Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Candidate's views? Re: Board decision on Crimea complaint
> > And here you are disqualifying yourself from the discussion because you > essentially reject the possibility that OSM can function as a cross > cultural, cross ideology project to document the verifiable geography of > the world. If you don't think that is possible and think that OSM when > mapping the world has to take a political side maybe OSM is not the right > project for you. Because that is the most fundamental idea behind our > project. I pointed out such a possibility in the same message (which I hoped you'd read fully before replying), assuming OSM wants to map "verifiable geography" and not "the world according to Christoph Hormann". As soon as you extend the physical ground truth principle to non-physical political entities, doing so *selectively* to form a single view that aligns with your personal feelings, the issue becomes political. It doesn't have to be. On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 2:40 PM Vladimir Agafonkin wrote: > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 12:52 PM Guillaume Rischard < > openstreet...@stereo.lu> wrote: > >> The on-the-ground rule has served us well on disputed borders: there is >> no other reasonable and possible alternative. Creating an exception in >> Crimea, without any justification, opens Pandora’s box. > > > All of these statements are misleading. If Crimea is an exception, how is > the ground-truth rule applied in South Osetia and Abkhazia, both of which > are included in the Georgia boundary which has absolutely no control over > those territories (de-facto controlled by Russia)? Why is Transnistria > included in the boundaries of Moldova? Why does the Cyprus boundary include > a large area fully controlled by Turkey? What police and tax authority is > there in large areas of Iran and Iraq controlled by ISIS, and why are these > areas still included in the respective countries? > > The only major difference in those cases compared to Crimea is that > applying the ground-truth rule there would require mapping respective areas > as independent countries. But — big surprise! — OSM community by convention > limits the list of countries to those recognized by the UN, because, as it > turns out, a country is a political entity after all. How ironic is that? > > In practice, OSM never fully adhered to the ground truth rule when it > comes to country boundaries, but at least the policy was vague enough to > make arbitrary decisions, with either "ground truth" or "widely > internationally recognized" bit taking precedence depending on how the DWG > members feel about the world on a particular day. Pretending OSM is out of > politics when solving an inherently political issue does not help, because > then you take a political side implicitly (becoming a welcome tool of > Russian regime propaganda in this case). > > There are reasonable and possible alternatives, such as this in-progress > disputed boundaries proposal > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Mapping_disputed_boundaries>, > but due to the complexity and emotional charge of the issue, fleshing them > out to a practical consensus will take a considerable time. Until such a > common ground is found, the most practical thing you can do is to revert to > a balance point that prevents never-ending edit wars and worked well in > practice for the last 5 years. It's unfortunate that this issue wasn't > taken seriously in that period, but hopefully this crisis, however > damaging, will facilitate coming to a universal solution soon. > > -- > Vladimir Agafonkin > https://agafonkin.com > +380 (93) 745 44 61 > -- Vladimir Agafonkin https://agafonkin.com +380 (93) 745 44 61 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Candidate's views? Re: Board decision on Crimea complaint
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 12:52 PM Guillaume Rischard wrote: > The on-the-ground rule has served us well on disputed borders: there is no > other reasonable and possible alternative. Creating an exception in Crimea, > without any justification, opens Pandora’s box. All of these statements are misleading. If Crimea is an exception, how is the ground-truth rule applied in South Osetia and Abkhazia, both of which are included in the Georgia boundary which has absolutely no control over those territories (de-facto controlled by Russia)? Why is Transnistria included in the boundaries of Moldova? Why does the Cyprus boundary include a large area fully controlled by Turkey? What police and tax authority is there in large areas of Iran and Iraq controlled by ISIS, and why are these areas still included in the respective countries? The only major difference in those cases compared to Crimea is that applying the ground-truth rule there would require mapping respective areas as independent countries. But — big surprise! — OSM community by convention limits the list of countries to those recognized by the UN, because, as it turns out, a country is a political entity after all. How ironic is that? In practice, OSM never fully adhered to the ground truth rule when it comes to country boundaries, but at least the policy was vague enough to make arbitrary decisions, with either "ground truth" or "widely internationally recognized" bit taking precedence depending on how the DWG members feel about the world on a particular day. Pretending OSM is out of politics when solving an inherently political issue does not help, because then you take a political side implicitly (becoming a welcome tool of Russian regime propaganda in this case). There are reasonable and possible alternatives, such as this in-progress disputed boundaries proposal <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Mapping_disputed_boundaries>, but due to the complexity and emotional charge of the issue, fleshing them out to a practical consensus will take a considerable time. Until such a common ground is found, the most practical thing you can do is to revert to a balance point that prevents never-ending edit wars and worked well in practice for the last 5 years. It's unfortunate that this issue wasn't taken seriously in that period, but hopefully this crisis, however damaging, will facilitate coming to a universal solution soon. -- Vladimir Agafonkin https://agafonkin.com +380 (93) 745 44 61 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Leaflet 0.3 released
Hi everyone, I'm happy to announce the new stable 0.3 release of Leaflethttp://leaflet.cloudmade.com/, a modern JavaScript library for interactive maps. 7 months after the previous stable version, this release brings a really huge number of improvements and bugfixes (see the changeloghttps://github.com/CloudMade/Leaflet/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md— just reading it will take quite a while!), having a smoother, more stable user experience, a wider platform support, and a more complete API while remaining simple, lightweight, fast and elegant, making Leaflet a number one choice for most web mapping needs of today. I'd like to thank all the awesome people that contributed code, reported bugs, suggested improvements and asked questions — what a joy to see such a wonderful growing community around Leaflet! Cheers! Vladimir -- Vladimir Agafonkin Front-End Architect, CloudMade +380 93 745 44 61 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Leaflet 0.2 released
Hi! After one month of active development since the first public release, Leaflet, a new JavaScript library for interactive maps by CloudMade, recently reached version 0.2. Highlights of this release include: - WMS layers support - GeoJSON support - different projections support (with EPSG:4326, 3857 and 3395 out of the box) - lots of bugfixes (especially for mobile browsers) - performance, usability and API improvements See the full list of changes here: https://github.com/CloudMade/Leaflet/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md On a side note, despite being more and more feature-complete as a map library, the JS code of a full Leaflet build still weights under 18kb gzipped. Found out more about Leaflet on the official website: http://leaflet.cloudmade.com/ -- Vladimir Agafonkin Front-End Architect, CloudMade +380 93 745 44 61 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Kothic JS - a full-featured JavaScript map rendering engine using HTML5 Canvas
Actually all browsers work like this - they have UI and JS running in the same thread, so you can't do anything while a tile is rendered. I've split the process to 3 chunks (styling, map rendering and text rendering) to make the UI a little more responsive, but generally this can't be addressed well at the moment. I'm hoping that browsers will implement the ability to manipulate Canvas in a Web Worker sometime so rendering is in a separate thread. On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 7:11 AM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: And it's gorgeous, just gorgeous. The only thing wrong with it is that the whole user interface of Firefox is written in JS. So when Kothic is rendering a complex map, be prepared to wait for your browser to pay attention to your clicks. -- Vladimir Agafonkin Front-End Architect, CloudMade +380 93 745 44 61 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The White House uses OpenStreetMap
It also uses CloudMade by the way :) http://www.whitehouse.gov/change On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org wrote: This has bee popping up in my social networks since yesterday and I have not seen it echoed here... So there - the White House uses OpenStreetMap : http://www.whitehouse.gov/mapping_service/inventory/524 How is that for an endorsement ? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Vladimir Agafonkin Front-End Architect, CloudMade +380 93 745 44 61 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Leaflet - a new open source JavaScript library for maps by CloudMade
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 7:01 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: It would be great to have a yardstick from you comparing Leaflet to OpenLayers in an if you want ... you'll probably be better off with Leaflet but if you want ... you'll be probably bet better of with OpenLayers way. I'd say that you should use OpenLayers if you want a really mature, massive library with tons of features, supporting myriads of GIS data formats, layers etc., but if you don't need much more than just a map with some tile layers, markers, popups and vectors on it, and want a faster and smaller library that is easier to use and works well under mobile browsers too, try Leaflet. -- Vladimir Agafonkin Front-End Architect, CloudMade +380 93 745 44 61 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Leaflet - a new open source JavaScript library for maps by CloudMade
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason ava...@gmail.com wrote: This library is very heavy on the GPU (as opposed to google maps), which makes it really slow in e.g. vmware without GPU acceleration, and presumably on platforms that don't have a GPU. It works pretty fast on one of my PCs that doesn't have GPU-accelerated browser graphics. The only thing that can possibly appear to be slow on such system is the zoom animation which is easily turned off. By the way, Google Maps v3 takes advantage of the GPU too. If you experience a noticeable slowdown with Leaflet in comparison to other libraries - please report the details here https://github.com/CloudMade/Leaflet/issues (browser version, platform, what action is slow, etc.), it's not normal and will probably be fixed. -- Vladimir Agafonkin Front-End Architect, CloudMade +380 93 745 44 61 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Leaflet - a new open source JavaScript library for maps by CloudMade
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 10:27 PM, Paul Hartmann phaau...@googlemail.comwrote: The animations are awesome though. On my system, they work in Chrome, but not in Firefox 3.6 or Opera 11.01 browser. The zoom animation works on browsers that support CSS3 Transforms and Transitions (e.g. in Chrome, FF4+, Safari, iOS). It's also coming in IE9 Opera in future versions. Normally I'd say it is good to have a little competition, but wouldn't it be so much easier to fork OL and rewrite the parts you don't like? A friendly fork could contribute some code upstream occasionally. If I had to rewrite the parts of OL I don't like I would end up rewriting everything (not to mention how enormous it is in terms of amount of code). Not that there's something really bad about it, it's just has a different vision from mine: development approach, design choices, API, set of features, etc. I guess I need to write a big detailed post about reasons that convinced me to write a library from scratch when I could just use OL - but believe me, they were quite significant. But I'd love to contribute to Polymaps and Modest Maps JS libraries in future - I like them a lot. :) -- Vladimir Agafonkin Front-End Architect, CloudMade +380 93 745 44 61 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Leaflet - a new open source JavaScript library for maps by CloudMade
Hi, Today CloudMade announced the first public release of Leaflet, its new open source JavaScript library for interactive maps on both desktop and mobile browsers (currently in beta). See the announcement here: http://blog.cloudmade.com/2011/05/13/announcing-leaflet-a-modern-open-source-javascript-library-for-interactive-maps/ I'm Leaflet lead developer at CloudMade and I'll be happy to hear what you think and answer any questions about the library here. :) The official website: http://leaflet.cloudmade.com/ GitHub repository: https://github.com/CloudMade/Leaflet Thanks! -- Vladimir Agafonkin Front-End Architect, CloudMade +380 93 745 44 61 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
