[Talk-si] Portal s pešpotmi
Živijo, Geopedia je pripravila zanimiv portal http://www.pespoti.si A kaj ko je vse, kar oni počnejeo, licenčno nekompatibilno z openstreetmap :-( LP Martin ___ Talk-si mailing list Talk-si@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-si
Re: [Talk-si] Portal s pešpotmi
On Tuesday 29 May 2012 16:19:20 Damjan Gerl wrote: Martin Vuk, on 29/05/2012 15.36, wrote: Živijo, Geopedia je pripravila zanimiv portal http://www.pespoti.si A kaj ko je vse, kar oni počnejeo, licenčno nekompatibilno z openstreetmap :-( LP Martin Ja, nekaj podobnega je tukaj [0], potrebno pa bi bilo dodati še veliko pešpoti... (saj jih v Sloveniji skoraj ni označenih) Mimogrede pa bi bilo lepo tudi, če bi lahko kdo prevedel stran v slovenščino. Očitno nisi prečital pravil uporabe (http://portal.geopedia.si/legal). Poglej točko 6. OSM in Geopedija sta nekompatibilna. Ne moreš vzeti podatkov iz enega in jih prenesti v drugega. Lahko pa svoje podatke vneseš v oba. Mimogrede, če koga zanimajo peš poti v Sloveniji naj si pogleda http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sl:Slovenian_Hiking_Routes. Na tej strani sem zbral relacije, ki predstavljajo markirane peš poti.Pohorje, Kozjak in Peca so pokriti skoraj 100%, ostanek Slovenije pa bolj slabo. Stran bi moral se nekoliko dopolniti. Manjka predvsem opis kako dodeljevati kategorijo poti. Do sedaj sem uporabljal pravilo: - lwn za gozdne učne poti in lokalne poti. Te so običajno markirane z rumeno zelenimi markacijami ali pa še to ne. - rwn za poti merkirane s Knafelčevo markacijo in regionalne obhodnice (Koroška planinska pot, Transferzala okoli Mute, ...). - nwn za daljše obhodnice. Kolikor vem se za to kvalificirata le slovenska planinska pot in Transferzala kurirjev in vezistov. - iwn za mednarodne poti (E6) To se približno ujema s tem kar delajo avstrijci (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Austria/Wanderwege). Odseke planinskih poti sem poimenoval in oblikoval bolj po občutku. Obstaja lista planinskih poti (http://www.pd-iskra-lj.si/poti.htm), ampak nisem siguren kako bi se uporaba tega vira ujemala z ODBL licenco. Mogoče še opozorilo za tiste, ki nameravate označevati planinske poti v OSM. Geopedija in planinske karte so polni napak. Marsikje je potek poti na terenu bistveno drugacen kot je vrisan v teh virih. Naprimer Pot kurirjev in vezistev od Male Kope do Slovenj Gradca http://hiking.lonvia.de/en/?zoom=15lat=46.50499lon=15.17151hill=0.57 in http://www.pespoti.si/pkv-tocka.php?id=53. To po svoje ni presenetljivo, saj je pot že v osnovi slabo označena, s sečnjo pa so v zadnjem času situacijo še poslabšali. Podrta debla z markacijami najteš tudi nekaj sto metrov od dejanske trase poti. Pozdrav, Blaž ___ Talk-si mailing list Talk-si@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-si
[OSM-legal-talk] It's a shame
Legal people know that an investigation is needed before an accusation can lead to a judge or jury proclaiming 'guilty' or 'not guilty'. Unfortunately, some users are very quick to proclaim guilty, even without knowing the local situation or talking to the person being accused. I'm very happy to answer any investigation questions raised upon edits I make. But please let it be judged by a person who knows the local situation, local open databases available etcetera. In the Dutch situation it's Henk Hoff whom I have faith in since he knows the Dutch situation. Let him contact me on this email adress osm...@gmail.com with any questions about my edits. But please - do not judge OSM'ers anymore without an investigation which also gives OSM'ers like me (spending some 15 hours per week on OSM for more than two years now) a chance to defend themselves. Kind regards, Johan (It's so funny) ps in spite of the ongoing discussion on @talk, I still didn't receive a mail in the normal way (by sending a personal message) ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
It's So Funny has not copied your data here, he has simply modified it (in this case, changing highway=residential to highway=unclassified). When the redaction bot is unleashed, if you have still not accepted the CTs (do you have a particular reason not to?), this data will be deleted. There is no problem here. Thanks Tom Davie On 29 May 2012, at 06:06, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.984706lon=4.351842zoom=18layers=M Look at Caracasstraat ! (among others in the region). Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] Verzonden: maandag 28 mei 2012 21:53 Aan: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen CC: talk@openstreetmap.org; osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 3:42 PM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: [ ... ] However, it was not meant that the data were simply to be copied, deleted and re-pasted into the map using a fake account. True. Copy / pasting is not the same as remapping from permitted sources. Could you provide a link or ID to one of the nodes, ways or relations that concern you? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
On 2012-05-29 08:41, Thomas Davie wrote: It's So Funny has not copied your data here, he has simply modified it (in this case, changing highway=residential to highway=unclassified). When the redaction bot is unleashed, if you have still not accepted the CTs (do you have a particular reason not to?), this data will be deleted. There is no problem here. It's So Funny changed a way that was created by CeesW on 2012-01-09: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/144917597/history The previous way was deleted by CeesW in the same changeset. http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/way/7539781/history So the person to confront would be CeesW, not It's So Funny. Offending changeset seems to be http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10345339 Regards, Maarten On 29 May 2012, at 06:06, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.984706lon=4.351842zoom=18layers=M Look at Caracasstraat ! (among others in the region). Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] Verzonden: maandag 28 mei 2012 21:53 Aan: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen CC: talk@openstreetmap.org; osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 3:42 PM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: [ ... ] However, it was not meant that the data were simply to be copied, deleted and re-pasted into the map using a fake account. True. Copy / pasting is not the same as remapping from permitted sources. Could you provide a link or ID to one of the nodes, ways or relations that concern you? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
I've sent CeesW a message asking him to join the discussion here. Most of his other edits seem legit, but the comment on this changeset is somewhat remarkable: ... data reconciliation ODbl. Let's hope he explains himself. Greets, Floris Looijesteijn On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl wrote: On 2012-05-29 08:41, Thomas Davie wrote: It's So Funny has not copied your data here, he has simply modified it (in this case, changing highway=residential to highway=unclassified). When the redaction bot is unleashed, if you have still not accepted the CTs (do you have a particular reason not to?), this data will be deleted. There is no problem here. It's So Funny changed a way that was created by CeesW on 2012-01-09: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/144917597/history The previous way was deleted by CeesW in the same changeset. http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/way/7539781/history So the person to confront would be CeesW, not It's So Funny. Offending changeset seems to be http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10345339 Regards, Maarten On 29 May 2012, at 06:06, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.984706lon=4.351842zoom=18layers=M Look at Caracasstraat ! (among others in the region). Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] Verzonden: maandag 28 mei 2012 21:53 Aan: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen CC: talk@openstreetmap.org; osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 3:42 PM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: [ ... ] However, it was not meant that the data were simply to be copied, deleted and re-pasted into the map using a fake account. True. Copy / pasting is not the same as remapping from permitted sources. Could you provide a link or ID to one of the nodes, ways or relations that concern you? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
Ok, they don't name us, but I think a leading open source map does refer to us. http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/ Oh wauw. We're not perfect. Let's close up the shop. Thanks to SteveC for all the effort, but it wasn't enough. Well, probably one of the very positive effects from OSM is the fact that when we start mapping something, the closed-source mappers follow suit. The fact that Google needs to add gimmicks like kajak routing across the pacific to beat us says enough. It's a win-win situation. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
On 2012-05-29 09:49, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 5/29/2012 3:00 AM, Maarten Deen wrote: On 2012-05-29 08:41, Thomas Davie wrote: It's So Funny has not copied your data here, he has simply modified it (in this case, changing highway=residential to highway=unclassified). When the redaction bot is unleashed, if you have still not accepted the CTs (do you have a particular reason not to?), this data will be deleted. There is no problem here. It's So Funny changed a way that was created by CeesW on 2012-01-09: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/144917597/history The previous way was deleted by CeesW in the same changeset. http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/way/7539781/history So the person to confront would be CeesW, not It's So Funny. Offending changeset seems to be http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10345339 I don't see anything wrong with CeesW's change either: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7539781/history AND has accepted the CT. The only thing cetest did was change unclassified to residential. This was kept by CeesW, but the whole area is a residential landuse, so I see no problem with that tag. The official stance from AND is that the data in the OSM database on march 1 2010 can be used under ODbL, but previously not-entered data from the original dataset is also not allowed to enter OSM under ODbL. That clarification came on april 5th (discussed on talk-nl): http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-nl/2012-April/013870.html This is months after the changes made by CeesW. So his actions (deleting and recreating) were extremly premature, in hindsight unnecessary and can be called strange at any point in time. You'd almost think it was an error on his part, but deleting and recreating the same ways in the one changeset does not support that view very much. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
Whatever. I've certainly seen footpaths classified as roads in commercial online maps for instance. This is a very one sided argument and assumes that commercial online maps are accurate. It also completely neglects the fact that you can use OSM data without a fee andf without someone telling you what you can and cannot do with it. I'd imagine they're running scared at the move away from the restrictive, closed-source model for electronic data. Nick -Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl wrote: - To: talk@openstreetmap.org From: Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl Date: 29/05/2012 08:45AM Subject: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us Ok, they don't name us, but I think a leading open source map does refer to us. http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/ Oh wauw. We're not perfect. Let's close up the shop. Thanks to SteveC for all the effort, but it wasn't enough. Well, probably one of the very positive effects from OSM is the fact that when we start mapping something, the closed-source mappers follow suit. The fact that Google needs to add gimmicks like kajak routing across the pacific to beat us says enough. It's a win-win situation. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:44 AM, Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl wrote: Ok, they don't name us, but I think a leading open source map does refer to us. http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/ Oh wauw. We're not perfect. Let's close up the shop. Thanks to SteveC for all the effort, but it wasn't enough. Well, probably one of the very positive effects from OSM is the fact that when we start mapping something, the closed-source mappers follow suit. The fact that Google needs to add gimmicks like kajak routing across the pacific to beat us says enough. It's a win-win situation. It looks like we're getting to the point where the closed-source mappers are starting to see us as serious competition. If the best they can do is that In one particular instance (presumably chosen to make their point as well as possible) we've got a third less residential road coverage and 16% less basic map attributes we're well on the way (especially the second part of that). Also, having said that the community is a drawback for Open Source, they then claim their community as an advantage! I doubt that their specialists really go out and check each correction that's sent in; I expect we do more (implicit) checking, as vandalism is reported and undone. I wonder whether their comment on pedestrians and in city or town centres can be taken as conceding that we're doing better than them in those areas? The nearest they make to an accurate point is classification of footpaths as roads --- I don't think I've seen any of those, but I have found quite a few unclassified roads that look more like tracks on Bing (and have adjusted them accordingly where confident of it). __John ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
Nick Whitelegg wrote: Whatever. I've certainly seen footpaths classified as roads in commercial online maps for instance. It's basically a misreading of how OSM data works. Essentially they're saying that the fact we use the highway=track tag means OMG OSM MISCLASSIFIES FOREST TRACKS AS HIGHWAYS. *facepalm* I've written a bit more about it at http://www.systemeD.net/blog/index.php?post=23 cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/TomTom-is-thumping-us-tp5710461p5710467.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
Certainly Apple mark footpaths as roads in the data that they have used from us, but that's a rendering issue, not a data issue. Tom Davie On 29 May 2012, at 09:14, Nick Whitelegg wrote: Whatever. I've certainly seen footpaths classified as roads in commercial online maps for instance. This is a very one sided argument and assumes that commercial online maps are accurate. It also completely neglects the fact that you can use OSM data without a fee andf without someone telling you what you can and cannot do with it. I'd imagine they're running scared at the move away from the restrictive, closed-source model for electronic data. Nick -Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl wrote: - To: talk@openstreetmap.org From: Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl Date: 29/05/2012 08:45AM Subject: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us Ok, they don't name us, but I think a leading open source map does refer to us. http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/ Oh wauw. We're not perfect. Let's close up the shop. Thanks to SteveC for all the effort, but it wasn't enough. Well, probably one of the very positive effects from OSM is the fact that when we start mapping something, the closed-source mappers follow suit. The fact that Google needs to add gimmicks like kajak routing across the pacific to beat us says enough. It's a win-win situation. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
2012/5/29 John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com: footpaths as roads --- I don't think I've seen any of those, but I have found quite a few unclassified roads that look more like tracks on Bing (and have adjusted them accordingly where confident of it). +1 to the rest, but I don't think we should change classification of roads from unclassified to track based on aerial imagery. There are unpaved unclassified roads also in Europe (I guess in all countries you might find them at least in very remote areas). cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
To be honest, if a road has no classification, and is made of mud and gravel, it's a track... If it's an official road in some way, then clearly it is classified ;) Thanks Tom Davie On 29 May 2012, at 09:32, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2012/5/29 John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com: footpaths as roads --- I don't think I've seen any of those, but I have found quite a few unclassified roads that look more like tracks on Bing (and have adjusted them accordingly where confident of it). +1 to the rest, but I don't think we should change classification of roads from unclassified to track based on aerial imagery. There are unpaved unclassified roads also in Europe (I guess in all countries you might find them at least in very remote areas). cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
