2017-10-25 11:49 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :
> On 25 October 2017 at 10:06, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
> > 2017-10-25 9:27 GMT+02:00 Safwat Halaby :
>
> > wikidata objects often don't say what they are about
> > (besides the name), they are just a bunch of
sent from a phone
> On 25. Oct 2017, at 08:43, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> Well, certainly Wikipedia links should only be added by people who know
> something about the feature in question, and not by a machine that
> compares name tags to Wikipedia entries and takes a wild guess.
To illustrate
2017-10-24 14:47 GMT+02:00 Christoph Hormann :
> The likeliness of a Communist and an Ultra-conservative having
> a friendly and open chat about something like philosophy, science or
> art is much higher if they are Europeans.
that's likely because there are more ultra conservative communists
2017-10-25 9:27 GMT+02:00 Safwat Halaby :
>
> A Wikidata tag is just as verifiable as Wikipedia tag: Both require
> visiting an external site. Y
no, because wikipedia articles describe what they are about (or get deleted
for lack of substance), wikidata objects often don't say what they are
abo
Frederik:
> I am appalled that after your abysmal OSM editing history where you more
> often than not ignored existing customs rules, while *claiming* to
> follow them, you're now building a service that entices others to do the
> same.
>
> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 6:09 AM Christoph Hormann wro
sent from a phone
> On 12. Oct 2017, at 20:17, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
>
> Wikidata's notability policy is actually very liberal. If you're familiar
> with the Inclusionist versus Deletionist debate in Wikipedia, Wikidata is
> heaven for Inclusionists. For instance, Wikidata now has items
sent from a phone
> On 11. Oct 2017, at 16:59, Rory McCann wrote:
>
> No-one's said it yet, but to me, that's a con. Not everyone likes the
> share-alike requirement, and that's fine. But there are people, like me,
> who think "share-alike" is a pro.
I also like the idea of share-alike, but
2017-10-11 13:42 GMT+02:00 Christoph Hormann :
> * Wikidata is definitely not suited as an universal meta-database
> connecting OSM with other open data sets. This is because of the
> Notability concept (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Notability)
> which practically means the vast majorit
2017-10-06 10:10 GMT+02:00 Jo :
> What I don't understand is the problems people seem to have with wikidata.
> If an existing wikidata entry doesn't align with what we mapped, then
> create a new wikidata entry that does and link it to the existing entries.
>
it's actually not that easy. I tried
sent from a phone
> On 6. Oct 2017, at 06:02, Yves wrote:
>
> @JB, I understood the bot=no tag like the add=no sticker on your physical
> mailbox
yes, just like every active mapper having tens of thousands of mailboxes to
add stickers to. What about an opt in? Add a bot=yes if you want yo
there is another aspect that could be added to your list for discussion:
wikipedia and wikidata integration on osm tag definition wiki pages.
* Some wiki editors seem to believe, the first word of a osm tag definition
should be a link to a wikipedia article about something related to this tag,
2017-10-03 8:11 GMT+02:00 Yuri Astrakhan :
> Martin, while it is fascinating to learn about Aldi, its history, and
> possible ways to organize information about it, isn't it a moot point for
> our discussion?
>
I just took it as an example because I think it works to illustrate several
problems
2017-10-03 2:25 GMT+02:00 Frederik Ramm :
>
> Did your proposal also extend to geoemtries? You said something about
> bot:* tags, but if a bot were to orthogonalize an existing building,
> would it then have to create a copy of that tagged "bot:building=yes"?
>
is automatically orthogonalizing g
sent from a phone
> On 2. Oct 2017, at 20:36, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> and Andy Mabbett from England editing supermarkets in
> Germany.
indeed it’s not helping the quality if editors are not familiar with the
language specifics for the area of the things they edit (this is true for all
UGC
2017-10-02 15:59 GMT+02:00 Christoph Hormann :
>
>
>
> Of course considering the big volume of editing activity that would
> likely take place in the 'bot:' namespace in that scenario it might be
> a good idea to put those tags into a separate database for efficiency
> reasons.
>
yes, keeping a
2017-09-28 15:01 GMT+02:00 Andy Townsend :
> (in the case of the Aldis discussed elsewhere I suspect that there will
> always enough info to say which is which in other tags or using geographic
> location).
>
in the case of Aldi Nord and Aldi Süd, you'd have to know the precise
position of the "
Recently I was presented with an Error message of my favorite editing
software, when I tried to upload a changeset where several pyramids in Giza
(Egypt) together are known by a common name.
