Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
this is valid for England and maybe Scotland and Wales (and
probably some other countries), but it is not working on a
worldwide basis. Your definition would in most of central Europe
not be functioning: routers would lead pedestrians in areas
where they are
Margie Roswell wrote:
I admit to being disappointed in viewership on this one.
Can anyone help to get the word out about this video?
Video's great!
A couple of good places to promote it would be:
- newbies@ mailing list
- http://forum.openstreetmap.org/ (log on with your usual
- Potlatch
Tobias Knerr wrote:
IMHO, the argument is perfectly valid. The problem with highway=
cycleway and pedestrians isn't that adding a foot=no would be
too much effort. The problem is that some people, while they
wouldn't mind adding it, don't know that they need to add it in the
first place.
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
well, the chap that first used cycleway might have been an Englishman,
and might have had in mind that pedestrians are allowed, when tagging
highway=cycleway, but there is absolutely no logic or natural
meaning for cycleways to deduct access rights for pedestrians.
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
OK. And where can I find this information? If it is not findable,
it will not be used.
Well, there's the rub. As a project, we are crap at documentation. Beyond
crap. How anyone ever manages to get started with OSM amazes me.
(And if you'll excuse me a hobby-horse,
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
Dave F. wrote:
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
Those who know about the video are probably using JOSM.
Potlach's target audience who would benefit from the video
probably does not read the mailing lists...
Right; and we don't have opposable thumbs either. :-(
I said
We have a bit of a push on at the moment to eliminate duplicate nodes
- i.e. where there's erroneously two nodes in the exact same place,
which should be a single node so they're joined.
== Identifying duplicate nodes ==
Some of you will have seen Matt's map, which shows dupes and is
Michael Collinson wrote:
At the moment, we are trying to address some concerns raised by OSM and
OSMF members about the new Contributor Terms. These have been slightly
modified and the latest version can be seen here
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms
This is much
Dave F. wrote:
What's the 'flashing' nodes for? It appears to be for new nodes only.
Is it just to highlight that they're new or is there something else?
It's for dupe nodes. But there was a bit of a cockup on my part
earlier where newly saved ones were getting it too - ooops.
cheers
Stefan de Konink wrote:
Is goes 'edited the project' then as far as 'wrote a
wikipage', 'submitted a bug', 'edited the source'.
Or is exclusively to geo-data?
We're only talking about the licensing of geodata here. There's no reasoning
for a coder to have a say over data which they haven't
Tom Hughes wrote:
The PDF that a scanner produces will normally just contain a
big embedded bitmap image. No idea how easy that is to
extract though.
Some scanner software produces a composite PDF with both vector content
(OCRed text) and the bitmap image in front. The vector content is
Steve Bennett wrote:
An observation of a deficiency isn't really a complaint. I actually
do want to help with PL2 (if there are things I can do), but it
won't be for the next 6 weeks.
\o/
If you can code ActionScript 3 (or would like to learn), the world's your
oyster. If not, there are
Steve Bennett wrote:
An observation of a deficiency isn't really a complaint. I actually
do want to help with PL2 (if there are things I can do), but it
won't be for the next 6 weeks.
\o/
If you can code ActionScript 3 (or would like to learn), the world's your
oyster. If not, there are
Frederik Ramm wrote:
If you are in the unfortunate situation of having willfully
chained yourself to one Hardware/OS supplier and that
supplier is unwilling to release Java6 for your platform,
it may be time to finally ditch
...JOSM in anticipation of imminent Potlatch 2 wondrousness.
Steve Bennett wrote:
Sweet. How hard can ActionScript be, really? (I've done plenty of C,
Delphi, Java etc in the distant past, usually the difficulty is not
the language, it's learning the codebase.)
Exactly. If you know Java then you shouldn't find AS3 much of a
stretch at all - think of
Frederik Ramm wrote:
I'm not sure; my guess is that the world is silently waiting for
Potlatch 2 to be released and will *then* complain about everything
that *still* doesn't work.
(My info comes from several mentions on, you guessed it, talk-de.)
