On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 3:24 AM, Simon Ward si...@bleah.co.uk wrote:
There is already the ability to change the licence without the CTs:
There is an upgrade clause in the ODbL itself.
Actually, section 3 will make it harder to upgrade. Under the CT
section 3, the database can only be licensed
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 11:05 PM, Antony Pegg anttheli...@gmail.com wrote:
What would you like to see done (or NOT see done) with TIGER 2010 as regards
OSM when it is released?
Nothing on a grand scale. A TIGER import into a pretty much blank map
is a great thing. A TIGER import into the
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote:
On a smaller scale, I don't know. Pretty much all the TIGER data I've
ever seen is surpassed in quality by local county/state data. So if
you're going to import county by county, why bother with TIGER?
Not all states /
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Lord-Castillo, Brett
blord-casti...@stlouisco.com wrote:
TIGER 2010 is a different beast from past TIGER products. Each county was
required to respond to the Census bureau with their addressing and centerline
data to build it. So, it is a year or more out of
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Lord-Castillo, Brett
blord-casti...@stlouisco.com wrote:
TIGER 2010 is a different beast from past TIGER products. Each county
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 7:21 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Lord-Castillo, Brett
blord-casti...@stlouisco.com wrote:
TIGER
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
I can't speak for Chris, but you [Frederik] don't make me nervous because
you're quite
open and you don't drive any issues that may have business implications.
He doesn't make me nervous, but I wouldn't want him (or anyone
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 8:34 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
That's an open question for the lawyer that wrote the CT. In casual
conversation with one lawyer (casual as in I wasn't paying the
lawyer) I was told that legal-English is not FORTRAN and the or is not
required for
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
Felix Hartmann schrieb:
Instead of just moaning about the Odbl, let's stark working on a future
without Odbl.
If you do that, please do it on your own servers, mailing lists, and
community, and with your own new project
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 8:13 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think making passwords publicly available is a good idea, but
it might be a sign of good faith on OSM(F)'s behalf if it were to
facilitate an easy method for people waiting to claim their
account/edits on a
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Andrew Ayre a...@britishideas.com wrote:
When I signed up for an account with OSM I didn't realize that my account
information was going into a database that was also CCBYSA.
It wasn't, although arguably, the entire database (including
usernames, passwords, and
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 3:56 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Anyway, the number of people who have submitted nearmap changesets is 121,
the total number of people who haved edited in Australia is 2752; so while
NearMap-affected data may be up to 10% of Australia, NearMap-using
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 5:26 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
My apologies. In that case: My main problem is that we're having this
discussion now, when the CT were finalised in June, instead of before that.
Which discussion? It looks to me like we did have this discussion
before
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 3:23 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
NearMap is the only company I'm aware of attempting to hold a lot of data
hostage in this way.
I sure hope you've tried your best to listen to their points and
explain yours, and come to an absolute impasse, before accusing them
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
That obviously explains why NearMap is very important to the community in
Australia. But for the project as a whole, one million objects is really not
something we should make a big fuss about.
I think that the people
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 2:38 AM, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:
Anthony:
Ugh, another point:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Relations_are_not_
Categories
Putting all the elements which have addresses referencing a
street
into a relation seems to me to violate
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 8:54 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
this discussion must move to legal-talk.
If we don't change the contributor terms, then we lose NearMap.
That's not a legal discussion.
___
talk mailing list
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Chris Browet c...@semperpax.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 14:17, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Chris Browet c...@semperpax.com wrote:
They definitely need to define that, it would help. an OSI endorsed
free
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
Anthony wrote:
I've contacted Angela Beesley and Benjamin Mako Hill from
freedomdefined.com
... which is about free cultural works
i.e. works or expressions which can be freely studied, applied,
copied
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
Please don't refer to something as stealing where it's not a process of
the previous owner unrightfully losing something and not having access to it
any more.