JOSM told me there was an Error in my data. An Error for the JOSM validator
is something that is most likel
do you intend to upload these to OSM, and if yes, are you going to create
traffic sign objects or will you add traffic sign information to nearby osm
objects like roads?
Cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openst
2017-09-28 13:28 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
> If their first language doesn't use Latin roots they will also have to
> look up "name".
>
sorry, seems "name" has Germanic roots.
Cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing
2017-09-28 10:53 GMT+02:00 Andy Townsend :
> On 28/09/2017 09:28, Jo wrote:
> Many mappers (especially those with a first language that doesn't use many
> Greek roots) will I suspect struggle with what "name:etymology:wikidata"
> actually means.
>
>
maybe, but they could look it up. If their fir
2017-09-28 12:07 GMT+02:00 Jo :
> My experience is that adding something we map (or refer to like the name
> of a mayor) to Wikipedia is absurdly hard to accomplish. Adding it to
> Wikidata is trivially easy in comparison. So the inclusion rules for
> Wikipedia and Wikidata are very different too.
sent from a phone
> On 27. Sep 2017, at 23:09, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
>
> Martin, that specific Wikidata item may have some, possibly incomplete data,
> that can be easily fixed, but that's irrelevant. As I keep saying - the
> wikidata and wikipedia tags are no different - both point to the s
sent from a phone
> On 27. Sep 2017, at 22:04, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
>
> Martin, you cannot make a general claim based on a single value.
I didn’t make a general claim based on this, I said it’s another example.
> Specifying Q125054 is the same as specifying "Aldi". If needed/wanted, it
sent from a phone
On 27. Sep 2017, at 21:58, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>>> the only wikidata example I can
>>> find is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/25716765
>
>> which btw. is another good example of misleading and wrong information via
>> wikidata.
>
> No, it's an example of wrong data in OS
sent from a phone
> On 27. Sep 2017, at 17:57, Andy Townsend wrote:
>
> In Germany both Aldi Nord and Aldi Sud operate, but these tend to be tagged
> in OSM as operator rather than brand, and the only wikidata example I can
> find is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/25716765
which btw. i
2017-09-27 17:45 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :
> On 27 September 2017 at 16:00, Christoph Hormann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 27 September 2017, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> means that by
> >> extension I also have to welcome "amenity:wikidata=Q123456" on
> >> something that is, say, an ice cream parlour beca
2017-09-27 16:56 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :
> On 26 September 2017 at 21:39, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>
> >> This might also mean that
> >> you have to discuss it via Telegram, Facebook, email, IRC, etc.
> >> depending on where that local community is.
&g
sent from a phone
> On 26. Sep 2017, at 23:58, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>
> Wherever I go in the world, I try to make some improvements to OSM. Am
> I then a local mapper? In Jakarta, Doha, Cairo, Larnaca, Istanbul, or
> Warsaw?
IMHO you are a local mapper in places that you know very well, eithe
for the record: using Latin would be the completely wrong message we could
send out IMHO. It would make us look like an elitist circle [1] and would
make many people feel rejected, or at least make them turn away as soon as
they get to know about it.
Cheers,
Martin
[1] sometimes you already can
2017-09-26 6:00 GMT+02:00 Oleksiy Muzalyev :
> But the Latin language does exist, and its popularity is growing [1].
>
see, they also mention Greek ;-)
Cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinf
2017-09-26 5:14 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis :
> This might also mean that
> you have to discuss it via Telegram, Facebook, email, IRC, etc.
> depending on where that local community is.
>
> The talk mailing list is not sufficient.
I think this is problematic. If the local community uses a paid service
sent from a phone
> On 22. Sep 2017, at 17:22, SwiftFast wrote:
>
> There are many places to tag places. (node, way, admin area,
> landuse=residential, etc). This confuses me, and I assume it confuses
> many others. We need a comprehensive summary covering all cases.
>
> Here's a draft: https
2017-09-25 12:39 GMT+02:00 Oleksiy Muzalyev :
> The Latin language itself has been for centuries the language of science,
> and it remains the language of scientific classification. For example,
> Isaac Newton wrote his breakthrough books in Latin.
>
Ancient Greek has been for centuries the lang
2017-09-25 12:37 GMT+02:00 Jo :
> 1000 - 7000 extra layers? That's give or take the number of languages in
> existence... depending on who you ask, but even adding 500 extra layers is
> not a practical endeavour.
>
maybe there are that many languages in the world, but there isn't
information in
For the default map having local names everywhere is a strong statement.
