Re: [Talk-us] GNIS POI populations

On 1/13/2015 5:34 AM, Minh Nguyen wrote: It looks like most of the place=city/town/village/hamlet POIs from GNIS are tagged with 2000 Census populations in the population tag. These population tags allow renderers to label places with font sizes corresponding to population, which is a pretty

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OSM based GPS navigations and ODbl license of OSM data

On 1/7/2015 7:21 PM, Stephan Knauss wrote: We could start merging 3rd party ODbL into OSM We can do so right now from a legal perspective. In fact, there are imports of ODbL data that have taken place. But then have a hard time to fulfill attribution requirements. No - we'd attribute the same

Re: [Talk-us] Retagging hamlets in the US

On 3/18/2015 4:20 PM, Kevin Kenny wrote: Levittown, New York, for instance is a hamlet with a population of over fifty thousand. This is not a hamlet. Typically a hamlet would have less than 100-200 people. What you've described is a town or a city, this is regardless of if it has

[Talk-ca] March Vancouver meetup

There's going to be a Vancouver meetup near Metrotown on March 17. In the great Saint Patrick's Day tradition, the theme is green locations, but anything is welcome. Bring your own device - laptop recommended. More info and RSVP at

Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)

On 3/31/2015 11:02 AM, stevea wrote: Part of the reason I do this is because other places you might discover these data (subdivision names) are maps published by the rail corporations. But, be careful. For example, I have found that when I go to Union Pacific's web site to get a page that

Re: [Talk-us] Why?

On 2/28/2015 4:07 AM, Hans De Kryger wrote: The city of Escondido has this mega residential area. Just wondering why? http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/33.1035/-117.0940 There's a few things going on here One is that there has been an import or tracing from an official landuse plan (e.g.

Re: [Talk-ca] ON prefix on Ontario highways

On 2/28/2015 9:45 AM, Richard Weait wrote: Don't use prefixes or adulterate the ref with extra characters. Use the network tag for that information. http://taginfo.osm.org/search?q=network%3Dca_on_county Although the lack of prefixes may be true for Ontario routes, it's worth remembering that

Re: [Talk-us] Why?

On 3/4/2015 3:38 PM, stevea wrote: landuse in OSM should be the actual landuse, not the legally permitted / designed landuse (zoning). I do not disagree (meaning I agree), however: if my quarter-hectare property of low density residential zoning has a house, fences, a garage, lawns, a creek

Re: [Talk-ca] duplicate address data

On Mar 26, 2015, at 11:55 AM, Gerd Petermann gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com wrote: Example: The ways http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/99649911 and http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/83504524 One has source=NRCan-CanVec-7.0, the other source=CanVec 6.0 - NRCan Is there a good reason for this

Re: [Talk-us] Santa Clara County (California) address import?

On 1/29/2015 9:38 PM, Tod Fitch wrote: First question, is their Creative Commons license [3] compatible with OSM? From previous list traffic from SteveA regarding California government data I believe that even if the CC license is not compatible with OSM the county data will be licensed

Re: [Talk-us] Moving historic railroad ways from OSM to OpenHistoricalMap

On 3/29/2015 5:00 AM, Mark Bradley wrote: Can I export these ways from OSM and then import them into OHM? The main technical problem with moving data from one OSM API to another (e.g. OSM to OHM, OSM to dev server, OSM to OpenGeoFiction) is making sure to get rid of the OSM IDs, as the other

Re: [talk-au] Use of mapconnect data in OSM [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

On 4/15/2015 6:01 AM, Ross wrote: Hi Simon, The issue is not with the licence. The current terms and conditions require permission to add data not owned by the contributor. This is incorrect. An appropriate license is sufficient. Some obviously appropriate licenses are CC0, PDDL, ODC-BY and

Re: [Talk-us] Facts about the world

On 4/3/2015 11:19 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: Perhaps we, as the U.S. chapter, play a role in creating or sustaining these false assumptions? Yes. To substantiate this, I looked at communications from the US chapter I looked through the current board term and the previous board term. In the

Re: [Talk-us] Facts about the world

On 4/3/2015 10:06 PM, Eleanor Tutt wrote: Paul - If perception of mapping in the US isn't aligning with reality, we probably *do* need to do a better job as a chapter board of telling the full story. I see what you mean about the blog posts, though I do think your interpretation is a bit

