On 7 Aug 2009, at 00:06, Mark Williams wrote:
Peter Miller wrote:
This is the A13 and it in the ncn13 relation which I think is wrong
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/23406798
Any thoughts? Anyone fancy following it up?
Actually no, the NCN13 route _IS_ down the A13! Bizarre but
This time he's invented a fictitious railway line into Great Yarmouth
This needs reverting:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2063848
added to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php?title=GB_revert_request_log
David
___
Talk-GB mailing
This is an interesting category of tools and resources available for
maintaining Wikipedia against vandalism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_counter-vandalism_tools
Regards,
Peter
___
Talk-GB mailing list
The only thing that ever worked with graffiti on the railway was painting it
over in all the obvious places. I'm afraid we just have to find a way to
undo or redo his works. In our context, obvious is anything big, and
anything new.
Richard
___
Talk-GB
Tom Hughes wrote:
Well it will have to go to the WG for that. They will doubtless start by
sending him a direct email.
Is it just me who thinks that having a wiki which is open to everybody
and doesn't have any controls over who can do what is utterly ludicrous?
Yes, I'm a trusting soul, but
Hi,
Nick Barnes wrote:
Is it just me who thinks that having a wiki which is open to everybody
and doesn't have any controls over who can do what is utterly ludicrous?
No, millions of Wikipedia contributors think it is a good thing (and
they even allow edits from people without an account) ;-)
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 8:21 PM, David Earlda...@frankieandshadow.com wrote:
Peter Miller wrote:
3 more changesets today from Liam123 for reversion.
I have added them to the revert page and have copied this email the
Andy.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/GB_revert_request_log
You got
Frederik Ramm wrote:
No, millions of Wikipedia contributors think it is a good thing (and
they even allow edits from people without an account) ;-)
Point taken, but Wikipedia isn't trying to position itself as a viable
and reliable alternative for a mission critical commercial solution (I'm
Andy Allan wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 8:21 PM, David Earlda...@frankieandshadow.com wrote:
Peter Miller wrote:
3 more changesets today from Liam123 for reversion.
I have added them to the revert page and have copied this email the
Andy.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Nick Barnesn...@thebarnesfamily.eu wrote:
To my mind, nobody ought to be able to edit live map data unless:
No, no, no - completely wrong approach. Think using Dettol
continuously to keep your house clean - most people now realise that
healthy immune systems come
I'd like to hear from the DWG on how they handle the edit wars in Cyprus.
Must be some kind of precedent?
Chris
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Hi,
Nick Barnes wrote:
Point taken, but Wikipedia isn't trying to position itself as a viable
and reliable alternative for a mission critical commercial solution (I'm
thinking about mapping for SatNav devices here).
I don't think we should either, because this leads to more control and
less
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Christopher
Osbornechris.gai...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd like to hear from the DWG on how they handle the edit wars in Cyprus.
Must be some kind of precedent?
Handled, past tense, I believe. I've heard that it's now resolved.
Anyway, that was a dispute, not
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Frederik Rammfrede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
Nick Barnes wrote:
Point taken, but Wikipedia isn't trying to position itself as a viable
and reliable alternative for a mission critical commercial solution (I'm
thinking about mapping for SatNav devices here).
I
On 7 Aug 2009, at 13:32, Andy Allan wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 8:21 PM, David
Earlda...@frankieandshadow.com wrote:
Peter Miller wrote:
3 more changesets today from Liam123 for reversion.
I have added them to the revert page and have copied this email the
Andy.
Frederik Ramm wrote:
No, that's perfectly ok. If you want to be extra safe, you might want to
ask for permission to distribute derived mapping under the license
choosen by the OpenStreetMap foundation, this will reduce problems if
the license should be changed in the future.
That's good to
Peter Miller wrote:
Personally I see little justification for not removing every edit done
by Liam123 until he talks to us or clearly starts to make good useful
contributions that we can verify. Can I ask you to reconsider you
decision and remove the changeset where he has made small
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:36 PM, 80n80n...@gmail.com wrote:
Try [amenity=pharmacy] instead of [*=pharmacy]
The index for the second form is no longer being maintained. There were
relatively few queries of this form and the overhead was substantial.
Ah, that worked. Excellent, thanks :-)
The
these data may contain errors, you can use it at your own risk, but
you can't sue us.
This whole wikipedia comparison seems bogus to me. Kids use wikipedia to do
their homework, people don't trust their lives to it like they do with maps
every day of the week. I've used an OS map many times
Maybe stopping people moving ways (or deleting or moving individual points
in ways by more than a few metres) for the first months. I don't think I've
ever done the former (except in error), and it took me a while to realise
that Yahoo needed moving (using the spacebar), rather than the data, with
Banning the account is a no-go.
Without any effective policing of account creation (which we probably
don't want), all that banning would do is encourage spiteful edits with
one or many new ids, which would be much more difficult to identify. At
least with a single known userid it can be
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Oh yeah, and let's also get their addresses and hang them! I am amazed
at how much hostility this Liam123 is able to provoke.
I'm not. I think it's similar to the way people react to virus writers
after their computer is infected. I've heard plenty of people suggest
that
80n wrote:
Try [amenity=pharmacy] instead of [*=pharmacy]
The index for the second form is no longer being maintained. There were
relatively few queries of this form and the overhead was substantial.
The software shouldn't give you a seemingly ok response, that needs
fixing. And I
I've been trying to tidy up some admin boundaries, using Relation Analyzer
to find gaps. As far as I can tell all the upper tier authorities
(non-districts) in England are there now, and form complete polygons.
For a while I was stumped by what seemed to be some gaps around Nottingham.
It turned
It would appear the Liam123 has been acting illegally under section 3 of
the Misuse of Computers Act 1990. This should be reported to the Police.
Even if it's not worth a prosecution the Police will know how best to
curtail Liam123's activities. Just because OSM-ers' contributions are
free doesn't
Peter Miller wrote:
Personally I see little justification for not removing every edit done
by Liam123 until he talks to us or clearly starts to make good useful
contributions that we can verify. Can I ask you to reconsider you
decision and remove the changeset where he has made small changed
2009/8/7 Vic Morgan vic.mor...@ntlworld.com:
It would appear the Liam123 has been acting illegally under section 3 of
the Misuse of Computers Act 1990. This should be reported to the Police.
Even if it's not worth a prosecution the Police will know how best to
curtail Liam123's activities.
Maybe we want different policies for different areas and different kinds of
data.
For example once all the roads are mapped we freeze the roads, but we allow
free changing of street names until they reach a freeze point.
Here in Korea I just want data and the more the better. In downtown London
28 matches
Mail list logo
