On 31 August 2010 10:05, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:
Looks to me like the platform is where the passengers wait (at the “bus
stop”) and the “stop” role is where the bus physically stops on the way.
From http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbus_stop :
The most widely
--- Original Nachricht ---
Absender: Michał Borsuk
Datum: 30.08.2010 22:19
On 30 August 2010 18:34, Steffen dido_...@web.de
mailto:dido_...@web.de wrot
[3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/13639
Why are the bus stops in the relation above separately
mapped as a node (IMHO
The nodes tagged highway=bus_stop (with role platform) are off to one side of
the highway, so not part of the way. It is the nodes in the way that have the
role stop. I personally wouldn’t bother with the latter as it should be obvious
that the bus stops at the nearest point in the way in the
On 31 August 2010 17:36, Steffen dido_...@web.de wrote:
[3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/13639
Why are the bus stops in the relation above separately
mapped as a node (IMHO correct), and yet again as a platform?
It is mapped ala Oxomoa/ÖPNV-Schema.
Then drop the
--- Original Nachricht ---
Absender: Michał Borsuk
Datum: 31.08.2010 18:14
On 31 August 2010 17:36, Steffen dido_...@web.de
mailto:dido_...@web.de wrote:
[3]
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/13639
Why are the bus stops in the relation above
Since most renders only display the name to make it useful to the
casual map user I'd suggest
A name or B name in the name field. There is a similar problem
with the GTFS stop_code.
Cheerio John
On 31 August 2010 14:17, Magnus Bäck ba...@swipnet.se wrote:
In the Skånetrafiken public transport
I have previously used name (A) and name (B) for the same situation -
and you can also place it into a separate ref=A or local_ref=A tag.
--
David
On 31 August 2010 19:31, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote:
Since most renders only display the name
how do you tag charitable institutions like orphanages and transient homes?
I know a few but have yet to add them e.g. Kamanggagawa Foundation on
EDSA at the entrance gate of Philam Homes, QC
--
---
I explore, therefore I blog.
http://www.backpackingphilippines.com
Probably amenity=charity?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/charity
But there are no concensus in the succeeding discussions:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/charity
I suggest you add them for now and a building=yes tag.
i.e.
amenity=charity
Anthony wrote:
[Jane Smith]
copyright are the chains of the modern worker, holding to the
means of Production.
Are there any moderators here?
Can we get this troll banned please.
I'm the list administrator for legal-talk. I'm not quite sure what offence
'Jane Smith' might have committed
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Please Do Not Feed The
Trolls.
The person who has chosen the pseudonym Jane Smith has a right to have their
point heard.
I would not consider this person to be a troll, whether or not I am the person
recalled as intending to be publicly
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 04:41:16AM +, Jane Smith wrote:
copyright are the chains of the modern worker, holding to the means of
Production.
We all know copyright has maps. But data underneath is important so that is
what we workers should control.
No copyright was the true reason for
Am 30.08.2010 13:43, schrieb John Smith:
2010/8/30 Dirk-Lüder Kreie osm-l...@deelkar.net:
data will not be available under ODbL temporarily. I'm very sure it will
be re-mapped, probably within less than a year.
I disagree, especially without access to some of the existing data
sources, and
Am 31.08.2010 06:36, schrieb Anthony:
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 6:12 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
You are still assuming that copyright is universally valid despite court
cases that demonstrate that it isn't.
What does that mean? Copyright is not universally valid? Even Iraq
has
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, Dirk-Lüder Kreie wrote:
data will not be available under ODbL temporarily. I'm very sure it will
be re-mapped, probably within less than a year.
I disagree, especially without access to some of the existing data
sources, and so far no one is offering to come to
Am 31.08.2010 12:30, schrieb Liz:
I was referring to user-mapped data. Imports have to fit the license,
not the other way around.
At the time of import the data imported fitted the licence.
Perhaps you had better look back at the archives for March 08 and see the
discussion over the LINZ
2010/8/31 Dirk-Lüder Kreie osm-l...@deelkar.net:
Are you suggesting that one contributor should have power over many,
just because they contributed more data? Because that seems what you are
saying by using the import as an argument against the CT and the ODbL
relicensing.