Apparently this ownership is more complex then at first sight. A way is defined by its nodes and its tags. Maarten only took a look at the tags. cetest did not only add a residential tag, but created the nodes (Version 1) that defines this particular way with GPS acquired data, later assisted by satellite data, even before Bing became available. way data: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7539781/history Nodes data (just one) http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/44729547/history The whole area is full of this type of copyright breaches, and I did not investigate anywhere else. Next topic of action: Analyzing the bicycle routes that I personally biked (GPS available, though not uploaded) through large parts of the south west in Holland, will show if the new author actually drove the route, copied the data that I created, or just took the GPX files from the fietsersbond. Regards Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Maarten Deen [mailto:md...@xs4all.nl] Verzonden: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 10:11 AM Aan: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! On 2012-05-29 09:49, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 5/29/2012 3:00 AM, Maarten Deen wrote: On 2012-05-29 08:41, Thomas Davie wrote: It's So Funny has not copied your data here, he has simply modified it (in this case, changing highway=residential to highway=unclassified). When the redaction bot is unleashed, if you have still not accepted the CTs (do you have a particular reason not to?), this data will be deleted. There is no problem here. It's So Funny changed a way that was created by CeesW on 2012-01-09: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/144917597/history The previous way was deleted by CeesW in the same changeset. http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/way/7539781/history So the person to confront would be CeesW, not It's So Funny. Offending changeset seems to be http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10345339 I don't see anything wrong with CeesW's change either: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7539781/history AND has accepted the CT. The only thing cetest did was change unclassified to residential. This was kept by CeesW, but the whole area is a residential landuse, so I see no problem with that tag. The official stance from AND is that the data in the OSM database on march 1 2010 can be used under ODbL, but previously not-entered data from the original dataset is also not allowed to enter OSM under ODbL. That clarification came on april 5th (discussed on talk-nl): http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-nl/2012-April/013870.html This is months after the changes made by CeesW. So his actions (deleting and recreating) were extremly premature, in hindsight unnecessary and can be called strange at any point in time. You'd almost think it was an error on his part, but deleting and recreating the same ways in the one changeset does not support that view very much. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com wrote: To be honest, if a road has no classification, and is made of mud and gravel, it's a track... The ones I reclassified typically had two wheel-tracks of soil-colour and grass between them, I think. If it's asphalt-coloured, even if there is grass growing down the middle, I still call it a road. __John ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
If I remember correctly (someone correct me if I don't), a lawyer has agreed that it's okay to keep node positions and ways where a user would reasonably have created the same way from an ODbL compatible data source. So for example, in this case, the user could reasonably create the exact same way by tracing bing, and hence is fine in terms of copyright breach. The less destructive way to do this would be to simply mark the way as odbl=clean rather than deleting the original and creating a new one with the same node positions though. Thanks Tom Davie On 29 May 2012, at 09:43, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: Apparently this ownership is more complex then at first sight. A way is defined by its nodes and its tags. Maarten only took a look at the tags. cetest did not only add a residential tag, but created the nodes (Version 1) that defines this particular way with GPS acquired data, later assisted by satellite data, even before Bing became available. way data: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7539781/history Nodes data (just one) http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/44729547/history The whole area is full of this type of copyright breaches, and I did not investigate anywhere else. Next topic of action: Analyzing the bicycle routes that I personally biked (GPS available, though not uploaded) through large parts of the south west in Holland, will show if the new author actually drove the route, copied the data that I created, or just took the GPX files from the fietsersbond. Regards Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Maarten Deen [mailto:md...@xs4all.nl] Verzonden: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 10:11 AM Aan: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! On 2012-05-29 09:49, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 5/29/2012 3:00 AM, Maarten Deen wrote: On 2012-05-29 08:41, Thomas Davie wrote: It's So Funny has not copied your data here, he has simply modified it (in this case, changing highway=residential to highway=unclassified). When the redaction bot is unleashed, if you have still not accepted the CTs (do you have a particular reason not to?), this data will be deleted. There is no problem here. It's So Funny changed a way that was created by CeesW on 2012-01-09: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/144917597/history The previous way was deleted by CeesW in the same changeset. http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/way/7539781/history So the person to confront would be CeesW, not It's So Funny. Offending changeset seems to be http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10345339 I don't see anything wrong with CeesW's change either: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7539781/history AND has accepted the CT. The only thing cetest did was change unclassified to residential. This was kept by CeesW, but the whole area is a residential landuse, so I see no problem with that tag. The official stance from AND is that the data in the OSM database on march 1 2010 can be used under ODbL, but previously not-entered data from the original dataset is also not allowed to enter OSM under ODbL. That clarification came on april 5th (discussed on talk-nl): http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-nl/2012-April/013870.html This is months after the changes made by CeesW. So his actions (deleting and recreating) were extremly premature, in hindsight unnecessary and can be called strange at any point in time. You'd almost think it was an error on his part, but deleting and recreating the same ways in the one changeset does not support that view very much. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
On 2012-05-29 10:43, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: Apparently this ownership is more complex then at first sight. A way is defined by its nodes and its tags. Maarten only took a look at the tags. cetest did not only add a residential tag, but created the nodes (Version 1) that defines this particular way with GPS acquired data, later assisted by satellite data, even before Bing became available. way data: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7539781/history Nodes data (just one) http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/44729547/history Interesting. If you say you created them from GPS data, why do they have source=AND and an AND_nodes tag? That would be indicative of the AND import. But you did not import the AND data in that region by hand? The fact that the nodes were created on 2007-09-30 and the way was created on 2007-09-20 does indicate some editing. Regards, Maarten -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Maarten Deen [mailto:md...@xs4all.nl] Verzonden: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 10:11 AM Aan: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! On 2012-05-29 09:49, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 5/29/2012 3:00 AM, Maarten Deen wrote: On 2012-05-29 08:41, Thomas Davie wrote: It's So Funny has not copied your data here, he has simply modified it (in this case, changing highway=residential to highway=unclassified). When the redaction bot is unleashed, if you have still not accepted the CTs (do you have a particular reason not to?), this data will be deleted. There is no problem here. It's So Funny changed a way that was created by CeesW on 2012-01-09: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/144917597/history The previous way was deleted by CeesW in the same changeset. http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/way/7539781/history So the person to confront would be CeesW, not It's So Funny. Offending changeset seems to be http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10345339 I don't see anything wrong with CeesW's change either: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7539781/history AND has accepted the CT. The only thing cetest did was change unclassified to residential. This was kept by CeesW, but the whole area is a residential landuse, so I see no problem with that tag. The official stance from AND is that the data in the OSM database on march 1 2010 can be used under ODbL, but previously not-entered data from the original dataset is also not allowed to enter OSM under ODbL. That clarification came on april 5th (discussed on talk-nl): http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-nl/2012-April/013870.html This is months after the changes made by CeesW. So his actions (deleting and recreating) were extremly premature, in hindsight unnecessary and can be called strange at any point in time. You'd almost think it was an error on his part, but deleting and recreating the same ways in the one changeset does not support that view very much. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
At the time it was judged to be important to keep reference to the original and data. I remember copying lots of old AND tags onto my created roads. I think what should be leading here is the version number, as recorded by the server. Whatever excuse there may be, including reference to anonymous lawyers, it's simply a shame using cut and paste to change ownership of nodes and ways. It was me that basically change the majority of this area into a nice, well aligned and usable map from the mess (in terms of layout) we got from AND. It is up to the new author to use GPS or Bing and create a new way, using new nodes. That is the intend of OSM, it has always been that and it's not because some users are bad/lazy losers that cheating can be justified. Regards, Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Maarten Deen [mailto:md...@xs4all.nl] Verzonden: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 11:04 AM Aan: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! On 2012-05-29 10:43, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: Apparently this ownership is more complex then at first sight. A way is defined by its nodes and its tags. Maarten only took a look at the tags. cetest did not only add a residential tag, but created the nodes (Version 1) that defines this particular way with GPS acquired data, later assisted by satellite data, even before Bing became available. way data: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7539781/history Nodes data (just one) http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/44729547/history Interesting. If you say you created them from GPS data, why do they have source=AND and an AND_nodes tag? That would be indicative of the AND import. But you did not import the AND data in that region by hand? The fact that the nodes were created on 2007-09-30 and the way was created on 2007-09-20 does indicate some editing. Regards, Maarten -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Maarten Deen [mailto:md...@xs4all.nl] Verzonden: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 10:11 AM Aan: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! On 2012-05-29 09:49, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 5/29/2012 3:00 AM, Maarten Deen wrote: On 2012-05-29 08:41, Thomas Davie wrote: It's So Funny has not copied your data here, he has simply modified it (in this case, changing highway=residential to highway=unclassified). When the redaction bot is unleashed, if you have still not accepted the CTs (do you have a particular reason not to?), this data will be deleted. There is no problem here. It's So Funny changed a way that was created by CeesW on 2012-01-09: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/144917597/history The previous way was deleted by CeesW in the same changeset. http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/way/7539781/history So the person to confront would be CeesW, not It's So Funny. Offending changeset seems to be http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10345339 I don't see anything wrong with CeesW's change either: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7539781/history AND has accepted the CT. The only thing cetest did was change unclassified to residential. This was kept by CeesW, but the whole area is a residential landuse, so I see no problem with that tag. The official stance from AND is that the data in the OSM database on march 1 2010 can be used under ODbL, but previously not-entered data from the original dataset is also not allowed to enter OSM under ODbL. That clarification came on april 5th (discussed on talk-nl): http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-nl/2012-April/013870.htm l This is months after the changes made by CeesW. So his actions (deleting and recreating) were extremly premature, in hindsight unnecessary and can be called strange at any point in time. You'd almost think it was an error on his part, but deleting and recreating the same ways in the one changeset does not support that view very much. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
On 29/05/2012 08:44, Maarten Deen wrote: Ok, they don't name us, but I think a leading open source map does refer to us. http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/ Sounds like they're scared to me. With them looking over their shoulders at OSM, it means their taking their eye off the ball. The best thing for OSM mappers is to keep on mapping. we harness the local knowledge of our 60 million satnav customers, How are the village pond footpath that's goes past it being mapped when their customers are travelling at 70mph on the nearby motorway? Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
On 29 May 2012, at 10:15, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: At the time it was judged to be important to keep reference to the original and data. I remember copying lots of old AND tags onto my created roads. I think what should be leading here is the version number, as recorded by the server. Whatever excuse there may be, including reference to anonymous lawyers, it's simply a shame using cut and paste to change ownership of nodes and ways. It was me that basically change the majority of this area into a nice, well aligned and usable map from the mess (in terms of layout) we got from AND. It is up to the new author to use GPS or Bing and create a new way, using new nodes. That is the intend of OSM, it has always been that and it's not because some users are bad/lazy losers that cheating can be justified. I'm sorry that you feel it's cheating to take the path of least resistance to valid, ODbL licensed data, personally, I would rather this guy had taken a path of even less resistance – simply tagged the way odbl=clean. Thanks Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
That's some great imagery if he can read the name signs on that street... Greets, Floris Looijesteijn On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com wrote: If I remember correctly (someone correct me if I don't), a lawyer has agreed that it's okay to keep node positions and ways where a user would reasonably have created the same way from an ODbL compatible data source. So for example, in this case, the user could reasonably create the exact same way by tracing bing, and hence is fine in terms of copyright breach. The less destructive way to do this would be to simply mark the way as odbl=clean rather than deleting the original and creating a new one with the same node positions though. Thanks Tom Davie On 29 May 2012, at 09:43, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: Apparently this ownership is more complex then at first sight. A way is defined by its nodes and its tags. Maarten only took a look at the tags. cetest did not only add a residential tag, but created the nodes (Version 1) that defines this particular way with GPS acquired data, later assisted by satellite data, even before Bing became available. way data: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7539781/history Nodes data (just one) http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/44729547/history The whole area is full of this type of copyright breaches, and I did not investigate anywhere else. Next topic of action: Analyzing the bicycle routes that I personally biked (GPS available, though not uploaded) through large parts of the south west in Holland, will show if the new author actually drove the route, copied the data that I created, or just took the GPX files from the fietsersbond. Regards Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Maarten Deen [mailto:md...@xs4all.nl] Verzonden: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 10:11 AM Aan: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! On 2012-05-29 09:49, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 5/29/2012 3:00 AM, Maarten Deen wrote: On 2012-05-29 08:41, Thomas Davie wrote: It's So Funny has not copied your data here, he has simply modified it (in this case, changing highway=residential to highway=unclassified). When the redaction bot is unleashed, if you have still not accepted the CTs (do you have a particular reason not to?), this data will be deleted. There is no problem here. It's So Funny changed a way that was created by CeesW on 2012-01-09: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/144917597/history The previous way was deleted by CeesW in the same changeset. http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/way/7539781/history So the person to confront would be CeesW, not It's So Funny. Offending changeset seems to be http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10345339 I don't see anything wrong with CeesW's change either: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7539781/history AND has accepted the CT. The only thing cetest did was change unclassified to residential. This was kept by CeesW, but the whole area is a residential landuse, so I see no problem with that tag. The official stance from AND is that the data in the OSM database on march 1 2010 can be used under ODbL, but previously not-entered data from the original dataset is also not allowed to enter OSM under ODbL. That clarification came on april 5th (discussed on talk-nl): http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-nl/2012-April/013870.html This is months after the changes made by CeesW. So his actions (deleting and recreating) were extremly premature, in hindsight unnecessary and can be called strange at any point in time. You'd almost think it was an error on his part, but deleting and recreating the same ways in the one changeset does not support that view very much. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