The current status is fine (where scripts for the language are supported by
the fonts used in rendering).
Having transliterated / localized versions should only be an optional, if
ressources allow for it. Mixed versions (show
2017-09-25 9:37 GMT+02:00 Frederik Ramm :
> ideally I
> want a map with local names except where I can't read them ;)
>
>
>
+1.
And ideally I'd want a map that not only shows cities or countries with
transliterated names where needed, but everything (especially POIs like
historical things, museu
2017-09-20 19:07 GMT+02:00 Christoph Hormann :
> Don't assume such cases are just a freak anomaly - they are not. OSM
> and wikidata are two very different projects which developed in very
> different contexts. Just another example: For most cities and larger
> towns (at least in Germany) there
sent from a phone
> On 20. Sep 2017, at 17:37, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
>
> This is most certainly a wrong modeling in Wikidata. While we can just have
> one well-written and comprehensive Wikipedia article about the
> country/archipelago, in Wikidata, one item should correspond to one con
2017-09-06 13:33 GMT+02:00 James :
> Not really, with a roundabout, you have a way you can follow. Where as an
> area, you'd calculate somewhat of the middle between the two edges to
> generate a path, as you can't just route on the boundary of the polygon as
> it might be unwalkable/doesnt make s
2017-08-30 11:56 GMT+02:00 Richard :
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 12:53:43PM +0100, Philip Barnes wrote:
> > This really needs routers to be able to route over areas, the same issue
> exists over large areas of grass such as found in parks or town squares.
>
> in many parts of the world such areas ar
2017-09-01 16:24 GMT+02:00 Oleksiy Muzalyev :
>
> But the advantage is that it weighs only 300 grams, very portable, and it
> is ready to fly almost instantly as folding propellers are fixed
> permanently, and smart-phone connects to the remote control via WiFi, no
> cables are necessary.
>
did
sent from a phone
> On 23. Aug 2017, at 11:54, djakk djakk wrote:
>
> I think there are five keys to tag a road :
> 1) its importance in the network (super-primary, primary, secondary ...)
> 2) its administrative class (motorway, mottorrad)
> 3) its physical characteristics (example : no at-g
sent from a phone
> On 23. Aug 2017, at 01:20, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
> maxspeed:practical should be a representative speed that's valid most of
> the time.
>
>> maxspeed:practical should not have any values above the legal speed
>> limit.. and if it had routers should ignore such values anyway
sent from a phone
> On 22. Aug 2017, at 01:42, Daniel Koć wrote:
>
> Of course we can have some of them, but while landuses can be added quite
> easily, it's different with the rest.
it's not easy for forests or similar things either, because they might be split
(for good reason) into seve
sent from a phone
> On 22. Aug 2017, at 15:46, Richard wrote:
>
> called differently, but this is it:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed:practical
yes, but practical maxspeed depends a lot on your equipment and capabilities,
and on other people driving in front of you, so th
sent from a phone
> On 22. Aug 2017, at 14:40, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
> Another is in the US
> where there are many roads signed 65 mph where traffic normally moves
> at 80 mph.
80mph are 129kph, so I guess these are motorways or bigger roads?
Maybe this should be fixed by the legislator rat
sent from a phone
> On 22. Aug 2017, at 13:29, Colin Smale wrote:
>
> I don't understand why junction penalties should be dependent on the road
> classes, and not on physical characteristics. I guess this is just a
> heuristic which can be useful if you don't have the full picture.
>
ofte
sent from a phone
> On 21. Aug 2017, at 22:09, djakk djakk wrote:
>
> Actualy, "highway=*" shuffles importance and characteristic of roads. May we
> add an "importance" key to roads ?
highway is generally about grid importance and in some cases also about legal
classification (motorways, f
sent from a phone
> On 19. Aug 2017, at 21:29, Marc Gemis wrote:
>
> As you can see from
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway:International_equivalence,
> trunk roads are defined differently in many countries. If you look at
> e.g. Denmark, a trunk road needs a special sign. Those sig
sent from a phone
> On 25. Jul 2017, at 18:24, john whelan wrote:
>
> I think the convention is if you see a settlement with side streets in a grid
> pattern its more than likely a settlement and can be labelled
> landuse=residential.
I believe you should use place=* for whole settlements,
2017-07-20 20:35 GMT+02:00 Michael Steffen :
> These changes are now reflected in the wiki: https://wiki.
