We (Switzerland and some parts of Germany) have for example started more
or less systematic remapping of anonymous contributions. There is no
real hope that a significant amount of this data will be re-licensed by
the original mappers, and since these objects pre-date the introduction
of hist
Am 17.11.2011 01:35, schrieb Andreas Labres:
On 16.11.11 12:28, Simon Poole wrote:
Currently there is no agreement on what exactly the rules/policy/algorithm
will be to determine which objects or tags will survive the transition
Sorry, but that's the core of the problem: this /has/ to be set
You are right Richard.
This O-trick actually is just a shortcut for delete and (re)place.
Just the thread in which it is presented is a bit suspicious.
The reason why anyone would want to remove a node and replace one at the same
(or approximate) location "escapes" my logic.
It disturbs history
Thank you Chris for your "constructive comment"
to my "stupid" contribution to this list.
I must apologize to you and the list because I should
have realized more early that I am too much of a fool
to be allowed to contribute. I am deeply sorry.
Gert Gremmen
.
Van: Chris Hill [
On 16.11.11 12:28, Simon Poole wrote:
>
> Currently there is no agreement on what exactly the rules/policy/algorithm
> will be to determine which objects or tags will survive the transition
Sorry, but that's the core of the problem: this /has/ to be set first. ASAP.
First we need the rules, then w
It looks like we are going to need tools to look for checking
"relicensed" nodes here. Do we have have CPU for that? I need
hosting.
thanks,
mike
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Gert Gremmen wrote:
>> Using this O-trick violates the copyright of the previous
>> owner,
Gert Gremmen wrote:
> Using this O-trick violates the copyright of the previous
> owner, just as copying from google would violate their
> terms of service.
As they have been for at least three years now, Gert, your opinions about
Potlatch are 100% venting and 0% actual knowledge
(http://lists.op
Just as a warning: replacing non-compliant nodes does
not mean just placing another node adjacent to it.
That's copying (or tracing).
This O-trick suggestion invites our members to fraude.
Using this O-trick violates the copyright of the previous
owner, just as copying from google would violate t
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Simon Poole wrote:
>> That said, I believe P2 now has a tool that will completly replace
>> a node with a new one at the same coordinates which is a bit of
>> a fix for your specific issue.
>
> Just for clarification - what it actually do
> -Original Message-
> From: Andreas Labres [mailto:l...@lab.at]
> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OSM Database Re-Build
>
> Hello,
>
> there is something wrong with the license status P2 shows...
>
> A node without tags holds only one information: its location (lat+lon).
> So for
> instan
Simon Poole wrote:
> That said, I believe P2 now has a tool that will completly replace
> a node with a new one at the same coordinates which is a bit of
> a fix for your specific issue.
Just for clarification - what it actually does is remove the node (in a way)
and create a new one at your _mo
On 16 November 2011 08:07, Maarten Deen wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 19:16:47 +0100, Michael Collinson wrote:
>
>> The numbers:
>>
>> http://matt.dev.openstreetmap.org/treemap.png - each square
>> represents one user, weighted by size of contribution. Green=accepted,
>> Red=Declined or has not res
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 19:16:47 +0100, Michael Collinson wrote:
The numbers:
http://matt.dev.openstreetmap.org/treemap.png - each square
represents one user, weighted by size of contribution.
Green=accepted,
Red=Declined or has not responded.
This displays an 800x600 grey image with black bord
13 matches
Mail list logo