Oh, I'd guessed that much. No-one outside
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
Is it worse or better than the PL1 codebase ?:)
Do you want a serious answer to that? :)
The codebase is a lot more proper: there's packages and
private/protected variables and all of that. You could probably write
unit tests for it if you like that sort of
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
have you thought about deprecating the live-mode in PL1 though? I
really think it is a pain and was happy when you wrote in another
thread that it will not be available in PL2.
Indeed, you've mentioned one or two (million) times before you're no
fan of it. :)
To
Tom Hughes wrote:
I mean obviously the intent is to limit the volume of calls, but
we've tended to do that by saying that the point is that it
should be used as part of an editing cycle where you are
fetching data with the intention of changing it rather than
just in order to use it in a
Tirkon wrote:
I.e. potlatch destroys the correct order of the ways in a
route relation, i.e. if you divide a way into two parts.
Serious point: if you find a bug or issue or what-have-you in any editor,
you need to actually tell us about it rather than just mithering unhappily.
I honestly
Tirkon wrote:
Richard Fairhurst richard at systemed.net wrote:
I honestly didn't know that the relation ordering issue was the
case until
last week when Frederik pointed it out on this list. I'm now told
there'd
been some prior discussion of it on talk-de but that doesn't really
help
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
maybe JOSM's default display style doesn't visualise relations as
clearly as Potlatch, I don't know
May I humbly suggest that, as the lead author of one of OSM's main
editors, you at least look at the competition? I mean I don't demand
For those who don't live on Twitter:
The UK Government has just announced its decision on freeing Ordnance
Survey data. Full document is at
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/corporate/pdf/1528263.pdf
Quick summary of what'll be released:
- medium-resolution vector data (Meridian2),
John F. Eldredge wrote:
Well, we could always use handcart, rather than cart, so as to specify
that
we don't mean the horse-drawn variety.
And then I suggest we go to hell in it[1].
cheers
Richard
[1] otherwise known as the tagging@ list
--
View this message in context:
John Smith wrote:
You might want to wikifiddle a bit
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Proposal_Page
That page and others still suggest that the talk list be used for tag
discussions...
Good point - had spotted one of those references but not the other. Fixed.
May I therefore
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
Does OSM have any guidelines about software that is hosted
on the wiki? Can people just make software under any license
and then put it on the wiki for free advertising ?
It is not in any sense hosted on the wiki. If it were hosted on OSMF
servers
David Murn wrote:
I can see both points of this argument, but while James seems to be
asking for consistency within OSM, everyone seems to be making excuses
as to why there doesnt have to be consistency.
Welcome to OSM.
We're not consistent. We're a glorious anarchic mess. That's why the
Felix Hartmann wrote:
Sadly though many people in OSM are not able to leave their small
focussed mind and cannot espace their caged mind and try to use a
motorist perspective to do bicycle autorouting (e.g. CycleStreets
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/CycleStreets or
Occasionally the subject of Flash and free software comes up here in
relation to Potlatch.
I would encourage people to sign the petition at http://openplayer.net/
encouraging Adobe to make the Flash Player open source.
cheers
Richard
___
talk
john whelan wrote:
Yes but a problem with Flash is it is a major security hole.
My considered opinion on that theory is bollocks.
It's a frickin' browser plugin, if the browser is letting it access your
l337 credit card details then the browser probably ought to address its
plugin
John Smith wrote:
Browser plugin security is a joke and has been for a very long time,
and as far as I'm aware nothing has been reported publicly that
anything is being done to fix the situation.
I think (though I'm absolutely no expert on the situation) that Chrome
and Safari are working
john whelan wrote:
In order to reduce the threat of successful exploitation of Web
browsers, administrators should maintain a restrictive policy regarding
which applications are allowed within the organization. […] Browser
security features and add-ons should be employed wherever possible to
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
Adobe has explicitly said in the past that they can't open source it
because they've used a lot of parts in in that they've licensed from
somewhere else.
http://www.adobe.com/de/products/eula/third_party/flashplayer/
Pretty much all the all rights reserved stuff
Dave F. wrote:
Older gps traces (10 months+) don't appear to be displaying when I
click on The Icon (G) in Potlatch.