> openstreetmap.org/wiki/Draft_Geocoding_Guideline
>
Is my interpretation correct that if this guideline goes into effect I
could get millions of addresses and their coordinates from OSM, wi
sent from a phone
> On 12. Jul 2017, at 12:33, Walter Nordmann wrote:
>
> If you don't know the osm_id? Don't think so.
knowing the id you don't need overpass api. If you don't know it, you can get
old data from overpass api to get the id, here's some more explanation and
example, with lin
sent from a phone
> On 12. Jul 2017, at 06:04, maning sambale wrote:
>
> Or press "U" in Potlatch 1 *
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Change_rollback#Potlatch_1
+1, you can also get deleted objects from the overpass api
cheers,
Martin
___
ta
sent from a phone
> On 9. Jul 2017, at 08:36, Maarten Deen wrote:
>
> I have to say: it is a nuisance that you can not get this information easily.
> Please someone who is in the map development and reads this: add an item to
> the right-click menu where you can see tile status.
https://gi
sent from a phone
> On 8. Jul 2017, at 08:39, Maarten Deen wrote:
>
> You used to be able to invalidate a tile, but that does not work anymore
AFAIK it still works, although it is rather complicated now to get the tile
URL, and there's reluctance from the admin to expose them in a convenien
sent from a phone
> On 7. Jul 2017, at 17:16, Oleksiy Muzalyev
> wrote:
>
> The issue is that the zoom both with the magic trackpad and with the magic
> mouse is a bit too fast and kind of volatile in JOSM
you can adjust the sensitivity in the mac preferences, I bet there's some
software
2017-07-06 11:43 GMT+02:00 Maarten Deen :
> 2)
> When rendering public transport platforms, the layer tag does not seem to
> be taken into account, making platforms that are areas render below roads
> that are running under the platform.
> Example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/222561489 but th
2017-07-06 11:43 GMT+02:00 Maarten Deen :
> I have two questions about some Mapnik renderings I encountered on the
> main OSM map.
>
> 1)
> Why is this road not rendered as a tunnel?
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/435805359
it is rendered as a tunnel, but you can't see it, because there's
sent from a phone
> On 20. Jun 2017, at 22:23, LapplandsCohan wrote:
>
> To be able to get routing descriptions that works for everyday use I motion
> that when the ref= tag is used on a highway, there MUST be signs in real
> life along the way that shows the same information (on-the-ground
>
sent from a phone
> On 11. Jun 2017, at 18:18, Eric Gillet wrote:
>
> Should changesets which are less than 95% correct be disallowed on OSM ? That
> would block a lot of contributions !
I think you shouldn't upload a changeset of which you believe only 95% are
correct, because 5% is an in
2017-06-07 17:13 GMT+02:00 Clifford Snow :
> They were asked [1] back in 2015 for attribution. It seems like they are
> ignoring the request. Maybe someone from the Czech community could contact
> them.
Maybe the foundation should contact them, 2 years are a long time, and the
Czech community d
2017-06-02 10:32 GMT+02:00 Christoph Hormann :
> > Individual Geocoding Results that are based on an Indirect Hit
> > contain no OSM data and so are free of any obligations under the
> > ODbL
>
>
> IMO it would make sense to remove this distinction because the guideline
> makes no significant
sent from a phone
On 30. May 2017, at 13:38, Dave F wrote:
>> Even when i close a nonsensical note i dont write 3.1415926 in them
>> but i write
>>
>> "A pure number is without context and we cant interpret it to extent
>> or improve the map. If you habe more context what this number means
>>
sent from a phone
> On 29. May 2017, at 01:10, john whelan wrote:
>
> >Over the last 2 days i've closed 500+ notes with the words (My
> >house,house,*someones name* house, I live here, my friend lives here)
> Regards,
> Hans
>
> But how will they find their way home?
the notes remain visib
2017-05-27 0:12 GMT+02:00 Nicolás Alvarez :
> The map should say "report a problem", not "add a note".
+1, I agree with this part. It really happens not too rarely that people
use the "notes" system for their personal notes (like "John's hotel").
Rather than "problem reports" they could also b
2017-05-26 11:56 GMT+02:00 Dave F :
> Quantity is not quality, as you note above.