On 29 May 2012, at 10:27, Floris Looijesteijn wrote: That's some great imagery if he can read the name signs on that street... The fact that all the tags were ODbL safe had already been established – they were created by another user who had accepted. Thanks Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
On 29 May 2012, at 10:36, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: Off list ! No need to annoy the list with comments with suggestion on how to cheat even more. No, I'd rather keep it on list, as I'd really like people to know the quickest and best methods for keeping as much data as possible; keeping as much history as possible and keeping making progress with a great open map. I honestly don't care if one user considers the methods involved to be cheating because they're easier than another method. BTW I and FOSM and a few more would be happy in the end, because if all were like you ( I'll take a look at your edits later) OSM would soon stop to exist as the first lawyer would declare OdBL non applicable. Feel free to enjoy looking through massive piles of buildings and coastline rearrangement. Is your assertion here that FOSM would enjoy watching the destruction of a large, free, open database of map data? That doesn't exactly caste FOSM in the best light does it? I am stupid to advise OSM for free on how to keep their data really OdBL clean. No one asserted that you were stupid, you've made some pretty intelligent comments. Please don't spoil that by putting FOSM in a bad light and making rash ones now. Thanks Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
On 29 May 2012 08:44, Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl wrote: Ok, they don't name us, but I think a leading open source map does refer to us. http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/ RichardF has a comprehensive slap down of their FUD: http://www.systemed.net/blog/index.php?post=23 Also hit Slashdot earlier today: http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/05/29/019213/tomtom-flames-openstreetmap / Grant ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] (dis)Honesty and Copyright
I am really astonished about the way some users on this list react to a claim to respect (my and CC-by-SA) copyright . The whole business of changeing license IS about copyright. If there is only a single grain of non-respect to copyright in your heads (those that are addressed, do know who I mean), why bother supporting a license change then that is about respect on copyright Everything up and running up in your heads? If TomTom or Nokia (just to mention a few major players) will find proof of the slightest infraction (well ok, a bit more then that) of copyrights, in OSM's database they will publish that at a future moment that suits them best Regards, Gert Gremmen, image001.gif___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
On 29 May 2012 11:28, Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com wrote: On 29 May 2012, at 10:27, Floris Looijesteijn wrote: That's some great imagery if he can read the name signs on that street... The fact that all the tags were ODbL safe had already been established – they were created by another user who had accepted. Acceptance of the Contributor Terms does *not* imply ODbL safety. Cheers ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
I did not give you permission to share a private conversation on the list. That is also about copyrights, Davie. Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Thomas Davie [mailto:tom.da...@gmail.com] Verzonden: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 11:43 AM Aan: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen CC: talk Talk Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! On 29 May 2012, at 10:36, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: Off list ! No need to annoy the list with comments with suggestion on how to cheat even more. No, I'd rather keep it on list, as I'd really like people to know the quickest and best methods for keeping as much data as possible; keeping as much history as possible and keeping making progress with a great open map. I honestly don't care if one user considers the methods involved to be cheating because they're easier than another method. BTW I and FOSM and a few more would be happy in the end, because if all were like you ( I'll take a look at your edits later) OSM would soon stop to exist as the first lawyer would declare OdBL non applicable. Feel free to enjoy looking through massive piles of buildings and coastline rearrangement. Is your assertion here that FOSM would enjoy watching the destruction of a large, free, open database of map data? That doesn't exactly caste FOSM in the best light does it? I am stupid to advise OSM for free on how to keep their data really OdBL clean. No one asserted that you were stupid, you've made some pretty intelligent comments. Please don't spoil that by putting FOSM in a bad light and making rash ones now. Thanks Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] (dis)Honesty and Copyright
On 29 May 2012, at 10:50, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: I am really astonished about the way some users on this list react to a claim to respect (my and CC-by-SA) copyright . Do you have an example of such a reply that astonishes you? Thanks Tom Davie___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
On 29 May 2012 11:01, Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com wrote: If I remember correctly (someone correct me if I don't), a lawyer has agreed that it's okay to keep node positions and ways where a user would reasonably have created the same way from an ODbL compatible data source. I don't know if a lawyer has said that, but I think it's unlikely to apply to tracing from imagery, first because the node positions are so unlikely to match if recreated from imagery, and secondly because Potlatch, I think, now has a whole mode designed to get rid of original node positions and add new ones quickly. (It's still a huge simplification with many open questions -- what about the directionality of ways where the direction is not significant, i.e. no oneway=yes tag -- this information could constitute a protected database on its own but all the remapping methods retain such information.) Cheers ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] (dis)Honesty and Copyright
Gert, Although I would have chosen a different tone of voice you are absolutely right to raise this issue. Let's just try to keep the discussion civilized. Greetings, Floris Looijesteijn On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:50 AM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: ** ** I am really astonished about the way some users on this list react to a claim to respect (my and CC-by-SA) copyright . ** ** The whole business of changeing license IS about copyright. If there is only a single grain of non-respect to copyright in your heads* *** (those that are addressed, do know who I mean), why bother supporting a license change then that is about respect on copyright Everything up and running up in your heads? ** ** If TomTom or Nokia (just to mention a few major players) will find proof of the slightest infraction (well ok, a bit more then that) of copyrights, in OSM’s database they will publish that at a future moment that suits them best…. ** ** ** ** ** ** Regards, Gert Gremmen, ** ** ** ** ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk image001.gif___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
Hello, First of all, let me just say it is indeed impolite to share private conversation but I would love to see that tested in a court. That said, the whole point of people in FOSM waiting for OSM to fail is kind of annoying. I understand why the fork happened (doesn't mean that I agree with it); I understand why some people are reacting the way they do but I have to admit it is getting ridiculous. FOSM is a fork. It is a conscious statement that you wanted to break away. I am glad that you guys had that *freedom* in the first place (despite all the FUD that the new contributor terms won't allow forking) and I wish you the best of luck in this project as I wish the best of luck to other mapping projects like Common map for example. Now, you decided to leave the project so just leave it. I am not going to go to FOSM and ask for my data to be deleted playing on my moral right for example (even though sometimes I am seriously tempted to ask for my data to be removed out of exasperation due to the behaviour of some members of FOSM). If you strongly believe that ODbL won't stand the legal scrutiny, mount a legal challenge to it. Just do it. That said, you have to realize that ODbL is currently the licence that is being used more and more in France for OpenData and actually across the world having being reviewed by several legal departments. You may not agree with the way it was drafted but it seriously look like it has some legs. If you point out elements that have been copied, we will be happy to make sure that people is not copying from your data. Anyway up to a point, the data will be replaced and the very use of copyright on fact is tenuous at best. I think from that point of view, despite all the mistakes the foundation made during the process (we are after all volunteers), the foundation has shown lot of willingness to sort many issues; it just that at some points we can only agree to disagree hence why there was a fork. You are just trolling. You are not even constructive towards FOSM. From the way I look at it, FOSM is only a half hearted fork where there are only a few people actually contributing, the rest of them is just sulking that OSM didn't go their way. Maybe it is time to be more constructive towards the choice that you made. From that point of view, I really appreciate the work of some people in FOSM who are actually being constructive. In short, feel free to complain when your data is *REALLY* used wrongly. Else, put up or shut up regarding the ODbL. If you really believe that it is not going to work, mount a proper legal challenge. Emilie Laffray On 29 May 2012 10:53, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: I did not give you permission to share a private conversation on the list. That is also about copyrights, Davie. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] (dis)Honesty and Copyright
O , 2012-05-29 11:50 +0200, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen rakstīja: I am really astonished about the way some users on this list react to a claim to respect (my and CC-by-SA) copyright . Hi Gert! First, keep tone civil and you won't get nasty replies as before :) And maybe recognize that OSM as in this list isn't organization, it's community, where people's thoughts differ on subjects now and then. What matters here that leadership agrees that deniers copyrights must be respected and their data removed when map will be published under ODbL The whole business of changeing license IS about copyright. If there is only a single grain of non-respect to copyright in your heads (those that are addressed, do know who I mean), why bother supporting a license change then that is about respect on copyright Everything up and running up in your heads? I would disagree here. We have group of people who work on copyright violations and so far it has been very effective. Existence of such infrastructure means that project is serious about respecting copyrights (and more serious than some big corporations). Some people responded harshly because of your tone. Yeah, data is still there, but license change hasn't actually happened yet. If TomTom or Nokia (just to mention a few major players) will find proof of the slightest infraction (well ok, a bit more then that) of copyrights, in OSM’s database they will publish that at a future moment that suits them best…. Then they would have to prove it (and inform OSM about it). That would be rather hard and knowing legalities of implicating someone's guilt, their lawyers would definitely suggest to avoid that without smoking gun. Respectfully, Peteris Krisjanis, OSM Latvia ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
On Tuesday 29 May 2012, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: I did not give you permission to share a private conversation on the list. That is also about copyrights, Davie. Public interest defence trumps this. Next! robert. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl wrote: Ok, they don't name us, but I think a leading open source map does refer to us. http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/ I think the most interesting part of this is actually direct criticism from our commercial competitors. You know the Gandhi thing: First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. Sounds like we're well and truly at stage 2. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
On Tue, 2012-05-29 at 20:37 +1000, Steve Bennett wrote: http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/ I think the most interesting part of this is actually direct criticism from our commercial competitors. You know the Gandhi thing: First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. Sounds like we're well and truly at stage 2. looks more like stage 3 to me -- regards Kenneth Gonsalves ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
Emilie, I defend 2 legal interests: Mine : I invested time work and money, that I co-licensed under CC-by-SA to the previous OSM OSM: by keeping the OSM database clean of tainted data If you call that trolling .. Sometimes I think that people are called trolls because they defend statements other do not agree with. Sorry Emilie, it's a pity if that creates some loss of data, but you should take it like a man, and accept the consequences of the route OSM took. Put the liability on those who are responsible for that ! Gert Van: Emilie Laffray [mailto:emilie.laff...@gmail.com] Verzonden: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 12:19 PM Aan: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen CC: Thomas Davie; talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! Hello, First of all, let me just say it is indeed impolite to share private conversation but I would love to see that tested in a court. That said, the whole point of people in FOSM waiting for OSM to fail is kind of annoying. I understand why the fork happened (doesn't mean that I agree with it); I understand why some people are reacting the way they do but I have to admit it is getting ridiculous. FOSM is a fork. It is a conscious statement that you wanted to break away. I am glad that you guys had that *freedom* in the first place (despite all the FUD that the new contributor terms won't allow forking) and I wish you the best of luck in this project as I wish the best of luck to other mapping projects like Common map for example. Now, you decided to leave the project so just leave it. I am not going to go to FOSM and ask for my data to be deleted playing on my moral right for example (even though sometimes I am seriously tempted to ask for my data to be removed out of exasperation due to the behaviour of some members of FOSM). If you strongly believe that ODbL won't stand the legal scrutiny, mount a legal challenge to it. Just do it. That said, you have to realize that ODbL is currently the licence that is being used more and more in France for OpenData and actually across the world having being reviewed by several legal departments. You may not agree with the way it was drafted but it seriously look like it has some legs. If you point out elements that have been copied, we will be happy to make sure that people is not copying from your data. Anyway up to a point, the data will be replaced and the very use of copyright on fact is tenuous at best. I think from that point of view, despite all the mistakes the foundation made during the process (we are after all volunteers), the foundation has shown lot of willingness to sort many issues; it just that at some points we can only agree to disagree hence why there was a fork. You are just trolling. You are not even constructive towards FOSM. From the way I look at it, FOSM is only a half hearted fork where there are only a few people actually contributing, the rest of them is just sulking that OSM didn't go their way. Maybe it is time to be more constructive towards the choice that you made. From that point of view, I really appreciate the work of some people in FOSM who are actually being constructive. In short, feel free to complain when your data is *REALLY* used wrongly. Else, put up or shut up regarding the ODbL. If you really believe that it is not going to work, mount a proper legal challenge. Emilie Laffray On 29 May 2012 10:53, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: I did not give you permission to share a private conversation on the list. That is also about copyrights, Davie. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Moderated Re: OSM : It's a shame !!!