They're still listed in GPS Traces are PUBLIC.
Is there a time limit for their visibility?
Potlatch pulls them down 10k (IIRC) at once to avoid boggling the server too
Frederik Ramm wrote:
I don't think that an a patch for the rails port which lets people
add feedback would be difficult to do
http://www.skobbler.co.uk/osmbugs
Skobbler rocks.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/new-logo-tp5046672p5064419.html
Robert Martinez wrote:
Now, could everybody still in doubt please do a simple google
image search for good logo and check for logos that tell a story!
I bet you'll hardly find any.
Robert, I think you have produced a good logo. Not an outstanding one, like
(to quote two of my favourites)
Richard Welty wrote:
which is a perfectly good theory, and very fussy in practice. i
am unfamiliar with any jurisdiction which enforces speed
limits to fractions of km/h or mph.
There are signs on the UK canals which inform the boater that the speed
limit is 6.43kph. I kid you not.
cheers
Nokia will be the exclusive, global provider of Yahoo!'s maps and
navigation services
http://yhoo.client.shareholder.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=472765
Nokia, of course, owns data provider Navteq, which in the grand scheme
of things is a rival to OSM. Yahoo! currently offers OSM the
Simone Cortesi wrote:
We are still dealing out on how to use this thru editors which do
not make use of WMS access to imagery.
Will potlatch or mapzen get WMS anytime soon?
Potlatch 1 will never have WMS support. Spherical Mercator is
sufficiently hardwired into the code that supporting
John Smith wrote:
Smokescreen, a 175KB, 8,000-line JavaScript-based Flash player
written by Chris Smoak at RevShock, a mobile ad startup, and to
be open-sourced 'in the near future.'
Wow. Just wow.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Gervase Markham wrote:
It would take an age to change it all manually in the SVG. What are
my options for a custom render?
FWIW: Halcyon, the Flash rendering engine used in Potlatch 2, uses a simple
CSS-like style language called MapCSS and would be an easy way right now to
produce a bitmap
On 10 Jun 2010, at 02:01, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 6:58 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net
wrote:
trac called, it wants its job back.
It is really really really unhelpful to bring up every little thing on the
mailing lists rather than
On 10 Jun 2010, at 18:12, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
I would. It already happens and it's right that it does. Trac's UI is
much, much better for this sort of thing.
As a bug reporter, I find that the trac UI sucks massively. I have spent
ages
Tim McNamara wrote:
[stuff about scope of share-alike]
[stuff about whether a share-alike or an attribution-only licence is
better]
Hello Tim; you are new here, I think (and welcome!). There is a bit of prior
discussion on this. About five years' worth, in fact. :)
If you'd like to look
David Paleino wrote:
[...] it seems like that was a unilateral decision made by Richard.
[...] Richard says I think the wiki may be wrong
[...] Richard, please don't take this as a personal attack :)
For the avoidance of doubt I should perhaps point out that this is another
Richard.
cheers
Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
Andy Allan writes:
If they have geographic data that we don't have, and they mix it
with OSM data, then the whole point is that we end up with access
to their geographic data.
[...]
You are obviously reading section 4.5 in a different way that I do.
[...]
For me
Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
Users must just take care that they do not edit cable lines according to
what they see on the OSM map, otherwise all of the cable network data
will be considered to be derived from OSM data and thus fall under odbl.
Very very broadly yes, but actually at that point
John Smith wrote:
Actually there is a 3rd option, some people prefer cc-by...
By and large the holy war is share-alike vs non-share-alike. Attribution
is kind of a sideshow; IMX most 'PD' advocates (myself included) would be
equally content, maybe even more so, with an attribution licence such
Oliver (skobbler) wrote:
Some people might want to achieve a wider use for humanitarian
projects. Then address referencing won't help and a license change
won't change either. There needs to be common understanding of
the vision where OSM is seen in five years from now.