Quality concerns are part of the reason why notes were introduced: to give
an easy feedback possibility without a risk to damage actual map data. as
long as we can deal with incoming notes, it is OK. If they're be
sent from a phone
> On 26. May 2017, at 00:24, Rafael Avila Coya wrote:
>
> "The place has gone or never existed. This is an auto-generated note from
> MAPS.ME application: a user reports a POI that is visible on a map (which can
> be outdated), but cannot be found on the ground. (OSM data v
sent from a phone
> On 25. May 2017, at 22:17, Dave F wrote:
>
> Many notes are indicating locations which already exist such as building
> names & parks. What devices are being used which don't display this clearly?
some app has put a note on every amenity=parking object around here (and
sent from a phone
> On 21. May 2017, at 10:52, Javier Sánchez Portero
> wrote:
>
> Hello.
>
> My name is Javier, from Spain. From yesterday, Mapnik is rendering the
> waterway=stream, intermittent=yes way with ugly black lines instead of the
> ussal dotted light blue.
thank you for repo
sent from a phone
> On 5. May 2017, at 12:24, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> This is true. It would actually be possible to write a plugin for JOSM
> to do that - automatically sign up to OSM with a different throw-away
> account for each changeset you upload.
then you'd know it's either a Germa
2017-05-05 12:24 GMT+02:00 Frederik Ramm :
> I think that even if they are careful enough not to use their real name,
> the identity of a mapper will often be easy to reconstruct if you have
> access to just a little bit of extra information (might be as little as
> a name on a doorbell).
>
if I
2017-05-05 12:10 GMT+02:00 Frederik Ramm :
> How the goals of transparency and quality control in the project and the
> goal of protecting the privacy of the individual contributor can be
> reconciled is something we can, and should, think about
>
I still don't see how someone can be individuall
Again on the term "personal data". According to the General Data Protection
Regulation (GDPR) (Regulation (EU) 2016/679) [1], pseudonymized data is not
concerned, unless it would be possible to attribute it to a natural person:
___
(26) "The principles of data protection should apply to any inform
sent from a phone
> On 5. May 2017, at 01:36, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> Only if you want to distribute it outside
> of OSM you'd either have to remove/pseudonymize the user names or get
> explicit permission (as in: "I am ok with you publishing this particular
> work with my name in it") from t
2017-04-27 10:21 GMT+02:00 joost schouppe :
> There are very good arguments for both sides of this discussion.
I forgot another two pro distinct geometry:
4. consistency. There is a general rule that separate carriageways should
be mapped separately. Why would we do it everywhere but on cycle
2017-04-27 9:19 GMT+02:00 joost schouppe :
> So not all of the cases are an error, but many of them.
I would like to come to a common agreement and document that
highway=cycleway on distinct geometry is preferable to having just a
cycleway=track attribute on a road. In the past some of the sepa
sent from a phone
> On 25. Apr 2017, at 19:07, Tobias Zwick wrote:
>
> I would say so, as long as there are not in reality two cycleways (see
> above). Wouldn't you?
it depends on the meaning/reading. I believe cycleway=track is bad anyway, it's
ok for preliminary mapping but fails when it
sent from a phone
> On 24. Apr 2017, at 19:27, Tobias Zwick wrote:
>
> With duplicate, I mean cycleways that are both
> - tagged as cycleway=* on a highway=* way and
> - mapped as a separate way parallel to the street with highway=cycleway
do you suppose this is an error?
I don't know about
sent from a phone
> On 22. Apr 2017, at 14:57, Oleksiy Muzalyev
> wrote:
>
> But such a situation is the same everywhere.
+1, there are even countries driving on the other side of the road than most of
the others, willingly paying an extra for having manufactures producing
vehicles with t
sent from a phone
> On 22. Apr 2017, at 08:33, Oleksiy Muzalyev
> wrote:
>
> In my opinion, it is a significant issue, in fact a disaster waiting to
> happen. There will be soon air-born taxi in Dubai, Singapore, etc., and the
> extremely high communication towers, the so-called aviation tr
sent from a phone
> On 22. Apr 2017, at 01:37, Andy Townsend wrote:
>
> The current tagging (man_made=tower; tower:type=communication) looks OK to me.
The word "communication" to me means a two-way exchange of information/ideas
(mutual, e.g. a phone call). For television, the word "broadcas
2017-04-10 12:16 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
> In JOSM there is a tool to simplify ways with errors of less than 3 metres
> in order to reduce the data base size.
> This amount of error is judged acceptable.
>
you can use the algorithm with any acceptable error margin set, but pleas
2017-04-10 10:45 GMT+02:00 Walter Nordmann :
> Hi sandor:
>
> to long - did not read it.
>
+1, make it a diary entry and provide a management summary here ;-)
http://www.openstreetmap.org/diary
Cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap
sent from a phone
> On 2 Apr 2017, at 14:19, Andy Townsend wrote:
>
> Maybe we should ask the JOSM maintainers to add an "open in Potlatch 2"
> option to allow the full history to be seen :)
+1, and also an "open in Potlatch" for seeing deleted ways in an area.
cheers,
Martin
sent from a phone
> On 1 Apr 2017, at 23:22, Dave F wrote:
>
> I'm struggling to see how this isn't a fundamentally incorrect way for
> OSM/JOSM etc to interpret the data. If nodes are moved then ways are amended
> & should be listed as such to avoid confusion & "reverting good edits made by
sent from a phone
> On 28 Mar 2017, at 13:21, nwastra wrote:
>
> Thanks for the link Martin.
> It is well written and helps me a great deal on this matter.
although you can put source tags on objects, there's much more sense* to adding
the "bezier=yes/no" tag on ways, and nearly nobody does
2017-03-27 23:17 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
> Source tags on features within the OSM data base have not been depreciated
> to my knowledge
let's say it like this: their use is discouraged, because the concept
doesn't work for OSM.
You can see this reflected here:
https://wiki.open
2017-03-27 16:20 GMT+02:00 Dave F :
> Individual entities can have multiple source tags added at different
> times. It would be far harder to 'track' their sources if only add to
> changesets. When editing an object you can instantaneously see the sources
> if added to it.
>
frankly, the thing I
2017-03-27 11:56 GMT+02:00 Jean-Marc Liotier :
> And while we're at it, the next most frequent building tagging mistake:
> outlining the building on orbital imagery at roof level instead of base
> level... Explaining that pictures are not always taken from the
> vertical usually drives the point h
2017-03-27 9:46 GMT+02:00 David Fox :
> Amendments within changesets can have multiple sources. Each entity can
> have multiple sources.
sure, you can add multiple sources to the changeset.
Cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
sent from a phone
> On 27 Mar 2017, at 07:56, nwastra wrote:
>
> I am unsure what is the preferred way or best practice to tag the source for
> multipolygons.
as with any edit, the source should be put on the changeset (i.e. the object
which represents the edit), not on the data objects (n
2017-03-20 11:58 GMT+01:00 Christoph Hormann :
> There is a continuum of possibilities between flashing the attribution
> in tiny letters at the bottom for half a second during startup and
> having it displayed in big letters all the time.
>
yes, and likely not all of these are OK.
>
> Quite
I wonder what appropriate attribution for a mobile app must look like. I do
know that there are some hints about this in the FAQ
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#3a._I_would_like_to_use_
OpenStreetMap_maps._How_should_I_credit_you.3F
which states:
--
*Where to put it*
sent from a phone
> On 19 Mar 2017, at 10:03, Andreas Vilén wrote:
>
> The main problem with Corine is that oftentimes the landuse data overlaps
> villages (which I found when I mapped mountain villages in southern Spain
> last week as well)
whenever looking closeup at any corine data it w
sent from a phone
> On 18 Mar 2017, at 21:40, Sandor Seres wrote:
>
> In another style, typical land related names are on the water like here
> http://osm.org/go/0Tt1PZIt-?layers=T .
seems like either a bad import or localities on the sea, e.g. here:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/25351
2017-03-16 20:00 GMT+01:00 Mike N :
> Then there's the serious and real ha ha ha
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/41.84196/-89.48580
>
> http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/10/31/from-the-sky-dixon-ch
> urch-looks-like-a-penis/
>
likely intentional, the "view from the sky" is the same as th
2017-03-16 16:01 GMT+01:00 James :
> The more restrictions you put, the smarter people will get (just look at
> CAPTCHA, for bots, people would upload images of captchas to a service
> which real people would solve and return the answer to the bots)
+1, recently there was a proof of concept of
sent from a phone
> On 4 Mar 2017, at 16:54, Jochen Topf wrote:
>
> the old-style
> polygons are next and I will create challenges for them, too.
great, they're really legacy to get rid of.
cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap
sent from a phone
> On 4 Mar 2017, at 08:49, Jochen Topf wrote:
>
> Looking at the graphs on http://area.jochentopf.com/stats you can see
> that the number of (multi)polygons is growing steadily, while the number
> of errors has been more or less flat over the last half year.
nice stats and
2017-02-27 21:54 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
> landcover=rock if you want to get detailed
Doesn't "rock" imply solid rock, not loose stones, or am I missled? IIRR we
either use stones, pebbles or bedrock as values to avoid ambiguity. I would
more point on the artwork subtype than o
401 - 500 of 1820 matches
Mail list logo