All This thread has gotten way out of line. Please refrain from posting anything more on this thread, or related threads (ie (dis)Honesty and Copyright). I suggest taking a moment and reviewing the Etiquette page on the wiki. Thanks Mikel Moderators___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
On 29 May 2012, at 12:51, Worst Fixer wrote: Hello. I ask you to review my planned edit. There are lot of ways to tag intermittent water feature found in database. Most popular is intermittent=yes. All others come from different old imports. Date ist 2009-2010 year. I countiered ~350 000 features tagged in different such ways. Most is done by 10 users. I ask users iandees and SK53 join discussion, as most of such tags were imported by them. Others welcome too. I propose unification of tagging in all this imports. Following tags converted to intermittent=yes: frequency=intermittent occurrence=intermittent stream=intermittent water=intermittent type=intermittent Following tags converted to intermittent=no: frequency=perennial stream=perennial stream=ephemeral converted to intermittent=ephemeral. Just removed stream=fixme. Converted fdate field from NHD imports in iso8601 date, moved to check_date tag. Removed all id-like tags. If no valid objections will be raised, I upload this change on 2012-06-12. Here is overview: Short, to get the idea: http://worstfixer.000a.biz/04-intermittent/overview-short.html Long, for exact analysis: http://worstfixer.000a.biz/04-intermittent/overview-full.html.gz I currently looking for place to upload exact .osm.gz for a preview. Suggestions welcome. Hi WorstFixer, I think this one might need a little more thought – what happens to something previously tagged water=intermittent... it becomes intermittent=yes... intermittent what? I doubt there's a nice way of predicting what water= should become to make it correctly tagged. Bob___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
On May 29, 2012 1:16 AM, Nick Whitelegg nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk wrote: This is a very one sided argument and assumes that commercial online maps are accurate. It also completely neglects the fact that you can use OSM data without a fee andf without someone telling you what you can and cannot do with it. I'd imagine they're running scared at the move away from the restrictive, closed-source model for electronic data. It also ignores the fact that TomTom wanted to totally own crowd sourced mapping, but they lost largely because Garmin doesn't lock us out on their devices. This reeks of sour grapes, big time. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
Hello, I will retract the troll bit as you seem actually to be enthusiastic but you seriously have to work on the perception that you give to people in the first place. Goodwill is something difficult enough to accrue in the first place. However, I will not retract the fact that I consider that you are a bit disingenuous in your behaviour. Emilie Laffray On 29 May 2012 11:48, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: Emilie, ** ** I defend 2 legal interests: ** ** Mine : I invested time work and money, that I co-licensed under CC-by-SA to the previous OSM OSM: by keeping the OSM database clean of tainted data ** ** ** ** If you call that trolling …… Sometimes I think that people are called trolls because they defend statements other do not agree with. ** ** Sorry Emilie, it’s a pity if that creates some loss of data, but you should take it like a man, and accept the consequences of the route OSM took. Put the liability on those who are responsible for that ! ** ** Gert ** ** ** ** ** ** *Van:* Emilie Laffray [mailto:emilie.laff...@gmail.com] *Verzonden:* Tuesday, May 29, 2012 12:19 PM *Aan:* ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen *CC:* Thomas Davie; talk@openstreetmap.org *Onderwerp:* Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! ** ** Hello, ** ** First of all, let me just say it is indeed impolite to share private conversation but I would love to see that tested in a court. That said, the whole point of people in FOSM waiting for OSM to fail is kind of annoying. I understand why the fork happened (doesn't mean that I agree with it); I understand why some people are reacting the way they do but I have to admit it is getting ridiculous. FOSM is a fork. It is a conscious statement that you wanted to break away. I am glad that you guys had that *freedom* in the first place (despite all the FUD that the new contributor terms won't allow forking) and I wish you the best of luck in this project as I wish the best of luck to other mapping projects like Common map for example. Now, you decided to leave the project so just leave it. I am not going to go to FOSM and ask for my data to be deleted playing on my moral right for example (even though sometimes I am seriously tempted to ask for my data to be removed out of exasperation due to the behaviour of some members of FOSM). If you strongly believe that ODbL won't stand the legal scrutiny, mount a legal challenge to it. Just do it. That said, you have to realize that ODbL is currently the licence that is being used more and more in France for OpenData and actually across the world having being reviewed by several legal departments. You may not agree with the way it was drafted but it seriously look like it has some legs. If you point out elements that have been copied, we will be happy to make sure that people is not copying from your data. Anyway up to a point, the data will be replaced and the very use of copyright on fact is tenuous at best. I think from that point of view, despite all the mistakes the foundation made during the process (we are after all volunteers), the foundation has shown lot of willingness to sort many issues; it just that at some points we can only agree to disagree hence why there was a fork.** ** You are just trolling. You are not even constructive towards FOSM. From the way I look at it, FOSM is only a half hearted fork where there are only a few people actually contributing, the rest of them is just sulking that OSM didn't go their way. Maybe it is time to be more constructive towards the choice that you made. From that point of view, I really appreciate the work of some people in FOSM who are actually being constructive. ** ** In short, feel free to complain when your data is *REALLY* used wrongly. Else, put up or shut up regarding the ODbL. If you really believe that it is not going to work, mount a proper legal challenge. ** ** Emilie Laffray On 29 May 2012 10:53, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: I did not give you permission to share a private conversation on the list. That is also about copyrights, Davie. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] An indoor airport
The fence around an airport here** (Bishkek in Kyrgyzstan): http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.83491lon=74.5764zoom=16layers=M Seems to have been tagged building = yes, building:levels = 2. I'm sure it gets chilly there in the winter, but this seems unlikely. Perhaps someone local to the area might want to take a look at it? Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, First of all, let me just say it is indeed impolite to share private conversation but I would love to see that tested in a court. That said, the whole point of people in FOSM waiting for OSM to fail is kind of annoying. I think someone has given you the wrong impression about FOSM. It's a free-standing fork of OSM that differs only in that it continues to use CC-BY-SA. We consider this to be a better license for contributors and we feel that contributors are the most valuable part of the equation. Sadly, OSM does not appear to value or care for contributors interests as much as I once hoped it would. Nobody expects OSM to fail. I was the first to point out to Steve Coast, in 2006, that OSM was already an unstoppable train. Not even the stress caused by the license change could prevent it's success. I understand why the fork happened (doesn't mean that I agree with it); I understand why some people are reacting the way they do but I have to admit it is getting ridiculous. FOSM is a fork. In many ways OSM is the fork. It is the project that is unsatisified with the status-quo. Although it has not yet managed to publish anything under ODbL and I wouldn't bet money on it achieving that objective any time soon. It is a conscious statement that you wanted to break away. I am glad that you guys had that *freedom* in the first place (despite all the FUD that the new contributor terms won't allow forking) and I wish you the best of luck in this project as I wish the best of luck to other mapping projects like Common map for example. Now, you decided to leave the project so just leave it. We all have the same goals. Free and open mapping data. Your language suggests you are trying to push people away. While there is indeed a license fork, there has never been a need for a fork of the community. You will recognise many fosm contributors as being major characters in the OSM community. I am not going to go to FOSM and ask for my data to be deleted playing on my moral right for example (even though sometimes I am seriously tempted to ask for my data to be removed out of exasperation due to the behaviour of some members of FOSM). Please explain more about the behaviour of fosm members? We don't have members as such, but I get what you mean. As far as I can see fosm contributors are a very happy and contented bunch. Especially when compared to some of the rhetoric on this list. If you strongly believe that ODbL won't stand the legal scrutiny, mount a legal challenge to it. Just do it. That said, you have to realize that ODbL is currently the licence that is being used more and more in France for OpenData and actually across the world having being reviewed by several legal departments. You may not agree with the way it was drafted but it seriously look like it has some legs. If you point out elements that have been copied, we will be happy to make sure that people is not copying from your data. Anyway up to a point, the data will be replaced and the very use of copyright on fact is tenuous at best. I think from that point of view, despite all the mistakes the foundation made during the process (we are after all volunteers), the foundation has shown lot of willingness to sort many issues; it just that at some points we can only agree to disagree hence why there was a fork. You are just trolling. You are not even constructive towards FOSM. From the way I look at it, FOSM is only a half hearted fork where there are only a few people actually contributing, the rest of them is just sulking that OSM didn't go their way. There's nothing half-hearted about fosm. Many of the people involved in it have been working with OSM since the very early days and are unlikely to go away. Some of OSMs most prolific contributors now contribute exclusively to fosm. Maybe it is time to be more constructive towards the choice that you made. From that point of view, I really appreciate the work of some people in FOSM who are actually being constructive. In short, feel free to complain when your data is *REALLY* used wrongly. Else, put up or shut up regarding the ODbL. If you really believe that it is not going to work, mount a proper legal challenge. No doubt, if the license change and redaction is not handled properly then it will end up in the courts. We will all lose if that happens. The laywers will be the only ones that win from that outcome. Emilie Laffray On 29 May 2012 10:53, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: I did not give you permission to share a private conversation on the list. That is also about copyrights, Davie. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