No, there
Oliver (skobbler) wrote:
It might be true that OSM is the best map in the world for cycling
and the best map in the world for humanitarian use. If the higher
goal of OpenStreetMap is to become the best map for cycling and
the best map for humanitarian use I will not complain. I did not
Oliver (skobbler) wrote:
How do you want to find the right licensing, funding and communication
approach (to avoid the word strategy) without having a strategic goal?
By encouraging a welcoming, meritocratic environment in which talented
people are able to do cool things. It's worked
John F. Eldredge wrote:
Recently, I have been using Potlatch, with the Yahoo aerial-photos
background,
to clean up some errors in data that originated with the TIGER import.
According to the Potlatch documentation on the wiki, if I drag a node
belonging to one way onto a node belonging
Maarten Deen wrote:
Is it possible to add a relation to a relation in Potlatch? I've
tried some things but haven't found a way yet.
No, not currently in Potlatch 1. You can in Potlatch 2.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Liz wrote:
I am campaigning, actively for no change.
Please do not ask me to change my opinion.
I have said consistently that the Australian section of the map stands to
lose an enormous amount of data in a change to ODbL.
So let's say Australia wants to stick with CC licences because most
Hi all,
(Deep breath)
I'm delighted to unveil a test version of Potlatch 2, the all-new,
completely rewritten version of OpenStreetMap's online editor.
You can play with it at http://www.geowiki.com/ . It talks to the main
OSM server and you can make real edits with it.
This is a public
Dave F. wrote:
One thing I can't find is GPX tracks (key: G). Has it not been
implemented yet or am I going blind?
Not yet! It's next on the list. But you can load a GPX from somewhere on
the web (Flash permission stuff notwithstanding) using the vector layers
stuff in the Background menu.
Andy Allan wrote:
I think the point where it's good enough to start thinking about
replacing Potlatch 1 on the edit tab is still a long way off. It's
much more likely that, when it moves out of alpha, Potlatch 2 appears
and gets used on other sites first since it's much easier to
customize.
Ulf Lamping wrote:
For example remember positions like Richard Fairhursts in the thread
(I know that it's not an official OSMF/LWG position)
Of course it isn't. I'm not on the OSMF board let alone LWG; indeed, I
actively told OSMF earlier this year that I did not intend to assist it in
any
Peter Herison wrote:
Now the strage part: Closed FF. Cleared browser cache without hope
but... After starting FF again, the error-images were gone. I could
continue editing like before and see all Yahoo-Images. Even these
tiles that has errors before.
I tried the same here at home (again)
Peteris Krisjanis wrote:
Is there any actual mapper who strictly don't like SA?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Users_whose_contributions_are_in_the_public_domain
(I reply merely to inform rather than to prolong the debate, as sticking my
head into a grinder is already seeming like
Richard Weait wrote:
Should we continue to name the osm.org tile layers by the
renderers they use? Is overloading the terms mapnik and
osmarender as both a tile layer, style file and rendering
library confusing?
We had this discussion way way way way back, and I vaguely remember
TimSC wrote:
In that case, is it legally sound if I download my own contribution
due, to database rights?
Difficult to say - I can see an argument either way. A database right
certainly exists and governs extraction from the database; but if what
you're extracting is exactly what you put in
,
right?
I look forward to Richard Fairhurst suing Richard Fairhurst for violating
the license on Richard Fairhurst's data.
*facepalm*
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Re-License-Cut-over-and-critical-mass-tp5333864p5333989.html
Sent from
Ben Last wrote:
the edits that we're submitting all come from one user
(that represents NearMap) since we don't (and can't) require
users of our site to all be registered with OSM.
Um... this is the sort of stuff that really, really needs to be discussed
first.
Whenever it has been raised
Ben Last wrote:
I'm not sure I agree. We don't want to put barriers in the way of an
average user (and I use that term to explicitly distinguish between
the average map site user and a mapping enthusiast) making simple
corrections such as adding address information or naming un-named
streets.
Frederik Ramm wrote:
I kind of understand your situation but I think the way forward would be
to either use OpenStreetBugs or set up an OpenStreetBugs like system
yourself, maybe integrate that in your editor - so that users without an
OSM account can only place OSB markers, and those (the
Ben Last wrote:
In particular ODbL+CT will require a contractual relationship
(i.e. the contributor terms) between OSMF and the user. If
you are not exposing the user to the sign-up process, they
are not agreeing to this contract.
