On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Lars Aronsson l...@aronsson.se wrote:
What I just can't tolerate
is this kind of argument that professional lawyers
have some absolute authority, that trumps every
contributor's opinion. I'm not saying that these
lawyers are wrong, but the argument that they
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
My point is that there should be no tagging for renderers of any kind:
correct or incorrect.
Huh? What does that mean? Who/what are you supposed to tag for if
not for renderers of any kind?
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Is that a topic that's been discussed before on this mailing list?
Here it is in the wiki:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Common_licence_interpretations
[quote]
If what you create is based on OSM data (for example if you create
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 07/25/2010 05:24 PM, Anthony wrote:
So why hasn't OSMF moved OSM to CC-BY-SA 3.0? The upgrade clause
makes that nearly as simple as sed 's/2.0/3.0/g' index.html,
right?
Nearly.
But at least one major contribution
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 07/26/2010 05:06 PM, Anthony wrote:
Go to a Wikipedia article. Look at the notice on the bottom. It says
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike
License It does not say this article
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 12:57 PM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 07/26/2010 05:19 PM, Anthony wrote:
Where are you given permission to copy and distribute the produced
work without following the terms of ODbL.
Nowhere.
Then you don't have permission to do so. At least
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 07/26/2010 05:30 PM, Anthony wrote:
No one can assert the database right on a derivative of the OSM
database, because they'd need the permission of the maker of the
database to do so.
Not if OSM(F) waive their own
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 9:37 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
Ok. There are two types of rights in OSM in its broadest sense:
a) the rights in the individual contributions
b) the rights in the database as a whole
The user preference refers to (a).
So your choice for a is
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 6:21 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
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 CC-BY-SA says nothing about
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 2:50 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.comwrote:
On 25 July 2010 12:21, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
TimSC wrote:
We should also get an official statement from OSMF that they will not
assert their database rights on our contributions.
Of course if
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 18:59:37 -0400, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
And what is it that's wrong with CC-BY-SA again?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License_FAQ
So, nothing that is solved by ODbL
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 23:33:59 +0200, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com
wrote:
However, the end result is effectively the same: with no copyright
statement, the default is All rights reserved, so the only way the
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 10:06 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
I propose 3) Occam's Razor - the now hundreds of people who've been
involved in the ODbL in the last few years, some of whom are real lawyers
are all wrong and suddenly Anthony with no legal training and is right or
the other
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 09:43:04 -0400, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 18:59:37 -0400, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
And what
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
* Limitations make it difficult or ambiguous for others to use OSM
data in a new work (eg mashups)
The ODbL codifies OSM's consensual haullucination
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 11:59:52 -0400, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
How?
By acknowledging their existence and using them against themselves.
I don't follow.
Upgrading from BY-SA 2.0 to BY-SA 2.5 is trivial
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 12:39 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 25 July 2010 02:33, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
Presumably the same thing that prevents the copyright on a DVD you copy
off a TV screen from evaporating when you burn it back to DVD. (I mention
copyright
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 7:37 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
2010/7/20 andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com:
If you find a planet on a bus there's no contract you may be affected
by. There may be copyright, which may protect the content. If
there's nothing written
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 4:36 AM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
James Livingston li...@... writes:
The relevant question is then Is hosting a copy of ODbL licensed material
(e.g.
a planet dump) on your website without requiring people to agree to a
contract a
violation of the ODbL?.
I
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 9:48 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
If you find planet on a bus you are not finding just a pile of ordered
ones and zeros. It's on media of some type. You might sell the disk
as is, but copying the data and selling it would be legally risky. A
Reasonable
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 5:33 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.comwrote:
On 23 July 2010 22:14, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010, Richard Weait wrote:
If you find planet on a bus you are not finding just a pile of ordered
ones and zeros. It's on media of some type. You
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 4:50 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I realize that there are others who believe that the lawyers advising OSMF
are wrong, and that CC-BY-SA could indeed be used further. I have doubts
about this and would like the proponents of that idea put forward
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
So again, either CC-BY-SA 'protects' the data or it does not.
Or it protects the data sometimes, in some jurisdictions, possibly,
depending on who you ask.
___
talk mailing list
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 11:49 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
So again, either CC-BY-SA 'protects' the data or it does not.
Or it protects the data sometimes, in some jurisdictions, possibly,
depending on who you ask
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 21:30:22 +1000, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
The difference here is companies like Teleatlas would sue someone for
massive damages if the contract was breached in the first place, which
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:
It seems to me that Steve's post is not just a harmless rant, but
contains an implication, whether purposeful or not, that some mappers,
namely stay-at-home sons (and daughters?), are less equal than others.