Hello, Please, do not respond further to this thread. Any further comments will receive individual moderation. -Mikel * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron From: Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com To: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 8:43 AM Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! Hello, I will retract the troll bit as you seem actually to be enthusiastic but you seriously have to work on the perception that you give to people in the first place. Goodwill is something difficult enough to accrue in the first place. However, I will not retract the fact that I consider that you are a bit disingenuous in your behaviour. Emilie Laffray On 29 May 2012 11:48, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: Emilie, I defend 2 legal interests: Mine : I invested time work and money, that I co-licensed under CC-by-SA to the previous OSM OSM: by keeping the OSM database clean of tainted data If you call that trolling …… Sometimes I think that people are called trolls because they defend statements other do not agree with. Sorry Emilie, it’s a pity if that creates some loss of data, but you should take it like a man, and accept the consequences of the route OSM took. Put the liability on those who are responsible for that ! Gert Van:Emilie Laffray [mailto:emilie.laff...@gmail.com] Verzonden: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 12:19 PM Aan: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen CC: Thomas Davie; talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! Hello, First of all, let me just say it is indeed impolite to share private conversation but I would love to see that tested in a court. That said, the whole point of people in FOSM waiting for OSM to fail is kind of annoying. I understand why the fork happened (doesn't mean that I agree with it); I understand why some people are reacting the way they do but I have to admit it is getting ridiculous. FOSM is a fork. It is a conscious statement that you wanted to break away. I am glad that you guys had that *freedom* in the first place (despite all the FUD that the new contributor terms won't allow forking) and I wish you the best of luck in this project as I wish the best of luck to other mapping projects like Common map for example. Now, you decided to leave the project so just leave it. I am not going to go to FOSM and ask for my data to be deleted playing on my moral right for example (even though sometimes I am seriously tempted to ask for my data to be removed out of exasperation due to the behaviour of some members of FOSM). If you strongly believe that ODbL won't stand the legal scrutiny, mount a legal challenge to it. Just do it. That said, you have to realize that ODbL is currently the licence that is being used more and more in France for OpenData and actually across the world having being reviewed by several legal departments. You may not agree with the way it was drafted but it seriously look like it has some legs. If you point out elements that have been copied, we will be happy to make sure that people is not copying from your data. Anyway up to a point, the data will be replaced and the very use of copyright on fact is tenuous at best. I think from that point of view, despite all the mistakes the foundation made during the process (we are after all volunteers), the foundation has shown lot of willingness to sort many issues; it just that at some points we can only agree to disagree hence why there was a fork. You are just trolling. You are not even constructive towards FOSM. From the way I look at it, FOSM is only a half hearted fork where there are only a few people actually contributing, the rest of them is just sulking that OSM didn't go their way. Maybe it is time to be more constructive towards the choice that you made. From that point of view, I really appreciate the work of some people in FOSM who are actually being constructive. In short, feel free to complain when your data is *REALLY* used wrongly. Else, put up or shut up regarding the ODbL. If you really believe that it is not going to work, mount a proper legal challenge. Emilie Laffray On 29 May 2012 10:53, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: I did not give you permission to share a private conversation on the list. That is also about copyrights, Davie. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
Hi, On 05/29/12 13:51, Worst Fixer wrote: There are lot of ways to tag intermittent water feature found in database. Most popular is intermittent=yes. All others come from different old imports. Date ist 2009-2010 year. I countiered ~350 000 features tagged in different such ways. Most is done by 10 users. 1. Is there any benefit? Does anybody use that tag at all, or is it just you feverishly looking for things you could fix? 2. I don't think you should continue to make mass edits under the username WorstFixer because that implies that before you fixed things they were among the worst which has the potential to offend people. I currently looking for place to upload exact .osm.gz for a preview. You could get an account on the dev server and put things there. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] moderation on OSM : It's a shame !!!
All In case you didn't see it the first time, this and related threads are moderated. Do not respond further to these threads, or you will be individually moderated. Thanks Mikel Moderators * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
2. I don't think you should continue to make mass edits under the username WorstFixer because that implies that before you fixed things they were among the worst which has the potential to offend people. I've not been following what has and hasn't been done, or is proposed, but the username WorstFixer looked to me like someone had changed their name after having had it pointed out that after their fixes things were worse than before, and that anyone else could have fixed things in a better way. So yes, not a good username choice. Ed ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
Worst Fixer wrote: I ask you to review my planned edit. There are lot of ways to tag intermittent water feature found in database. Most popular is intermittent=yes. All others come from different old imports. Date ist 2009-2010 year. I countiered ~350 000 features tagged in different such ways. Most is done by 10 users. Following tags converted to intermittent=yes: frequency=intermittent occurrence=intermittent stream=intermittent water=intermittent type=intermittent Following tags converted to intermittent=no: frequency=perennial stream=perennial While that doesn't sound unreasonable... Short, to get the idea: http://worstfixer.000a.biz/04-intermittent/overview-short.html ..this page actually lists many more tags that you propose to change. You're going to remove 9413 ele tags; why? No doubt at some point someone decided that lake:shore_length:miles=2 was a useful thing to record, and you want to remove it. Why? I have a suggestion: break your proposed edits into smaller chunks. For example, in this case, propose an edit that *only* makes the 'intermittent' change that I've quoted above. Then propose separate edits that make each of the other changes. Regards, Phil. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
2012/5/29 Phil Endecott spam_from_osm_t...@chezphil.org: You're going to remove 9413 ele tags; why? No doubt at some point someone decided that lake:shore_length:miles=2 was a useful thing to record, and you want to remove it. Why? because there is no such thing as a shore length, it depends on the resolution. Aside from this there is also no tradition in OSM to record units in the key. So this particular key really doesn't seem to make any sense (the length of the shore in OSM-precision is already in the data geometry). See also here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox I have a suggestion: break your proposed edits into smaller chunks. For example, in this case, propose an edit that *only* makes the 'intermittent' change that I've quoted above. Then propose separate edits that make each of the other changes. +1 cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] An indoor airport
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 7:52 AM, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote: The fence around an airport here (Bishkek in Kyrgyzstan): http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.83491lon=74.5764zoom=16layers=M Seems to have been tagged building = yes, building:levels = 2. I'm sure it gets chilly there in the winter, but this seems unlikely. Perhaps someone local to the area might want to take a look at it? I pointed out this error before the edit was made but apparently community feedback was not respected before the automated edit was run... http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2012-May/063021.html Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2012/5/29 Phil Endecott spam_from_osm_t...@chezphil.org: No doubt at some point someone decided that lake:shore_length:miles=2 was a useful thing to record, and you want to remove it. Ã Why? because there is no such thing as a shore length, it depends on the resolution. Aside from this there is also no tradition in OSM to record units in the key. So this particular key really doesn't seem to make any sense (the length of the shore in OSM-precision is already in the data geometry). See also here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox This is of course true, and Worst Fixer's table at http://worstfixer.000a.biz/04-intermittent/overview-short.html would benefit from a column giving a whole series of justifications like this for each of the proposed changes. Regards, Phil. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
Hmm I seem to recall a stnav company accepting speed limit information from users and then having the problem that people set the roads in front of their houses to a speed limit of 0 so that the satnav routing would avoid it... wasn't that TomTom? Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
The node referenced created by cetest will not survive redaction (and I assume the rest of data to be similar), and neither do the edits on the way indicate anything other than normal editing (see http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=7539781). I am slightly at a loss to see what exactly Gert is complaining about. Simon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
We'd be vulnerable to exactly the same kind of attack, right? Do we have any mechanisms to detect or prevent it? Steve On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:21 AM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: Hmm I seem to recall a stnav company accepting speed limit information from users and then having the problem that people set the roads in front of their houses to a speed limit of 0 so that the satnav routing would avoid it... wasn't that TomTom? Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
Steve Bennett wrote: We'd be vulnerable to exactly the same kind of attack, right? Do we have any mechanisms to detect or prevent it? Well (at the risk of stating the bleeding obvious) we can actually see data that says maxspeed=0 rather than just wondering why we never actually get routed from A to C via B. I guess it varies from place to place, but well-mapped areas tend to be effectively gardened so that odd or out of place edits get spotted at some point. It might not be immediately, but I bet it'd get spotted. People use various methods (e.g. OWL) - I use a combination of ITO's tools and something that checks for stuff I've previously edited whenever I create a new Garmin map. Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
On 05/29/2012 12:48 PM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: Sorry Emilie, it’s a pity if that creates some loss of data, but you should take it like a man I'm afraid she won't. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Waste map and OSM?
2012/5/28 valent.turko...@gmail.com valent.turko...@gmail.com: You have probably seen this Waste map project that uses OpenStreetMap as background for mapping waste all over the globe: http://www.letsdoitworld.org/waste_map Does anybody know what technology did they use to overlay images and circles with waste? Is their technology open and recyclable (pun intended) for similar projects that need an overlay on top off OSM data? Citing the developer Ahti (btw, he one of most famous developers in Estonia, as he is one of the original developers of Skype): It is open source so the answer is yes. https://github.com/ahtih/ldiw_waste_map and https://github.com/ahtih/Geoclustering For overlay, we use OpenLayers. -- Jaak ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
On 29/05/12 15:29, Steve Bennett wrote: We'd be vulnerable to exactly the same kind of attack, right? Do we have any mechanisms to detect or prevent it? A community! Steve On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:21 AM, Toby Murraytoby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: Hmm I seem to recall a stnav company accepting speed limit information from users and then having the problem that people set the roads in front of their houses to a speed limit of 0 so that the satnav routing would avoid it... wasn't that TomTom? Toby -- Cheers, Chris user: chillly ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
Hello. I used reply to instead of reply to all in my mail agent. We had a small thread with Thomas. Here is major result we achived. Thomas expressed opinion that not 100% of water=intermittent have other tags, so we have no way count them as water. In my sub-extract of water=intermittent: 127310 become intermittent=yes; 124417 have already natural tag; 749 get natural=wetland because NHD:FType=Inundation Area; 2123 have waterway tag; 21 has landuse tag. 127310-124417-749-2123-21=0. Check sum passed. This tag came from imports only, that is why it kann be cleaned up perfectly. -- WorstFixer, twitter: http://twitter.com/WorstFixer ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
Actually, the conclusion, while it involved that, also involved that there are potential other uses (e.g. on river=intermittent; stream=intermittent etc) that need to be checked too, and that this seems like an arbitrary renaming of tags that doesn't gain anything, but may destroy data. Thanks Tom Davie On 29 May 2012, at 20:08, Worst Fixer wrote: Hello. I used reply to instead of reply to all in my mail agent. We had a small thread with Thomas. Here is major result we achived. Thomas expressed opinion that not 100% of water=intermittent have other tags, so we have no way count them as water. In my sub-extract of water=intermittent: 127310 become intermittent=yes; 124417 have already natural tag; 749 get natural=wetland because NHD:FType=Inundation Area; 2123 have waterway tag; 21 has landuse tag. 127310-124417-749-2123-21=0. Check sum passed. This tag came from imports only, that is why it kann be cleaned up perfectly. -- WorstFixer, twitter: http://twitter.com/WorstFixer ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
Worst Fixer writes: Just removed stream=fixme. Why? Removed all id-like tags. Why? If no valid objections will be raised, I upload this change on 2012-06-12. Don't. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
Frederik Ramm writes:
2. I don't think you should continue to make mass edits under the
username WorstFixer because that implies that before you fixed
things they were among the worst which has the potential to offend people.
I always thought it meant that he was the worst person to be doing
this fixing, or doing the worst job at fixing things.
The problem with his worst fixing, is that unless he starts {bugging /
bothering / teaching / correcting / annoying / discouraging} mappers
who are making these edits he disagrees with, they're going to keep
making these edits.
