im jeweiligen Gebiet. Ich halte es nicht für ein Glaubensbekenntnis, wenn auch viele es so sehen. 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] CC-BY-SA 3.0
The SA versions of the CC commons licences prior to 4.0 are incompatible with both the CTs and the ODbL. The 4.0 version is some what out in the open because they are very new and AFAIK there has been no rigorous investigation of the compatibility issues, but it is unlikely that the situation is very much different. Simon Am 12.01.2015 um 15:07 schrieb Paul Churchley: Hi everyone, I am looking to import some data from a database where the data is licensed with CC-BY-SA 3.0. Would this be acceptable to OSM? I find this licensing issue very confusing. Sorry. Paul ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Keeping imported data updated with source changes
Addresses are trivial to match by geographic proximity and the actual values and given that addresses are one of the things that are quite likely to move and be attached to other objects (and loose any non-standard ref tags in the process) any tool that relies solely on such ref tags is going to fail. So given that you have to implement such matching in any case at least as a fallback, I don't see a case for a complicated ref system. Matter of fact you don't even need geographic coordinates in the source data to get a list of missing/changed addresses as http://regio-osm.de/hausnummerauswertung/ shows which is based on non geo-referenced address lists. In summary I don't see the need for adding additional refs which will simply make editing more complicated, I can see a need for additional tools outside of what is already available, but that should be possible without trying to link back to the original data. Naturally going for a walk outside and having a look at what has changed is the most preferable action. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OSM based GPS navigations and ODbl license of OSM data
Am 07.01.2015 um 13:00 schrieb Henning Hollburg: Let's say I have a great source of Floating Car Data (FCD). I'd like to use this FCD to calculate precise weights for edges I derived from OSM. These edges will be used in an online navigation application later on. The crux is the later on algorithmically combining data/datasets on device is at least a grey area, specifically if the non-OSM data is actually dynamic. As a tendency I would lean on the side of the result being a produced work and that 4.5.b would apply. Naturally you can create some undesirable corner cases (distributing a diff between OSM and your OSM+), but that's probably unavoidable and likely not to have any real consequences. Do I need to publish these weights according to the ODbL? You are never required to publish you original proprietary data, just the derivative database (if it actually exists). Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OSM based GPS navigations and ODbl license of OSM data
Please see http://osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Community_Guidelines signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OSM based GPS navigations and ODbl license of OSM data
Marketing != Reality It is just some marketing blurb to sell their product, trying to derive what they are really doing from it is just speculation. We -do- know that TeleNav has added lots of stuff to OSM directly (for example http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/28211) and/or are providing such data to the OSM community ScoutSigns, maproulette challenges etc. for use to improve OSM data. Which all is clearly unproblematic, not to say very good. Simon Am 07.01.2015 um 10:30 schrieb Henning Hollburg: Hi, as far as I understand the community guideline the creation of a routable graph from the OSM data (only!) is regarded a trivial transformation that doesn't have to be published under the ODbL. I am wondering now what happens when you combine this graph with other (non open) data. One example is Skobbler: http://developer.skobbler.com/features#qualityMapData ///traffic data from millions of devices is being reintegrated into our navigation map and routing algorithm. This means that your next route will take the latest turn restrictions, traffic speed, speed cameras, and more into consideration./// some more information: http://stevecoast.com/2014/05/19/why-openstreetmap-is-now-navigation-ready-for-people-like-you/ Doesn't this mean that this data has to be published according to the ODbL? If not, why? Best regards Henning Am 07.01.2015 um 09:51 schrieb Karel Charvat: Thank you very much. I needed exactly somethink like this. -- Původní zpráva -- Od: Simon Poole si...@poole.ch Komu: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org Datum: 7. 1. 2015 9:09:38 Předmět: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OSM based GPS navigations and ODbl license of OSM data Please see http://osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Community_Guidelines___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [Talk-de] Jahresrückblick 2014 und Ausblick auf 20 15