Perhaps
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 1:58 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Jul 17, 2010, at 3:24 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 3:04 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Jul 16, 2010, at 6:11 PM, Rob Myers wrote:
Science Commons seem to think copyright doesn't apply to databases
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Graham Jones grahamjones...@googlemail.com
wrote:
It is true that we had a vote, but I am becoming less convinced that we
voted the right way.
I voted in favour of the change on the basis that at the superficial level
the existing and proposed licences
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 5:32 PM, Ulf Möller o...@ulfm.de wrote:
Am 19.07.2010 22:31, schrieb Anthony:
IIRC, the contributor terms changed significantly *after* the vote took
place.
http://www.osmfoundation.org/index.php?title=License/Contributor_Termsdiff=326oldid=204
Yeah, that's
Aleksandr Dezhin wrote:
As I know Anthony (one_half_3544) tried to contact this user on July 8
[1].
Yes, I've mailed him on 8th, and since he uses potlatch, he should have
seen my message.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 2:11 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
The companies I talk to today come down in to two camps on PD. The first
basically lick their lips and want us to go PD so they don't have to
contribute anything (in effect make their business easier) and the second
think it
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 4:22 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 19 July 2010 06:18, TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote:
It's not a question of OSMF member support, I am talking about how
share-alike encourages business to share data with OSM.
Then why mention produced
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 5:56 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Jul 18, 2010, at 9:49 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 2:11 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
The companies I talk to today come down in to two camps on PD. The first
basically lick their lips and want us
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Frederik posts many wonderful hypothetical situations. ;-)
Here's a completely hypothetical situation. What if I want to import OSM
POIs into Wikipedia. Wikipedia is, of course, under CC-BY-SA.
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
The user is looking at
produced works, ccbysa for the ccbysa tiles, your choice for the ODbL
tiles.
Here's another completely hypothetical situation. What if I use CC-BY-SA
for the ODbL tiles. And then someone else
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 2:39 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
For a long time we assumed that the current license did indeed work, and we
essentially told everyone who signed up that their data was protected.
And what does it mean for the data to be protected?
It doesn't mean
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 2:39 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
We now know that anybody, at least in most jurisdictions and if he has a
decent-sized legal budget and has not respect for ethics (i.e. is
sufficiently evil), can effectively use our data as if it were unprotected.
In
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 07/16/2010 04:33 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 5:19 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org
mailto:r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 07/16/2010 10:05 AM, Anthony wrote:
BY-SA almost certainly applies
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
I see you're talking about the US. So I'll provide a case for you. Key
Publications, Inc. v. Chinatown Today Publishing Enterprises Inc. held that
the yellow pages of the phone directory were copyrightable. Surely the OSM
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Francis Davey fjm...@gmail.com wrote:
But there is quite a high threshold for protection since there is a
requirement that databases so protected by reason of the selection or
arrangement of their contents, constitute the author's own
intellectual creation.
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 5:18 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 07/16/2010 09:49 AM, Anthony wrote:
ODbL is a comparable licence to BY-SA, with the main change being
that it has actually been written to cover data.
That's not at all correct. The main change between BY-SA
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 5:19 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 07/16/2010 10:05 AM, Anthony wrote:
BY-SA almost certainly applies to the OSM database as a whole, even if
it doesn't apply to some individual parts of the database. So you're
wrong that this is an undeniable fact
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 7:07 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
I am simply saying that if you wanted to get involved in the decision
whether or not to ask users how they would licence their contributions,
there was a really simple way to do so: by joining OSMF.
If you want to
Hi!
User Juergenian (http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Juergenian) has
vandalized Russian Nenets autonomous district
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/608648126/history) + made some
very strange edits within that area (he has reverted some of them
himself). I've written him, but got
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
Liz wrote:
Anything this contrived and complex that the potential users can't sort
it out fails the usability test.
There are only three possible data licences that aren't complex:
1. You may do anything you
On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 5:23 AM, Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl wrote:
Yeah, they'll remove it shortly when they notice the bugs
If at first you don't succeed, give up.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
years later!
Reasoning in half empty instead of half full won't lead us anywhere. Stop
whining, be constructive.
2007On 2010-07-05 01:44, Anthony wrote:
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com
mailto:waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 10:34 PM
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 6:13 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.comwrote:
2010/7/5 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
Okay. How do you use speed limit tags when only 8% of the roads are
tagged
with them?
Actually it doesn't matter at all, how many percents of the planet are
tagged
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 2:20 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Nic,
Nic Roets wrote:
There is a lot of talk around better algorithms (e.g. contraction
hierarchies), distributed routing, stress tests etc. So I'm going to
put in into perspective with a few calculations.
For a
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
Ed Avis wrote:
Isn't this tagging redundant? If a link road leads from a primary to a
secondary, or whatever, this can be seen by looking at the tags for the
two
roads it connects. In principle there is no need to
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
Anthony wrote:
You could always have highway=link.