Unless it's stealing someone's idea, stealing a kiss, stealing
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 4:14 AM, TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote:
Assuming GPS tracks have some legal protection in some legal jurisdictions,
does anyone care to take a stab at answering my original question? :)
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 1:51 PM, TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 11:14 AM, TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote:
On 18/08/10 15:13, Anthony wrote:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 1:51 PM, TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk
wrote:
Is tracing someones ODbL licensed GPS track a creation of a derived
database
or a produced work
They both (street and collection) have problems. type=street is the
best type. role=member (or no role) would be the best role.
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 8:10 AM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
Since associatedStreet was historicaly the first proposal including house
numbers and is the most
Also I think the notion of general inheritance should be abandoned. A
tag should be on the street relation only if it applies to the street
as a whole, and not to the individual ways which make up the relation.
IOW, name is fine. oneway=yes, for a dual carriageway, wouldn't be
(even though the
Ugh, another point:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Relations_are_not_Categories
Putting all the elements which have addresses referencing a street
into a relation seems to me to violate that principle.
What's needed is a way to put a reference to the street into the way
for the
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 1:25 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
According to the wiki, associatedStreet only allows one occurrence of
the street role,
Which is the main difference with the proposal 'street'. But this can
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 7:31 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
But changing it is probably a bad idea. Do we really want a relation
with 500 ways representing the street and 50,000 nodes representing
the buildings?
wow, 500
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Peter Wendorff
wendo...@uni-paderborn.de wrote:
On 18.08.2010 19:21, Anthony wrote:
put a reference to the street into the way
for the building, not a way to put a reference to the building into
the way for the street. One possibility is to just use
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Peter Wendorff
wendo...@uni-paderborn.de wrote:
Isn't addr:street=Main Street enough?
It'd be nice to have an easy way to link the address to the street.
Oh yeah, another advantage (though
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 7:45 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 August 2010 09:37, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
By the way, all the images I've personally seen in the Yahoo API (this
isn't the same as maps.yahoo.com) are most likely USGS. So there is
no license. It's
A good start would be an explanation of why a user *wouldn't* be
allowed to trace data from Yahoo. Why do they need permission in the
first place?
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 11:29 AM, David Groom revi...@pacific-rim.net wrote:
Is there anything available which would allow a user who has signed up
At 2010-08-17 12:52, Dale Puch wrote:
Because your losing information.
If your separating the elements to different tags... if truly not part of
the name, it can be used for part of the address instead of street.
Is it really not part of the street name, what are the rules you use to
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Dale Puch dale.p...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, personally there is what is, what should be, and what is practical.
The directional prefix/suffix absolutely should not be dropped from any
streets. Even ones that are simple straight lines that change N/S or E/W at
On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Robert Whittaker (OSM)
robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote:
However, lets suppose (hope?) that the CT's are changed so they're no
longer a problem. The question still remains as to whether CC-By or
CC-By-SA are compatible with ODbL+DbCL.
If the work is
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 2:26 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
• If you've made your point already, you don't need to tell us all
again
Not sure how that's supposed to work. If someone on the list asks a
question that's already been asked by someone else and answered, or
expresses a
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Apollinaris Schoell ascho...@gmail.com wrote:
As several asked already let's
open the vote for old accounts to dual license and get a strong vote for a
license.
The vote is at http://openstreetmap.org/user/terms
You're only allowed to vote yes, though.
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 7:16 AM, Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com wrote:
Map is a hand-written 2D picture of the world. It is definitely more a
kind of art than a digital photo in flickr, there is more subjectivity
and intelligence etc needed to make it.
How can photos be copyrighted?
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 8:09 AM, Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/8/10 Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com:
Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org writes:
Any license that tries to use this patchy copyright protection of data
is bound to be unfair at the very least, and more likely a pain
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:36 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Anthony wrote:
What about a tracing of a photograph of a flower? [...]
What about a tracing of a photograph of a lake, as viewed from
an aircraft?
Bauman v Fussell may be relevant here.
