date:20100831

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 disruptive.
The troll has no specific interest in the discussion nor its solution.
Just because Jane Smith chooses a pseudonym and phrases reminiscent of the 
extreme left of the 1960s and 70s does not invalidate the point.

This person feels that some of their freedoms are at risk.
Could we consider this point?

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

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 Germanys rapid industrial expansion:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,710976,00.html

A small quote:

German authors during this period wrote ceaselessly. Around 14,000 new
publications appeared in a single year in 1843. Measured against 
population
numbers at the time, this reaches nearly today's level. And although 
novels
were published as well, the majority of the works were academic papers.

The situation in England was very different. For the period of the
Enlightenment and bourgeois emancipation, we see deplorable progress in 
Great
Britain, Höffner states.

Equally Developed Industrial Nation

Indeed, only 1,000 new works appeared annually in England at that time
-- 10 times fewer than in Germany -- and this was not without 
consequences.
Höffner believes it was the chronically weak book market that caused 
England,
the colonial power, to fritter away its head start within the span of a
century, while the underdeveloped agrarian state of Germany caught up 
rapidly,
becoming an equally developed industrial nation by 1900.

Flo
-- 
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

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 so far no one is offering to come to australia and map
 the regional and rural areas that every keeps claiming will be so easy
 to get re-mapped...

I was referring to user-mapped data. Imports have to fit the license,
not the other way around.

-- 
Dirk-Lüder Deelkar Kreie
Bremen - 53.0901°N 8.7868°E

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

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 copyright now.  May not be universal, but 99.9% of the world has
 copyright.

Iran's copyright protects only works by Iranians.

Besides, what I think he meant is, that collecting facts (like geodata)
doesn't usually fall under the protection of copyright.

-- 
Dirk-Lüder Deelkar Kreie
Bremen - 53.0901°N 8.7868°E

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

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 australia and map
  the regional and rural areas that every keeps claiming will be so easy
  to get re-mapped...
 
 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 import.

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

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 import.

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.

-- 
Dirk-Lüder Deelkar Kreie
Bremen - 53.0901°N 8.7868°E

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

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 contributors aren't being asked what they want, we're
being told what we should do.

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

2010-08-31 Thread Grant Slater

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 attribution needed? To whom then? The individual
 contributors?)
 - with ODbL, you'd have to ask OSMF, which will be the owner of the data.

 Please correct me if I'm wrong.


Both CC-BY-SA and ODbL allow forking without needing to ask for permission.

The ability to fork an ODbL dataset was a specific question the LWG
asked legal council. Legal council answered in the affirmative that
anyone can fork an ODbL licensed dataset.

Relicensing a CC-BY-SA, ODbL or GPL etc license project would require
asking each of the contributors for permission (or replacing their
contribution).

Regards
 Grant

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

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 look back at the archives for March 08 and see the
 discussion over the LINZ import.

 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.
 
 No, I am not saying that, and I can't see where you got that impression.
 I am looking back at evidence for an import being discussed on this list, 
 advice offered, and it was thought that the new licence would make it easier.
 Now that the evidence is that the new licence will not make it easier and the 
 contributor terms will make it impossible, why are some people complaining 
 about imports getting in the road of the new licence?

To clarify: I complain about imports generally, because in my experience
they harm the community, not just because of the relicensing.

I'm very much in favor of manual mapping, because that creates some sort
of connectedness of the mapper with their map.

The only solution I see with (now?) incompatible imports is to try and
renegotiate with the donors, preferably to have the data released into
the Public Domain, like *the* import we did was from the start (TIGER).

Besides, as others have already pointed out, we remove data that doesn't
fit our license all the time, where should we draw the line? how much
mapper effort may be wasted in order to have somewhat of a legally sound
status for the future of the project as a whole?

Is it even valid to risk the future status of the work of hundreds of
thousands of contributors for the work of some 1000 users, which are,
after all, less than half a percent of our userbase? It's a hard
question, and I'm not sure I can answer it.

All I can say is what I would like to see, and that would be a free and
open map data collection of the world. Preferably PD, but SA-ish is also
acceptable (again: for me).

-- 
Dirk-Lüder Deelkar Kreie
Bremen - 53.0901°N 8.7868°E

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Fwd: Using OSM material for our online tool

2010-08-31 Thread Richard Fairhurst

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 maps would be a great addition because of the detailed
city and regional data. We would like to enable our users to
access part of the OSM material and therefore plan to make use
of the OSM API.

Great that you're thinking of using OSM data.

I would, however, counsel you very strongly to investigate alternatives to
the API.

OpenStreetMap aims to create free geographic data and make it available for
others to use. But we are a non-profit, volunteer-funded organisation and
can't maintain free, unlimited server resources for everyone.

Our servers, including the API, are principally provided for the benefit of
those editing the data. Any other usage may be restricted or banned
entirely. API services may be modified or withdrawn with minimal notice.

Instead, you are encouraged to download a dump of our data, and host it
yourself on your own servers (whether physical or something such as an
Amazon EC2 instance). If this isn't convenient, you may like to engage a
third-party company to provide this service for you. Geofabrik and CloudMade
are two well-known companies in this field.

The full data dump can be downloaded from http://planet.openstreetmap.org/ .
Smaller excerpts for particular countries and regions are available from
other sites (e.g. geofabrik.de). The formal Terms of Use for the API are
linked from http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright .

cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-Fwd-Using-OSM-material-for-our-online-tool-tp5481984p5482623.html
Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

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.

 Besides, what I think he meant is, that collecting facts (like geodata)
 doesn't usually fall under the protection of copyright.

Collecting facts never falls under the protection of copyright.  The
expression of facts usually does, though.

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

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 two other
 people here. She is posting HTML messages and can't quote properly: same
 applies to at least one other person here. She is trolling: and yes, at
 least one other person here has publicly vowed (elsewhere) that they will
 continue to be deliberately disruptive on the OSM lists.

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.

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

2010-08-31 Thread Rob Myers


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 copyright are necessarily trolling, 
however capitalized, but they are a bit off topic for a list about 
bourgeois law. ;-)


- Rob.

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] ODbL vs CC-by-SA pros and cons

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 clause).

Copyright assignment could never work on a project with 100,000 contributors.

CC-BY-SA 2.0 does have an and later clause.

And ODbL is not in the same spirit as CC-BY-SA, any more than LGPL
is in the same spirit as GFDL.

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] ODbL vs CC-by-SA pros and cons

2010-08-31 Thread andrzej zaborowski

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.

 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
 license it as they please - possible with certain restrictions (like always
 making it available with a free and open license, as the CT states).

 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 clause).

CC-By-SA 2 does have this kind of provision (1.0 didn't), by stating
which licenses it is comptaible with, unfortunately it is not helpful
in this case because CC-By-SA seems to have been a wrong choice from
the start.  The ODbL with it's upgrade clause should be better.

Cheers

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] ODbL vs CC-by-SA pros and cons

2010-08-31 Thread Francis Davey

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
 license it as they please - possible with certain restrictions (like always
 making it available with a free and open license, as the CT states).