At this stage
On 30 August 2010 10:36, Chris Browet c...@semperpax.com wrote:
As far as I understand the licenses, nobody is permitted to fork the OSM
data without permissions, and it is thus not truly open:
- with CC-BY-SA, you'd have to ask every contributor the permission to fork
their data (or is only
Am 31.08.2010 12:56, schrieb Liz:
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, Dirk-Lüder Kreie wrote:
Am 31.08.2010 12:30, schrieb Liz:
I was referring to user-mapped data. Imports have to fit the license,
not the other way around.
At the time of import the data imported fitted the licence.
Perhaps you had better
Ole Brandenburg wrote:
I would be thankful if someone can point me in the right direction.
We plan to use the OSM API for our map tool (at stepmap.de).
We currently have a list of roughly 1,500 pre-defined maps and
a zoom-feature that enables users to create their own map/region.
The OSM
2010/8/31 Dirk-Lüder Kreie osm-l...@deelkar.net:
Am 31.08.2010 06:36, schrieb Anthony:
What does that mean? Copyright is not universally valid? Even Iraq
has copyright now. May not be universal, but 99.9% of the world has
copyright.
Iran's copyright protects only works by Iranians.
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:31 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
I'm the list administrator for legal-talk. I'm not quite sure what offence
'Jane Smith' might have committed that would cause you to want her to be
banned. She is clearly posting under a fake name: so are at least
On 08/31/2010 03:09 PM, Anthony wrote:
So that's all allowed? Okay then. Let the games begin. I can create
a few extra gmail accounts to troll the list with too.
I think it's more that we should ignore (people who we think are)
obvious trolls.
I'm not sure that Marxist views on
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
Actually, IMHO, it's was wrong of the OSM project to do neither a copyright
assignment nor a license that has a clear clause on automatic possibility of
upgrade to a newer license in the same spirit (i.e. and and later
On 31 August 2010 17:00, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
Maarten Deen schrieb:
On 29-8-2010 19:21, Rob Myers wrote:
It's basically the same as copyright assignment. Which can work well for
projects of non-profit foundations.
Copyright assignment is not signing a blank sheet of paper.
On 31 August 2010 16:00, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
No, but it is signing a paper that states exactly which information (all
your OSM data? all your GNU code?) is handed over to a specific entity (the
OSMF? the FSF?) in terms of copyright entirely and it's up to that entity to
Am 29.08.2010 11:10, schrieb jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com:
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Francis Davey fjm...@gmail.com wrote:
yes, i think i see what you are saying:
the license will be the only protection against third party abuse.
I think that copyleft is good enough.
I believe
Hi,
80n wrote:
An ODbL fork would not have same rights to the data as OSMF would have.
It would be a somewhat asymmetrical fork. You cannot fork the substance
of the contributor terms.
True, but I believe this discussion was about whether you can fork the
future ODbL OSM without having to
On 1 September 2010 07:21, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I think that most people would say that's a feature, not a problem.
But you aren't asking most people since you don't want to know the true answer.
___
legal-talk mailing list
Chris wrote:
I think this is an argument for Public Domain.
As far as I understand the licenses, nobody is permitted to fork
the
OSM data without permissions, and it is thus not truly open:
- with CC-BY-SA, you'd have to ask every contributor the
permission
to fork their data (or is
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 01:05:59PM +1000, John Smith wrote:
On 31 August 2010 06:51, Jane Smith janesmith...@gmail.com wrote:
That is not true as 80n has shown. It's an anti-thetan license with pseudo
GPL clauses and is Racist against Australians.
While some love to keep confusing the
On 31/08/2010 6:23, Jane Smith wrote:
We should demand that osmf give control to 80n.
You are welcome to stand for board elections next year.
Regards,
--
Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 2:40 AM, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:
Then mark the reasons it's not suitable. We have this same discussion
with cycling (in fact, Peter Miller had an entire presentation on this
issue
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 3:10 PM, Craig Wallace craig...@fastmail.fm wrote:
On 30/08/2010 14:53, Steve Bennett wrote:
So you could end up mapping highway=path; bicycle=yes; width=1;
surface=dirt; in great detail, and totally miss the fact it's
unrideable.
Use mtb:scale and/or sac_scale, to
Am 31.08.2010 10:35, schrieb Florian Lohoff:
Its about the new complexity - I am not against ODBL+CT + whatever per se.
It might be the better solution - although its much more complex as we
see - I would like the new license to be much simpler than before and i am
willing to pay to price of
On 31 August 2010 12:25, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote:
Yes, this is the intent of the section 3 of the Contributor Terms.