Re: [Talk-ca] OSM data quality in Canada

On 6/17/2015 1:12 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: * What is the imports history, particularly in relation to road network, POIs and addresses? (Beyond what’s in the import catalogue page on the wiki, if anything) CanVec, National Hydrographic Network (NHN), and National Road Network (NRN), all

Re: [Talk-us] cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

On 6/14/2015 2:24 PM, Harald Kliems wrote: Well, you've certainly motivated me to from now on always modify the tiger:reviewed tag :-) Thanks again for your efforts! The most important change is probably setting appropriate surface information. I don't know the exact secret sauce magic of

Re: [Talk-us] OSM TED Style Talk - Fort Collins Colorado

On 5/26/2015 2:00 PM, Mike Thompson wrote: Is anyone else using OSM to advocate for change (or preservation) in their community? Could you share a sentence or two about what you are doing and grant me permission to use it in my talk? In England people are mapping in OpenStreetMap and then

[Talk-ca] Low quality unresolvable notes

I've been catching up on local notes, and have come across a few I'm not sure how to resolve. There are a number which are equivalent to There is a some name of shop somewhere in this block. While probably correct, they're not very useful. The notes aren't bug reports, the original intent of

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Suspicion of site using OSM data without proper credits?

On 5/23/2015 1:25 PM, Anders Anker-Rasch wrote: Hi, Who do I contact regarding investigations about a site potentially using OSM data without proper credits? Best regards, Anders If you don't want to contact them yourself, you can forward the information to le...@osmfoundation.org

Re: [Talk-GB] Paths and Footways

On 8/17/2015 3:25 PM, Rob Nickerson wrote: I'm surprised if this is just England and Wales as I would have thought some other country has some way of documenting paths in a legal context and as such this may be relevant for other countries I'm not aware of any countries which quite have the

Re: [Talk-ca] Fwd: Ottawa, Canada import

On 8/17/2015 8:20 PM, Stewart C. Russell wrote: Hi James, but I did receive approval from the city that we could import data from data.ottawa.ca/dataset http://data.ottawa.ca/dataset. Which I documented here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/Import/Permission I'm

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] GADM license - any news?

On 8/21/2015 7:41 AM, Simone Aliprandi wrote: Do you know if any news have come in these six years? Do you know if OSM received a sort of direct permission to include those data in the OSM database? GADM is still under a non-commercial license. I don't know who said they were going to

Re: [Talk-us] Tagging National Forests

On 8/18/2015 1:58 PM, Ben Discoe wrote: As someone who has worked on protected areas in OSM globally, it has always been obvious that the landuse tags and the boundary tags serve clear and different purposes. US National Forests are boundaries around land which contain many uses(*), and

Re: [Talk-us] Arm chair mapping challenges

. We learn by doing and constructive criticism. It's only when someone doesn't learn or ignore comments that it's a problem. Paul Norman For the Data Working Group ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org

Re: [Talk-GB] Paths and Footways

On 8/16/2015 1:57 PM, ajt1...@gmail.com wrote: Until I provided a counter-example there, the only example on https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/747 was of a well-mapped central European city. If there is evaluation of the results in both rural and urban settings in

Re: [Talk-us] Tagging National Forests

On 8/17/2015 10:10 AM, Tod Fitch wrote: The issue, as I see it, is that the OSM landuse=forest means that all the land so designated is used for timber production No. Unfortunately, all that a data consumer can gather from landuse=forest or natural=wood is that there are trees there.

Re: [talk-au] Unauthorised bike trails in national parks

On 7/29/2015 6:52 PM, fors...@ozonline.com.au wrote: Possibly tag it access=no and rename it to Track closed depending on how widely the name Ant Track is known. It may be known as Ant Track by a very small group of riders. The name might not be Ant Track, but it's almost certainly not Track

Re: [Talk-GB] UK/GB OpenStreetMap survey results

On 8/6/2015 2:07 PM, Antje wrote: Forking the map style with stronger British road colours and then getting that forked road style onto the main site once the default style goes “international”. After all, we didn’t call it “open” for nothing! I'd approach this with caution, for two reasons

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Legal requirements of permissions to import into OSM

On 7/27/2015 9:00 AM, Tom Lee wrote: 3. if they balk at this, ask for an attribution license, most likely a pre-4.0 version of CC-BY Pre-4.0 CC BY attribute requirements are clearly incompatible with common attribution for multi-source maps, practices of data consumers (including Mapbox), and