If you don't care about what someone does with your copyright work,
then you can certainly assign the copyright (or database right or
whatever) to that someone without a great deal of difficulty. You can
also assign some or all of what you have created (or in many
jurisdictions and with some more careful restrictions, what you will
create).

If you want to restrict what the person you assign to does with the
copyright, then either you want to avoid assigning and retain
ownership - a suitably drafted exclusive licence could have that
effect in England and Wales, or you want Isome kind of reversion on
condition subsequent could also work, though it would be more
complicated.

Agreeing with the person you assign to that they will only use the
copyright in certain ways won't protect you against a subsequent
assignee of the copyright (eg OSMF assigns to XXX Ltd), subject to
certain exceptions.

-- 
Francis Davey

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] ODbL vs CC-by-SA pros and cons

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 our user base and fast update times are what really protects
us against abuse.

-- 
Dirk-Lüder Deelkar Kreie
Bremen - 53.0901°N 8.7868°E

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

2010-08-31 Thread Frederik Ramm


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 ask OSMF, and the answer is yes.


If the community chooses to exercise clause 3 of the contributor terms 
and change the license from ODbL to something else, that something else 
must be free and open. It is probably open to interpretation whether 
free and open implies freely forkable but I have yet to see a 
license that is free and open but does not allow forks,


What you can *not* do is fork the project, let yourself and two friends 
be the community in the new fork and then decide to relicense to 
public domain (but two thirds of the community have agreed, we're only 
using clause 3 of the contributor terms!).


I think that most people would say that's a feature, not a problem.

Bye
Frederik

--
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09 E008°23'33

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

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
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

2010-08-31 Thread Ed Loach

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 only attribution needed? To whom then?
The 
 individual contributors?)

Which is why (IMO) switching to a PD licence would require starting
from (almost) scratch; while there are some contributors who would
be willing to offer their work as PD, there is far too much stuff in
the current database with attribution requirements. (My reason for
quoting Chris above is the is only attribution needed question,
which wouldn't as I understand it make the resulting licence public
domain.) 

It is also (again IMO) why whatever the CT may suggest the project
will have to stay with a licence which supports attribution in the
future. 

CC-BY-SA is what we all agreed to when we started mapping with OSM;
we were happy with the attribution and sharealike aspects of the
project. Depending when we joined we might be aware that CC licences
aren't really suitable for data (and as a result a few people are
treating it in some jurisdictions as PD from what I've read
previously), and that there was no other licence at the time that
was suitable. So -by-sa defines the spirit of the project, and the
new ODBL licence provides a basis to make that work in reality (I
say this based on the assumption that the OSMF and Open Database
Commons lawyers know what they are doing). (As an aside, I do think
Open Database Commons should have called the licence ODC-BY-SA in
case they later come up with -BY and PD variants). As far as I can
see the only problem is with the contributor terms which I think
should make clear the project can't really switch away from a
licence that maintains any attribution requirements of source data).


Ed


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

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 issue and keep saying that most
 speaking out are against the ODBL, this isn't completely untrue and
 they know it, the majority of problems lie with the the new
 Contributor Terms...

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 Share-Alikeness and other protecting elements.

I'd rather say - make it PD and lets continue mapping - Its not about
licenses but rather about community. 

I'll not relicense as it stands today as thats the only time i am beeing
asked about relicensing and the license - so the only choice i have
is to refuse relicensing now ...

Flo
1) Not that i believe in Share-Alike or believe in OSMF suing someone
   for abusing - neither does it make sense ...
-- 
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

2010-08-31 Thread Iván Sánchez Ortega


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
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Scheme Recommendations: highway=path, footway, trail?

2010-08-31 Thread Andy Allan

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 at SOTM09 - he just suggested the wrong solution :-) ). One
 persons unsuitable for motorcycles is another person's fun and
 games. So if the problem is that there are steps, then mark the steps.
 If the problem is that there's a massive chasm with a log over it,
 then mark bridge=yes width=0.25m surface=log maxweight=150kg (or
 similar!). Mark the stepping stones as stepping stones.

 In short, mark the facts that lead you to think it's not suitable, and
 leave the judgement to the producers of the map as to what they think
 is appropriate for their particular audience.

 This solution sounds appealing, but is totally impractical. Recording
 the information you cite is orders of magnitude more work than
 recording a simple yes/no.

It might be harder, but it's also better. Recording the attributes of
the path is the right thing to do, making sweeping generalisations
whilst mapping is easy but wrong.

 Moreover, even with all the information you suggest tagging, I
 honestly don't even know what the end user would do with it all.
 Something somewhere has to boil it down to a yes/no. Your GPS isn't
 going to deal with it, so the logic has to be up stream. By far the
 best person to make a judgment call is the person who mapped it.

Ah, see here's the issue. The best person to judge the features of the
real-world situation is certainly the mapper on the ground. The
absolute worst person to judge how that data is going to be used is
... the mapper on the ground. When they are walking along a path and
want to add information to OSM they have no idea if it's going to be
used for a cycling map, for a route planner, for a wheelchair, for a
horse rider, for a forestry worker, for a firefighter, for a local
council official, for a birdwatcher, or for whoever. They have
absolutely no idea what the data will be used for, and more
importantly, they probably don't have the expert knowledge needed to
assess the criteria for most of these activities.

So the mapper should stick to the stuff only they can do - describe
what's there in front of them. All the decision making should be done
by the people processing the data, since they much better know what
it's going to be used for. And the people doing the processing can
have different takes on what makes a path unrideable - which
combinations of features would make that path no passable to the
people the product is intended for - and then end users can find a
particular variation that suits them well. For example, if we only
mark cycling=suitable and forget about the width tags, how would I
make bikes-with-kiddie-trailers-maps.org? In order to make new,
interesting - and unexpected - outputs, we need to reign in any
assumptions about what the data will be used for, and stick to the
facts.

Cheers,
Andy

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Scheme Recommendations: highway=path, footway, trail?

2010-08-31 Thread Andy Allan

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 tag how ridable/hikable it is.

 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:mtb:scale
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sac_scale

I think these kinds of things would be great, if we were only making
products for mountain bikers and hikers. But we aren't. Are we instead
supposed to send one person from every end-user fraternaty to map
every path over and over again?

Also, given that I'm a mountain biker and I have no idea what a handy
surface is, nor what a bail like hairpin is, I have great doubts
about these particular guidelines. They sound like they can open the
way for many tagging disputes!

Cheers,
Andy

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

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 Share-Alikeness and other protecting elements.

I agree, but...

 I'd rather say - make it PD and lets continue mapping - Its not about
 licenses but rather about community. 

I very much agree.

 I'll not relicense as it stands today as thats the only time i am beeing
 asked about relicensing and the license - so the only choice i have
 is to refuse relicensing now ...

... I rather accept the new license, assuming the lawyers and the LWG
know what they're doing.

Besides the CT open a way to PD, which is also incentive to accept them.
(And a source of problems where incompatible imports happened).

-- 
Dirk-Lüder Deelkar Kreie
Bremen - 53.0901°N 8.7868°E

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

2010-08-31 Thread Francis Davey

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.