But some links ARE motorway rules and some ARE trunk road so just saying
link does not work.
I guess, but now you're using a different definition of *_link. Not
tag
Having a wiki is great but the 'anyone can edit' model is not good for
pages
that are meant to be authoritative,
Luckily we don't have authoritative pages in OSM.
I don't know about luckily, but yeah. For data to be maximally useful, it
needs to be well-defined.
Instead of trying to
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 9:16 AM, James Livingston li...@sunsetutopia.comwrote:
I, and from what I see in use where I live quite a few other too, have
always used xxx_link tags to join a highway=xxx with a higher one, because
we think what was documented on the wiki (xxx_link joins highway=xxx
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 9:29 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
2010/6/23 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
I figured it would be footway=* (a la cycleway=*), but apparently that
was
proposed years ago and never adopted
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features
On 6/23/10, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
highway=path wouldn't work if the way is already tagged with
highway=secondary.
I was thinking something like highway=secondary, footway=both (a la
highway=secondary, cycleway
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 6:08 PM, David Paleino da...@debian.org wrote:
Hello people,
does someone know the reasoning behind:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Map_Features:highwaydiff=490719oldid=485601
?
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23 June 2010 00:14, Paul Houle p...@ontology2.com wrote:
I'd like to see some tagging that tells cyclists not to ride on
sidewalks, for instance: as a pedestrian I've been involved in
accidents where cyclists
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 2:40 AM, Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl wrote:
On Monday 21 June 2010 01:21:19 Roy Wallace wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Personally I don't mind if they add some sort of subjective hazard level
tag as well as these objective
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
They want to produce a map of the city that highlights the dangerous
roads to avoid in order to show how they act as barriers and make it
very difficult to move around town on a bicycle.
Sounds like it's in both their
OTRS?
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 9:30 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
Well let me take that back a bit - actually even doing some very simple
cleanup of the interface and having a feedback mechanism *at all* would be a
good first step, as people jumped on my recent OGD post in the comments:
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 9:50 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Jun 17, 2010, at 7:45 PM, Anthony wrote:
OTRS?
huh?
Does anyone think it would be a good idea to set up OTRS for OSM?
If your question was what OTRS is, http://lmgtfy.com/?q=otrs
It's the system that Wikimedia uses
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:31 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
I think we can do better
Well then, feel free.
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:32 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Jun 17, 2010, at 8:27 PM, Anthony wrote:
I'd expect the company sending all that feedback at us
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:46 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
that's a matter of opinion, any reasonable person I've ever met would
prefer uservoice to trac or otrs or whatever.
For what? From a glance at the two, OTRS and uservoice don't even seem to
be in the same category.
The two
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 12:40 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Jun 17, 2010, at 10:36 PM, Anthony wrote:
Anyway, if your point in this thread is just defending yourself against
what you see as an attack from Frederick, feel free to ignore this. But if
you'd like some ideas on how
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 12:54 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
OTRS is a horrible system, whereas uservoice is easypeasy.
From whose perspective? Send an email, wait 3 minutes and 42 seconds,
receive a response that your issue has been resolved and thanking you for
your report. That's my
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:15 PM, Roland Ramthun osm...@roland-ramthun.dewrote:
Am Dienstag, den 15.06.2010, 15:54 -0400 schrieb Richard Weait:
[...]
Wow. Every respondent will be getting $50-equivalent? I sure
misunderstood the original announcement.
Right, this was somewhat unclear.
seem to believe is a rule - the supposed map only what's on the
ground rule. Do the website=* and wikipedia=* tags violate this rule?
Anthony
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 9:18 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 7 June 2010 23:12, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
The only thing I'm really afraid of is that these tags would violate what
some people seem to believe is a rule - the supposed map only what's on
the
ground rule
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 8:16 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 7 June 2010 23:39, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Either way, I could see someone going around removing uuid=* tags from
places where they couldn't find the QR code in the store window.
UUIDs aren't just so you
If you want to interlink databases, eg wikipedia, you would simply
extend upon the work I've done for UUID to OSM object lookup table,
you'd add one more table and then use the UUID as the key field and
link other object IDs from other databases to it.
Do you have a link? I'm not
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:18 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
You might be confusing a couple of issues here, when you look at OSM
tags you are viewing a simplified database, that is the raw data, what
you are describing is presentation of that data in a more human
friendly way,
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Really, I think we need a better example than a lamp post, or at least the
node ID of an actual lamp post in OSM.
http://osmdoc.com/en/tag/highway/street_lamp
Still not sure what the use case would be, though
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:51 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 8 June 2010 12:50, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Really, I think we need a better example than a lamp post, or at least
the
node ID of an actual
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:55 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 8 June 2010 12:46, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
How else are you going to describe what your object is? I don't see a
uuid:lamp_post in your list of examples. I guess that would be,
uuid:man_made? I don't
By the way, I assume we should break this out to an off-list discussion, or
on a different list, or something.