I'd prefer to see a consensus among editors that we don't do that
anymore, with the old way not being in the OSM wiki anywhere,
backed up with an analysis of the timing of these edits as not
recently made, *BEFORE* any of these mass edits are made.
Because if people are still editing like this, then I don't see the
problem that WorstFixer is fixing as actually being fixed. Users of
the map will still have to deal with both the format that WorstFixer
doesn't like AND the format he does like. Less of the former and more
of the latter, but still some of both.
Persuade people to map just one way, THEN once they're doing that, go
back and get rid of the old way.
--
--my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com
Crynwr supports open source software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] An indoor airport
Toby Murray writes: I pointed out this error before the edit was made but apparently community feedback was not respected before the automated edit was run... http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2012-May/063021.html Okay, Worst Fixer, you said that you wouldn't make the edit if there was substantial objection. Toby objected. You made the edit anyway. Please explain why you said one thing and did the opposite. I *appreciate* what you are trying to do. I disagree on the exact details of the timing and sequencing. ... But I *do* disagree. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] An indoor airport
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 7:49 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: Toby Murray writes: I pointed out this error before the edit was made but apparently community feedback was not respected before the automated edit was run... http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2012-May/063021.html Okay, Worst Fixer, you said that you wouldn't make the edit if there was substantial objection. Toby objected. You made the edit anyway. Please explain why you said one thing and did the opposite. I *appreciate* what you are trying to do. I disagree on the exact details of the timing and sequencing. ... But I *do* disagree. I wasn't even objecting to the edit in general. Just pointing out a minor but clear error in the proposed edit that needed manual review instead of a blind mechanical edit. These are exactly the types of things that proposed mechanical edits should be reviewed for by the community. Edge cases, false assumptions by the editor, local quirks, etc. Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Import of buildings in Chicago
On 5/29/2012 1:09 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: I used to agree with you, but in terms of minimum labor, updates are best performed by retaining the original upload data, then doing a conflation between the original data and a later update. That will highlight only changes from the original source, and only those differences will need to be manually merged into OSM. Except you won't see possible errors introduced after the first import by OSM editors. I think it's useful to see the diff between the current state of both databases. In an ideal OSM world, those errors would be caught by the 'Gardeners' in the area who tend their regions by watching OWL or an equivalent edit monitor. The best time to catch errors is while they can serve as a learning experience for a new contributor who can remember what he intended to do, as well as easier to revert if necessary. Doing a diff between the updated database and the OSM database calls out many changes that shouldn't need to be reviewed: a fence terminating at a building, gardens, plazas, sidewalks and stairways that connect to buildings. It's just a trade off in the effort needed to perform the import synchronization task. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
HI there, I thought FOSM was off topic, where are all the moderators to stop this thread? I never wanted to leave osm, osm made me leave. I never wanted to fork osm, osm forked itself to some new license. lets keep the facts straight, people just wanted to continue with the same system as before, osm is the one that changed. mike On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:18 AM, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com wrote: That said, the whole point of people in FOSM waiting for OSM to fail is kind of annoying. I understand why the fork happened (doesn't mean that I agree with it); I understand why some people are reacting the way they do but I have to admit it is getting ridiculous. FOSM is a fork. It is a conscious statement that you wanted to break away. I am glad that you guys had that *freedom* in the first place (despite all the FUD that the new contributor terms won't allow forking) and I wish you the best of luck in this project as I wish the best of luck to other mapping projects like Common map for example. -- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
Could you post the code used to generate the changesets? That would be the easiest way for some of us to review your proposed changes. It wouldn’t remove the need to explain it to non-programmers, but it would be much easier for some of us if we could look at the code. That being said, a few concerns jump out at me - You provide no information on why you are removing the keys that you are - A couple of other people have expressed concern over the message sent by having a mechanical edit from the WorstFixer username. I share them. It is not enough to dismiss this as an objection that is not “valid” - A significant number of these ways appear to be from US NHD data. You should also consult specifically with the US community and develop a consensus there that the edit is worth doing, in addition to the global community. - The mapping from NHD FCode to OSM tags used for some of these imports may of not been ideal. I have been working on a better one but have not finished. I believe it would be best to exclude the US from this edit and later on (post-rebuild likely) propose an edit which includes changing tagging on untouched objects. From: Worst Fixer [mailto:worstfi...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 4:51 AM To: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters Hello. I ask you to review my planned edit. There are lot of ways to tag intermittent water feature found in database. Most popular is intermittent=yes. All others come from different old imports. Date ist 2009-2010 year. I countiered ~350 000 features tagged in different such ways. Most is done by 10 users. I ask users iandees and SK53 join discussion, as most of such tags were imported by them. Others welcome too. I propose unification of tagging in all this imports. Following tags converted to intermittent=yes: frequency=intermittent occurrence=intermittent stream=intermittent water=intermittent type=intermittent Following tags converted to intermittent=no: frequency=perennial stream=perennial stream=ephemeral converted to intermittent=ephemeral. Just removed stream=fixme. Converted fdate field from NHD imports in iso8601 date, moved to check_date tag. Removed all id-like tags. If no valid objections will be raised, I upload this change on 2012-06-12. Here is overview: Short, to get the idea: http://worstfixer.000a.biz/04-intermittent/overview-short.html Long, for exact analysis: http://worstfixer.000a.biz/04-intermittent/overview-full.html.gz I currently looking for place to upload exact .osm.gz for a preview. Suggestions welcome. -- WorstFixer, twitter: http://twitter.com/WorstFixer ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-br] Contribuições ao OSM em Manaus (transporte público) e perguntas
Olá Martin, 2012/5/23 Martin Weilandt martin...@gmx.net: Talvez nem seja uma boa ideia você colaborar com esses mapas baseados em Google Maps: As condições de Google Maps API não permitem o uso de arquivos KML criados usando Google Maps fora do mundo de Google. Em outras palavras: O valor desses arquivos para OSM é limitado. For example, you must not use geocodes obtained through the Service in conjunction with a non-Google map. [1] Obrigado por me avisar disso. Felizmente, até o momento a única rota que inseri é uma que conheço bem (inclusive a versão inserida no Google Maps está desatualizada, pretendo contribuir de volta para eles assim que tiver o GPX que eu mesmo coletei). Espero que em breve eles forneçam a versão impressa das rotas (com o itinerário), assim teria outra fonte externa ao google maps para me basear. Até mais, -- Anderson Lizardo ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
[Talk-de] Wie remappen? Was dabei beachten?
Hi, ich habe seit Jahren leider kaum was bei OSM editiert, nachdem ich vor fünf Jahren einiges an Grundlagen in meiner Stadt gemappt hatte. Nun habe ich mir im Zuge der Relizenzierung überlegt, ob ich nicht helfen sollte Daten von Nichtzustimmern zu überarbeiten. Aber wärend ich zwar den theoretische Sinn der Relizenzierung verstehe, habe ich Verständnisprobleme bei der praktischen Umsetzung. Gibt es denn neben https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Remapping denn eine Hilfe wie man konkret und praktisch in bestimmten Fällen vorgehen soll? Ich habe einige Fälle in meiner Gegend, die auf dem ersten Blick trival wirken, aber wo ich nicht versehe was man da praktischerweise tun soll oder darf. Beispiele: - Wie ersetzt man einzelne einfache Knoten ohne weitere Tags (wo also allein die Position relevant ist)? Einfach löschen und dann grob an derselben Stelle (ggf mit Hilfe von Satellitenbildern oder vorhandenen GPS-Spuren) einen neuen Punkt setzen? Oder reicht es sogar den Punkt nur blind um ein paar Milli- oder Zentimeter zu verschieben? Inwiefern ist das (provokant gefragt) besser als das böse Copy Paste-Remappen? Oder muss ich mit dem GPS-Gerät selbst dahingehen und den Punkt neu vermessen? - Was ist mit Elementen, wo der Nichtzustimmer nur triviale Informationen wie zum Beispiel einen Namen eingetragen hat? Muss dieses Element ersetzt werden? Wenn, ja, inwiefern ist das unterscheidet man es von einem Copy Paste-Remappen? Und wenn nicht, was tut man stattdessen? - Oder was ist mit Elementen, wo der Nichtzustimmer nur Informationen gelöscht hat, z.B. Knoten aus einem Weg oder Tags? Was genau ist daran urheberrechtlich geschützt? Und was soll man da machen? Gruß, Robin ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] overpass-api - was bedeutet die Meldung ?
hi ! ich habe folgendes URL abgesetzt die schon einmal min. funktioniert hat: http://overpass.osm.rambler.ru/cgi/xapi?way[construction_year=*][@meta] Bekomme jetzt folgende Meldung: The data included in this document is from www.openstreetmap.org. It has there been collected by a large group of contributors. For individual attribution of each item please refer to http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/[node|way|relation]/#id/history *Error*: runtime error: open64: 2 /osm3s_v0.6.98_osm_base Dispatcher_Client::1 Kann mir einer von Euch sagen was das bedeutet und wie man das beheben kann ? Gruß Jan :-) ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] overpass-api - was bedeutet die Meldung ?
Hallo Jan, 2012/5/29 Jan Tappenbeck o...@tappenbeck.net http://overpass.osm.rambler.ru/cgi/xapi?way[construction_year=*][@meta] Bekomme jetzt folgende Meldung: The data included in this document is from www.openstreetmap.org. It has there been collected by a large group of contributors. For individual attribution of each item please refer to http://www.openstreetmap.org/** api/0.6/[node|way|relation]/#**id/historyhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/%5Bnode%7Cway%7Crelation%5D/#id/history *Error*: runtime error: open64: 2 /osm3s_v0.6.98_osm_base Dispatcher_Client::1 Kann mir einer von Euch sagen was das bedeutet und wie man das beheben kann ? Der Server rambler hat wohl ein Problem: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Overpass_API/status Mit der anderen URL scheint's zu gehen: www.overpass-api.de/api/xapi?way[construction_year=*][@meta] Grüße, Michael ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Tracks Selector wird zum Editor
Hi! Ich bin gerade dabei den Tracks Selector etwas zu erweitern. Die Darstellung und Bedienung wurde daher überarbeitet. Die Tracks werden jetzt bei MouseOver in einer anderen Farbe hervorgehoben. Darüber hinaus bereite ich gerade die Möglichkeit vor, die Tracks auch direkt im Browser bearbeitet zu können. Die JavaScript Seite ist fast fertig, ich muss nur noch die OAuth-Anbindung implementieren. Der Ablauf wird sein, dass man sich die Daten im aktuellen Sichtbereich des Browsers downlädt und dann die Tracks nach und nach bearbeitet. Danach alles auf einen Schlag hochlädt. Die entsprechenden Buttons und Funktionen sind bereits implementiert. http://tracks.osmsurround.org Mir schwebt auch noch vor, das alles Smartphone/Tablet tauglich zu machen. Die Auswahl der Tracks würde dann über eine scrollbare Liste und die Darstellung auf einer verkleinerten Karte erfolgen. Viele Grüße, Adrian. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Fwd: [Talk-at] derStandard Artikel - TomTom schimpf über OSM
Weitergeleitet aus talk-at. -- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -- Von: ScubbX markus4mayr.li...@gmail.com Datum: 29. Mai 2012 14:46 Betreff: [Talk-at] derStandard Artikel - TomTom schimpf über OSM An: OpenStreetMap AT talk...@openstreetmap.org Hallo! Seht, was heute im onlineStandard steht: http://derstandard.at/1336698119763/Freie-Karten-TomTom-schimpft-gegen-OpenStreetMaps Original tomtom-Blogpost unter: http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/ Schade, dass tomtom auf seiner eigenen Blogseite keine Kommentare erlaubt. ;-) lg, Markus ___ Talk-at mailing list talk...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-it] R: è possibile salvare Bing o PCN in locale ?
