Paul Norman wrote:
From: Lester Caine [mailto:les...@lsces.co.uk]
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Import guidelines proposal update
who last edited an object! ). Where the import HAS nice unique object
identifiers things are a lot easier, but raw vector data like the French
import, and I think
From: Lester Caine [mailto:les...@lsces.co.uk]
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 11:47 PM
To: 'OSM'
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Import guidelines proposal update
Paul Norman wrote:
From: Lester Caine [mailto:les...@lsces.co.uk]
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Import guidelines proposal update
Paul Norman wrote:
From: Lester Caine [mailto:les...@lsces.co.uk]
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 11:47 PM
To: 'OSM'
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Import guidelines proposal update
Paul Norman wrote:
From: Lester Caine [mailto:les...@lsces.co.uk]
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Import guidelines proposal
2012/9/20 Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk:
My own interest here is more historic than current and I was looking for the
development of areas relating to my family tree, but there seems to be a
general consensus that once an object ceases to exist it should be deleted
from the database.
there
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
My own interest here is more historic than current and I was looking for the
development of areas relating to my family tree, but there seems to be a
general consensus that once an object ceases to exist it should be deleted
from the database.
there is not this
On jeudi 20 septembre 2012, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
If the negative effects however affect other/different people - perhaps
because they are using the API outside of specifications, or causing
more work for people elsewhere in the project - then they can't.
I can only fully agree
Am 20.09.2012 13:43, schrieb sly (sylvain letuffe):
which isolated processes ?
You are the guy that requests that the French community is doing things
different than the rest of the OSM-word. So you must answer your
question by yourself...
Best regards,
Michael.
On jeudi 20 septembre 2012, Lester Caine wrote:
sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote:
The 'mechanisms' that we use MUST be managed centrally,
What are you talking about ? What mechanisms are you refering to ?
Simply the methods by which data is added to the database.
There are several methods in
Hi,
On 09/21/12 14:12, sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote:
No problems, let's discuss. But while we do talk about a future rule, the
previous one should (I mean must) still apply until the new one is ready to
replace it.
This is not about one rule. This is about the whole question of rules
and
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
As long as DWG have to clean
up the mess they will make the rules governing imports and mechanical edits.
Exceptions from the rules can be negotiated with DWG in advance if someone
thinks they really need one.
Thanks
On 20 September 2012 08:02, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
I'm mostly a lurker in these discussions, and generally more pro-import
than many who participate in import decisions. But I find the 'separate
account for import' to be an utterly reasonable (along with the rest of
the
On vendredi 21 septembre 2012, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
Hi again,
This is not about one rule. This is about the whole question of rules
and authority.
No problems, let's also talk about rules and authority.
But we (french community) are facing one problem right now, not problems,
one
sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/248 because that poor guy
doesn't read english, was following what we've always done.
Hang on - they've been editing since 5th September, it's just over two
weeks later; their changeset 13180810 contains 21976 nodes and
: [OSM-talk] Import guidelines proposal update
Hi,
On 09/21/12 14:12, sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote:
No problems, let's discuss. But while we do talk about a future rule, the
previous one should (I mean must) still apply until the new one is ready to
replace it.
This is not about one rule
On vendredi 21 septembre 2012, SomeoneElse wrote:
sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/248 because that poor guy
doesn't read english, was following what we've always done.
Surely they're exactly the sort of person who needs to be told whoa
horsey! and
andrzej zaborowski wrote:
Well, this time a
single import account has been registered per province with a single
person coordinating the (potential) imports in each province. The
assignments have been documented on the wiki. This is better but the
account names are still not directly linked
From: sly (sylvain letuffe) [mailto:li...@letuffe.org]
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 7:41 AM
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Import guidelines proposal update
On vendredi 21 septembre 2012, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
Hi again,
This is not about one rule
@openstreetmap.org
Envoyé le : Vendredi 21 septembre 2012 17h33
Objet : Re: [OSM-talk] Import guidelines proposal update
andrzej zaborowski wrote:
Well, this time a
single import account has been registered per province with a single
person coordinating the (potential) imports in each province
From: Lester Caine [mailto:les...@lsces.co.uk]
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Import guidelines proposal update
who last edited an object! ). Where the import HAS nice unique object
identifiers things are a lot easier, but raw vector data like the French
import, and I think the Spanish data you
On 09/19/2012 10:55 PM, Richard Weait wrote:
[1] Of course, I don't mean you personally, Jean-Marc. I have no idea
of your OSM screen name, if you are a Cadastre importer or if you use
an import account. I mean those who have been knowingly ignoring the
import guidelines.