Might be worth sharpening section 3 to make it clear that the members
may from time to time designate an alternative licence or licences (at
the moment it reads as if the selection will and may only be made
once). Also it screams to be formatted with bullet points or
something, but that's a pure niggle of style.

-- 
Francis Davey

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

2010-08-31 Thread David Fawcett

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:
 - with CC-BY-SA, you'd have to ask every contributor the
 permission
 to fork their data (or is only attribution needed? To whom then?
 The
 individual contributors?)

 Which is why (IMO) switching to a PD licence would require starting
 from (almost) scratch; while there are some contributors who would
 be willing to offer their work as PD, there is far too much stuff in
 the current database with attribution requirements. (My reason for
 quoting Chris above is the is only attribution needed question,
 which wouldn't as I understand it make the resulting licence public
 domain.)

 It is also (again IMO) why whatever the CT may suggest the project
 will have to stay with a licence which supports attribution in the
 future.

 CC-BY-SA is what we all agreed to when we started mapping with OSM;
 we were happy with the attribution and sharealike aspects of the
 project. Depending when we joined we might be aware that CC licences
 aren't really suitable for data (and as a result a few people are
 treating it in some jurisdictions as PD from what I've read
 previously), and that there was no other licence at the time that
 was suitable. So -by-sa defines the spirit of the project, and the
 new ODBL licence provides a basis to make that work in reality (I
 say this based on the assumption that the OSMF and Open Database
 Commons lawyers know what they are doing). (As an aside, I do think
 Open Database Commons should have called the licence ODC-BY-SA in
 case they later come up with -BY and PD variants). As far as I can
 see the only problem is with the contributor terms which I think
 should make clear the project can't really switch away from a
 licence that maintains any attribution requirements of source data).


 Ed


 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

2010-08-31 Thread Robert Kaiser


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


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

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 think are) obvious
 trolls.

But that's a non sequitur unless he's saying that *he* should also
ignore them.  In which case, if that's the way the list is going to be
run, then let the games begin.

 I'm not sure that Marxist views on copyright are necessarily trolling,
 however capitalized, but they are a bit off topic for a list about bourgeois
 law. ;-)

The fact that I chose to quote that line and not any of the others was
my way of ignoring and not feeding the troll.

Otherwise I would have chosen to quote something like We should not
lynch anyone apart from those who are killing the map with the 'new
license'.

But, whatever, if that's the way this list is going to be run...  I
don't really mind if this list disintegrates into chaos.  I can make a
few extra accounts, take straw man positions, and make outlandish
comments with the intent of causing as much controversy as possible.

I thought we had a Big Damn Fricken Leader or something that was going
to put a stop to this, though.

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] ODbL vs CC-by-SA pros and cons

2010-08-31 Thread Robert Kaiser


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 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 license it as they please - possible with certain restrictions 
(like always making it available with a free and open license, as the CT 
states).


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 clause).


Robert Kaiser


___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] ODbL vs CC-by-SA pros and cons

2010-08-31 Thread Robert Kaiser


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 existing license, than changing
licenses, that is going from GPL to BSD...


If anything, OSM is about to go from BSD go LGPL and later right now.

And then, the GPL v3 is basically a completely different license than 
the GPL v2, even in large parts of its spirit - and still everyone can 
use it when projects were clever enough to use a GPL v2 and later clause.


Robert Kaiser


___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

[OSM-talk] Waze using OSM Data

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 map here
in Chile and not giving any kind of attribution, is it the same
anywhere else? Is it a known fact that they are using OSM Data and not
giving any kind of credit to the community?

Cheers

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Waze using OSM Data

2010-08-31 Thread SteveC

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
 (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 map here
 in Chile and not giving any kind of attribution, is it the same
 anywhere else? Is it a known fact that they are using OSM Data and not
 giving any kind of credit to the community?
 
 Cheers
 
 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-legal-talk] Wikipedia on Google Map Maker

2010-08-31 Thread ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen

[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, publicly display, distribute, and create derivative
works of the User Submission
[/quote]

LOL.

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Waze using OSM Data

2010-08-31 Thread IgnacioZ

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 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
  (
 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 map here
  in Chile and not giving any kind of attribution, is it the same
  anywhere else? Is it a known fact that they are using OSM Data and not
  giving any kind of credit to the community?
 
  Cheers
 
  ___
  talk mailing list
  talk@openstreetmap.org
  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
 

 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

2010-08-31 Thread Simon Ward

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
  what we workers should control.
 
 No copyright was the true reason for Germanys rapid industrial expansion:
 
 http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,710976,00.html

Maybe. An Ars Technica article[1] points out some obvious flaws.  I’d
like to see a much more detailed investigation.

[1]: 
http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2010/08/drool-britannia-did-weak-copyright-laws-help-germany-outpace-the-united-kingdom.ars

Simon
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Waze using OSM Data

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 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 map here
in Chile and not giving any kind of attribution, is it the same
anywhere else? Is it a known fact that they are using OSM Data and not
giving any kind of credit to the community?

Cheers

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Waze using OSM Data

2010-08-31 Thread IgnacioZ

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 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 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 map here
 in Chile and not giving any kind of attribution, is it the same
 anywhere else? Is it a known fact that they are using OSM Data and not
 giving any kind of credit to the community?

 Cheers

 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

2010-08-31 Thread 80n

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 CC-BY-SA, you'd have to ask every contributor the permission to
 fork
  their data (or is only attribution needed? To whom then? The individual
  contributors?)
  - with ODbL, you'd have to ask OSMF, which will be the owner of the
 data.
 
  Please correct me if I'm wrong.
 

 Both CC-BY-SA and ODbL allow forking without needing to ask for permission.

 The ability to fork an ODbL dataset was a specific question the LWG
 asked legal council. Legal council answered in the affirmative that
 anyone can fork an ODbL licensed dataset.


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.





 Relicensing a CC-BY-SA, ODbL or GPL etc license project would require
 asking each of the contributors for permission (or replacing their
 contribution).

 Regards
  Grant

 ___
 legal-talk mailing list
 legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Waze using OSM Data

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: 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 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 map here
 in Chile and not giving any kind of attribution, is it the same
 anywhere else? Is it a known fact that they are using OSM Data and not
 giving any kind of credit to the community?

 Cheers

 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Waze using OSM Data

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 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 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 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 map here
 in Chile and not giving any kind of attribution, is it the same
 anywhere else? Is it a known fact that they are using OSM Data and not
 giving any kind of credit to the community?

 Cheers

 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Waze using OSM Data

2010-08-31 Thread Jonas Krückel

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
 julio.co...@openstreetmap.cl wrote:
 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: 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 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 map here
 in Chile and not giving any kind of attribution, is it the same
 anywhere else? Is it a known fact that they are using OSM Data and not
 giving any kind of credit to the community?
 
 Cheers
 
 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
 
 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
 
 
 
 
 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Waze and OSM in Chile

2010-08-31 Thread Noam Bardin

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.

Please see our apology at
http://www.waze.com/blog/thanks-and-huge-apology-to-the-openstreetmap-community/
.

Noam

-- 
Noam Bardin
CEO Waze
www.twitter.com/noamb11
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Waze using OSM Data

2010-08-31 Thread Noam Bardin

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).