It allows a mechanism for the community to adopt a new license in the
future. It is the main point of contension with some of the imported
dataset.
A nice breath of clarity...
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 3:04 AM, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:
Chris wrote:
I think this is an argument for Public Domain.
As far as I understand the licenses, nobody is permitted to fork
the
OSM data without permissions, and it is thus not truly open:
-
Chris Browet schrieb:
I think this is an argument for Public Domain.
All of this is, as in many jurisdictions, using CC-BY-SA for such data
basically means PD as the CC license doesn't apply anyhow - at least
that's how understand it.
Robert Kaiser
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 08/31/2010 03:09 PM, Anthony wrote:
So that's all allowed? Okay then. Let the games begin. I can create
a few extra gmail accounts to troll the list with too.
I think it's more that we should ignore (people who we
Maarten Deen schrieb:
On 29-8-2010 19:21, Rob Myers wrote:
It's basically the same as copyright assignment. Which can work well for
projects of non-profit foundations.
Copyright assignment is not signing a blank sheet of paper.
No, but it is signing a paper that states exactly which
John Smith schrieb:
On 30 August 2010 20:03, Rob Myersr...@robmyers.org wrote:
The majority ( 50%) of GPL projects are now GPL 3. Which is hardly an
argument against allowing relicencing.
There is a little bit of a difference between changing versions that
are merely an extension of the
Last night in the process of responding some comments to our GPS
selling campaign
(http://www.fayerwayer.com/2010/08/chile-compra-un-gps-barato-y-ayuda-a-openstreetmap/)
(The goals being to buy a lot of Data Loggers and a server for the
local community) I found out that Waze is using OSM for its
I have pinged waze with this.
Have fun,
Steve | stevecoast.com
On Aug 31, 2010, at 10:11 AM, Julio Costa Zambelli
julio.co...@openstreetmap.cl wrote:
Last night in the process of responding some comments to our GPS
selling campaign
[quote]
The project is similar to OpenStreetMap (OSM), but unlike OSM which
provides its map data under a Creative Commons license, Google obtains
... a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and
non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish,
publicly perform,
Also, where are the modifications from all the clients (it seems the Iphone
version of Waze uploads new tracks).
Are they contributing back?
Regards,
Ignacio.
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 1:19 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
I have pinged waze with this.
Have fun,
Steve | stevecoast.com
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 10:40:32AM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 04:41:16AM +, Jane Smith wrote:
copyright are the chains of the modern worker, holding to the means of
Production.
We all know copyright has maps. But data underneath is important so that is
So what ?
Gert
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org] Namens Julio Costa Zambelli
Verzonden: dinsdag 31 augustus 2010 18:11
Aan: OSM-talk
Onderwerp: [OSM-talk] Waze using OSM Data
Last night in the process of responding
Just asking... are they sharing the new tracks?
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 5:09 PM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert
Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote:
So what ?
Gert
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org] Namens
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Grant Slater
openstreet...@firefishy.comwrote:
On 30 August 2010 10:36, Chris Browet c...@semperpax.com wrote:
As far as I understand the licenses, nobody is permitted to fork the OSM
data without permissions, and it is thus not truly open:
- with
No.
On 31 August 2010 16:22, IgnacioZ zigna...@gmail.com wrote:
Just asking... are they sharing the new tracks?
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 5:09 PM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert
Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote:
So what ?
Gert
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van:
Is it me or they just decided to erase the whole thing? (I am noticing
the new tiles at the lower zoom levels)
On 31 August 2010 16:51, Julio Costa Zambelli
julio.co...@openstreetmap.cl wrote:
No.
On 31 August 2010 16:22, IgnacioZ zigna...@gmail.com wrote:
Just asking... are they sharing the
FYI http://opengeodata.org/thanks-and-huge-apology-to-the-openstreetmap
-Jonas
Am 31.08.2010 um 23:26 schrieb Julio Costa Zambelli:
Is it me or they just decided to erase the whole thing? (I am noticing
the new tiles at the lower zoom levels)
On 31 August 2010 16:51, Julio Costa Zambelli
Guys,
we saw your post on Chile (thanks for letting us know). We investigated it
with our partner in Latin America and discovered a data source who has been
infringing on OSM data. We have taken immediate action by removing all data
from that source while our partner investigates further.