I was not
Hi,
On 09/19/2012 04:24 PM, sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote:
I've read the rather long thread Import guidelines OSMF/DWG governance and
I'd like to propose a change on the wiki page :
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
I think that imports, or all automated edits, have multiple
Frederik Ramm wrote:
But besides the content aspect, there's also the technical or procedural
aspect - things like where and how to document your import, or whether or not
you need a separate import account, or whether it is acceptable to do
large-scale imports with an account the name of which
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
I've combined their responses and made them generic.
I take my turn to combine your arguments:
- Too hard to register with another email. I say use
username+osmimp...@yourisp.com if they support it. Alternatively,
Hi,
De : Michael Kugelmann
On 19.09.2012 23:45, Vincent de Chateau-Thierry wrote:
The only criteria for removing French Cadastre data will be the value
of the source tag.
That's a bad idea: if someone for what ever reason just decides to
remove (or change) the source=cadastre tag of a
I'd like to propose a change on the wiki page :
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
I think that imports, or all automated edits, have multiple aspects.
Up to that point, we fully agree.
there's also the technical or procedural aspect (...)
I don't think these should
sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote:
there's also the technical or procedural aspect (...)
I don't think these should be decided locally.
And that's where we disagree. Your are not accepting any distinction about all
different cases in your statement, and it seams you are implicitly denying
the ability
The 'mechanisms' that we use MUST be managed centrally,
What are you talking about ? What mechanisms are you refering to ?
and it is this mechanism that is currently BROKEN when handling
imported data?
Are you talking about the mechanism that the dwg is blocking users not using
a
On 20/09/2012 13:18, Lester Caine wrote:
Go on wiping and reloading every time the source data is updated and
manually merging everything.
Sounds ugly doesn't it ? Because it is. Wouldn't it be much better if
each building from the cadastre had a UUID that could be traced so that
differential
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
On 20/09/2012 13:18, Lester Caine wrote:
Go on wiping and reloading every time the source data is updated and manually
merging everything.
Sounds ugly doesn't it ? Because it is. Wouldn't it be much better if each
building from the cadastre had a UUID that could be
sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote:
The 'mechanisms' that we use MUST be managed centrally,
What are you talking about ? What mechanisms are you refering to ?
Simply the methods by which data is added to the database.
And all I am trying to understand now is why if we HAVE digital data to work
with
De : Lester Caine
So would it not be better to provide it as an raster overlay instead? And
trace
from that.
But I was assuming that this was vector data?
French cadastre is vector data in about 70-80% of the 36.000 municipalities.
The rest is
made of old paper maps turned into
Vincent de Chateau-Thierry wrote:
For the vector data, it is also available as raw .osm files, split into
thematic layers :
mainly administrative boundaries and buildings.
Sure it can be processed. Change detection for buildings is a topic discussed
on talk-fr
but there is no real tool
Hi,
On 20.09.2012 12:29, sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote:
And that's where we disagree. Your are not accepting any distinction about all
different cases in your statement, and it seams you are implicitly denying
the ability of the local community to decide wisely.
What I wanted to say is:
If the
Hi,
I've read the rather long thread Import guidelines OSMF/DWG governance and
I'd like to propose a change on the wiki page :
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
(you can also read and comment on my proposal change on the talk page if you
wish to keep this list trafic lower)
I believe that dedicated accounts are generally better for imports
than using mixed ones which are also used for original data. This
really helps a lot in sorting data according to its intellectual
properties holders. The only exception I could possibly see is data
that doesn't come with strings
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
I believe that dedicated accounts are generally better for
imports than using mixed ones which are also used for
original data. This really helps a lot in sorting data
according to its intellectual properties holders.
Yes, absolutely.
The really obvious example
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
I would caution against repeating the same mistake.
I thought that such issue is not possible anymore with ODbl.
Pieren
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
Pieren wrote:
I thought that such issue is not possible anymore with ODbl.
No, the Contributor Terms simply say You are indicating that, as far as You
know, You have the right to authorize OSMF to use and distribute those
Contents under our current licence terms (1a).
If the licence changes to
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Pieren wrote:
If the licence changes to one which is incompatible with the import, OSMF
may remove Your contributions from the Project (1b)... and that rather
requires being able to identify what these incompatible
On 19/09/2012 17:26, Pieren wrote:
So, theoretically, we might have the same issue when tracing from Bing
for instance. Should we use a different account for Bing imagery
contributions as well, just in case we move later to a licence
incompatible with Bing ?
No, because tracing over Bing
2012/9/19 Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
So, theoretically, we might have the same issue when tracing from Bing
for instance.
The only obligation when creating data with the help of Bing aerial
imagery is that is has to be a non-commercial editor and that you have
to contribute back to
The really obvious example of this is the Polish UMP data, which was
licensed CC-BY-SA and could not be kept post-licence change. If dedicated
accounts had been used, removing this data would have been relatively easy;
in reality, it has been (and continues to be) a nightmare. :(
Although I
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Richard Fairhurst
rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Pieren wrote:
I thought that such issue is not possible anymore with ODbl.