Thanks,

Noam

On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Julio Costa Zambelli 
julio.co...@openstreetmap.cl wrote:

 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 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 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 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 map here
  in Chile and not giving any kind of attribution, is it the same
  anywhere else? Is it a known fact that they are using OSM Data and not
  giving any kind of credit to the community?
 
  Cheers
 
  ___
  talk mailing list
  talk@openstreetmap.org
  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
 
  ___
  talk mailing list
  talk@openstreetmap.org
  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
 
 
 

 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk




-- 
Noam Bardin
CEO Waze
www.twitter.com/noamb11
US: 415-216-8719
Israel: +972-54-463-6406
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Waze and OSM in Chile

2010-08-31 Thread SteveC

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 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.
 
 Please see our apology at 
 http://www.waze.com/blog/thanks-and-huge-apology-to-the-openstreetmap-community/.
 
 Noam
 
 -- 
 Noam Bardin
 CEO Waze
 www.twitter.com/noamb11
 
 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Can OSM sources be public domain CC-0(zero)?

2010-08-31 Thread Niklas Cholmkvist

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
proving that the name is the same as the one shown on the street sign) 
In some cases where I want to fine-adjust the location of a geotagged
photo using for example the rendered OSM Mapnik images, will part of my
photo(or the photo in whole) become CC-BY-SA-2.0? (this question arised
after I considered making all my geotagged -in EXIF- photos public
domain CC-0-1.0-Universal) 

Another question about GPS traces: When I contribute to OpenStreetMap
with my GPS traces which I upload, do they become available under any
specific license or are they just uploaded? (if they are just uploaded
then they are 'All Rights Reserved' apart from giving special permission
to the OSM project to use them)

Regards,

Niklas
-- 



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Can OSM sources be public domain CC-0(zero)?

2010-08-31 Thread Aun Yngve Johnsen

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 Cholmkvist wrote:


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
proving that the name is the same as the one shown on the street sign)
In some cases where I want to fine-adjust the location of a geotagged
photo using for example the rendered OSM Mapnik images, will part of  
my
photo(or the photo in whole) become CC-BY-SA-2.0? (this question  
arised

after I considered making all my geotagged -in EXIF- photos public
domain CC-0-1.0-Universal)

Another question about GPS traces: When I contribute to OpenStreetMap
with my GPS traces which I upload, do they become available under any
specific license or are they just uploaded? (if they are just uploaded
then they are 'All Rights Reserved' apart from giving special  
permission

to the OSM project to use them)

Regards,

Niklas
--

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Waze and OSM in Chile

2010-08-31 Thread Gregory Arenius

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 like it would be a decent
fit.

Greg
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Waze using OSM Data

2010-08-31 Thread ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen

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
 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).

 Thanks,

 Noam

 On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Julio Costa Zambelli
 julio.co...@openstreetmap.cl wrote:

 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 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 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 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 map here
  in Chile and not giving any kind of attribution, is it the same
  anywhere else? Is it a known fact that they are using OSM Data and not
  giving any kind of credit to the community?
 
  Cheers
 
  ___
  talk mailing list
  talk@openstreetmap.org
  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
 
  ___
  talk mailing list
  talk@openstreetmap.org
  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
 
 
 

 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



 --
 Noam Bardin
 CEO Waze
 www.twitter.com/noamb11
 US: 415-216-8719
 Israel: +972-54-463-6406


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-nl] BV het Pieterpad

2010-08-31 Thread Lambertus

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 ik in principe met wegtype = unknown.

Iemand die de situatie kent kan deze dan later updaten.

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.

http://openwandelkaart.nl/?zoom=13lat=53.34719lon=6.5032layers=B000FTFTTF
http://openwandelkaart.nl/?zoom=13lat=53.34719lon=6.5032layers=B000FTFTTF

Dat voorkomt een heleboel puzzelwerk als er fouten in de relatie komen.

Ik denk dat we dezelfde aanpak moeten kiezen voor de LAW als bij

de lange snelwegen.

Bij de nationale fietspaden heb ik al gemerkt dat het behoorlijk

lastig is vast te stellen of de route er compleet inzit, omdat de relatie

van het pad soms duizenden ways omvat. Die moeten we misschien ook eens
omkatten.

Gert Gremmen

-

Osm

Openstreetmap.nl (alias: cetest)

P* Before printing, think about the environment.*

-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: talk-nl-boun...@openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-nl-boun...@openstreetmap.org] Namens Ben Laenen
Verzonden: Saturday, August 28, 2010 5:50 PM
Aan: talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk-nl] BV het Pieterpad

rob...@elsenaar.info wrote:

  Met aanwezige tracks plan ik graag een paar avondjes o ze in te brengen.

  :-)

Wil wel eens weten hoe je dat juist gaat mappen met enkel een track. Hoe
weet

je dan wat er zich in werkelijkheid bevindt (pad, zandweg, verharde weg,

misschien zelfs trappen)?

Ben

___

Talk-nl mailing list

Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org

http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl



___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl



___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl

Re: [OSM-talk-nl] BV het Pieterpad

2010-08-31 Thread robert


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
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 ik in principe met wegtype = unknown.

Iemand die de situatie kent kan deze dan later updaten.

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.

http://openwandelkaart.nl/?zoom=13lat=53.34719lon=6.5032layers=B000FTFTTF
http://openwandelkaart.nl/?zoom=13lat=53.34719lon=6.5032layers=B000FTFTTF

Dat voorkomt een heleboel puzzelwerk als er fouten in de relatie komen.

Ik denk dat we dezelfde aanpak moeten kiezen voor de LAW als bij

de lange snelwegen.

Bij de nationale fietspaden heb ik al gemerkt dat het behoorlijk

lastig is vast te stellen of de route er compleet inzit, omdat de relatie

van het pad soms duizenden ways omvat. Die moeten we misschien ook eens
omkatten.

Gert Gremmen

-

Osm

Openstreetmap.nl (alias: cetest)

P* Before printing, think about the environment.*

-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: talk-nl-boun...@openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-nl-boun...@openstreetmap.org] Namens Ben Laenen
Verzonden: Saturday, August 28, 2010 5:50 PM
Aan: talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk-nl] BV het Pieterpad

rob...@elsenaar.info wrote:

 Met aanwezige tracks plan ik graag een paar avondjes o ze in te brengen.

 :-)

Wil wel eens weten hoe je dat juist gaat mappen met enkel een track. Hoe
weet

je dan wat er zich in werkelijkheid bevindt (pad, zandweg, verharde weg,

misschien zelfs trappen)?

Ben

___

Talk-nl mailing list

Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org

http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl



___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl



___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl




___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl

Re: [OSM-talk-nl] BV het Pieterpad

2010-08-31 Thread Ben Laenen

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.
 http://openwandelkaart.nl/?zoom=13lat=53.34719lon=6.5032layers=B000FT
 FTTF
 
 Dat voorkomt een heleboel puzzelwerk als er fouten in de relatie komen.
 Ik denk dat we dezelfde aanpak moeten kiezen voor de LAW als bij
 de lange snelwegen.
 Bij de nationale fietspaden heb ik al gemerkt dat het behoorlijk
 lastig is vast te stellen of de route er compleet inzit, omdat de
 relatie
 van het pad soms duizenden ways omvat. Die moeten we misschien ook eens
 omkatten.