StartSSL überprüft durchaus (mind. stichprobenmässig) ob die Domain der Person tatsächlich gehört die das Zertifikat bestellt. Sprich eigentlich kommst du nicht darum herum die Orga-zertifizierung zu machen. Natürlich könnte man auch einfach die Domain der OSMF übertragen und Grant könnte dann ein Zertifikat von StartSSL ausstellen lassen. Simon Am 05.01.2015 um 13:32 schrieb Bernd Wurst: Hallo. Am 04.01.2015 um 21:29 schrieb Sven Geggus: Jepp. Ich möchte eigentlich ein Wildcard-Zertifikat für *.openstreetmap.de haben. Ich hoffe wir kriegen das mit der Überprüfung für den FOSSGIS e.V. bei Startssl endlich mal hin. Das wäre Geldverschwendung. StartSSL prüft immer zunächst Personen. Diese Personen können danach gegen entsprechenden Nachweis noch die Orga-Zertifizierung machen und damit Zertifikate für einen Verein ausstellen. Kostet dann nochmal so viel. Alles das musst du mind. alle zwei Jahre wiederholen. Spar dir die Orga-Zertifizierung, lass einen Menschen der mutmaßlich noch ein paar Tage in dieser Ecke involviert ist das auf seinen Namen machen. Wenn es bisher Konsens ist, dass Zertifikate eh niemanden jucken sollten, dann sollte der unschöne Name später wirklich egal sein. Gruß, Bernd ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de 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] redraw from CC-BY-SA tiles and ODbL data
Am 31.12.2014 um 18:14 schrieb Lars-Daniel Weber: . Are these objects to be released in ODbL and have they to be given back to the community? Since the CC-BY-SA tiles might have some generalisation (smoothing, selection), this license also has to be encountered. . IMHO it really depends on what your users are doing: - tracing elements from the background and extracting naming etc in a systematic fashion (outside of what is covered by non-substantial): the licences apply (given that the only sane reason to do this would be to circumvent the licence, yes the licence applies) - drawing/adding something with only no reference to the background (for example a new building or a POI from GPS data): independent data. - doing the above using the OSM data as a reference: grey area. An example why the later is a grey area: you could easily use an OSM based background map to determine what is missing and what is already in OSM to generate a dataset that you could then provide as OSM+ or so. This is likely something that the community would feel uneasy about and I personally would at least view as trying to work around the licence. On the other hand I'm sure there are a number of use cases were such use is unproblematic. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Hemnet.se using OSM data without attribution
I had a quick look at it. Given that the OSM data is clearly separate from the google map background I don't see any problem with that aspect. They naturally should add attribution to OSM as soon as they display the buildings, IMHO on the map. Naturally if the agreement they have entered in to with google is anything like their standard TCs then they likely have a problem with googles terms, but that is not our problem. Simon Am 02.01.2015 um 08:54 schrieb Andreas Vilén: The Swedish real estate website hemnet.se http://hemnet.se has started using OSM data for buildings on top of Google maps on their website. To see it, go to http://www.hemnet.se/ , click sök på karta (under the map) and zoom in on some bigger city that should have building data (for example Stockholm). Sadly they do not credit us but only give a link to is a building missing? with an explanation of how OSM works and that they use OSM for buildings and Google for everything else: http://www.hemnet.se/om/kartdata Of course my first instinct is to ask them to credit us with the same prominence as Google but then it hit me: are they allowed to mix map data like this? What would be the best course of action from here? Regards Andreas (Grillo) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] maintenance?
