Jon Stockill writes:
>I've been adding
>buildings from streetview, then going out to survey for addresses. If
>the buildings get removed it'd better be done in a way that preserves
>the address data, or we lose the results of a lot of surveying.
You could check with the legal mailing list, bu
Graham Jones writes:
>If I collect a GPS trace of a road that is tagged as say 'source=NPE', I will
>adjust the road to match the trace, and change it to source=survey.
I would put source=NPE;survey but nobody really expects the source tag to be
a bomb-proof, legally sound way to determine the s
I don't think that is fair enough if you are going to be legally
pedantic about it. The basic track was derived from NPE and you have
adjusted it, by implication you have taken into account the original
work in two ways: as a validation that the GPS trace relates to this
item, and also you have
On 23/07/2010 15:18, Graham Jones wrote:
If I collect a GPS trace of a road that is tagged as say 'source=NPE',
I will adjust the road to match the trace, and change it to
source=survey.
That means that unless you look through the history there will be no
evidence that it was once derived from
If I collect a GPS trace of a road that is tagged as say 'source=NPE', I
will adjust the road to match the trace, and change it to source=survey.
That means that unless you look through the history there will be no
evidence that it was once derived from another source...but, once you have
surveyed
On 22/07/10 16:25, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Ed Avis wrote:
As an aside, I think the 'source' tag is a bit misconceived; it would make
much more sense to tag source on the changeset, not on each object it
touches.
Only if you solely use one source per changeset. I'll typically use at l
On 23/07/2010 08:52, Ed Avis wrote:
Fair point. In that case, to be scrupulous, you would need to add
individual
source tags to each object as you change it. But even then, the object data is
not sufficient to know where it has come from: you must check the change history
and see at which point
Richard Fairhurst writes:
>>As an aside, I think the 'source' tag is a bit misconceived; it would make
>>much more sense to tag source on the changeset, not on each object it
>>touches.
>
>Only if you solely use one source per changeset. I'll typically use at least
>a mix of NPE, OS OpenData, G
I agree with what Kevin said earlier - that the OS OpenData is too good a
resource to ignore, so from my perspective the acceptability of any new
licence depends on making sure that the OS OpenData derived data stays in
the OSM database (either by persuading ourselves that the new licence is
compat
Kevin Peat wrote:
In 6 months time the OS data will be so entrenched in the UK map that we
could never strip it out in any useful way without vast amounts of fixup
being required and I can't imagine many people being interested in doing
that. So for me at least whatever license we change to mu
Ed Avis wrote:
> As an aside, I think the 'source' tag is a bit misconceived; it would make
> much more sense to tag source on the changeset, not on each object it
> touches.
Only if you solely use one source per changeset. I'll typically use at least
a mix of NPE, OS OpenData, GPS survey and p
As an aside, I think the 'source' tag is a bit misconceived; it would make much
more sense to tag source on the changeset, not on each object it touches.
The best way to see what data comes from OS or elsewhere is to look at the
history of an object and see which changeset added the 'name' tag or w
Nice work, but as the OS data is a good dataset and compatible with our
current license why would anyone be surprised that people are using it. I've
uploaded woods and waterways for my area so it looks pretty blue but the
streets were surveyed on the ground and I would think that might be the same
@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Use of OS OpenData in OSM
That looks much better now. It’s certainly interesting to see that
whole counties, like Norfolk, appear to be sourced from OS OpenData.
I know that that isn’t true, but I guess it’s a just a side-effect
of the last edit to existing
On Behalf Of Graham Jones
Sent: 21 July 2010 22:58
To: 80n
Cc: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Use of OS OpenData in OSM
Hi,
I have tidied up my OS Opendata Map
(http://www.maps.webhop.net/osm_opendata).
The changes are:
* Lines and dots are smaller so it looks l
Hi,
I have tidied up my OS Opendata Map (http://www.maps.webhop.net/osm_opendata
).
The changes are:
- Lines and dots are smaller so it looks less of a mess.
- It excludes source tags containing '25k', 'os7' and 'photos', which
were giving quite a lot of false positives, especially in S
Thank you all for your comments.
I'll not get into the licence change debate here - plenty of that on
osm-talk
- I agree that there are a few surprises highlighted here. There are a
couple of cycle tracks highlighted that I survryed myself, so I will have to
check the underlying data. When
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Robert Whittaker (OSM) <
robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Emilie Laffray wrote:
> > The second point is that I don't see the relation between knowing how
> much
> > OS OpenData and the switch to the new licence. Talks of losing data is
> > partially a se
Emilie Laffray wrote:
> The second point is that I don't see the relation between knowing how much
> OS OpenData and the switch to the new licence. Talks of losing data is
> partially a self fulfilling prophecy. It is impossible right now to gauge
> how much data IF ANY we would lose since we don'
On 19 July 2010 23:37, Graham Jones wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> Given all of the talk on the osm-talk mailing list about the possibility of
> losing data if we move to the new licence, I started to wonder just how
> widespread OS OpenData use is in OSM. I couldn't find a visualisation, so I
> made one
Hi Folks,
Given all of the talk on the osm-talk mailing list about the possibility of
losing data if we move to the new licence, I started to wonder just how
widespread OS OpenData use is in OSM. I couldn't find a visualisation, so I
made one this evening which is visible at
http://www.maps.webhop
21 matches
Mail list logo