Not particularly
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Peter Körner osm-li...@mazdermind.de wrote:
[...] CC-BY-SA can't be used for databases.
That's certainly trivially incorrect.
The database that holds Wikipedia is a database, for instance.
___
talk mailing list
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com wrote:
I like this test because it will make things easy. No fuzzy shades of grey
like
some Richard is suggesting. Can you give an example of a thing that is done
by a
human being and that is not art by this definition?
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:49 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
I never really got that, pro-PD people are pro-ODBL because copyright
may not be enough to cover the database...
Not sure what that means. I'd prefer OSM to stay CC-BY-SA. Barring
that, I'd prefer CC0 (or PDDL, or
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Elena of Valhalla
elena.valha...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/10/10, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Peter Körner osm-li...@mazdermind.de
wrote:
[...] CC-BY-SA can't be used for databases.
That's certainly trivially incorrect
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
As Matt noted, there's a growing legal opinion that our current data is in
fact in the PD, as the CC-BY-SA can't be legally applied to it. Is that the
state you want to have in the future?
Better than it being under ODbL.
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 5:53 AM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Frederik Ramm frede...@... writes:
By the way, the database right exists - in certain jurisdictions like
the EU - even if it is not asserted. That means, OSMF is likely to hold
database rights over the database even today. But
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 7:59 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Anthony,
Anthony wrote:
I don't trust the OSMF to properly remove
all of my work and derivatives of my work if/when they stop releasing
those derivatives under CC-BY-SA.
In December last year we had a guy also called
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 8:54 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Ed Avis wrote:
Anthony writes:
I'm currently working on a fork.
I'm still hopeful that people will find some compromise, and it won't be
needed. (Myself I would be quite happy if the project chose a dual
licence
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
If you really consider your contributions to be in the public domain then
good news for you: we do not require your agreeing to any contract.
No, I'll simply take his data and upload it under an account which I sign up
2010/8/9 Dirk-Lüder Kreie osm-l...@deelkar.net:
Yes, easier said than done. But in my opinion a free and open
geodatabase of the world is only free if it doesn't impose limits on
it's uses.
If you use OSM in a work, say that you used OSM, and don't sue anybody
for copying that work.
Is that
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote:
A common
mantra is that copyright does not mean much unless exerted. Views?
I'm not sure where you're getting that from. In any countries which
have agreed to the Berne Convention, copyright is acquired
automatically,
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
OSMF is not moving to a PD license disguised as BY-SA
Then why don't they ever talk about the fact that the contents are
going to be released under DbCL?
___
talk mailing list
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
Anthony wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
OSMF is not moving to a PD license disguised as BY-SA
Then why don't they ever talk about the fact that the contents are
going
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:30 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 August 2010 07:25, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
they do. and it's in the contributor terms: ODbL 1.0 for the database
and DbCL 1.0
On 10 August 2010 07:25, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
they do. and it's in the contributor terms: ODbL 1.0 for the database
and DbCL 1.0 for the individual contents of the database. the
One other thing. What is meant by the individual contents of the
database. Is a changeset an
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Can we get a collection of quotes from those lawyers that you say
think otherwise? Exact quotes of what they said?
unfortunately not. apparently legal advice
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Can we get a collection
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 5:43 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
Most of the cases you are probably familiar with involve simple lists of
telephone numbers and subscribers. The moment you add even the slightest
originality to a
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
Can you give examples of what you consider originality in the OSM database?
Is a painting of a flower copyrightable? What about a tracing of a
photograph of a flower? What if you just trace the outline of the
flower?
Is a
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 6:51 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
PD has nothing to do with it. Full stop.
What's the difference between PD and DBCL?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
John Smith schrieb:
For anyone still fence sitting over the new contributor terms and the
ODBL this is what you have to look forward to in the near future:
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I don't see any reason for an outcry other than this might make the
coastline less precise for a while. Chances are it is going to be fixed very
quickly in areas with Yahoo imagery, and might retain some of the typical
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
On 08/08/2010 04:39 PM, Anthony wrote:
If the license change is important, why don't the people who want the
license change make their own coastline, on the dev server. This can
be done quickly, right
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
On 08/08/2010 05:13 PM, Anthony wrote:
No, what I said is that you need to start from a blank map. If you
want to create a map which isn't CC-BY-SA, you aren't allowed to use
the CC-BY-SA map to do it.