My apologies to those who don't like a lot of traffic on talk.
OSM-verbose, anyone?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote:
I sure hope not, because I use it all the time.
It's very new here - much newer than the 2007 Yahoo imagery - it looks
like
it was taken in 2010. What is your JOSM WMS URL?
To clarify, I use the USGS imagery for
suppose this could be allowed
for advanced users who want to do things by hand, but it's not in this plan.
Anthony
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Please note that I've abandoned the functionality of having multiple uuids
on a single element (e.g. uuid:building and uuid:shop).
Hmm, on second thought, maybe that's not such a hot idea. There might be
two different stores
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.comwrote:
On 3 June 2010 15:38, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:39 AM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
So is the permanent object the node? Is the permanent object the POI?
What if the POI
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 9:49 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
Worst than that, it could lead to even more stupid terms and
conditions annoying you over and over and over again after every route
request.
They could always require people to log in. Or require people to log in if
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 10:16 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 3 June 2010 00:15, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
They could always require people to log in. Or require people to log in
if
they want to put up with the annoying terms and conditions only once.
This woman
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 7:27 AM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
When I map, I just want to create a useful map. And when I write
software it should be backward compatible with old data and forward
compatible with new data and still give reasonable results. I don't
want to waste time on
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Matt Williams li...@milliams.com wrote:
On 1 June 2010 13:33, Jason Cunningham jamicu...@googlemail.com wrote:
1... What's the correct way of tagging a street as 'dangerous/suicidal'
for
pedestrians in OSM? (Couldnt find an answer in the wiki)
Recently come
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Matt Williams li...@milliams.com wrote:
The road should simply be marked as having no pavement/sidewalk.
Something like pavement=yes/no is a start at least. It's best to avoid
subject
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:38 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 2 June 2010 10:23, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
You seem to have missed the rest of my post. I was arguing that a road
with
no pavement but with a shoulder is *not* unsafe. OTOH, if the road has
no
shoulder
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 2:45 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
Anthony wrote:
I guess the suggestion to map what's on the ground is good advice as
long as it's not exclusionary. But my beef is with people who tell us to
map what's on the ground to the exclusion
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Andrew wynnd...@lavabit.com wrote:
If anything is unclear on the ground the mapper needs to provide a source.
That
way other mappers can judge whether the source is legitimate.
That's a great point. I hate fixing an area of map which is already in
place and
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
Anthony wrote:
By these definitions, something that is able to be confirmed as true or
false in an official online source is actually *more* verifiable than
something written on a street sign in a place where
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 2:06 PM, Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
No borders? No national parks? No nature reserves? No voltage on power
lines? No
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
If they are not marked, how do the locals know what and where they are?
They look at a map!
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
2010/5/31 Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com
I don't think anyone has suggested that we leave out things I'd they
aren't signposted.
Nathan, who started this thread, has done exactly that, and he's gone around
removing route relations where the routes were not signed on the ground.
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 5:40 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 June 2010 07:29, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
Nakor wrote:
Did Google add their notice after the fact?
I am trying to make it a habit to read articles before I reply to them
and have
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 5:40 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 June 2010 07:29, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
Nakor wrote:
Did Google add their notice after the fact?
I am trying to make
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 3:40 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 30 May 2010 15:39, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
If the dispute can not be resolved through discussion, then the simple
default rule is that whatever name, designation, etc are used by the
people
on the ground
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 9:19 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 30 May 2010 23:17, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
From what I can tell, it was actually the solution to such an edit war.
How
map what the people on the ground say turned into map what's on the
ground, I can't
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
In any case, more important than the etymology of the phrase map what's
on
the ground is what it means and whether or not it's good advice. In
terms
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:
Right now, the only mention of the on the ground rule on the wiki is
here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes#On_the_Ground_Rule
Should a separate page be created about how it applies more generally?
Well,
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 1:35 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:
Right now, the only mention of the on the ground rule on the wiki is
here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes#On_the_Ground_Rule
Should
OSM: using 10,000 people to do what Google does with 300. ;)
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 11:50 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2010/05/google_hiring_300_temp_workers_in_kirkland_to_pinpoint_bugs_in_google_maps.html
Anyone care to come up with a press
It'd be perfect for the closed source fork of OSM which comes into place
after the content is moved from CC-BY-SA to DbCL.
I'll take it.
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 8:04 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
If anyone wants the above domain name, let me know as it expires in a
month.
Yours c.
701 - 800 of 1311 matches
Mail list logo