Re: [Talk-ca] Highway recoding

On 7/22/2015 11:43 AM, Daniel Begin wrote: So far, I understand we have 2.5 votes for tagging trunk/motorway all roads identified as “core route” in document (a); 0.5 against (I am still torn between the two approaches!-) More comments would be appreciated Such an approach would be

Re: [Talk-ca] Open Data Imports

On 7/23/2015 8:54 PM, Andrew MacKinnon wrote: Does anyone know which of these (and others) are compatible with the OSM license? Very likely most of them are not released under open licenses. Unfortunately, non-open data gets listed in OpenAddresses and there's no assurance that you can combine

[Talk-ca] Mapping Commercial Drive event in Vancouver

The Vancouver OSM group will be meeting on Saturday at 11 AM on Commercial Drive We'll be mapping locations on Commercial Drive and enjoying the nice summer weather outside. Use your favorite OpenStreetMap tool to do the mapping, be it an app, notebook, GPS, or field papers. People from all

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using a WMS imagery with CC-BY4.0

On 7/13/2015 3:09 AM, Simon Poole wrote: It is, as you may have seen from previous discussions, not clear if the CC 4.0 licences are compatible (with the exception of CC0 naturally) with the ODbL and this is likely not an issue that will be resolved short term. To clarify a bit, any CC

Re: [Talk-us] rebooting: tagging footways and sidewalks discussion

On 10/27/2015 7:33 AM, Marc Gemis wrote: I just noticed a similar question on the tagging mailing list: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2015-October/027115.html It would be nice to combine efforts, not ? Yes, this isn't a US issue so the discussions on the tagging@ list

[Talk-us] OpenStreetMap US chapter board elections

of 4.28 votes were cast per completed ballot. Thanks to everyone who ran and was involved in the election, including the other scrutineer, Henk Hoff. -- Paul Norman ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org

Re: [Talk-us] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in, favor of relations

On 11/7/2015 10:18 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: I find lately that it needs a patched Mapnik, because Mapnik (sensibly) went to a read-only database connection, and one of Phil's stored procedures modifies the database the first time that a shield cluster is requested. One of these times I'll fix it.

Re: [talk-au] Highway route number prefixes for QLD and NT

On 11/11/2015 9:04 PM, Leith Bade wrote: We hope in the future to also make use of route relations, however the key piece of software (osm2pgsql) we use to work with OSM does not support them. osm2pgsql does support route relations, and will in fact import them with the default style.

Re: [Talk-ca] Map rendering errors

On 11/1/2015 5:27 AM, Bruno Remy wrote: By the evidence, this is a database problem in osm2pgsql schema , witch is used by Mapnik's rendering process. The most probable hypothesis is : some old nodes and old ways

Re: [Talk-us] Maxweight in the USA

On 11/2/2015 2:28 PM, Toby Murray wrote: My view is that this isn't much different than speed limits. We don't tag maxspeed=96.5606, we tag maxspeed=60 mph. Tag what's on the sign. The complicating factor on this is of course that "ton" has at least 3 different meanings but I would generally

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

On 10/14/2015 5:30 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: - in each state, have a state mailinglist, limited to people who actively map in the state, because they live there, or because they drive there to work. Explicitly discourage non-locals from joining. These lists would have more of a "people

Re: [Talk-ca] Federal licence : Confusion

On 10/12/2015 4:44 PM, Stewart C. Russell wrote: Much of the data is tagged with CANVEC import etc viewable in JOSM but in the Ottawa area in particular many of this attr / source tags have been removed. The tags don't matter; attribution is in the *© OpenStreetMap Contributors* link. Aren't

Re: [Talk-ca] Federal licence : Confusion

On 10/12/2015 5:38 AM, Stewart C. Russell wrote: Many other national contributors use an OGL licence, such as in the UK . These contain very similar attribution terms

Re: [Talk-ca] GeoBase Import

On 7/8/2015 2:40 AM, James wrote: Has anyone else had issues with the conversion script from GML to osm? I've been looking at the wiki here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Geobase/Import_How-To and when I try to convert the data python gives me the : UnicodeDecodeError: 'ascii' codec can't

Re: [Talk-ca] Low quality unresolvable notes

On 7/6/2015 6:42 PM, Andrew MacKinnon wrote: Some of these notes are POIs that are visible on Mapillary but I couldn't figure out exactly where they are (for instance, the sign on a strip plaza shows there is a shop but I can't see exactly where it is). You should probably keep these. If you

Re: [Talk-us] GeoBadges 1.0 for OpenStreetMap

On 11/16/2015 6:09 PM, Steven Johnson wrote: Hi Frederik, Thanks for the suggestion and I appreciate the distinction. Because this is our first outing, we're sure that the badge will evolve and the requirements are terminology will evolve with them. I would suggest "Editor" for the criteria

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Any expert CC-BY - ODbL negotiators?