Depends
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 11:15 AM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
There's likely to be 20% data loss based on the feedback I'm getting.
I can't imagine it'll be anywhere near that low. What percentage of
contributors are even still active? Maybe 20% of active contributors
will disagree with the
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
Anthony schrieb:
And I'm sure if you do it that way you'll be infringing on the
copyright of the CC-BY-SA data.
Gah, what are we? I thought we were an OPEN project that likes share-alike
licensing, mostly without
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 1:43 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/stats/data_stats.html
12,094 active users in the past month. How many in the past 6 months?
Even if we assume 12,094 times 6 (which vastly overestimates things),
and assume that 100% of
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 2:44 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that is considerably on the high side of things, since someone
gave an estimate of total number of contributors at about 75k
Good call. There are 5,404,188 changesets. Only 11,631 changesets
are completely
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Incidentally, I'd also guess the 30,000 'CT 1.0' signups is a
similarly misleading figure.
What's the UID of the first user to sign up under CT 1.0? Can I
assume that any higher uids have likewise agreed to the contributor
terms
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Incidentally, I'd also guess the 30,000 'CT 1.0' signups is a
similarly misleading figure.
What's the UID of the first user to sign up under CT 1.0? Can I
assume
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Two recent, very high-profile judgements in Australia both repudiate the
notion that copyright can protect collections of unoriginal facts. These are
IceTV vs Nine Network (last year) and Telstra vs Phone Directories
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 08/05/2010 02:49 PM, Anthony wrote:
I don't see that's different from any other drawing,
in digital form.
It depends how creative/original it is.
No it doesn't. It depends whether or not it crosses the threshold
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 08/05/2010 03:20 PM, Anthony wrote:
Still waiting for that definition of geodata.
It's a contraction of geographical data.
I didn't ask for an expanded form, I asked for a definition. If you'd
like to be tricky, you can
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 11:08 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6 August 2010 01:02, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Call it mapping for the renderer if you want. Call it a violation
of the rules of OSM. But that's a copyrightable work.
So would any use of the smoothness
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 08/05/2010 05:09 PM, Anthony wrote:
And OSM is more than just geographical data. A way isn't geographical
data.
A way is geographical data. Or possibly geographical metadata. ;-)
I don't think so. Ways contain
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Jamie Smith jamiekrsm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 08/05/2010 08:20 PM, Anthony wrote:
I don't think so. Ways contain geographical data
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:23 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 August 2010 22:44, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
Oh and BTW this exact dragging on is why I suggested we bound the problem by
signing up new users - so the problem doesn't grow every day with more and
more
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com wrote:
trollHum, I think that quite a few things on Wikipedia can be considered
creative in the first place allowing for copyrights to kick in. /troll
Hum, in Wikipedia, it is not the facts that is protected but the
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com
wrote:
trollHum, I think that quite a few things on Wikipedia can be considered
creative in the first place allowing for copyrights to kick in. /troll
Hum
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:36 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Anthony wrote:
And who told you that OSM is a collection of unoriginal facts?
I did, last time I did some mapping. I faithfully recorded where the paths,
gates and stiles were, rather than pulling some fictitious
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
I've pretty much stopped uploading my maps to OSM precisely because of
this switch to ODbL.
Basically, I don't trust you to delete all of my work and all of the
derivatives based on it, when you switch
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:
On 05/08/10 14:37, Anthony wrote:
By the way, if you know the history of copyright, you'll know that
maps were one of the first two types of works which were protected.