Integendeel. Niks zo makkelijk als controleren of een wandelroute volledig is, 
omdat er geen speciale situaties zijn zoals bij fietsroutes waar de route heen 
en terug niet overal dezelfde is. Zelfs de relatie-editor in JOSM kan dit al 
laten zien.

Je maakt het jezelf zelfs moeilijker als je opsplitst in allemaal stukjes van 
20km, want wil je dan controleren of de route mooi op elkaar aansluit dan ga 
je die allemaal één voor één moeten testen, met manuele tests of de plekken 
waar twee relaties op elkaar aansluiten wel in orde zijn.

Ben

___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl

Re: [OSM-talk-nl] BV het Pieterpad

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 over de NS aanlooproutes.

Omdat we de relaties nog moeten maken is het aansluiten nu niet
zo moeilijk. Misschien moeten we de relatie check uitbreiden
met een controle van de deelstukjes in een superrelatie.

Regards,
Gert Gremmen




 Before printing, think about the environment. 



-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: talk-nl-boun...@openstreetmap.org 
[mailto:talk-nl-boun...@openstreetmap.org] Namens Ben Laenen
Verzonden: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 11:46 AM
Aan: talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk-nl] BV het Pieterpad

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.
 http://openwandelkaart.nl/?zoom=13lat=53.34719lon=6.5032layers=B000FT
 FTTF
 
 Dat voorkomt een heleboel puzzelwerk als er fouten in de relatie komen.
 Ik denk dat we dezelfde aanpak moeten kiezen voor de LAW als bij
 de lange snelwegen.
 Bij de nationale fietspaden heb ik al gemerkt dat het behoorlijk
 lastig is vast te stellen of de route er compleet inzit, omdat de
 relatie
 van het pad soms duizenden ways omvat. Die moeten we misschien ook eens
 omkatten.

Integendeel. Niks zo makkelijk als controleren of een wandelroute volledig is, 
omdat er geen speciale situaties zijn zoals bij fietsroutes waar de route heen 
en terug niet overal dezelfde is. Zelfs de relatie-editor in JOSM kan dit al 
laten zien.

Je maakt het jezelf zelfs moeilijker als je opsplitst in allemaal stukjes van 
20km, want wil je dan controleren of de route mooi op elkaar aansluit dan ga 
je die allemaal één voor één moeten testen, met manuele tests of de plekken 
waar twee relaties op elkaar aansluiten wel in orde zijn.

Ben

___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl

Re: [OSM-talk-nl] BV het Pieterpad

2010-08-31 Thread robert

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  
misschien bijgemaakt kan worden. Wie moeten we daar voor benaderen?
Uit ervaring weet ik wel dat het onderhouden van grote relaties erg  
tijdrovend kan zijn.


groet
Robert

Quoting ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl:


Ik heb in het Pieterpad ook
al stukjes gezien met verschillen voor heen en terug.
Of dat zinvol is weet  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 over de NS aanlooproutes.

Omdat we de relaties nog moeten maken is het aansluiten nu niet
zo moeilijk. Misschien moeten we de relatie check uitbreiden
met een controle van de deelstukjes in een superrelatie.

Regards,
Gert Gremmen




? Before printing, think about the environment.



-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: talk-nl-boun...@openstreetmap.org   
[mailto:talk-nl-boun...@openstreetmap.org] Namens Ben Laenen

Verzonden: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 11:46 AM
Aan: talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk-nl] BV het Pieterpad

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.
http://openwandelkaart.nl/?zoom=13lat=53.34719lon=6.5032layers=B000FT
FTTF

Dat voorkomt een heleboel puzzelwerk als er fouten in de relatie komen.
Ik denk dat we dezelfde aanpak moeten kiezen voor de LAW als bij
de lange snelwegen.
Bij de nationale fietspaden heb ik al gemerkt dat het behoorlijk
lastig is vast te stellen of de route er compleet inzit, omdat de
relatie
van het pad soms duizenden ways omvat. Die moeten we misschien ook eens
omkatten.


Integendeel. Niks zo makkelijk als controleren of een wandelroute   
volledig is,
omdat er geen speciale situaties zijn zoals bij fietsroutes waar de   
route heen

en terug niet overal dezelfde is. Zelfs de relatie-editor in JOSM kan dit al
laten zien.

Je maakt het jezelf zelfs moeilijker als je opsplitst in allemaal stukjes van
20km, want wil je dan controleren of de route mooi op elkaar aansluit dan ga
je die allemaal één voor één moeten testen, met manuele tests of de plekken
waar twee relaties op elkaar aansluiten wel in orde zijn.

Ben

___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl





___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

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 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/5634963.
 
 I checked some of the other QA tools at
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Quality_Assurance, but of course it
 would be good if there was some central framework for having QA checks
 run centrally on OSM servers. This way one could get updates when say
 a node and closed way are in the same location with the same tags.
 


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
:)

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

 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.

-- 
Cheers
Ross

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

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 your zoom level and how close to the center
of the way the node is.

Mapnik takes into account the size of the way when deciding on whether
to render the name or not at a given zoom level, I guess the idea is
that small areas don't need the name rendered when you are zoomed out.
This would explain why the ways name is not rendered when zoomed out,
but a nodes name is.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

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
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

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 there are no academic articles in the first 
page.
Instead
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/UnNews:Australia_says_%22You_just_don%27t_understand_our_humour!%22

-- 
You have a truly strong individuality.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

 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 your zoom level and how close to the center
 of the way the node is.

 Mapnik takes into account the size of the way when deciding on whether
 to render the name or not at a given zoom level, I guess the idea is
 that small areas don't need the name rendered when you are zoomed out.
 This would explain why the ways name is not rendered when zoomed out,
 but a nodes name is.

I'm well aware of how mapnik works, as well as most of the other renderers, 
being a developer of software that uses it.  In this case cyclemap and 
osmarender show both names at maximum zoom only.

Mapnik will not render one name directly over the top of the other.  It will 
overlap sometimes, on linear ways, but not on areas.

In the case of Campbell Primary School it only renders one name at even the 
highest zoom level.

What you've done is basically a no-no, DON'T do mass deletes or changes of data 
without discussing it first.  Two responses on the newbies list is not 
discussing it.  Any discussion of this sort needs to be on the talk-au if it 
affects Au or on the talk or tagging list if it affects everything.


-- 
Cheers
Ross

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

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
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

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?

Is your browser caching old tiles?

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

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
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

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
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-35.290188lon=149.156265zoom=18layers=M)

As for the double names, you don't need a node + polygon/multipolygon
with the same name, otherwise they both render. To fix it, all you
have to do is shift any additional tags to the way and delete the
node.

Another good example of names being rendered is on suburb/postcode
multipolygons being rendered and putting the name of the
suburb/postcode in the middle of no where.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

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.
 
 ___
 Talk-au mailing list
 Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Mine's showing both now so maybe it's just rerendered after the changeset was 
reverted. 