Something has broke (unplanned naturally). Admins are working on it. Am 13.12.2014 20:52, schrieb Brad Neuhauser: Looks like there's some database maintenance happening--I didn't notice anything about this on the list recently. Any idea what's up and how long it might last? (was planning a small mapping party this afternoon...) Thanks! Brad ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Addresses from Land Registry Price Paid Data
Am 01.12.2014 15:08, schrieb Robert Whittaker (OSM lists): This also raises the question of whether there are any other OGL-licensed datasets out there that have been used in OSM, but which contain undocumented third-party IP rights that we don't have permission to use. This is, IMHO, not a problem specific to the OGL. In general I have yet to see any licence or agreement to include data in OSM, that actually states that the licensor has all the necessary rights to licence the data on the terms presented and holds the licensee (us) harmless for any damages arising out of not having those rights. Note that the ODbL is no different in this respect. Essentially it boils down to buyer beware. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Skybox for good imagery test
Am 29.11.2014 22:51, schrieb Rob Nickerson: Just to pick up on your point about HOT. Google has confirmed that Imagery released under Skybox for Good can be digitized into OSM under OSM's license. This applies to all imagery whether the imagery was captured following a request from HOT or any other organisation. Currently we have the following statement: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2014-October/071318.html This is not what Skybox has stated publicly (later), see https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2014-November/008053.html This may or may not be in conflict with what Mikel wrote, but in any case there is more than enough fuzziness to sit quiet at this point in time. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] amenity=bicycle_repair_station :::: only 18 so far
Bryce, where are these common? Not something I've seen here (in a wide sense of the word). Simon Am 15.11.2014 02:32, schrieb Bryce Nesbitt: I'd like to encourage people to map bicycle repair stations. There are only 18 in the database right now. Can we double that this week? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dbicycle_repair_station -- Separately I'm torn if it's better to map operator= for the party responsible or operated_by=. The first form results in many renderings of the name, which is usually not helpful. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Changeset comment function
I would like to personally thank ukasiu, emacsen, woodpeck and TomH for developing and deploying this. A much wanted and needed feature. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Steve's better map
I commented on the better map vision here http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SimonPoole/diary/25975 . Steve hasn't actually said how he wants to fix the problem in concrete terms, given that as I write there are larger countries where there is no easy, even hit and run, solution. Simon Am 31.10.2014 11:59, schrieb Nick Whitelegg: One concern I have as a user of, primarily, road path and POI data, is the growing size of the planet file that addressing data would cause. If we are to focus on addresses more, then I think we do need to produce planet extracts with just the basic street and POI data, so that those of us who are primarily interested in that data and do not have powerful servers can get hold of that data easily. Nick -RB tan...@gmail.com wrote: - To: Jason Remillard remillard.ja...@gmail.com From: RB tan...@gmail.com Date: 31/10/2014 08:38AM Cc: Jukka Rahkonen jukka.rahko...@latuviitta.fi, OSM Talk talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Steve's better map I second that. While it is true that OSM is definitely more that an addressable map, addresses are, indeed, very helpful and even necessary. For various reason, they constitute a weakness in the current project growth and emphasizing the need to survey them / negotiate import with relevant authorities is a good thing. On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 2:24 AM, Jason Remillard remillard.ja...@gmail.com mailto:remillard.ja...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, The OpenAddress project is great, but we still need addresses in OSM. It would make sense to write OSM importing (and updating) software that is assumes OpenAddress as an input, rather than the raw files released by official GIS committees. By standardizing on the output of the OpenAddress project, most of the remaining work needed for an OSM address import is the same, therefor we have a chance of getting good OSM import software written and a standardized processes that can be optimized. Thought I have never seen this idea expressed on the OSM lists, I assume this is part of the long term vision for the OpenAddress project. If a commercial OSM user (or the board) wants to encourage getting addresses into OSM at a large scale, this would be the way to go. Jason On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 2:27 PM, David Fawcett david.fawc...@gmail.com mailto:david.fawc...@gmail.com wrote: Agreed. Jukka points to ideas that could enhance OpenAddresses, There is some good momentum behind OA already, let's get together and improve that project. On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com mailto:ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Jukka Rahkonen jukka.rahko...@latuviitta.fi mailto:jukka.rahko...@latuviitta.fi wrote: With a dedicated database and tools for addresses the route could really be easier and faster and I would not feel ashamed at all while importing addresses from this master address database into OSM later. Such a thing already exists! :) I would love to have you contribute to OpenAddresses: http://openaddresses.io/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-de] Sinn der Relation