When copyright was invented, it protected books and maps
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
We can simply decide to re-license, then ask everyone to agree, then
disallow contributions from people who haven't agreed. All the time, the
planet is still under CC-BY-SA. Then we evaluate the losses. Say we find
that
http://www.bing.com/community/blogs/maps/archive/2010/08/02/bing-maps-adds-open-street-maps-layer.aspx
Unfortunately, the driving directions don't seem to be based on OSM data.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
John,
John Smith wrote:
On 31 July 2010 22:05, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
That is indeed selfish, because you're saying that your time is more
valuable than theirs.
And you are saying their time is
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Agreed. I think the comment should say 'why' not 'what'
What does that mean?
What: made a road into a dual carriageway
Why: ???
I assume you don't want an explanation of my vision of my role in the universe.
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 9:25 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
On 31 July 2010 03:02, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
But road A has been rerouted since the TIGER data was created and now
ends at road C, without touching road B. You can't use shortcuts like
this.
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 12:24 AM, Alan Millar amillar...@gmail.com wrote:
I haven't seen a conclusion on what people want to see in the naming
convention (see for example the thread at
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2010-April/003138.html).
Just because the conversation is
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Alan Mintz
alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net wrote:
There's another, very important use for the tiger:reviewed tag.
As I've said above, that's the one tiger tag I don't remove (until
I've reviewed the way, of course).
You don't seem to have read that message. In it
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Alan Mintz
alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net wrote:
A couple of different users have recently been removing all the tiger:*=*
tags from roads in the process of other edits to them.
I'm among them. Mostly because they are not documented in the wiki.
However, they
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 3:33 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
The only tiger tag that is important to keep (to me) is the
tiger:tlid, all the other values can be pulled from the original TIGER
database provided the TLID.
Unfortunately, that's also one of the hardest ones to
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Dave Hansen d...@sr71.net wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 18:44 -0400, Anthony wrote:
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Alan Mintz
alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net wrote:
A couple of different users have recently been removing all the tiger:*=*
tags from roads
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Dave Hansen d...@sr71.net wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 18:58 -0400, Anthony wrote:
Just look in the history for when the way was originally added.
With way combination and splitting, _this_ isn't feasible, either.
TIGER didn't have any bridges, and so doing
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:11 PM, Dave Hansen d...@sr71.net wrote:
Leave
the hard work of the people that laid the groundwork before you *alone*.
Let's look at an example of what it means to leave that work alone.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/44945783
A bridge split from the Florida
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:40 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
On 30 July 2010 00:58, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Please define them in the wiki, and I'll keep them. Unless I have a
definition, I have no way of determining if they're correct or not.
So you're going to delete
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:49 PM, Alan Millar amillar...@gmail.com wrote:
Furthermore, don't store redundant data in the OSM database. There's
absolutely no excuse for having 200 ways which all say name=Cain Rd,
name_base=Cain, name_type=Rd. It's absolutely terrible design.
Patches welcome.
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:41 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:11 PM, Dave Hansen d...@sr71.net wrote:
Leave
the hard work of the people that laid the groundwork before you *alone*.
Let's look at an example of what it means to leave that work alone.
http
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Alan Millar amillar...@gmail.com wrote:
Specifically, RIGHT NOW, you are screwing with my ability to improve
mkgmap. Stop deleting them until you provide a better replacement
functionality.
What is it that you are using this info for in mkgmap? Or is this
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Jim McAndrew j...@loc8.us wrote:
It would be great if attributes could be assigned to a number of ways, at
least from a normalization standpoint.
From a UI standpoint, I don't really know how it would be done, but it could
be possible.
Modifying all the
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote:
Better start putting them all back. They are documented in the wiki.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/TIGER_to_OSM_Attribute_Map
That's an explanation of how to convert the tiger fields into OSM
keys. The only preserved data
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 8:30 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
On 30 July 2010 02:26, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
But as I've shown (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/44945783)
the tlids don't even make sense. tiger:tlid =
86486485:86486486:86486387;
86507262:86489492
601 - 700 of 1311 matches
Mail list logo