-- 
Cheers
Ross

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

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 after the perm link
 (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-35.290188lon=149.156265zoom=18layers=M)

 As for the double names, you don't need a node + polygon/multipolygon
 with the same name, otherwise they both render. To fix it, all you
 have to do is shift any additional tags to the way and delete the
 node.

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).


 Another good example of names being rendered is on suburb/postcode
 multipolygons being rendered and putting the name of the
 suburb/postcode in the middle of no where.


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

 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
 (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-35.290188lon=149.156265zoom=18layers=M)
 
 As for the double names, you don't need a node + polygon/multipolygon
 with the same name, otherwise they both render. To fix it, all you
 have to do is shift any additional tags to the way and delete the
 node.

That's what we've been discussing but it's also a good idea to make sure you 
don't translate incorrect information like source tags.

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 :)



Personally I'd rather see the node left with name address and all the tags and 
the area just marked with the appropriate type and source.

eg for the Campbell Primary School the node has:

amenity=school
name=Campbell Primary School
addr:city=Canberra
...
source=gov.au

and the area tagged as
amenity=school
source=whatever

Then the names will not double render but the name is rendered in an 
appropriate position.  It's not really practical for suburb relations but most 
have a place= node anyway.


Cheers
Ross

 
 Another good example of names being rendered is on suburb/postcode
 multipolygons being rendered and putting the name of the
 suburb/postcode in the middle of no where.
 
 ___
 Talk-au mailing list
 Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

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 have a node if you have a similarly tagged polygon...

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

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 list and I knew it could be reverted anyway.

 Personally I'd rather see the node left with name address and all the tags 
 and the area just marked with the appropriate type and source.

 eg for the Campbell Primary School the node has:

 amenity=school
 name=Campbell Primary School
 addr:city=Canberra
 ...
 source=gov.au

 and the area tagged as
 amenity=school
 source=whatever

 Then the names will not double render but the name is rendered in an 
 appropriate position.  It's not really practical for suburb relations but 
 most have a place= node anyway.

What if I just do the ones from NSW, where the tags on both the way
and node are exactly the same, or only less major differences?

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

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 things I haven't done :)

 Personally I'd rather see the node left with name address and all the tags 
 and the area just marked with the appropriate type and source.

 and the area tagged as
 amenity=school
 source=whatever

That is one way to do it, but it's not the recommended way, since if
points are needed for whatever reason, they can be generated based on
the mid-point of the area. I'm trying to find the wiki page with
recommended tips on it.

The only other suggestion I've seen to do this sort of thing is using
a multipolygon relation and using a node to tweak things, since the
location you are trying to tag may be offset from the mid-point.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

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 things first and use reverting as a very last
resort, not the first resort...

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

2010-08-31 Thread Emilie Laffray

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 things to do a revert, the more problematic it
 will be, best to discuss things first and use reverting as a very last
 resort, not the first resort...


Also depending on the bot you are using or the tool you are using, it would
be nice to publish your modification file before applying the modification.
One bot used in the French community is actually accepting a specific
modification format and regularly people publishes their patches for
people to review.
It is one way of making sure that things don't go awfully wrong.

Emilie Laffray
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [Talk-is] Varðandi merkingar á hjólalei ðum

2010-08-31 Thread Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

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 footway tag á
almenna stíga þar sem það á við. Skokkar og göngufólk hljóta að njóta góðs
af því.
Ég er frekar sáttur við þessar skilgreiningar á stígum sem fram hafa
komið.
Væri ekki ráð að búa til Presets fyrir þessar skilgreiningar ásamt
wikisíðu með ljósmyndum og guidelines af hvernig ætti að tagga leiðirnar.

Nöfn á presetin gæti hljómað svona:
(Ég tek það fram að ég er glænýr notandi og þekki ekki virkni presets
fullkomnlega)
Stígur,malbik
Stígur Möl (gæti átt við heiðmörk og fl útivistarsvæði)
Hjólreiðabraut
Gangstéttir
Hjólreiðarein
Hjólavísar

Persónulega skil ég ekki merkingu orðsins Hjólavísir en það er væntanlega
bara orðaforðaskortur hjá mér. Mér dettur í hug Almenn akbraut ef að ég
túlka þessa skilgreiningu rétt. Er þetta ekki basicly þeir staðir þar sem
hjólreiðamenn kjósa eða þurfa að hjóla á götunni?
Svona reiðhjólaumferð eins og hefur td. stóraukist við Hafnarfjarðarveginn
Ásamt ýmissa tenginga á milli annara hjólaleiða í gegnum íbúðargötur, yfir
bílastæði, gatnamót og fl.

Hjólavísar eru útskýrðir hér:
http://www.lhm.is/lhm/pistlar/299-hjr-reykjavr- og hér
http://www.lhm.is/lhm/pistlar/236-hjolavisar-nyjung-a-goetum-reykjavikur
Þeir eru nú komnir á Einarsnesi, Suðurgötu sunnan Hringbrautar, Lanholtsvegi
og Laugarásvegi og nú síðast við Hverfisgötuna í tilraunaverkefni umhverfis-
og samgöngusviðs Reykjavíkurborgar.

Er hægt að skilgreina götur sem þegar eru inni sem hjólavísa? Eða eru
þetta leiðir sem við ættum að teikna upp á nýtt ? Skiptir það máli þegar það
kemur að virkni hjolavefsjáa?

það væri ekki vitlaust að finna svo nokkur vel valin aukatögg til að
auðvelda áframhaldandi úrvinnslu (td. fyrir hjólavefsjá)
Ég veit ekki hvernig þessar vefsjár sem eru að routa hjólaleiðir
skilgreina öryggi leiðanna geta tögg eða stöðluð preset hjápað þar ?
Það væri kanski hægt að gefa leiðunum einkun eftir hversu hjólavænar þær
eru (A leið B leið og C leið?). Aðkoma að gatnamótum, bílaumferð,
stígabreidd, útsýni og brekkur geta spilað þarna inní.

Ég útbjó drög að flokkun gatna með tilliti til þæginda til hjólreiða í 6
flokka. Ef hægt væri að tagga götur í flokka A til F eftir því hversu
þægilegt er að hjóla þær yrði til einskonar gæðaflokkun hjólreiðaleiða
eftir götum. Það væri þá líka hægt að setja einhverja flokkun við
gangstéttir, útivistarstíga, hjólreiðabrautir, hjólreiðareinar og götur með
hjólavísa. Þá mætti líka ímynda sér að hægt væri að flokka leiðirnar eftir
breidd stíga og hættum sem hafa verið færðar innn við þá, s.s. blindhorn,
blindbeygjur, hálkustaði o.s.frv.

Drög að flokkun gatna:

A. flokkur. Þægileg til hjólreiða. Hæg umferð ca. 30 km. Lítil umferð.
Ráðandi staða þægileg. Akrein 3,5 m breið. Dæmi botnlangar.

B. flokkur. Þægileg til hjólreiða en meiri umferð og ráðandi staða
óþægilegri. Hæg umferð ca. 30 km. Meiri umferð. Þarf oft að taka ráðandi
stöðu í umferð vegna aðstæðna (þrengingar, hliðargötur, útkeyrslur,
bílastæði í götu). Akrein 3,5 m breið. Dæmi Hverfisgata.