Ottimo! Questo intendevo: per ricalco come hai fatto tu oppure per aggiungere dettagli alle way, perché i sentieri in osm sono graficamente tutti uguali e senza uno sfondo fotografico non ricordo per esempio quale ha mtb_scale=1 e quale mtb_scale=3. Malizioso chi è andato subito a pensare a qualcosa di illegale. :-/ -Messaggio originale- Da: Damjan Gerl [mailto:dam...@damjan.net] Inviato: lunedì 28 maggio 2012 18.21 A: openstreetmap list - italiano Oggetto: Re: [Talk-it] è possibile salvare Bing o PCN in locale ? Vedi qui [0]. Io ho fatto così per lavorare con le pcn senza avere internet. A casa ho cachato tutta la zona che mi serviva, poi in ferie con il solo pc portatile senza nessun collegamento ad internet ho lavorato bene con sullo sfondo le pcn. Ciao Damjan [0] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:JOSM/Plugins/WMSPlugin#Fare_il_caching _in_locale_del_WMS_PCN ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] R: è possibile salvare Bing o PCN in locale ?
Malizioso chi è andato subito a pensare a qualcosa di illegale. :-/ in realtà non credo volessero sospettarti di cattive intenzioni, è che in passato siamo stati accusati gratuitamente dal PCN di ogni neffandezza, compresi quelli che cercavano di difendere certe loro scelte ... Tieni presente che il sistema di ban attuale del PCN è stato istituito dopo che GFOSS aveva messo in piedi un server di cache che serviva ad -aiutare- il loro lavoro ... Ciao, Stefano ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
[Talk-it] TomTom su OSM
http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/05/29/019213/tomtom-flames-openstreetmap Tag: FUD ciao maxx ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] TomTom su OSM
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:40 AM, emmexx emm...@tiscalinet.it wrote: http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/05/29/019213/tomtom-flames-openstreetmap Tag: FUD Imagine if some of those 'self-driving cars' would use them. Esatto. Immaginiamo che usino i dati proprietari che contengono un ponte che non esiste (tempo fa bigshot me ne ha segnalato un paio in mezzo ai campi). Ecco. tutto qui :-D -- E' assurdo impiegare gli uomini di intelligenza eccellente per fare calcoli che potrebbero essere affidati a chiunque se si usassero delle macchine Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz, Filosofo e Matematico (1646-1716) Internet è la più grande biblioteca del mondo. Ma il problema è che i libri sono tutti sparsi sul pavimento John Allen Paulos, Matematico (1945-vivente) Luca 'remix_tj' Lorenzetto, http://www.remixtj.net , lorenzetto.l...@gmail.com ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
[Talk-it] Svincoli autostradali senza restriction
Non solo gli svincoli autostradali, girando per la mappa italiana e non solo ce ne sono a josa di svincoli non segnalati e senza restrizioni. Sarebbe un lavoro da fare tutti assieme svincolo per svincolo regione per regione. Chi mappa uno svincolo dovrebbe inserire subito le restrizioni e sensi unici almeno per autostrade, superstrade e statali primary e secondary poi chi del luogo segnalerà le restrizioni per le strade service e minori. sarebbe interessante sapere il numero esatto nel paese solo ieri ne ho sistemati 3-4 senza alcuna restrizione e senza oneway in entrata e uscita. Messaggio originale Da: grop...@gmail.com Data: 28/05/2012 22.35 A: Talk-it@openstreetmap.org Ogg: [Talk-it] Svincoli autostradali senza restriction Ciao, ho visto che spesso manca l'obbligo di proseguire diritto alle motorway_link che escono dall'autostrada, nel punto in cui queste incontrano le way entranti, rendendo possibili inversioni di marcia del tipo: http://map.project-osrm.org/v8 in realtà si deve uscire dal casello e fare la rotatoria: http://map.project-osrm.org/v9 Altro esempio: http://map.project-osrm.org/vb percorso corretto: http://map.project-osrm.org/vc Ho estratto tutti gli svincoli che probabilmente hanno questo difetto. Molti non sono così importanti però, se volete controllare/sistemare quelli vicini a voi, si possono vedere in questa mappa (grazie al plugin OGR2Layers): http://bit.ly/MTHvbC Nota: è probabile che ci siano dei falsi positivi. Ho selezionato i nodi motorway_link [1]: - privi di una relazione type=restriction, - posti all'incrocio di almeno tre way (se si incrociano solo due percorsi autostradali devono essere a senso unico), - con almeno una way a doppio senso. Ciao, Groppo [1] script: http://bit.ly/L8MnFk ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] TomTom su OSM
2012/5/29 Luca 'remix_tj' Lorenzetto lorenzetto.l...@gmail.com: Esatto. Immaginiamo che usino i dati proprietari che contengono un ponte che non esiste (tempo fa bigshot me ne ha segnalato un paio in mezzo ai campi). Qualcuno che ha un TomTom aggiornato può guardare se a Piacenza c'è il normale ponte sul Po? Lo chiedo perché, per esempio, la 2012.32 (penultimo aggiornamento esistente) delle Garmin presentano ancora il ponte di barche (che non esiste da mesi e mesi e che costringe a fare un giro di 30 Km invece che di 2). Giusto per sapere se sia vero che le loro mappe sono migliori (grazie anche al volontariato degli utenti, però se fanno il lavoro per loro vanno bene, se lo fanno open source, allora sono inaffidabili). Mah... -- Cià Cristiano / Sky One Home: http://www.skyone.it (itinerari in moto e non solo) Pensieri: http://blog.skyone.it ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
[Talk-it] tomtom parla di noi
http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/ e ha così tanta paura che non dice nemmeno il nostro nome :) Our map-makers are real experts -- -S ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] R: è possibile salvare Bing o PCN in locale ?
Am 29.05.2012 09:18, schrieb Stefano Salvador: ... ... Tieni presente che il sistema di ban attuale del PCN è stato istituito dopo che GFOSS aveva messo in piedi un server di cache che serviva ad -aiutare- il loro lavoro ... Mi sono accorto che da un pò non è più possibile usare il PCN. Ci sono altri informazioni come mediare? Al momento uso Bing per quello che faccio, ma ogni tanto mi vengono i dubbi sul corretto allineamento e vorrei verificare con il PCN, ma non è possibile attualmente :( -- cheers, Alex ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] R: è possibile salvare Bing o PCN in locale ?
2012/5/29 Alexander Roalter alexan...@roalter.it: Mi sono accorto che da un pò non è più possibile usare il PCN. Ci sono altri informazioni come mediare? funziona qui ;-) Hai provato di cancellare gli indirizzi del WMS dalle preferenze e di riaggiungerli dai presets (dopo aver fatto un update delle fonti di WMS in JOSM)? Hanno cambiato la sintassi delle richieste qualche mese fa, e la versione nuova la trovi preconfigurato in JOSM. ciao, Martin ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] R: è possibile salvare Bing o PCN in locale ?
Am 29.05.2012 13:44, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: 2012/5/29 Alexander Roalteralexan...@roalter.it: Mi sono accorto che da un pò non è più possibile usare il PCN. Ci sono altri informazioni come mediare? funziona qui ;-) Hai provato di cancellare gli indirizzi del WMS dalle preferenze e di riaggiungerli dai presets (dopo aver fatto un update delle fonti di WMS in JOSM)? Hanno cambiato la sintassi delle richieste qualche mese fa, e la versione nuova la trovi preconfigurato in JOSM. ciao, Martin Questo purtroppo non l'ho fatto. Non ho letto tutta la discussione circa un mese fa. Proverò appena ritornerò a casa. -- cheers, Alex ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
[Talk-it] Terremoto in Emilia Romagna
Ciao, vi riferisco la proposta di mcheck di mappare le zone colpite dal terremoto di questi giorni. Lui ha tracciato da PCN gli edifici di Finale Emilia ( http://osm.org/go/xdVQL~R9) ed è disponibile a tracciare altre zone. Stefano ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
[Talk-it] (senza oggetto)
-- Linux Infinite Freedom ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Terremoto in Emilia Romagna
2012/5/29 sabas88 saba...@gmail.com Lui ha tracciato da PCN gli edifici di Finale Emilia ( http://osm.org/go/xdVQL~R9) ed è disponibile a tracciare altre zone. Ho sistemato ed inserito alcune vie a Cavezzo (http://osm.org/go/xX~yOj~L-- ). Però in casi come questi sarebbe utile per non dire cruciale avere delle immagini satellitari aggiornate... Proviamo a sentire l'HOT? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team ciao Tiziano ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Terremoto in Emilia Romagna
Però in casi come questi sarebbe utile per non dire cruciale avere delle immagini satellitari aggiornate... Proviamo a sentire l'HOT? Sono stati fatti diversi rilievi nei giorni scorsi, alcuni anche molto dettagliati. Le scosse odierne hanno però tragicamente cambiato la situazione. In ogni caso bisogna chiedere alla Regione Emilia Romagna. Ciao, Stefano ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Terremoto in Emilia Romagna
2012/5/29 Stefano Salvador stefano.salva...@gmail.com: Però in casi come questi sarebbe utile per non dire cruciale avere delle immagini satellitari aggiornate... Proviamo a sentire l'HOT? Sono stati fatti diversi rilievi nei giorni scorsi, alcuni anche molto dettagliati. Le scosse odierne hanno però tragicamente cambiato la situazione. In ogni caso bisogna chiedere alla Regione Emilia Romagna. +1 Mappare delle zone ex-novo in questo momento darebbe false informazioni con il rischio di ritenerle corrette (se l'hanno inserito adesso, significa che è giusto). Io farei pressione sulla Regione: ricordo male o l'ultimo convegno inerente le catastrofi (ed OSM) è stato proprio a Bologna? Non è che qualcuno ha qualche gancio? -- Cià Cristiano / Sky One Home: http://www.skyone.it (itinerari in moto e non solo) Pensieri: http://blog.skyone.it ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
[Talk-it] R: Terremoto in Emilia Romagna
Si , sicuramente servono per un'analisi dello stato attuale e la scelta dei tag adatti a rappresentare il danno Ma il ricalco degli edifici non può essere eseguito sulle immagini del 2006? -Messaggio originale- Da: Stefano Salvador [mailto:stefano.salva...@gmail.com] Inviato: martedì 29 maggio 2012 16.05 A: openstreetmap list - italiano Oggetto: Re: [Talk-it] Terremoto in Emilia Romagna Però in casi come questi sarebbe utile per non dire cruciale avere delle immagini satellitari aggiornate... Proviamo a sentire l'HOT? Sono stati fatti diversi rilievi nei giorni scorsi, alcuni anche molto dettagliati. Le scosse odierne hanno però tragicamente cambiato la situazione. In ogni caso bisogna chiedere alla Regione Emilia Romagna. Ciao, Stefano ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] R: Terremoto in Emilia Romagna
Per inserire gli edifici si puo' fare l'import dei dati (molto accurati) forniti dalla regione Emilia Romagna: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Emilia_Romagna_edificato In questo modo si fa molto prima rispetto a ricalcarli dalle foto aeree. 2012/5/29 Alech OSM alech.hos...@gmail.com Si , sicuramente servono per un'analisi dello stato attuale e la scelta dei tag adatti a rappresentare il danno Ma il ricalco degli edifici non può essere eseguito sulle immagini del 2006? -Messaggio originale- Da: Stefano Salvador [mailto:stefano.salva...@gmail.com] Inviato: martedì 29 maggio 2012 16.05 A: openstreetmap list - italiano Oggetto: Re: [Talk-it] Terremoto in Emilia Romagna Però in casi come questi sarebbe utile per non dire cruciale avere delle immagini satellitari aggiornate... Proviamo a sentire l'HOT? Sono stati fatti diversi rilievi nei giorni scorsi, alcuni anche molto dettagliati. Le scosse odierne hanno però tragicamente cambiato la situazione. In ogni caso bisogna chiedere alla Regione Emilia Romagna. Ciao, Stefano ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] R: Terremoto in Emilia Romagna