Julio and Ignacio,
thank you for bringing this to our attention. See our blog post at
http://www.waze.com/blog/thanks-and-huge-apology-to-the-openstreetmap-community/
You guys were right and we took immediate action and deleted all potentially
infringing data (see full story on the post).
Awesome.
As I said on opengeodata - this is a cool example of a firm taking swift action
on an unintended problem and working well with a community. +1 to waze.
Steve
stevecoast.com
On Aug 31, 2010, at 3:33 PM, Noam Bardin wrote:
Guys,
we saw your post on Chile (thanks for letting us
Hello,
When I map, sometimes I add sources to my contributions. It could be a
bus route relation where I may add the GPS trace I took while riding the
bus as the source for the route. Other times if I name a street I may
use a geotagged/geolocated photo of the street sign as a source.(thus
I believe if you are the owner of the data, you can put any license
you care on it and liberate it for use with OSM regardless of chosen
license. As long as you state in some way that the data is free for
use within OSM or something.
brgds
Aun Johnsen
On 31/08/2010, at 18:46, Niklas
Noam,
Out of curiosity...I imagine you folks investigated just using the OSM data
directly even if you have to give attribution? What made you decide to go
with other data providers that you have to pay for? Was it coverage or
routability or?
I'm only asking because on the surface it looks
Noam,
Thank you for taking this as seriously as it needs, and solving the
whole issue this fast.
Regards,
Julio Costa
On 31 August 2010 17:35, Noam Bardin n...@waze.com wrote:
Julio and Ignacio,
thank you for bringing this to our attention. See our blog post at
Met wegtype=unknown bedoel je highway=road? Die combinatie is speciaal
voor dit soort situaties bedoeld. Just checking...
On 2010-08-31 08:53, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote:
Voorzover de wegen zich al in OSM bevinden is het niet moeilijk.
Als de weg er niet op staat map
Lambertus,
Ik heb de pagina
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Kaarteigenschappen#Wegen er even
op aangepast. Lijkt me wel handig voor alle toekomstige mappers.
groet
Robert
Quoting Lambertus o...@na1400.info:
Met wegtype=unknown bedoel je highway=road? Die combinatie is speciaal
ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote:
De eerste etappe zit erin. Pieterburen Winsum. Dat was een makkie.
Bijna alleen verharde wegen.
Ik kies ervoor om voorlopig alle etappes een aparte relatie te geven, en
daarna het hele Pieterpad in een superrelatie te brengen.
Ik heb in het Pieterpad ook
al stukjes gezien met verschillen voor heen en terug.
Of dat zinvol is weet ik niet, maar het is het er nu al zo druk
dat ze de vervoersbewegingen moeten scheiden ??? ;)
Verder is het nu mogelijk om de dagetappes apart te laten zien.
We moeten ook nog eens nadenken
Het controleren of wegen keurig aansluiten gaat in JOSm inderdaad erg
mooi. de controle over de relaties heen in een superrelatie heb ik
zelf geen ervaring mee.
Wanneer hij dit zou doen, zou dat natuurlijk fantastisch zijn.
Weet iemand of dat er toch misschien ergens in zit en of dat er dan
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Andrew Harvey wrote:
FYI. As per
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#One_feature.2C_one_OSM-ob
ject I've removed a whole bunch of nodes where the same feature was mapped
out as a way. I made sure not to loose any tags in the process.
Changeset
Welcome to talk-au
I don't subscribe to the newbies list, so have no idea who is preaching what
on that list.
Thanks for letting us know here what you did, so that we can discuss and
provide our point of view.
Aussies of course revel in being different
:)
Sarcasm switch firmly on.
--
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
Does not show up here. I see only one name Campbell Primary School.
Cyclemap and Osmarender show both names at maximum zoom.
Often the node name is rendered on top of the way name, so you only
see one. This depends on
On 31 August 2010 17:30, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, Ross Scanlon wrote:
Sarcasm switch firmly on.
:D
Can anyone explain why aussie humour isn't understood in most other
parts of the world?
___
Talk-au mailing list
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, John Smith wrote:
On 31 August 2010 17:30, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, Ross Scanlon wrote:
Sarcasm switch firmly on.
:D
Can anyone explain why aussie humour isn't understood in most other
parts of the world?
I put the question to google, and
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
Does not show up here. I see only one name Campbell Primary School.