C. flokkur. Þægileg til hjólreiða en meiri umferð og meiri hraði. Ökuhraði
um 50 km. Breidd götu leyfir víkjandi stöðu hjólreiðamanns og framúrakstur
bíla án þess að þeir fari yfir miðlínu eða þá að umferð er lítil. Akrein
yfir 4,2 m breið. Dæmi Suðurgata sunnan Hringbrautar hæri akrein.
Kársnesbraut í austurátt.

D. flokkur. Minna þægileg til hjólreiða (einkum á annatíma). Ökuhraði um 50
km. Breidd götu leyfir ekki framúrakstur bíla án þess að þeir fari yfir
miðlínu og umferð er nokkuð þétt. Akrein 3,5 m breið. Dæmi Bústaðavegur.

E. flokkur. Þægileg til hjólreiða en hentar frekar þjálfuðum
hjólreiðamönnum. Hröð umferð 60 km og yfir. Bílar geta tekið framúr án þess
að fara yfir akreina línu. Fáar að- og fráreinar og/eða fullnægjandi hönnun
og pláss. Breidd akreinar 4,2-4,8 m eða fullnægjandi vegöxl eða
öryggissvæði. Dæmi Reykjanesbraut endurbyggð sunnan/vestan Hafnarfjarðar.

F. flokkur. Frekar óþægileg til hjólreiða en getur hentað þjálfuðum
hjólreiðamönnum. Hröð umferð 60 km og yfir. Bílar geta ekki tekið framúr án
þess að fara yfir akreina línu. Margar að- og fráreinar og/eða ekki
fullnægjandi hönnun og pláss. Breidd akreinar 3,5 m og ekki fullnægjandi
vegöxl eða öryggissvæði. Dæmi Miklabraut, Kringlumýrarbraut o.fl.

Þetta hljómar ágætlega, kannski ekki sem aðal flokkunarkerfi (þar
sem við viljum enn highway=*), heldur gæti þetta verið flokkunarkerfi
ofan á það. Þú getur sett endalaust mörg tögg á vegi og aðra hluti í
OpenStreetMap þannig það er um að gera að gera eitthvað svona ef það
er vilji til að halda þessu við.

OpenStreetMap er voðalegt þeir sem gera hlutina ráða, þannig að ef
þér finnst þetta góð hugmynd endilega splæstu þessu inn á

Re: [Talk-de] Navipowm 0.2.4.

2010-08-31 Thread André Joost


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 den Baum

Browse Files for NaviPOWM - All Files -- Navipowm --- 0.2.4

Dort hatte ich gesucht, fand aber nur PC-Versionen.



Wenn du weit genug nach unten blätterst, stehen da auch WM-Versionen für
Windows Mobile 5 und 2003:


Sorry, war zu blind!


Die neueste Entwickerlversion gibt es hier:
http://wince.dentro.info/koord/osm/navipowm/navipowm/WinCE_ARM_PNA/


Schrieb ich doch weiter oben schon. Nur wollte ich dem Wolfgang eine 
stabile Version empfehlen.


BTW: Straßenbahnen im Straßenniveau (als eigene Wegelemente) scheint 
navipowm immer noch nicht zu mögen :-(


Gruß,
André Joost



___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Bilder von Ausfahrten etc.

2010-08-31 Thread Simon Poole


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 versuchen die Information einzuschränken,
so versucht Nearmap folgendes:

 Using our PhotoMaps to derive information

If you derive information from observing our PhotoMaps, and include
that information in a work, you will own that work, and may distribute
it to others under a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike
(CC-BY-SA) licence.


Simon 




___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Gemeindegrenzen der Schweiz

2010-08-31 Thread Fred Jelk

 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 ogr2osm verwendet,
 aber  mit  dem  Parameter  -e 21781  konnte  ich  mir eine OSM-Datei
 erstellen, die maximal 1.5 Meter neben Grenzen liegt, welche der offi-
 zielle WMS-Dienst von http://geo.admin.ch/ liefert.

 Genauer wirds mit obiger Formel (wo/wie müsste ich die eingeben?) auch
 nicht, odr?


 Gruss,
 Thomas



 ___
 Talk-de mailing list
 Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de


___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Openstreetmap-Daten für Navigationssy steme der Automobilhersteller?

2010-08-31 Thread Wolfgang

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 einem EU-Kommissar? Schließlich wird
 hier massiv der Wettbewerb behindert.
 

Die massive Wettbewerbsbehinderung sehe ich eher bei den fest in die Fahrzeuge 
eingebauten Geräten. Hier gibt es nur wenige Hersteller, und der 
Fahrzeughersteller entscheidet, welches Gerät eingebaut wird.

Gruß, Wolfgang

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Openstreetmap-Daten für Navigationssyste me der Automobilhersteller?

2010-08-31 Thread M∡rtin Koppenhoefer

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 einem EU-Kommissar? Schließlich wird hier
 massiv der Wettbewerb behindert.


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 deren Format
reengineerst und veröffentlichst.

Gruß Martin

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Openstreetmap-Daten für Navigationssyst eme der Automobilhersteller?

2010-08-31 Thread Johann H. Addicks


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 
Wiedereinführung von DIN-Schächten für Radios streiten plus ein 
Interface zur Mitnutzung der bereits im Auto verbauten LCDs und 
Lenkrad-/Hebelstockschalter.


-jha-


___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

[Talk-de] Nochmal Lizenzwechsel, Zustimmungstext

2010-08-31 Thread Wolfgang

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 Muttersprachlern).

Da sind selbst griechische Autovermieter schon weiter...

Gruß, Wolfgang

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Nochmal Lizenzwechsel, Zustimmungstext

2010-08-31 Thread Bernd Wurst

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 (außer Franzosen, Italienern und englischen
 Muttersprachlern).

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 allen Benutzen einheitlich sein, damit man den 
Benutzer nachher darauf festnageln kann, dass er *genau das* akzeptiert hat.

Gruß, Bernd

-- 
Ich möchte nichts mit Naturkost zu tun haben.
In meinem Alter braucht man alle Konservierungsstoffe, die man bekommen kann.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

[Talk-de] Harmann/Becker NTG2 Was: Openstreetma p-Daten für Navigationssysteme der Automobilherst eller?

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:

-r-xr-xr-x 1 root root5785600 2006-09-15 14:40 E10-40_3067_EU.DB
-r-xr-xr-x 1 root root 182272 2004-12-22 14:10 GPS222.DB
-r-xr-xr-x 1 root root 174080 2004-12-22 11:49 GPS7_A412.DB
-r-xr-xr-x 1 root root 1151426560 2009-10-20 10:27 kN092EUx17G32b.DB_GDB
-r-xr-xr-x 1 root root  496148480 2009-10-20 10:29 kN092EUx17La.DB_LIT
-r-xr-xr-x 1 root root 1996638208 2009-11-05 12:25 kN092EUx17t02.DB_XAC
-r-xr-xr-x 1 root root   16861184 2004-12-22 14:10 LWC_IPS.IPS
-r-xr-xr-x 1 root root   10444800 2005-06-02 11:06 SDB_1873b.DB

Die GPS files scheinen softwareupdates fuer verbaute GPS Empfaender zu sein.
Das E10 scheint die Software zu sein - jedenfalls findet sich sowas:

0x0850: 24486561 6465723A 202F2F49 535F4465 $Header: //IS_De
0x0860: 706F742F 70726F6A 65637473 2F444357 pot/projects/DCW
0x0870: 7878784E 61766942 6F782F52 656C6561 xxxNaviBox/Relea
0x0880: 73652F45 31305F30 302F5678 4253502F se/E10_00/VxBSP/
0x0890: 546F726E 61646F2F 74617267 65742F63 Tornado/target/c
0x08A0: 6F6E6669 672F616C 6C2F7372 632F5570 onfig/all/src/Up
0x08B0: 64617465 496E666F 2E61736D 23332024 dateInfo.asm#3 $

D.h. das wird ein VXWorks sein - Allerdings ist das nur ein Flash Updater
so wie das aussieht und das image ist komprimiert ... Mit ein bischen
rumprobieren bin ich der ueberzeugung das das eine big endian SuperH 
CPU ist in der kiste ...

SDB_1873b.DB sind die Stimmen - der rest ist mir spontan unklar...

Flo
-- 
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Openstreetmap-Daten für Navigationssys teme der Automobilhersteller?

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 deren Format
 reengineerst und veröffentlichst.

Ohne jetzt Rechtsanwalt zu sein - aber war da nich was mit
reverse engineeren zu kompatibilitaetszwecken?

Flo
-- 
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Nochmal Lizenzwechsel, Zustimmungstext

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 allen Benutzen einheitlich sein, damit man den 
 Benutzer nachher darauf festnageln kann, dass er *genau das* akzeptiert hat.

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 ist macht die nummer durchaus leichter
anfechtbar denke ich auch wenn ich kein Anwalt bin ...

Flo
-- 
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Nochmal Lizenzwechsel, Zustimmungstext

2010-08-31 Thread Bernd Wurst

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 inoffizielle Übersetzungen anbieten, aber das was man
  unterschreibt muss bei allen Benutzen einheitlich sein, damit man den
  Benutzer nachher darauf festnageln kann, dass er *genau das* akzeptiert
  hat.
 
 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 ist macht die nummer durchaus
 leichter anfechtbar denke ich auch wenn ich kein Anwalt bin ...

IANAL.
Meiner Meinung nach ist es für jeden der bei OSM mit macht ziemtlich schwer, 
glaubhaft zu begründen dass er kein englisch kann.


Wichtig für das Projekt ist IMHO, dass man nachher konkret weiß was die User 
akzeptiert haben. Und das ist um ein vielfaches einfacher, wenn es *ein* Text 
ist. Übersetzungen, vor allem von Freiwilligen Laien erstellte, bergen immer 
ein Potenzial von Mehrdeutigkeiten oder Missverständnissen, die eventuell erst 
bei sehr genauer Analyse auffallen.

Gruß, Bernd

-- 
Manche Menschen sind so seltsam, dass man es bereut,
sie kennen gelernt zu haben.  -  Ernst R. Hauschka (dt. Aphoristiker)


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Openstreetmap-Daten für Navigationssy steme der Automobilhersteller?

2010-08-31 Thread Bernd Wurst

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 kompatibilitaetszwecken?

Ja, das reverse-engineering selbst ist nicht problematisch, da gab es schon 
mehrere Fälle.

Schwierig wird es, wenn Software-Patente zum Zug kommen, denn dann gibt es 
meist keine Möglichkeit, mit dem selben Ergebnis um das Patent herum zu 
programmieren und jede Software zur Erstellung solcher Karten würde 
automatisch gegen das Patent verstoßen (siehe H.264 oder MP3). Egal auf 
welchem Weg man die Spezifikation erhalten oder herausgefunden hat.

Gruß, Bernd

-- 
No man in the world has more courage than the man who can stop
after eating one peanut.  -  Channing Pollock (US humorist)


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Nochmal Lizenzwechsel, Zustimmungstext

2010-08-31 Thread Stefan Schwan

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 ist macht die nummer durchaus leichter
 anfechtbar denke ich auch wenn ich kein Anwalt bin ...

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 Vorschriften des geltenden Rechts, gesetzliche
Verbote oder die guten Sitten verstößt.. Wer die Sprache nicht
versteht (und das kann im Zweifel ja auch bei feinsten Juristendeusch
der Fall sein) und trotzdem unterschreibt, der kann sich hinterher
nicht rausreden.

Gruß,
Stefan

[1]http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertragsfreiheit

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] PD-Argumente reloaded (war: Lizenzwechsel: freiwillige Zustimmung ...)

2010-08-31 Thread godofglow


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: 
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Lizenzwechsel-freiwillige-Zustimmung-ab-jetzt-moeglich-tp5415486p5481774.html
Sent from the Germany mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] PD-Argumente reloaded (war: Lizenzwechsel: freiwillige Zustimmung ...)


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 bestehen. Entweder Lizenz erfüllen oder gefälligst raus mit  
 meiner Software aus $KOMMERZIELLEANWENDUNG.

Ich glaube du verstehst da was nicht - Die benutzen unmodifizierte Busyboxen.
Die muessen sie dann wieder rausgeben - was hast du gewonnen? Wenn es haarig
wird wird halt die eigenentwicklung nicht dagegen gelinked sondern im userspace
ueber die API angeflanscht - Schon zieht die GPL nicht mehr - sie nvidia,
oder ati/radeon/amd driver (fgrlx) die ueber wrapper an den Kernel linken.
Das ist schon wieder so komplex das sich da keiner traut das einzuklagen 
weil die erfolgsaussichten minimal sind - auch wenn ich der meinung bin
das es klare GPL verstoesse sind.

 Leider sehen einige Firmen die ganze Open Source Bewegung nur als große  
 Quelle kostenloser Software. Nehmen: Ja, Zurückgeben: Nein. Die Idee  
 dahinter wird oft nicht verstanden. Dank der GPL kann man als Autor  
 wenigstens etwas zurückfordern.

Hast du da Zahlen/Belege fuer? Wieviel code ist denn so bereits eingeklagt
worden der Stand heute in Free Software Projekten ist? Mein Gefuehl sagt
das geht gegen null ...

Ausserdem stehen in einem Aktuellen LWN Artikel 1) genau gegenteilige Zahlen
(Hier ein etwas aelterer Vergleich 2) ) - Demnach sind ~85% aller Patche des
Linux Kernels mittlerweile von Angestellten irgendwelcher Firmen - Und das hat
nichts mit GPL zu tun sondern zum grossteil damit das das Pflegen von externen
Patchen ein vielfaches so aufwendig sind und damit das nicht zu benutzen ist.

Also bevor es wieder heisst Die grosse Boese 
Firma klaut alles: - Get your facts straight.

Flo

1) Subscriber Only content:
   http://lwn.net/Articles/402512/
2) Who Wrote 2.6.33 http://lwn.net/Articles/373405/
-- 
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Nochmal Lizenzwechsel, Zustimmungstext