The problem is that they have specified a license with attribution that is unreasonable for geodata (CC BY 3.0 and earlier). Neither OpenStreetMap.org or most data consumers (e.g. MapBox) would meet the CC BY 3.0 and earlier attribution requirements. There are a few options for permission. The

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Any expert CC-BY - ODbL negotiators?

Sent from my Cyanogen phone On Aug 30, 2015 6:04 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: Huh. Really? Did I completely misunderstand this?  http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/GettingPermission My understanding was that when you import data into OSM, you assign special permission

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] GADM license - any news?

On 8/25/2015 3:55 AM, Simon Poole wrote: - in dire circumstances and with a very large effort, as Paul has pointed out, three and a half years ago I managed to get hold of the responsible person with GADM and get explicit permission for a handful of datasets that had been imported in violation

Re: [Talk-us] Another road classification disagreement (this time with HFCS in Kansas)

On 9/6/2015 1:24 AM, Toby Murray wrote: US 24: two lanes, undivided, 65 MPH speed limit, narrow shoulders US 81: four lanes, divided by a 50 foot median, 70 MPH speed limit, 10 foot shoulders I'm pretty sure US 24 also has a lot more random driveways and farm access roads than US 81 although 81

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Legal status of certain mapping activities

On 9/16/2015 6:03 AM, Toggenburger Lukas wrote: Case 1: Is it legal/desired to look up the address of a particular POI on online maps like Bing map (https://www.bing.com/maps/), search.ch (http://map.search.ch), Google Maps (https://www.google.ch/maps/) or Swiss cantonal geoportals to

Re: [Talk-us] User HomocideBaltimore adding fake / fictional / old data all over Baltimore

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/804 placed to force the user to read it before they can continue to edit. If needed, I can merge all the users changes and revert them in one go. On 9/10/2015 3:34 PM, Elliott Plack wrote: This is very strange! The user HomicideBaltimore has been

Re: [Talk-us] Should driveways be on OSM?

On 10/2/2015 7:23 AM, Tom Bloom wrote: -If the driveway is long and wrong, or short and inside an urban area, delete it. Paul and Kevin say I should fix them. Easily said, but there are are too many and there are whole towns needing alignment, and endless roads connecting them that don't

[OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

I'm trimming the cc list and taking this to a new thread, since it's independent of the metadata guideline. On 9/22/2015 4:26 PM, Alex Barth wrote: Overall, I'd love to see us moving towards a share alike interpretation that applies to "OSM as the map" and allows for liberal intermingling of

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Licensing a combined OSM adapted and CC-BY derived work

On 11/22/2015 6:19 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote: On 23 November 2015 at 13:06, Andrew Harvey wrote: >To comply with the OSM data's ODBL license, my published results >contain a notice that it is "based on data (c) OpenStreetMap >Contributors under the Open Database License

Re: [Talk-GB] UKOSM - technical aspects

On 1/10/2016 1:47 PM, Harry Wood wrote: For an OSMUK website you mean? I have a few ideas about that, and would like to be involved. Certainly I'd like to see something done in an openly editable way so it's not too much of a centralised "request changes from the chief" situation. Code in

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC BY-NC (was FYI Collective Database Guideline)

On 6/10/2016 9:48 AM, Tom Lee wrote: Protecting commercial interests by limiting reuse is generally not a goal of open licenses*. If someone owns proprietary data and wants to extract rents from it, they probably shouldn't contribute it to an open data project like OSM. * obviously there are

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Reporting Attribution Issues on Mapbox maps

On 6/10/2016 3:03 PM, Serge Wroclawski wrote: But I'm a little concerned about non-MB hosted maps. If not this URL, where can we report attribution issues related to non-hosted Mapbox maps and can you link to that other place we can report attribution issues related to that other kind of