Cyclemap and Osmarender show both names at maximum zoom.
Often the node name is rendered on top of the way name, so you only
see one. This depends
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
In the case of Campbell Primary School it only renders one name at even the
highest zoom level.
I'm seeing two names at the highest zoom level.
___
Talk-au mailing list
On 31 August 2010 19:11, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
In the case of Campbell Primary School it only renders one name at even
the highest zoom level.
I'm seeing two names at the highest zoom level.
URL?
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:14 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
URL?
http://c.tile.openstreetmap.org/18/239684/158567.png
Is your browser caching old tiles?
No.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
On 31 August 2010 19:16, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:14 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
URL?
http://c.tile.openstreetmap.org/18/239684/158567.png
I was after the perm link
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 19:16:35 +1000
Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:14 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
URL?
http://c.tile.openstreetmap.org/18/239684/158567.png
Is your browser caching old tiles?
No.
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:24 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 31 August 2010 19:16, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:14 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
URL?
http://c.tile.openstreetmap.org/18/239684/158567.png
I was
On 31 August 2010 19:16, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:14 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
URL?
http://c.tile.openstreetmap.org/18/239684/158567.png
I was after the perm link
On 31 August 2010 19:28, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:
This is exactly what I did, but Ross said this is not correct (barring
the one or two source tags I incorrectly copied across that I offered
to fix).
There may be a miscommunication, but you definitely don't need/nor
should
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:41 PM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
Additionally just don't delete 300 or so nodes without seeing if it's by
general agreement rather than just announcing that you've done it.
Ok sorry, in future I'll make announcements here. I just didn't want
to spam the
On 31 August 2010 19:41, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
Additionally just don't delete 300 or so nodes without seeing if it's by
general agreement rather than just announcing that you've done it.
Not that you'd do anything like that, John :)
Actually that's probably one of the few
On 31 August 2010 20:00, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok sorry, in future I'll make announcements here. I just didn't want
to spam the list and I knew it could be reverted anyway.
The longer you leave things to do a revert, the more problematic it
will be, best to discuss
On 31 August 2010 11:08, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 31 August 2010 20:00, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok sorry, in future I'll make announcements here. I just didn't want
to spam the list and I knew it could be reverted anyway.
The longer you leave
2010/8/30 Arni Davidsson arni...@gmail.com:
2010/8/29 Karl Georg ka...@ekkert.org
Á meðan Routing tólin Gúddera síga taggaða highway=path sem hjólaleið þá
er það fín skilgreining á milli hjólreiðabrautar og hjólaleiðar í almenna
stíga/götu kerfinu. Það hlýtur að vera mikilvægt að setja
Am 30.08.10 19:04, schrieb dieter jasper:
Am 30.08.2010 18:28, schrieb Wolfgang Wienke:
Hallo!
Am 30.08.2010 08:58, schrieb André Joost:
Am 27.08.10 17:44, schrieb Wolfgang Wienke:
Hallo! Am 27.08.2010 14:23, schrieb Georg Feddern:
Auf http://sourceforge.net/projects/navipowm/files/ unten
Thomas schreibt
Trotz allem bleibe ich bei meiner Grundaussage, dass die *Information*
auf den Bildern der Autobahn-Tafeln nicht schützbar ist.
Ich gehe auch davon aus, es war in diesem Thread aber nicht klar ob
wirklich nur die Info verwendet werden sollte.
So oder so, man kann auch
genauer wird es wohl effektiv nicht. Gemäss
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Grenzen_der_Schweiz#Datensatz ist
die Lagegenauigkeit 3.8 Meter. Von daher ist 1.5 Meter perfekt.
Gruss
Fred
Am 30.08.2010 21:34, schrieb Thomas Ineichen:
Ich hab jetzt nicht nachgeschaut, welche Bibliothek
Hallo,
Am Dienstag 31 August 2010 06:22:12 schrieb Thomas Reincke:
Am 30.08.2010 23:28, schrieb Ulf Lamping:
Solange die Hersteller nicht freiwillig ihre Formatbeschreibungen
rausrücken würde ich daher nicht mit OSM basierten Karten für diese
rechnen.
Hat niemand gute Beziehungen zu
Am 31. August 2010 06:22 schrieb Thomas Reincke m...@thomas-reincke.de:
Am 30.08.2010 23:28, schrieb Ulf Lamping:
Solange die Hersteller nicht freiwillig ihre Formatbeschreibungen
rausrücken würde ich daher nicht mit OSM basierten Karten für diese
rechnen.