infatti... avevo già iniziato tempo fa ad importare nel comune dove vivo (Cesena) stasera vedo di concentrarmi sulla prov di Modena e Ferrara Il giorno 29 maggio 2012 16:22, Luca Wehrstedt luca.wehrst...@gmail.comha scritto: Per inserire gli edifici si puo' fare l'import dei dati (molto accurati) forniti dalla regione Emilia Romagna: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Emilia_Romagna_edificato In questo modo si fa molto prima rispetto a ricalcarli dalle foto aeree. 2012/5/29 Alech OSM alech.hos...@gmail.com Si , sicuramente servono per un'analisi dello stato attuale e la scelta dei tag adatti a rappresentare il danno Ma il ricalco degli edifici non può essere eseguito sulle immagini del 2006? -Messaggio originale- Da: Stefano Salvador [mailto:stefano.salva...@gmail.com] Inviato: martedì 29 maggio 2012 16.05 A: openstreetmap list - italiano Oggetto: Re: [Talk-it] Terremoto in Emilia Romagna Però in casi come questi sarebbe utile per non dire cruciale avere delle immagini satellitari aggiornate... Proviamo a sentire l'HOT? Sono stati fatti diversi rilievi nei giorni scorsi, alcuni anche molto dettagliati. Le scosse odierne hanno però tragicamente cambiato la situazione. In ogni caso bisogna chiedere alla Regione Emilia Romagna. Ciao, Stefano ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it -- - Gianmario ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
[Talk-it] Tag per codice ISTAT e codice catasto
Ciao a tutti, mi chiedevo quali sono i tag piu' appropriati per riportare il codice ISTAT e il codice catasto delle divisioni amministrative (comuni, province, regioni). Intendo le relazioni type=boundary/boundary=administrative, non i nodi place=*! Io proporrei *ref:ISTAT* e *ref:catasto*. Tuttavia ho un paio di dubbi: Riguardo al primo: ho notato che e' gia' stato utilizzato il tag istat_id[1]. Questo nome non mi convince troppo: se il tag rappresenta un identificatore ritengo che sia meglio mettere il prefisso ref: invece del suffisso _id. Il tag e' stato utilizzato quasi sempre insieme ai tag place=* e gfoss_id=*, quindi immagino che sia il risultato dell'import dei dati GFOSS. Tuttavia noto che su 9005 utilizzi ci sono solo 1925 valori diversi (uno stesso valore e' stato usato 7077 volte!!), quindi il tag non e' molto utile come identificatore. Il valore associato a questo tag e' il codice ISTAT per le localita' (ed in genere e' lungo 10-11 caratteri), mentre il codice ISTAT per i comuni, le province e le regioni e' lungo rispettivamente 6, 3 e 2 caratteri. Credo quindi che non sia sbagliato introdurre il tag ref:ISTAT per indicare il codice ISTAT delle divisioni amministrative, lasciando il tag istat_id per i codici delle localita' (almeno per ora...) Riguardo invece al tag ref:catasto, il nome non mi convince troppo. Questo identificativo dei comuni e' mantenuto dall'Agenzia del Territorio, pero' il tag ref:AgenziaDelTerritorio mi convince ancora meno. Qualcuno ha dei consigli migliori? Ciao, Luca [1] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/istat_id#overview ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Tag per codice ISTAT e codice catasto
2012/5/29 Luca Wehrstedt luca.wehrst...@gmail.com: Io proporrei ref:ISTAT e ref:catasto. Tuttavia ho un paio di dubbi: Riguardo al primo: ho notato che e' gia' stato utilizzato il tag istat_id[1] sappiamo che sono costanti gli id dell'ISTAT? O sono anche sogetto a delle modifiche? In questo caso dovremo avere versioni (ref:istat:1,...) secondome, se il tag precedentemente usato è istat_id lo utilizzerei anche in futuro (chiarendo prima la questione delle versioni). ciao, Martin ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Tag per codice ISTAT e codice catasto
vedo che ci sono anche questi tags: 295 it:lombardia:ctrn:localita_significativa:COD_ISTAT 86 it:lombardia:ctrn:cod_istatn 86 it:lombardia:ctrn:cod_istat di cosa si tratta? Sono gli stessi codici? ciao, Martin ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Tag per codice ISTAT e codice catasto
2012/5/29 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com sappiamo che sono costanti gli id dell'ISTAT? O sono anche sogetto a delle modifiche? In questo caso dovremo avere versioni (ref:istat:1,...) Questi ID sono abbastanza costanti: cambiano quando cambia il territorio amministrato dal comune (perche' viene aggregato o suddiviso) o quando il comune passa da una provincia ad un'altra. In genere se un comune cambia semplicemente nome il suo ID non cambia. Considerando che comunque eventi di questo genere capitano raramente io eviterei di inserire un numero di versione. vedo che ci sono anche questi tags: 295 it:lombardia:ctrn:localita_significativa:COD_ISTAT 86 it:lombardia:ctrn:cod_istatn 86 it:lombardia:ctrn:cod_istat di cosa si tratta? Sono gli stessi codici? Sembrano essere il risultato di un import della Carta Tecnica Regionale della Lombardia. Probabilmente sono stati importati in batch tutti i tag presenti nello shapefile, tra cui anche tag inutili (ad esempio it:lombardia:ctrn:shape_area e it:lombardia:ctrn:shape_len). Comunque il primo e il terzo dovrebbero essere i codici ISTAT dei comuni, mentre il secondo non lo conosco (potrebbe essere il codice ISTAT delle localita', ma il formato e' un po' diverso...). secondome, se il tag precedentemente usato è istat_id lo utilizzerei anche in futuro (chiarendo prima la questione delle versioni). Il tag istat_id ha una semantica diversa (indica il codice della localita', non del comune!), ha un nome che non rispetta le linee guida per i tag e, soprattutto, e' stato usato male: se deve essere un identificativo (univoco) non e' possibile che oltre 7000 nodi (su un totale di 9000) abbiano lo stesso valore!! Quindi non vedo perche' portarci dietro un tag che, probabilmente, e' stato introdotto senza rifletterci piu' di tanto quando invece abbiamo la possibilita' di definire un nuovo tag con un nome corretto e un significato chiaro. Ciao, Luca ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] R: Terremoto in Emilia Romagna
Per inciso, ho dato un'occhiata alla viabilità della zona e mi pare manchino un po' di primary e secondary: una statale declassata (con old ref SS255) è classificata secondary mentre alcune provinciali sono solo tertiary... Che ne dite, facciamo qualche promozione? ciao Tiziano ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] R: Terremoto in Emilia Romagna
2012/5/29 Tiziano D'Angelo tiziano.dang...@gmail.com: Per inciso, ho dato un'occhiata alla viabilità della zona e mi pare manchino un po' di primary e secondary: una statale declassata (con old ref SS255) è classificata secondary mentre alcune provinciali sono solo tertiary... Che ne dite, facciamo qualche promozione? +1, sono a favore, spesso trovo la classificazione molto bassa. ciao, Martin ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Tag per codice ISTAT e codice catasto
2012/5/29 Luca Wehrstedt luca.wehrst...@gmail.com: 2012/5/29 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com secondome, se il tag precedentemente usato è istat_id lo utilizzerei anche in futuro (chiarendo prima la questione delle versioni). Il tag istat_id ha una semantica diversa (indica il codice della localita', non del comune!), ha un nome che non rispetta le linee guida per i tag e, soprattutto, e' stato usato male: se deve essere un identificativo (univoco) non e' possibile che oltre 7000 nodi (su un totale di 9000) abbiano lo stesso valore!! va bene, non avevo capito che la semantica era diversa, se hai dei buoni motivi per utilizzare un nuovo tag, vada pure... ciao, Martin ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
[Talk-co] Flash 59 Nivel Naranja Volcán Nevado del Ruiz
NIVEL NARANJA(II): ERUPCIÓN PROBABLE EN TÉRMINO DE DÍAS O SEMANAS Durante las últimas horas se ha presentado un incremento importante en la actividad del volcán que se puede resumir en los siguientes aspectos: A las 03:07 (Hora Local) del día 29 de Mayo de 2012, se registró de una señal sísmica asociada a una emisión de ceniza, con reporte confirmado de caída en el área cercana a los sectores de Brisas y el Recreo en el área del volcán y en cascos urbanos y sectores rurales de los municipios de Manizales y Villamaría. Este evento se caracteriza por tener mayor energía que los procesos de emisión de ceniza reportados los días 19 de Abril, 10 y 22 de Mayo de 2012 y menor a la erupción del 13 de noviembre de 1985 y 1 de septiembre de 1989. Se recomienda a la comunidad continuar atento a cualquier cambio que se presente en la actividad del volcán, conservar la calma y estar atento a la evolución de la actividad y posteriores reportes. UNGRD @CarlosMarquezPe @GestionDGR Cordialmente, Sandra Calvo Pinzón Jefe Oficina Asesora de Comunicaciones Unidad Nacional para la Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres Presidencia de la República sandra.ca...@dgr.gov.co comunicac...@dgr.gov.co 3142010582 3202376139 PIN 26D06B06 Skype: sandra.calvo3 Twitter: CarlosMarquezPe GestionDGR Enviado desde BlackBerry® de COMCEL S.A. ___ Talk-co mailing list Talk-co@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-co
Re: [Talk-co] Flash 59 Nivel Naranja Volcán Nevado del Ruiz
Estimada Sandra: Buenos días y gracias por mantenernos informados. Ante la situación asalta la duda sobre cómo esta comunidad de maperos y desarrolladores de geo-aplicaciones puede contribuir de manera articulada a la prevención y atención de este posible e inminente desastre. Aparecen las siguientes ideas: 1. Actualización cartográfica de la zona [1], existen etiquetas de emergencia que pueden ser de ayuda [2]. De manera que el ciudadano cuente con un producto cartográfico a la mano (p.ej.: en su celular, imagen en Internet) con rutas de evacuación y recursos ante la emergencia o desastre; 2. Sistema de emergencia SMS: En doble vía: cuando se de la alerta roja envíe uno (o varios) SMS a la red de ciudadanos en riesgo de su vida; cada ciudadano tenga la posibilidad de enviar mensajes GeoSMS [3] sobre una alerta o su localización y condición. Espero este año podamos tender puentes de articulación tras la vocación altruista que converge en las organizaciones humanitarias. Saludos, Humberto Yances Equipo Humanitario OSM PD: Me llega información de que existen radios comunitarias que están apoyando la coordinación de la alerta entre la población civil; sin embargo el MinTIC prohíbe su radiodifusión... paradojas que luego pueden resultar en lamentos? [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=4.911lon=-75.28zoom=10layers=M [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Emergency [3] http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/opengeosms El 29 de mayo de 2012 06:08, Sandra Calvo sandra.ca...@dgr.gov.coescribió: NIVEL NARANJA(II): ERUPCIÓN PROBABLE EN TÉRMINO DE DÍAS O SEMANAS Durante las últimas horas se ha presentado un incremento importante en la actividad del volcán que se puede resumir en los siguientes aspectos: A las 03:07 (Hora Local) del día 29 de Mayo de 2012, se registró de una señal sísmica asociada a una emisión de ceniza, con reporte confirmado de caída en el área cercana a los sectores de Brisas y el Recreo en el área del volcán y en cascos urbanos y sectores rurales de los municipios de Manizales y Villamaría. Este evento se caracteriza por tener mayor energía que los procesos de emisión de ceniza reportados los días 19 de Abril, 10 y 22 de Mayo de 2012 y menor a la erupción del 13 de noviembre de 1985 y 1 de septiembre de 1989. Se recomienda a la comunidad continuar atento a cualquier cambio que se presente en la actividad del volcán, conservar la calma y estar atento a la evolución de la actividad y posteriores reportes. UNGRD @CarlosMarquezPe @GestionDGR Cordialmente, Sandra Calvo Pinzón Jefe Oficina Asesora de Comunicaciones Unidad Nacional para la Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres Presidencia de la República sandra.ca...@dgr.gov.co comunicac...@dgr.gov.co 3142010582 3202376139 PIN 26D06B06 Skype: sandra.calvo3 Twitter: CarlosMarquezPe GestionDGR Enviado desde BlackBerry® de COMCEL S.A. ___ Talk-co mailing list Talk-co@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-co ___ Talk-co mailing list Talk-co@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-co