Re: [Talk-us] problematic import in san francisco state university

On 6/18/2016 10:13 AM, Eric Ladner wrote: I could fix it manually, if you like. Pretty straight forward, actually. I wouldn't suggest putting too much work into it until we determine a source, since it's possible the data might have to go. ___

Re: [Talk-ca] Stat Can and buildings

On 6/15/2016 8:01 AM, john whelan wrote: As a first step Stats would like to know the tags used when mapping buildings in Canada and the number of times used. This is to get an idea of what is already mapped and to see which values should be used when new tags are added. I looked at a

Re: [Talk-ca] Stat Can and buildings

On 6/15/2016 3:08 PM, john whelan wrote: Thank you Paul I think that sums up the issue nicely, someone at Stats Canada is going to have fun working out which tags are relevant to them especially when some may be a different way to express the same thing. Plus of course we have

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] share-alike on generalized data?

On 2/6/2016 9:41 PM, Tobias Wendorff wrote: I mean, this won't be enough, will it? - get OSM data extract from 2016-02-07 - filter streets - get LMA data extract from 2015-12-31 - open in generalization tool XY with parameters XY When publicly using a derivative database (or produced work from

Re: [Talk-ca] Highway recoding

On 1/28/2016 10:31 AM, Ken Wuschke wrote: So a suggestion to a definition for trunk routes in Canada could be a simple as: *A highway=trunk is a roadway that is a part of the National Highway System as defined by the Council of Ministers Responsible for Transportation

[Talk-us] Local event calendar

On the front page of the wiki, we have a calendar showing upcoming local events, powered by http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Current_events The North American meetups have been inconsistent about adding them, but it'd be good to do better. This will help show that there's a share of meetups

Re: [Talk-us] Legal Research

On 2016-02-22 12:38 AM, Ian Dees wrote: As has been mentioned before, the LWG and OSMF were and are involved in this process. The OSMF is not formally involved in the process, through the LWG or otherwise. OpenStreetMap US is free to engage with law students to ask legal questions about

Re: [Talk-ca] Highway recoding

On 1/26/2016 11:34 AM, Chandler Vancouver wrote: To begin with I am relatively new to OSM but I am trying to figure the Canadian definition for trunk status and find the current definition as described on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canadian_tagging_guidelines#Trunk as academic and

Re: [Talk-ca] Bus stops in Ottawa

On 2016-02-29 2:46 AM, john whelan wrote: I think with the clause in the uploading terms that OSM can change the license its very difficult to import anything as it is difficult to say to City of Ottawa etc we'd like your data but we don't know what license it may have in OSM in the future.

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Old Aerodromes

On 4/12/2016 2:40 AM, Christoph Hormann wrote: On Tuesday 12 April 2016, Martijn van Exel wrote: >Hi, > >I was mapping some rural area in the U.S. and noticed, not for the >first time, an aerodrome node in the middle of a field where there is >obviously no airport or airfield. I am not sure

Re: [Talk-us] Caliparks re-tagging paths?

On 3/24/2016 5:50 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: It is obvious to me that all occurrences of highway=social_path need to be replaced with whatever they were before. I'd normally say let's give them some time to come up with a better idea but seeing that the problem has been highlighted to them pretty

Re: [Talk-ca] Bus stops in Ottawa

On 2016-03-02 7:14 PM, Stewart C. Russell wrote: On 2016-03-01 06:42 PM, Tristan Anderson wrote: >Let's not be too hasty in removing large amounts of data, … simply >because it may or may not be compatible with a future OSM license. That's not the issue. It's not compatible with the current

Re: [Talk-us] Communications manager

On 4/1/2016 12:22 AM, Greg Morgan wrote: I would think that the US Board should add another board member to be a communications manager. I now understand why corporations have paid staff that do nothing but manage all these communication options. Why would this need to be a board member as

Re: [Talk-us] Representing census-designated places (CDP), Census County Division (CCD), etc

On 4/28/2016 12:24 PM, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: We are having a discussion about representing statistical boundaries in Brazil and while trying to search for similar cases I found that your CDP (maybe CCD too) seems to be similar: "They don't have any legal status, or represent the

[Talk-us] Proposed import cleanup: NYSDEClands

I was debugging some MP issues and came across the NYSDEClands import[1], done in 2010, consisting of natural areas. They have a number of unwanted tags[2], and a couple of other problems with their tags Because there's a relatively small number of them, I think a mechanical edit is the best