Hat niemand gute Beziehungen zu
Am 31.08.2010 07:20, schrieb Benjamin Lebsanft:
Keiner der Navi Hersteller hat ne (quasi) Monopolstellung. Da wirst du
es wohl ziemlich schwierig haben.
Es geht ja um herstellerseitig vorgerüstete Festeinbau-Navis.
Aber wenn man da etwas tun wollte, dann sollte man erstmal für die
Hallo,
ich habe mir die Zustimmungsseite mal angesehen, und ich glaube, dass ein
wesentliches Hindernis für manche die fehlende Übersetzung ist. Hier wird eine
rechtsverbindliche Erklärung gefordert, deren Text nicht jeder _vollständig_
versteht (außer Franzosen, Italienern und englischen
Am Dienstag 31 August 2010, 10:19:09 schrieb Wolfgang:
ich habe mir die Zustimmungsseite mal angesehen, und ich glaube, dass ein
wesentliches Hindernis für manche die fehlende Übersetzung ist. Hier wird
eine rechtsverbindliche Erklärung gefordert, deren Text nicht jeder
vollständig versteht
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 06:47:18PM +0200, Frank Sautter wrote:
hallo zusammen,
in vielen deutschen autos sind navigationssysteme von blaupunkt (vw/audi
gruppe, bmw) bzw. becker (mercedes) bereits ab werk eingebaut.
Das hier ist ueberigens mal so nen content von der W211 NTG2 DVD:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 09:56:13AM +0200, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
das ist proprietäre Software, das _ist_ der Wettbewerb
(Geschäftsgeheimnis). Ich sehe nicht, warum die Ihre
Formatbeschreibung rausrücken müssten. Vermutlich ist eher das
Gegenteil der Fall: Du wirst verklagt werden, wenn Du
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 10:26:58AM +0200, Bernd Wurst wrote:
Da hast du recht, aber eine rechtsverbindliche Zustimmung auch noch
rechtsverbindlich zu übersetzen ist ein ziemlich aufwändiger Schritt.
Man könnte inoffizielle Übersetzungen anbieten, aber das was man
unterschreibt muss bei
Hallo.
Am Dienstag 31 August 2010, 10:47:32 schrieb Florian Lohoff:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 10:26:58AM +0200, Bernd Wurst wrote:
Da hast du recht, aber eine rechtsverbindliche Zustimmung auch noch
rechtsverbindlich zu übersetzen ist ein ziemlich aufwändiger Schritt.
Man könnte
Am Dienstag 31 August 2010, 10:30:10 schrieb Florian Lohoff:
Vermutlich ist eher das
Gegenteil der Fall: Du wirst verklagt werden, wenn Du deren Format
reengineerst und veröffentlichst.
Ohne jetzt Rechtsanwalt zu sein - aber war da nich was mit
reverse engineeren zu
Hallo
Am 31. August 2010 10:47 schrieb Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de:
Und was ist wenn der User dann nachweisen kann kein English zu koennen und gar
nicht wusste was er da zustimmt? Dann ist der Vertrag nichtig oder?
http://dejure.org/gesetze/BGB/119.html
Das es eben nicht in der Muttersprache
Ich wiederhol mich ja echt ungern.
Aber ist denn niemand in der Lage ein paar Folien mit verschiedenen
Fallbeispielen in verschiedenen Sprachen zu erstellen.
Eine Art Gegenüberstellung der Lizenzen.
Das würde das ganze Transparent machen..
--
View this message in context:
Hola,
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 10:34:53PM +0200, Manuel Reimer wrote:
Wenn sich herausstellt, dass doch Veränderungen durchgeführt wurden,
dann ist die Lizenz auch mit Freigabe eines unveränderten Source-Pakets
nicht erfüllt. Ich als Autor würde also weiterhin auf Erfüllung der
Lizenz
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:07:40AM +0200, Stefan Schwan wrote:
Ich bin auch kein Anwalt - in Deutschland herrscht allerdings anders
als in Frankreich und Italien Vertragsfreiheit[1] - dh du kannst jede
beliebige Sprache für einen Vertrag verwenden, solange der Vertrag
nicht gegen zwingende
1 - 100 of 291 matches
Mail list logo