No, they're agreeing to terms and conditions with us. We
Ben Last wrote:
More seriously, though, this question has already been raised, and we
follow the guidelines at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#I_would_like_to_use_OpenStreetMap_maps._How_should_I_credit_you.3F
and credit OpenStreetMap in the same way and with the same
Anthony wrote:
And who told you that OSM is a collection of unoriginal facts?
I did, last time I did some mapping. I faithfully recorded where the paths,
gates and stiles were, rather than pulling some fictitious locations out of
my ass.
I realise that you've been far too busy trolling the
Nick Black wrote:
The current mechanism by which Mapzen and Mapzen POI Collector
users authenticate against OSM is horrible for users.
At the risk of being really hand-wavy and imprecise, I'd just say: Twitter's
OAuth UI is really exemplary. It's a great demonstration of how to get it
right.
Peteris Krisjanis wrote:
I respect PD guys, but in overall, I start to grow to openly
dislike their attitude.
Could you cite who these alleged PD guys are, please? Thanks in advance.
I'm getting increasingly exasperated with people projecting this big
bogeyman (or strawman. A big man made
80n wrote:
Isn't it going to present some complicated management problems if the
LWG changes the contributor terms at this stage in the process?
No, not in this case. The proposal is a subset of the powers currently
available to OSMF, not a superset. It is the existing CT _minus_ the
option
Anthony wrote:
What about a tracing of a photograph of a flower? [...]
What about a tracing of a photograph of a lake, as viewed from
an aircraft?
Bauman v Fussell may be relevant here.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
80n wrote:
Why don't you try this. Import some Ordnance Survey Street View data
into OSM, then render it as a Produced Work with the ODbL required
attribution
I've written fairly extensively on this in talk-gb, but to reiterate a
posting from May:
To comply with ODbL for data obtained
80n wrote:
This is quite a good place to start:
http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Copyright_protection_of_databases
It's good to see licence sceptics starting to look at the case law too.
There are of course a million things you could say about rights pertaining
to factual compilations in the US.
John Smith wrote:
I'm not being petty in the least, I want a compromise, but others
have outright refused to even consider any kind of a compromise
that will save years of work without resorting to shady legal tactics.
Hey, now that's not fair.
The reason I suggested to LWG that they drop
Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
I like this test because it will make things easy. No fuzzy shades of grey
like some Richard is suggesting.
I'm not suggesting, I'm reporting. You might like things to be easy but that
isn't the way the law works... or we wouldn't have been having this
discussion for the
John Smith wrote:
No idea about printed maps, but several sites recently only linked
to an attribute page on their site, rather than displaying it on top
of the map, so maybe having a small lookup table of major
contributors that can be linked to would be suitable?
We do. :)
Andreas Labres wrote:
1. accessability with low cost air carriers
...and please remember those of us who try to travel by sustainable means,
too. :)
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Portugal-proposal-for-the-SOTM-2012-tp6990490p6995954.html
Michael Collinson wrote:
We suggest that re-mapping by individuals is more important
initially than automated revert scripts as it puts back often more
and better content than was taken out. We'd like therefore
promote that and to concentrate on tools to help folks easily
see what needs
ThomasB wrote:
the April 1st is mentioned in the LWG minutes and in a
LWG mail to legal talk. However, as a non native english
speaker I am a bit confused by the vague wording. Is
the date final, if nothing material happens in the meantime
Yes - barring unforeseen circumstances (of
Václav Řehák wrote:
Any tile server provided by the app author will be way behind in
the updates. I expect the Locus tile server to be updated once in
a week or so making it unusable for my weekend mapping trips.
I think this, sadly, falls under the category of collateral damage. The 1%
of
Serge Wroclawski wrote:
I encourage you and others to get involved in the Foundation (ie
become members, get active on the lists, tell the board your feelings,
vote)
You missed out the most important one:
help
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Hello all,
[crossposted to various groups]
As you may know the OSM Foundation has lots of terribly boring-sounding
working groups and the Strategic Working Group is possibly the most
boring-sounding of the lot.
However... occasionally we do things that are not stultifyingly boring
and this
jaakkoh wrote:
Or maybe, just maybe, some of the blessed developers who
know Rails well enough could help make connecting with
other mappers easier/smoother/even_delightful
There's lots of stuff that can be done and I suspect OWL, Matt's what edits
are actually happening in a given area
Frans Thamura wrote:
i just hacking the osm logo (develop using inkspace, isnt it?),
now ichange and make it AI.
Illustrator's SVG import is famously buggy (and I say that as someone who
generally likes Illustrator very much). Your best bet is to use a tool with
a better understanding of SVG,
Floris Looijesteijn wrote:
I think that should be made more clear on the remapping page.
You mean the fact that the _very_ _first_ _sentence_ of the main page
content is
Remapping means 'replacing with new content'. It does not mean simply
copying the old content - that might infringe the
Adam Hoyle wrote:
For example (there are a lot more examples):
http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=wtfelon=-0.81228lat=51.72366zoom=17
shows a path with red nodes, but I added that and no-one else has edited
If you look at the history of each node, you can see who's edited it.
In this case,
80n wrote:
Isn't it time to block edits to non-CT content?
There is certainly an issue here, and what you describe as non-CT content
can take two forms.
There is content that will not be relicensed. This is the content input by
those who have declined the Contributor Terms.
I agree that it
Adam Hoyle wrote:
is there something else I need to do?
It'll only work in the default, 'Potlatch' map style (not 'Network' or
'Wireframe' or others - I need to fix that!) but apart from that, yes, that
should be all you need to do.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Adam Hoyle wrote:
Oh wow - I must have been on some long gone map
style, it's all looking very different now I've changed
the map style (and looking good too). Am I right in
saying that purple outlines mean things are part of
a hiking route, and green outline means foot route right?
80n wrote:
The two forms you describe are quite irrelevant and just muddy the water.
Can you answer the question, please?
You have edited a bunch of stuff in the North Cotswolds, which is an area
very near where I live and which I care about. I remember one changeset
called Cotswolds, another
80n wrote:
David, many people have been coerced or suckered into agreeing. I've
been badgered many times (including three times today, on this very
thread by an OSMF board member).
No. I am badgering you to say what you will do, or explain why you will not
say. Obviously, I would prefer it
Edward Hillsman wrote:
that Potlatch does not highlight everything that even the OSM
Inspector designates as being at risk of removal or reversion
(giving false positives and false negatives; I have identified
one of each in the area I map)
Potlatch 2 uses exactly the same source as OSM
Maarten Deen wrote:
Well, since all history of that data before API v0.5 is lost
Hey hey hey. Slow down.
Data before API 0.5 is _not_ lost. It is archived.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Maarten Deen wrote:
That is something different than what 80n said earlier
80n, not for the first time, is wrong.
So, which is it? Cleared and no details about any previous
modifications or archived and earlier details available?
You have to excuse the confusion, because these are
Martijn van Exel wrote:
there's bound to be people slave-mapping for GMM that
would contribute to OSM instead if 1) they knew about
it or 2) it were easier to get started.
If we had more than five people coding on the main site then maybe we could
start to fix 2. ;)
We're kind of hamstrung
Our appeal for a new server is tantalisingly standing at 97.2%:
http://donate.osm.org/server2011/
Will we get to 100% by Christmas Day - a Christmas present for OSM?
If you can give just £5/€5/$5 or local currency of your choice, please
do - it'd be lovely to get to 100% for
...100%!
And the order for the new server has been placed.
Have a happy Christmas everyone.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/97-2-tp7123532p7123971.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Robin Paulson wrote:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=-36.878407lon=174.741523zoom=19
the landuse polygon has an orange highlight on it, why does it do that?
You've turned on the Show licence status option in the options box.
That'll give any object mapped by someone who's refused the new
501 - 600 of 1720 matches
Mail list logo