[Talk-us] Proposed import cleanup: Olympic peninsula streams

The Olympic peninsula has a a few imports from the US NFS and NPS I'm proposing cleaning them up with a mechanical edit that for streams from the NFS - Removes attribution=US-NFS, fixme=resurvey, import_uuid, length, length_unit, llid, and waterway_llid tags - Changes

Re: [Talk-ca] Fort McMurray forest fires

On 5/9/2016 12:43 PM, Kunce, Dale wrote: Bernie, I do see that the building footprints are in the esri basemap unfortunately this doesn’t actually help. The esri basemap data is just an tiled image and does not provide us with the vector data that we need to complete our work. I’m happy to

[Talk-ca] Fwd: Re: Fort McMurray forest fires

Fort McMurray is the 5th largest city in the province of Alberta and has been evacuated in the face of wildfires which have burned thousands of structures. Satellites have been tasked to gather imagery, but it probably won't be very useful imagery for OSM until the smoke has cleared. My guess

Re: [Talk-ca] Fort McMurray forest fires

On 5/9/2016 11:17 PM, Heather Leson wrote: Hi Folks Planet Labs opened up their imagery with an OSM friendly license https://www.planet.com/pulse/fort-mcmurray-wildfire/ The license on there (CC BY-SA) is not suitable for deriving data for use in OSM with - do we have a special permission

Re: [Talk-us] Tagging National Forests

On 8/19/2015 2:29 AM, Nathan Mixter wrote: I would like to see areas in OSM categorized as either land use, land cover (which we call natural for the most part in OSM) or administrative to clear the confusion. I am also in favor of eliminating the landuse=forest tag at least in its current

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] MAPS.ME combining OSM data and non-OSM data?

On 7/22/2016 12:28 AM, Ilya Zverev wrote: Consider a simpler experiment. I remove nodes based on an obscure algorithm. I then publish the rest of the database and a list of removed nodes under an open license. Do I have to open the algorithm? The database would be a derivative database and

Re: [talk-au] CC 4.0 was Re: Response regarding use of PSMA Administrative Boundaries (Australia)

On 7/12/2016 1:50 AM, Simon Poole wrote: - the additional requirement to adhere to the AUS privacy regulations was not addressed in the response, which in itself would be a killer. It depends if it's part of the license or a reminder that in Australia there are other laws that may effect what

Re: [talk-au] CC 4.0 was Re: Response regarding use of PSMA Administrative Boundaries (Australia)

On 7/15/2016 7:15 PM, cleary wrote: In regard to the Australian Privacy Principles, I think they have responded to our concern. On this issue, the earlier response stated very clearly that "We can also confirm that OpenStreetMap is not responsible for the actions of your downstream users."

Re: [Talk-GB] Schools

On 8/5/2016 5:59 AM, Andy Allan wrote: Our mapping conventions are based on our mappers, not consumers. As you say, it's easy for the consumers to handle both situations, but it's harder for mappers to deal with multipolygons-with-one-outer than just a basic closed way. Speaking as a data

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OpenStreetMap usage limits

On 8/3/2016 5:04 AM, stones_edite...@cosoluce.fr wrote: Hi, Our company is developping a web application. Scenario is : ·The web application will be sold to many clients (one application for each) ·The web application will be hosted on our web server most of the time (and in some

Re: [Talk-ca] Mapping exit numbers and destinations in Canada

On 8/11/2016 5:53 AM, Kevin Farrugia wrote: Yes - recently bootprint, andrewpmk, and I have been changing and correcting the name tags to destination in Ontario along the 400-Series highways. If you see a ramp/link that is named, it's fine to change it over to destination or correct a problem

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

On 1/22/2017 9:48 AM, James wrote: So why is this not considered the exact same as OGL-CA, which is considered compatible with ODBL? As mentioned previously, the OGL-CA is compatible because the Federal government has said so for their data. The Federal government's statement only applies

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

On 1/22/2017 7:07 AM, John Marshall wrote: Paul, So once we get a letter from the City of Ottawa, are we good to add the buildings as per the wiki? It depends what they say in their reply. If they say no, then we can't use their data. If we have a suitable reply, then we are able to legally