No, the Contributor Terms simply say You are indicating that, as far as You
know, You have the right to authorize OSMF to use and
On 19/09/12 at 16:24 +0200, sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote:
Hi,
I've read the rather long thread Import guidelines OSMF/DWG governance
and
^^
Note that the use of the term guidelines is problematic by itself.
Either they are *guidelines*,
On Sep 19, 2012, at 12:06 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Pieren wrote:
I thought that such issue is not possible anymore with ODbl.
No, the Contributor Terms simply say You are indicating that, as far as You
know, You have the right to authorize OSMF to use and
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
The only obligation when creating data with the help of Bing aerial
imagery is that is has to be a non-commercial editor and that you have
to contribute back to openstreetmaps.org
The only obligation to use
Richard Weait wrote:
So use a separate account for imports. And follow the other
guidelines as well. The guidelines make for a better OSM, even if it
is slightly less convenient.
I suppose if a mapper is ONLY using import data then they only need one account?
As long as it is flagged as
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 6:51 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
requires being able to identify what these incompatible contributions are.
:
What has also happened, when cleaning up the inappropriate import, is
that the user mixed the import with their regular account.
I agree with
Before we go further with policy edits, perhaps we should make sure that
everyone understands the goals and that there is a consensus about
them... That will make the resulting rules or guidelines more acceptable.
Let's focus on the item that triggered the current debate : the
requirement for a
On 20 September 2012 00:41, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
I believe that dedicated accounts are generally better for
imports than using mixed ones which are also used for
original data. This really helps a lot in sorting data
according to its
Sending to imports@ and cc'ing talk@ as that's more widely read than the
wiki talk pages.
From: sly (sylvain letuffe) [mailto:li...@letuffe.org]
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Import guidelines proposal update
Or, to make it even clearer, can I commit my change to the wiki without
starting an edit
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org wrote:
Before we go further with policy edits, perhaps we should make sure that
everyone understands the goals and that there is a consensus about
them... That will make the resulting rules or guidelines more acceptable.
Since
On 19.09.2012 17:03, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
I believe that dedicated accounts are generally better for imports
a very clear +1from my side.
Best regards,
Michael.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On 19.09.2012 18:51, Richard Weait wrote:
More likely, and more often, what happens is that a well intentioned
mapper uses a source for which he believes he has permission.
Imports, then finds out that he didn't have (sufficient) permission
for the current license.
This has happened many times.
On 19.09.2012 18:42, sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote:
Although I agree we shouldn't forget the past to avoid repeating the same
mistakes but since every cases beeing different, I'm proposing to let local
communities decide what they think is good for them.
But only if it is not completely opposed to
rw == Richard Weait rich...@weait.com writes:
rw the facts at hand. A group of importers decided that they weren't
rw going to follow the guidelines. Then one failed to respond when
rw approached about a specific guideline. And now a group is upset to
rw find that their
Hi,
Le 19/09/2012 22:55, Richard Weait a écrit :
- Cadastre is not an import. Cadastre is an import. Could you do
the same thing if there were no Cadastre to import? No, you couldn't.
Cadastre is an import.
Cadastre is sometimes an import, sometimes not. Using the same data
source, you
On 19.09.2012 23:45, Vincent de Chateau-Thierry wrote:
The only criteria for removing French Cadastre data will be the value
of the source tag.
That's a bad idea: if someone for what ever reason just decides to
remove (or change) the source=cadastre tag of a object (and don't
change anything
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Since you[1] are trying to revise guidelines that are found to be
acceptable across the community
Could you provide evidences about this ? Since the vast majority of
the community does not care about import guidelines, I
Pieren pier...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Since you[1] are trying to revise guidelines that are found to be
acceptable across the community
Could you provide evidences about this ? Since the vast majority of
the community
- Original Message -
From: Lucas Nussbaum lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net
To: sly (sylvain letuffe) li...@letuffe.org
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 5:59 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Import guidelines proposal update
On 19/09/12 at 16:24 +0200, sly (sylvain
On 9/19/2012 6:29 PM, Michael Kugelmann wrote:
Or to be more precise: you need to use a lot of effort and check all
versions of an object (this means: the whole planet) whether it once had
the source=cadastre tag. But thats a lot of work to do. Much (!) more
easy to identify all the object is if
From: Vincent de Chateau-Thierry [mailto:v...@laposte.net]
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Import guidelines proposal update
Hi,
Le 19/09/2012 22:55, Richard Weait a écrit :
- Cadastre is not an import. Cadastre is an import. Could you do
the same thing if there were no Cadastre to import
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote:
On 9/19/2012 6:29 PM, Michael Kugelmann wrote:
Or to be more precise: you need to use a lot of effort and check all
versions of an object (this means: the whole planet) whether it once had
the source=cadastre tag. But thats a lot
64 matches
Mail list logo