iD macht das automatisch, was IMHO zwar leicht überraschend ist, aber durchaus richtig. Überlegung ist wohl: du hast ein gültiges geschlossenes Polygon z.B. für ein Haus, der Nutzer teilt das Polygon. Wenn du jetzt nicht ein MP daraus machst hast du ein falsch getaggtes Objekt wenn nichts weiter daran gemacht wird. Das Problem ist wohl eigentlich nur das solche Sachen dann vor dem Upload nicht wieder automatisch vereinfacht werden falls möglich. Simon Am 30.10.2014 21:24, schrieb Andreas Neumann: Moin, mir ist nun schon recht häufig aufgefallen, dass Gebiete von einigen Nutzern von Areas in Relationen umgewandelt werden. Nun gut, über Sinn und Unsinn kann man bekanntlich streiten. Heute wurde in Ilmenau ein Gebäude in eine Relation umgewandelt [http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4148179]. Es ist ein Multipolygon, dass nur aus Außenwegen besteht. Die beiden Außenwege haben keine eigene Attributierung und sind auch nicht Teil anderer Wege. Kann mir _irgendwer_ den Sinn dieser Aktion erklären, außer dass ich morgen früh prüfen muss, ob meine Stadtplansoftware den Mist noch einigermaßen sauber interpretiert bekommt? MfG Andreas ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: [okgis] FW: Google Is Giving Away Up-to-Date Satellite Images For Free
See the thread on this list from the 27th. Simon Am 29.10.2014 22:35, schrieb Paul Johnson: Wonder if we can get someone to reach out and see if we can get this available to us under an amicable license. Seems to be making the New York and Oklahoma GIS circles right now. -- Forwarded message -- From: *Willard Gustafson* wgustaf...@meshekengr.com mailto:wgustaf...@meshekengr.com Date: Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:30 AM Subject: [okgis] FW: Google Is Giving Away Up-to-Date Satellite Images For Free To: ok...@gis.ou.edu mailto:ok...@gis.ou.edu ok...@gis.ou.edu mailto:ok...@gis.ou.edu Thought this would be good information to share….from another listserv. Google acquired skybox, and they're giving away free imagery for good causes: http://gizmodo.com/google-is-giving-away-up-to-date-satellite-images-for-f-1651169968 http://www.skybox.com/blog/introducing-skybox-for-good Sincerely, *Willard Gustafson, GISP* Senior GIS Specialist | Meshek Associates, PLC http://meshekengr.com/ 1437 S Boulder Ave Ste 1550 | Tulsa, OK 74119 (918) 392-5620 x211 tel:%28918%29%20392-5620%20x211 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Postponing elections, or other alternatives (Was: Modus operandi of the board)
Particularly because the far more efficient is clearly false (for one compare number of fundamental reforms at all level of government that stick in Switzerland vs. other countries, particularly those with two-party systems). The Swiss system is fairly fine-tuned though and lots of things work smoothly because the direct democratic system exists, not because it is invoked. But this is really really off topic Simon PS: one thing that confuses non-residents a lot is that for example tax increases in general (gross simplification naturally) are accepted in popular votes here. PPS: mandatory cultural dissonance pointer: Switzerland doesn't even have a head of state in any conventional sense of the word and still is by many metrics one of the most successful countries in the World. Invoking the image that things can't work without a leader telling people what to do, tends to get us rolling on the floor with laughter. And that even without going as far as collecting Godwin points. Am 28.10.2014 12:51, schrieb Pieren: On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Kathleen Danielson kathleen.daniel...@gmail.com wrote: Direct democracy is cumbersome and often lacks nuance, which is why it's so infrequently used. Representative democracies and their ilk are far more common simply because they are far more efficient. Ouch. Never say that to our swiss friends ;-) Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Skybox release aerial imagery
Rob IMHO only: I would suggest asking for explicit permission (to trace and to distribute the results on ODbL terms). It is not clear at all if their licence would allow it and reading the blurb it seems as if the use case they are thinking of is more online display of the images. You should ask the LWG for their opinion in any case. Simon Am 27.10.2014 22:35, schrieb Rob Nickerson: Hi list, Google (through their acquisition of skybox) have released some aerial imagery under the Cc-by licence: http://www.engadget.com/2014/10/26/skybox-for-good/ Can someone just remind me - are we able to use this in OpenStreetMap? If yes, please forward to the HOT mailing list as it is of value to them. Finally we should be very proud of what we as a community have achieved. The work that we, HOT and those who have already made aerial imagery available (bing, digital globe, etc) have achieved to date is so significant that other big players are following in our footsteps. This is a great day :-) Best, Rob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Skybox release aerial imagery
Am 27.10.2014 22:58, schrieb Paul Norman: The SkyBox imagery is CC BY 4.0, which *may* be compatible. It does not have the obvious problems that earlier versions of CC BY have. That is the one side of it, the other is that you will find that the opinions on if tracing even creates a derivative work to be very divided (IMHO is depends on jurisdiction) and I would find explicit permission better than legal speculation and potentially ignoring the licence. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-de] Deutsche OSM-Vertretung sinnvoll?
Am 27.10.2014 18:23, schrieb Markus: ... Bis jetzt ist OSM eine Technokratie. Entscheidungen werden von Programmierern und Server-Admins getroffen. Vermutlich sind viele in der OSMF organisiert. Wobei die OSMF (mir) recht intransparent erscheint. Das mag wohl so sein. Andererseits leben wir das Prinzip der Graswurzelrevolution: jeder macht was er will. Dann ist aber bald eine Überraschung fällig wenn Steve wieder an der Macht ist mit seine Junta. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Deutsche OSM-Vertretung sinnvoll?
Am 27.10.2014 21:58, schrieb Manfred A. Reiter: Kannst Du das hier dann bitte einmal ein wenig tranparenter machen. Wer gehört denn zu seiner Junta? Das weiss man nicht, aber sein Program ist: lasst mich mal für ein Jahr machen, ich reduzier den Vorstand auf 3 Leute (sprich Steve plus 2) , löse alle Probleme, schaffe kübelweise Geld her. Natürlich nur wenn ihe alle schön brav Addressen erfasst. ... und die Frage drängt sich mir schon seit Deinem Rücktritt auf - wäre es nicht sinnvoll gewesen dagegen zu halten? Viel kräftiger kann man nicht dagegen halten, dass geht aber als Vorstandsmitglied natürlich nicht. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [OSM-talk] talk Digest, Vol 122, Issue 63
The current articles require the most senior 1/3 of the board to stand down when an election is scheduled at a general meeting. Given that non-election of incumbents that stand again has been rare, it essentially doesn't guarantee fresh blood nor does it provide a maximum accumulated term limit. Simon Am 26.10.2014 16:51, schrieb St Niklaas: Hi board members, I doubt if this is the right platform. Nevertheless I do have a simple question about the ins and outs of the board nomination and its members. Aren't there some rules in or for the OSMF board about who’s participating and how long and how many terms ? Should nt a schedule about it be a good idea, just to avoid some of the ideas ventilated through some of the Forums ? What about some legal rules as each year 2 members have to step down and will be or not available for reelection. But for a max of 2 terms of 2- 3 years, it depends on the size of the board. Hendrikklaas ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board
Am 23.10.2014 08:22, schrieb Sarah Hoffmann: .. It very clear states the obligations of a board member with respect to board meetings and transparency. How does the board hold its individual members accountable for following the rules of order? How can the OSMF membership hold board members accountable for it? .. The board members are elected by the OSMF members and the board doesn't really have control over its own composition outside of a couple of nuclear options that naturally tend to not be invoked. The rules of order can be seen as a contract between the board members complementary to the law and articles of association, but just as in the real world a breach of contract will make people unhappy, but given the trade-offs tend to not have any consequences of note. One thing has become obvious, that the current 1/3 of the board stands for re-election per year rule has provided lots of continuity but not enough change. Going forward I would suggest tweaking the articles to limit consecutive terms to two (just reiterating what I've said earlier) and require a minimum of 3 seats to be available at every election. There has been some discussion between Michael, the board and myself on changing the inner workings of the OSMF a bit which potentially could address some of the remaining issues, however these are at a very early discussion stage. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?
See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Video_mapping and http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Video_Mapping_with_the_ContourGPS_Helmet_Camera It is my preferred way of surveying if not on foot. There are numerous problems, for example current affordable video cams tend to not have enough resolution for stuff like house numbers and so on. But for a lot of larger things it is very efficient. Simon Am 23.10.2014 12:20, schrieb David Cuenca: There are many people who record both a gps trace and a video of their itinerary. Do you think it would be viable to use these videos as a sort of street view by associating the frames to a location? When there is no gps trace, it could be done by interpolation, defining synchronization points between map and video. It is not 360°, but at least there would be some images of remote areas. Cheers, Micru ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?
It has all kinds of problems not that they are not fixable, but stuff like assuming a fixed 1s GPS recording interval and similar and AFAIK there was never a stable version released. Given that one of the nice things about videos is that you don't actually need an exact position for them to be useful, I never felt motivated enough to spend the time to fix it. Simon Am 23.10.2014 16:48, schrieb Mike Thompson: Does anyone know if the video plugin for JOSM works under Windows? I tried it about a year ago and couldn't get it to work. If it is not working, is anyone working on a fix or another video plugin? Mike On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 5:53 AM, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson j...@betra.is mailto:j...@betra.is wrote: Well all the images are under CC-BY-SA license http://www.mapillary.com/legal.html I don't see anyone at the moment making another non-profit solution that gives an instant benefit to OSM (via iD editor). Storage space and bandwidth are never free while volunteer time is, wether it is programming or contributing material, so until then anyone offering a similar service will require income to pay for it. Mapillary is the best answer to your question at this point in time. That is all I can say. Þann 23.10.2014 11:33, skrifaði David Cuenca: The business activity of the for-profit company Mapillary is not new. Before it was acquired by Google, Panoramio did the same: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panoramio I don't see any point in working for free for a private company so they can sell their services to third parties. I was asking here to see if there is a not-for profit way of reaching the same goal. Thanks for your support, Micru On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com mailto:jan...@gmail.com wrote: There is a blog entry about uploading GoPro photos to Mapillary: http://blog.mapillary.com/technology/2014/07/21/upload-scripts.html Janko ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Etiamsi omnes, ego non ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board
Sorry for sounding like a broken record to some: there are no EGMs or AGMs any more under UK law, there are simply general meetings, there is not even a requirement to have any at all (that is why we are suggesting adding such a clause to the articles at the GM in Argentina) and you could just as well have one on 365 days of the year. The board could realistically schedule a GM with or without elections in March or April, remote participation is possible since last year so there are multiple ways to participate. Obviously this depends on the board actually agreeing to do so except if you want to require one via the mechanics of a request by the members (needs 5% of the regular members). As I've pointed out there are other reasons to disassociate the meeting from SOTM in any case so I wouldn't expect much resistance. Simon Am 23.10.2014 17:23, schrieb Kathleen Danielson: Sorry-- looks like I forgot to copy the whole list. On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Kathleen Danielson kathleen.daniel...@gmail.com mailto:kathleen.daniel...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Frederik, You've got a few really interesting ideas in here. Some quick questions: On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org mailto:frede...@remote.org wrote: Hi, On 10/23/2014 01:25 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Absolutely no force required. I would hope that the existing board members would recognise the virtue of a fresh mandate and a clean start. A radical step, but I like it. I'd be more than happy to withdraw my candidacy if there was a spirit of rebooting. We wouldn't even need seven new candidates; we could simply elect a few and they could then add new un-elected board members as they like (article 79 in the AoA). I really like this idea, although, as I acknowledged earlier, I definitely know there are some challenges. Instead of rushing through such an unprecedented measure, we could also do it in a more orderly fashion: Have this year's AGM decide that the board should prepare to resign altogether at the next AGM, and prepare the election of a full new board. This event would then be known long in advance and people would have time to prepare their bids for a seat on the rebooted body. Independent of the actual legal powers of the AGM, certainly no board member could ignore such an express declaration by the very people they're serving. What if we had some sort of compromise, and we asked the membership if we could hold another AGM in 3 months, followed 2 weeks (or so) later by an election? We've already talked about decoupling it from SOTM, and given what a global project it is, it's unrealistic to expect a majority of voting members to be able to attend SOTM. I haven't checked the bylaws, but I would guess there's no rule against having *more* than one AGM per year. OSM-US has started holding our AGMs remotely. I'm sure other groups do as well. If we did a 3 month time scale, we still wouldn't be making rash decisions, but we would have more chance of maintaining the momentum we've seen over the past month or so. The current board could also focus energy on preparing things so that there can be a smooth transition, even if there is high turnover in the board. Another thing, while we're throwing doors wide open. In many political systems around the world, the electorate doesn't elect a group of people with wildly different goals. Instead, people form parties and the electorate decides for a party, and the party will then form the government. (Grossly simplifying, I know.) That way, people in government have to fight each other to a much lesser degree than they would if government were comprised of people following different political views and goals. By appointing seven directors individually, on the one hand we have the advantage that they can keep each other in check; we, as the electorate, don't have to be super careful, if we elect someone who's incompetent or a kleptomaniac, the others on the board will hopefully notice and fix it somehow. On the other hand, there's the danger of seeding the board with a couple of difficult personalities that make life hard and reduce productiveness for the rest of them. Should we perhaps vote for teams? Just like a team can assemble and bid for holding a SotM, should we allow a team to bid for being the OSMF board for a year?
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board
Am 22.10.2014 11:48, schrieb David Cuenca: Hi Martin, thanks for the link. What about annual plans and community reviews? Where can I see them? David, The WMF has a considerable amount of resources available both in funds and in people. It is a very Apples and Oranges comparison, which extends beyond just the relative size or the organisation. You will find essentially none of the WMFs sugar coating in the OSMF. In some of these discussions there seems to be an assumption that we could simply just emulate the WMF and everything would be fine and dandy, however the basic business model and competitive environment is very different and we have some very different trade off's to make. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] A Better Map
Serge I want to apologize in case you missed explicit support from me (and the board), it was likely just a miscommunication given that the person in question lambasted essentially everybody that he had ever had contact with and you in discussion suggested that we simply ignore him. Simon Am 22.10.2014 22:54, schrieb Serge Wroclawski: I want to actually apologize for one mis-statement. Michael Collinson from the MT actually was very good about this and one-on-one, board members who I speak with have been kind/supportive, I want to also point out that this is not about me getting recognition for my work on OSM, but about the general lack of support that the volunteers can get from the board, when just a pat on the back would be nice. The board is under incredible stress and strain, and they're volunteers like the rest of us, but there's a ton of work being done by groups like the Operations Team, the License Working Group, the Management Team, the Communications Working Group, the Data Working Group, etc. All of these folks deserve more support and recognition. - Serge On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Kate, Replies in-line. On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com wrote: I'd say the size of the board to me is not necessarily the issue. I do think however having a board elected completely just from the OSMF membership isn't the best approach. Those elected from OSM contributors (I frequently have seen in the past people post people's OSM edits for board elections) are not necessarily the best to be on a board. It does not allow the flexibility to seek out board members with specialized skills. For example most of the board would not claim to be experts in finance, or legal matters. I certainly think election from part of the community is not a bad thing, but perhaps it isn't the only way. I think you're connecting board membership with officer positions and that doesn't need to be connected. It's possible (and often preferable) to have a board of people who oversee the officers but are not one of them. That also gives you flexibility because your board can say We will nominate so-and-so to be CEO and so-and-so to be CFO, rather than using terms like President and Treasurer. It also means the board positions can be equal, if the board so chooses. I think that this argument of separation of concerns makes a lot of sense, I think that board members should be members, but officers may not need to be. Yes, I think that paid staff can certainly help with some of the tasks. Financing this is a different issue however. I used to work as paid staff on an animal shelter for abused/neglected horses that had many volunteers while attending uni. When there was 2 feet of snow in the middle of January it was the paid staff usually out feeding the animals and shoveling the manure. Volunteers were great for the fun tasks such as giving tours, grooming horses and giving pony rides at fundraisers. We need to seriously look at what the OSM equivalent is of shoveling manure and if it is appropriate hire people to do it. Yes, and adding on, some recognition would also be nice, even for volunteers. Last month I received an extremely nasty, rude email from someone about actions that I took as part of my DWG duties. That email insulted me, attacked my sexuality, was vaguely threatening to my fiancee, etc. and the board was CCed by the original author. None of the board members or members of management team (who was also CCed) said a word about it. This kind of dismissal for our feelings as individuals as we put work into the project is really disheartening. - Serge ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] A Better Map
Am 22.10.2014 23:38, schrieb Kate Chapman: ... I was not suggested the entire board would be non-affiliated. There are different approaches to this and you can look at other organizations with mixed boards. Checks and balances are possible, especially with a membership. Just to clarify. My reference to non-affiliated was as in: not working for a company or organisation with a direct financial or other interest in OSM, or in other words the a prototypical OSM contributor. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Applications to the Local Chapter Agreement
Hi Rob I had the feeling that I had announced something outside of the board, but that may simply be a figment of my imagination. Applications have been received from Iceland, Italy and Japan. All three have the honor and the pain of having to beta test the procedure, mainly providing us with some additional documentation. I'm sure translating the respective articles is the main issue, but I can't see how minimal due diligence can be avoided without creating a liability nightmare. There are further organisations that have indicated their willingness to join us and I would expect a few more applications in the next couple of months. Simon Am 22.10.2014 23:41, schrieb Rob Nickerson: Simon, I note in [1] that there are now three applications to the Local Chapter Agreement [2] and these are being processed now. In light of the current discussions on transparency and holding the board to account, can I ask whether it possible to disclose these just in case there are any other local groups that feel they represent the geographic regions included in the first three applications. Also I'm curious :-) Best, Rob [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2014-October/002697.html [2] http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Local_OSMF_Chapters ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
