Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Rebuild] Progress update
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 11:05 PM, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote: I'm also a real mapper and I do truly desire the cleansing bot to weave It's magic as soon as possible. This is because I'm reluctant to add any new data to the project while there is *ANY* date left in the project that was not donated freely for the good of the project. And me (also hopefully a real mapper) - I'm still in two minds. Remapping is somewhat harder with old, tainted data in place. OTOH, the longer we wait, the less disruptive the change will be. Although last time I looked at CLEANMAP, it actually looked not too bad for Victoria (Australia) - we'd lose a couple of towns and a few suburbs around Melbourne, but nothing all that catastrophic, really. I'd definitely appreciate more frequent updates to talk@ though. (I think the issue is too important to be confined to obscure lists like osmf@ and rebuild@) Steve ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Rebuild] Progress update
I've seen no such demonstration of desire. The only thing we real mappers... Hi Alan, I'm also a real mapper and I do truly desire the cleansing bot to weave It's magic as soon as possible. This is because I'm reluctant to add any new data to the project while there is *ANY* date left in the project that was not donated freely for the good of the project. Also, the only thing that I've felt thrust dowm our throats is the incessant sniping from the few people who couldn't get there own way during the licence debate. So, in summing up, I'm at least as cross as Richard with the snipers and I also need to clean my bike since I stuck it in the mud (and crashed) twice on my first attempts at mountain biking today. I have made some improvmentsd to the bike tracks on Strolmo Park Forest but my GPS unit didn't survise my crashes so I'll get some more tomorrow... Cheers Nick ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Rebuild] Progress update
Richard wrote: ...Given people's constraints on time and the community's (understandable) desire for the redaction to get underway asap... I've seen no such demonstration of desire. The only thing we real mappers are discussing is anxiety over exactly what will happen and when, and the huge amount of data that is tainted and will be lost when this thing is shoved down our throats. At 2012-06-21 08:02, Evin Fairchild wrote: There is still a lot of remapping to be done, especially in Los Angeles area where there are several mappers whom have not accepted the new license... ... Are you guys really willing to let this much data go down the drain? There is also a similar issue in other cities and countries, including London, Germany, and especially Poland. What is going to be done about all this data? And why didn't the OSMF step in and help, since they were the ones forcing this upon us? And Richard responded: Evin - this is a list for technical discussion of the rebuild project. If you have policy or mapping questions, there are more suitable channels, in particular legal-talk@openstreetmap.org and osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org. Thanks. Is this really the problem? Have we been barking up the wrong tree? The osmf-talk list isn't even in the list of lists - you have to know it's there and then go to http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk, and it apparently requires approval by a human administrator to get onto it. Is that the community you've been listening to? Your board members and lawyers? (I'm sorry for the tone and the cross-posting, but we've been unable to get the board to engage in a substantive discussion about a solution to the bad data problem. Instead, there's just this seemingly-mindless progression going on. I'm want to make sure the real mapping community knows what's going to happen to their data and hope they'll speak up about it.) -- Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Rebuild] Progress update
[followups set to legal-talk, but you may want to adjust to talk-us if focusing on LA etc.] On 21/06/2012 17:57, Alan Mintz wrote: Richard wrote: ...Given people's constraints on time and the community's (understandable) desire for the redaction to get underway asap... I've seen no such demonstration of desire. The only thing we real mappers are discussing is anxiety over exactly what will happen and when, and the huge amount of data that is tainted and will be lost when this thing is shoved down our throats. Ok. I am struggling not to get cross here at your caricature of we, unlike you, are real mappers, but given that I still have tingling in my hands from cycling down 25 miles of bumpy, muddy track yesterday to get some GPS tracks and waypoints... well, yeah, I am a little cross. But in an effort to be civil (hey, first time for everything), I'll confine myself to this: The huge amount of data is globally not that huge. It is 1.2% of nodes (or so odbl.poole.ch tells me, and the guy behind that is cleverer than me, so I have no reason to doubt it). In the US it's 0.2%. I know, for LA people, that's a bit like the old saw that 0.2% unemployment is no consolation if you happen to be in that 0.2%. But: with my Potlatch hat on, I am very very very happy to build/adjust tools to help you fix LA quickly in exactly the same way that I fixed the Llyn Peninsula and Cornwall/Devon, neither of which have been a problem for months. I'm sure there are others who are equally happy to help. If you want to have that conversation, that's great. _But_ one request: please leave out the aggressive stuff about real mappers. About the one way in which you could make me crosser is by going on to assert that real mappers use JOSM. ;) Anyway, I ought to go and clean my bike. cheers Richard personal opinions only yadda yadda ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Rebuild] Progress update
Am 21.06.2012 19:35, schrieb Richard Fairhurst: The huge amount of data is globally not that huge. It is 1.2% of nodes (or so odbl.poole.ch tells me, Actually in real life the damage to nodes is substantially less. On the one hand I don't respect the V0 rule, on the other hand and more importantly, 0.53% points (so not quite half of the 1.2%) of the tainted nodes are from imports, that, should we so wish, could be reimported (on the case of ABS2006 with better data). and the guy behind that is cleverer than me, so I have no reason to doubt it). Haha. Simon ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Rebuild] Progress update
On 22 June 2012 04:28, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote: Actually in real life the damage to nodes is substantially less ... more importantly, 0.53% points (so not quite half of the 1.2%) of the tainted nodes are from imports, that, should we so wish, could be reimported (on the case of ABS2006 with better data). I'm not sure that percentages are useful applied globally and in this way. As you point out, the percentages are skewed by large imports, both tainted and untainted. In the particular case of the ABS2006 data that you mention, all the unmodified imported data has already been removed. The remaining data is all modified in some way. Rivers, roads, coastline, etc, use and change this information. I think it is accurate to say that all the remaining ABS2006 data, when deleted, will be losing some manually created information that can't be directly created from a reimport. Of course, the significance of that information is hard to estimate. The Nile River has many nodes, but infinitely easier to create than a dense mass of inner-city streets with skyscraper obstructed imagery, gps canyons, turn restrictions, one way rules. We have no measure that I've seen which is useful to assess that - but there is no doubt that in several cities it will be very significant. Ian. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