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

On 1/22/2017 9:06 AM, James wrote: So if I understand correctly Paul, CC0 or any other license would require permission as a bypass to the license, even though it would be considered compatible with ODBL. No. CC0 is compatible with the ODbL, so you can just go ahead and use the data*,

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

On 1/21/2017 3:11 PM, Paul Norman wrote: On 1/20/2017 5:33 PM, john whelan wrote: Did you include permission for the bus stops as well? They are from the same source and the same licence. I think I might have included one pitch sport soccer. The pitch was mapped but the sport soccer was I

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

On 1/21/2017 4:34 PM, john whelan wrote: What you have is an interpretation of the Federal Government license. From my background in the civil service my understanding is for a statement it would have to be over a minister's signature or by act of parliament. No one else has the authority

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

On 1/21/2017 3:48 PM, James wrote: It is, the thing they changed was federal references to municipal ones. Which is why i'm confused the license is "not compatible" We have a statement from the Federal government for their data under their license. The Federal government cannot make a

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

On 1/20/2017 5:33 PM, john whelan wrote: Did you include permission for the bus stops as well? They are from the same source and the same licence. I think I might have included one pitch sport soccer. The pitch was mapped but the sport soccer was I must confess taken from their open data

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

On 1/20/2017 12:40 PM, Ellefsen, Bjenk (STATCAN) wrote: Hello everyone, Big news, the City of Ottawa has released the footprint of over 325,000 buildings on their open data portal in support to the project with Statistics Canada and the OSM community. We are very grateful for the amazing

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

On 1/20/2017 3:22 PM, James wrote: Old link to an old wiki. Please see: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/Import/Plan#Permission That says Ottawa gave some data to Stats Canada in 2016, not that their data can be reused under the ODbL. I've sent an email to them asking

Re: [Talk-us] U.S.-Mexico border fence update

On 1/24/2017 11:24 AM, Michael Corey wrote: Thanks, folks, these are good suggestions. I think posting the map in Github is a good first step -- we first have to iron our our licensing so it's compatible with OSM and with our own licenses. Just to note, if it's based on the OSM border data,

Re: [Talk-ko] Use of questionable imagery in Korea

, In OpenStreetMap you can't copy from copyrighted maps without permission. This includes vworld, which you did here. Continuing to copy like this could lead to a permanent block. Unfortunately I have to remove this copied data. Paul Norman For the OpenStreetMap Data Working Group

Re: [Talk-ca] [Talk-us] destination:street

On 1/19/2017 5:00 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: Looking at a random one, http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/34154734 / http://openstreetcam.org/details/10767/4194 — I think in the US we would just map this as destination=Carman Road;Iriquois and destination:ref=1 That is how it would be

Re: [Talk-ko] Use of questionable imagery in Korea

On 2/25/2017 2:47 AM, Paul Norman wrote: On 2/23/2017 12:00 PM, Simon Poole wrote: while not speaking for the DWG, I suspect that due to the touchy nature of this specific source we will want to redact the edits (which removes them from history too) so likely it doesn't make sense to revert

Re: [Talk-ca] CanVec Reverts

that OpenStreetMap is a crowd-sourcing project, which inherently involves working with other people. This requires good communication, which was absent here. Paul Norman For the OpenStreetMap Foundation Data Working Group [1]: Except for the CanVec license, which is ODbL and possibly CC BY-SA [2]: Much

Re: [Talk-ca] Forests/Land Use, was: Canvec reverts

On 9/1/2016 8:17 AM, Paul Ramsey wrote: I'm "glad" to see someone else w/ this issue. It's glancingly related to the canvec import issue, since the land use polygons are a source of some of the issues the reverter is complaining about (malformed multipolygons / boundary overlaps). In my own

Re: [Talk-ca] Forests/Land Use, was: Canvec reverts

On 9/1/2016 1:22 PM, Paul Ramsey wrote: I'm not sure I agree. "Better than nothing" I guess is the principle, but when what is there (not nothing) gets in the way of improving other features, then it's not better than nothing. And what if what's there is, from an information point of view,

Re: [Talk-GB] Users tagging Farmyard as place=farm (Was Summer quarterly project)

On 9/14/2016 7:37 AM, Dave F wrote: From the examples posted it's clear the recent rise is due to the iD editor's presets. There have been mentions of OSM Carto and iD presets causing an increase in place=farm usage. Support for place=farm was added to the default style on osm.org back in

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >