Re: [Talk-it] ca reste ouverte

[Cascafico Giovanni]

Credo funzioni attraverso un database intermedio, non ancora configurato
per gestire il territorio italiano.

Il dom 3 mag 2020, 22:53 Martin Koppenhoefer  ha
scritto:

> Mi sono installato l’app ma non fa vedere niente, nonostante ho taggato
> dei posti con i tags covid, ne sapete qualcosa? Sempre per il discorso del
> file di configurazione italiana?
>
> Ciao Martin
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [talk-au] Vandalism

[Andrew Harvey]

All done now, after reviewing further I did issue a 0-day "need to login"
block because everything looks fabricated.

On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 12:26, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
> Thanks Andrew!
>
> Graeme
>
>
> On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 12:22, Andrew Harvey 
> wrote:
>
>> I agree, I'll go through and revert and send a note as a first step.
>>
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Vandalism

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Thanks Andrew!

Graeme


On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 12:22, Andrew Harvey  wrote:

> I agree, I'll go through and revert and send a note as a first step.
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Vandalism

[Andrew Harvey]

I agree, I'll go through and revert and send a note as a first step.

On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 12:00, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

> Hi all
>
> Found either some bad jokes or (I'm afraid) more likely vandalism, all
> done by one apparent new mapper, just on a month ago.
>
> User is https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Jelena%20Jaredic
>
> Their work, all done on the same day:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Jelena%20Jaredic/history#map=6/-31.475/151.941
>
> The first one I noticed (by checking the incorrect phone numbers report!)
> was an internet cafe, supposedly in the middle of a service station
> carpark!
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7372255785#map=19/-34.28286/150.63696
>
> I thought this may have been a simple error, or possibly mapping a
> building that doesn't yet appear on imagery, so was going to try to contact
> them via changeset comments, but I then saw that they had mapped 2 kindies,
> also on the grounds of that servo!
>
> Have now looked at all of their changesets & everyone of them appear to be
> dodgy, with Govt / telecommunications offices out in the middle of nowhere,
> cafes etc in the middle of parks, a waterfall named as "Aboriginal land" &,
> for the piece de resistance, a Doctor's office, supposedly located in St
> Kilda, but actually mapped in the middle of the taxiways at Sydney
> Kingsford-Smith Airport!
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7372255885#map=17/-33.93882/151.17989
>
> Could somebody please revert all these changes?
>
> Is there anything else we should do here with regard to reporting them?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] Vandalism

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Hi all

Found either some bad jokes or (I'm afraid) more likely vandalism, all done
by one apparent new mapper, just on a month ago.

User is https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Jelena%20Jaredic

Their work, all done on the same day:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Jelena%20Jaredic/history#map=6/-31.475/151.941

The first one I noticed (by checking the incorrect phone numbers report!)
was an internet cafe, supposedly in the middle of a service station
carpark!
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7372255785#map=19/-34.28286/150.63696

I thought this may have been a simple error, or possibly mapping a building
that doesn't yet appear on imagery, so was going to try to contact them via
changeset comments, but I then saw that they had mapped 2 kindies, also on
the grounds of that servo!

Have now looked at all of their changesets & everyone of them appear to be
dodgy, with Govt / telecommunications offices out in the middle of nowhere,
cafes etc in the middle of parks, a waterfall named as "Aboriginal land" &,
for the piece de resistance, a Doctor's office, supposedly located in St
Kilda, but actually mapped in the middle of the taxiways at Sydney
Kingsford-Smith Airport!
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7372255885#map=17/-33.93882/151.17989

Could somebody please revert all these changes?

Is there anything else we should do here with regard to reporting them?

Thanks

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] attributions par l'Est Républicain

[Philippe Verdy]

Plutôt déjà 447 (et ça monte encore!) On est très loin des chiffres du
confinement.

L'Est Républicain a adopté une attitude suicidaire vis-à-vis du droit
d'auteur s'il prétend maintenant l'ignorer comme bon lui semble en
supprimant l'essentiel (qui est dans toutes les chartes journalistiques: la
citation correcte des attributions, même dans le cadre d'un simple droit de
citation comme ici).

Autant alors plagier tous ses articles (et l'Est Républicain ne pourra pas
se plaindre ensuite si ses titres et extraits d'articles sont pompés par
Google News, Yahoo actualités, et d'autres).

Pendant ce temps-là le site de l'Est républicain n'hésite pas à abuser avec
ses cookies traceurs publicitaires (qui contrairement à ce qui est
prétendu, ne sont absolument pas refusables, ses annonceurs ignorant
complètement les paramètres). Visiblement l'Est Républicain ne défend plus
la charte journalistique et défie même ses propres lecteurs (les plus
fidèles ou pas). Il a décidé de déclarer forfait, autorise la violation de
la loi par lui et par ses annonceurs, renonce à défendre même son propre
contenu, et n'hésite désormais plus à l'alimenter en pompant les autres.
C'est encore un "journal"? Y-a-t-il encore un seul journaliste employé chez
eux sur son site qui n'est plus que le reflet de décisions incontrôlées,
injustifiables et même illégales d'une bande de modérateurs soumis à la
seule volonté des géants du web ou à leur propre désirs personnels (et en
toute ignorance de la loi).

Les "modérateurs" de ce journal ne sont visiblement pas journalistes du
tout, ils cherchent juste à justifier le montant dont on les paye (sans
doute très peu, voire pas du tout si le seul but est d'orienter les débats
publics selon leurs désirs). Si le titre imprimé suit cette voie imposée
par la vitrine éditoriale du site web (comme seul moteur économique pour sa
survie), ce n'est plus un journal du tout, il est totalement manipulé au
mépris de tous (lecteurs et journalistes). Bref c'est du suicide.
Impossible même d'afficher et revendiquer la moindre politique éditoriale
en bafouant et laissant bafouer le droit d'auteur.

Cette feuille de choux n'a plus aucune fiabilité et autant lire juste les
"fake news" des réseaux sociaux manipulées par n'importe qui...

(et surtout de gros intérêts financiers ou des pouvoirs occultes voire des
groupes violents: voyez ce que vient de faire Trump aux USA en soutenant
une bande terroriste néo-nazie lourdement armée, entrée au Capitole du
Michigan pour menacer directement la vie des élus, pour bloquer les
discussions, et pour empêcher l'adoption démocratique des mesures de lutte
contre le Covid: là aussi Trump les considère des "very good people". On
voit que certains défendent la force et la violation du droit issu de la
démocratie, certes imparfaite mais certainement meilleure que ce n'importe
quoi. Trump vient de se déclarer publiquement et très officiellement comme
dictateur en soutenant la violation et même le changement du droit sous la
contrainte des armes et ce faisant il est devenu aussi terroriste actif. Le
droit de manifestation est une chose, mais la manif armée soutenue à
distance par un responsable politique qui les influence directement pour
influer sur la vie sociale de millions de gens aussi est bel et bien un
acte terroriste. Trump a outrageusement violé la constitution américaine en
refusant de la défendre et soutenant des terroristes qui veulent la changer
par la force).


Le dim. 3 mai 2020 à 15:58, Cédric Frayssinet  a
écrit :

> Le 03/05/2020 à 15:32, Marc M. a écrit :
>
> Quand commence la désintoxication aux cartes Google de votre rédaction?/
>
> amusant depuis un compte GM :)
>
> Ah ah :) Combien de libristes utilisent Gmail et ne font pas l'effort de
> migrer leurs mails vers des solutions plus vertueuses.
>
> Tout le monde est malheureusement bien trop gentil avec Google :(
>
>
> On e-manifeste devant le siège de l'est-republicain ? :)
> direction régionale 60 Grande rue - 25000 
> Besançonhttps://manif.app/?lat=47.23756786062618=6.024199873209=20:)
>
> Déjà 3 !
>
> --
>
> Sur Mastodon : @bristow...@framapiaf.org
> 
>
> [image: Promouvoir et soutenir le logiciel libre] 
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [talk-au] OSGeo Oceania Local Chapter application

[Phil Wyatt]

Hi Folks,

 

I am just a solo OSM mapper from Tasmania, Australia but I have come across the 
folks behind OSGeo Oceania both at local Australian conferences and via the web 
(Slack channels, Discord, mailing lists). I have no doubt that they have their 
hearts behind the open source community and OSM in particular.

 

When I have had issues they, and other community members, have always been 
available with advice or links to appropriate documentation to solve my issues. 
I am not actually sure there are many ‘OSM communities’ across Australia but I 
have found that mappers from across the country have come together in a spirit 
of cooperation when work has been required due to events such as bushfires, 
cyclones etc where quick mapping of areas has been required. They have also 
supported other organisations embarking on the use of OSM during emergencies 
(Recent SSSI event).

 

I have no doubt that this organisation will further the OSM project in the 
greater Oceania region in a respectful manner and well represent the OSMF.

 

Would I join them – yes, already have, to give back where my skills enable me 
to do so.

 

Cheers – Phil 

http://hdyc.neis-one.org/?tastrax

 

 

 

From: Joost Schouppe [OSMF secretary]  
Sent: Monday, 4 May 2020 4:29 AM
To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Cc: Rory McCann 
Subject: [talk-au] OSGeo Oceania Local Chapter application

 

Hello OSM people of Australia,

You may be aware that OSGeo Oceania has applied to become an official Local 
Chapter of the OpenStreetMap Foundation. We would like to know how the various 
OSM communities of Oceania feel about this application. Have you heard of OSGeo 
Oceania? Do you like and support them? Would you want to join them? 

Please share your opinion, questions, comments or concerns! You can do so here, 
or contact us privately. I am sending this message together with Rory McCann. 
Because we live as far from Oceania as is possible on this planet, we will be 
sending out messages to a sample of active mappers in the region to get a feel 
of the region. Feel free to send us a private message at 
rory.mcc...@osmfoundation.org   and 
jo...@osmfoundation.org  .

You can find all the information about this Local Chapter application on the 
OSMF website:  
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Local_Chapters/Applications/Oceania . 

The group's page is at: https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Oceania 

We will keep the discussion open for 30 days, starting today, May 3rd.

Looking forward to your opinions, and thank you to the OSGeo Oceania team for 
applying!

All the best,




Joost Schouppe

Secretary

OpenStreetMap Foundation


Name & Registered Office:
OpenStreetMap Foundation

St John’s Innovation Centre

Cowley Road

Cambridge

CB4 0WS

United Kingdom

A company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales
Registration No. 05912761

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Let's talk Attribution

[Richard Fairhurst]

Kathleen Lu wrote:
> OSM has imported sources that are ODbL. The attribution to those sources
> does not appear on the map, but rather after several clicks (usually first
> to the copyright page, then the contributors page). If that's not
> acceptable under ODbL for a map that has multiple data sources, then 
> OSM would be violating others' ODbL licenses.

When data is imported from an attribution-required dataset, OSM takes the
view that a waiver from that requirement should be obtained. For example,
for CC-BY licences:

"...attribution to all such sources on an OpenStreetMap-based map or similar
visual display is impossible. Instead, we provide attribution (including
original license information) to major sources like [entity] on our
Contributors page. OpenStreetMap users are then required to attribute
'OpenStreetMap Contributors' in a collective fashion when using any
OpenStreetMap data... we just need you to confirm that you would consider
OpenStreetMap's attribution method to attribute [entity] in a 'reasonable
manner' in accordance with Section 3(a)(1) of the CC BY 4.0 license."

[linked from https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/ ]

ODbL's core attribution requirement ("a notice associated with the Produced
Work reasonably calculated to make any Person that uses, views, accesses,
interacts with, or is otherwise exposed to the Produced Work") is not
materially different from CC-BY's ("any reasonable manner based on the
medium, means, and context in which You Share the Licensed Material"). In
other words, given that OSM believes CC-BY implies on-map attribution unless
a waiver is received, it also believes that for ODbL. OSMF has not issued
any such waivers.


> The key difference is between using a service (such as tiles hosted by 
> a company, such as Mapbox), and using open data that originated with 
> but *is not hosted* by an entity.

It really isn't. This has been introduced to the discourse in the last
(AFAICT) three months by Silicon Valley folks. I had never seen it suggested
before then. It certainly wasn't part of the discourse on attribution when
OSM adopted the ODbL and set out its current attribution requirements; you
can go back and ask the major SaaS map providers of the time if you like.

Every single major current webmap, with one exception[1], credits principal
non-OSM _data providers_ on-map on desktop. Google Maps has on-screen
attribution to their principal data providers. Bing does. HERE does (it's
themselves). ViaMichelin does. TomTom (MyDrive) does. Mapquest does. Tencent
does. Qwant does. The USGS National Map does. Esri's ArcGIS "My Map" does.
You can go and check these. I did.

The key word here is "principal". From your previous message:

> Check out HERE's webmap: https://mobile.here.com/?x=ep. It takes 
> 3 clicks to get to this page: https://mobile.here.com/about/notices. 
> And another 4 clicks to get to this page:
> https://legal.here.com/en-gb/terms/general-content-supplier-terms-and-notices

The three clicks take you to a page crediting the public transport authority
for Baden-Wurttemberg for contributing public transport info. Fine. It takes
two clicks on osm.org (Copyright -> Contributors) to get to the equivalent.

That's proportionate. It's not what we are talking about here. We are
talking about maps where 90%+ of the data comes from OSM, yet a credit to
OSM is either missing entirely or deliberately obscured. Please let's not
try to derail the issue of OSM-based maps missing all credit to OSM by
talking about bus timetables in Heidelberg.

Richard

[1] The one exception is Apple Maps, presumably because if you're Apple and
your market cap is $1.2trn you can do what you like. Even then, it's one
click away on mobile, and you could take the view that one click is larger
and more prominent than several other cases under discussion.



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/General-Discussion-f5171242.html

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Let's talk Attribution

[Kathleen Lu via talk]

On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 10:14 AM Alexandre Oliveira 
wrote:

> > Mapbox also has a whitelabling option for customers to remove the logo
> from Mapbox tiles. But again, we're talking about the tile service. It
> would be quite reasonable for OSM to add a logo to the OSM tiles and make
> keeping that logo on there a condition of using OSM tiles.
> > Mapbox employees have contributed to OSM for years. That data belongs to
> Mapbox but is shared with the world through OSM and ODbL. Attribution for
> that doesn't appear on-map unless the user is also using Mapbox tiles.
>
> So, if I understood it correctly, you're implying that it's totally
> fine to hide data source attribution several clicks away or not
> attributing at all? And that the attribution on the corners of the map
> are only feasible if you're using OSM's tiles?
>
> OSM has imported sources that are ODbL. The attribution to those sources
does not appear on the map, but rather after several clicks (usually first
to the copyright page, then the contributors page). If that's not
acceptable under ODbL for a map that has multiple data sources, then OSM
would be violating others' ODbL licenses.


> What I don't understand is the positioning of corporate users of OSM.
> Sure, Mapbox has a business model that depends on attribution and even
> then you're obliged to follow their terms of use and policies if you
> choose their service. How is that different from OSM? Both provide the
> same services, you can choose both Mapbox and OSM for tiles or data,
> and even then, you are required to follow their licenses and
> terms/policies.
>

The key difference is between using a service (such as tiles hosted by a
company, such as Mapbox), and using open data that originated with but *is
not hosted* by an entity. I agree that if someone were to use OSM tiles
hosted by OSM, then attribution should be visible in the corner at all
times.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki (ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

[Mateusz Konieczny via talk]

May 3, 2020, 18:10 by joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com:

> I propose removing the "wikidata=" parameter from the descriptions of keys 
> and tags on the OpenStreetMap wiki. See discussion:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template_talk:ValueDescription#Wikidata
>
Yes, infobox is for the summary of the most important information.

Wikidata link maybe can be useful in some extremely rare cases, but none is 
typical
for people using OSM Wiki.

It is certainly not deserving to be displayed there.

And now, with Data items this data can be added there, so not displaying it in 
the infoxbox 
does not mean that data loss would happen.

I fully support not showing this kind of links in our infoboxes.

> I've also noted that often the links are wrong, because a tag like "craft=*" 
> is not the same as the wikidata definition of "crafts". You would need to 
> link to several wikidata concepts to describe one OpenStreetMap tag in that 
> case.
>
Yeah, links are weird mix of "Wikidata data items about OSM tag" (that has 0 
added value),
"sort of related data item but not actually matching OSM tag" (misleading) and 
some
"matches OSM tag but there are crucial differences" (misleading anyway) and 
rare cases
where context exactly matches (but added value is minimal if any).

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

[Talk-it] ca reste ouverte

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Mi sono installato l’app ma non fa vedere niente, nonostante ho taggato dei 
posti con i tags covid, ne sapete qualcosa? Sempre per il discorso del file di 
configurazione italiana?

Ciao Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki (ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 3. May 2020, at 19:24, Andrew Hain  wrote:
> 
> there are also links to artificial Wikidata items such as Q57977870 highway 
> key in OpenStreetMap to consider.


IMHO these are the least questionable kind, if all wikidata links from 
OpenStreetMap tags would be pointing to wikidata items for these specific 
OpenStreetMap tags, they might be less contested ;-)

Cheers Martin 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Talk-de] weeklyOSM #510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[weeklyteam]

Die Wochennotiz Ausgabe Nr. # 510, ist nun verfügbar - 
 wie immer mit vielen Nachrichten aus dem OSM-Universium:

 https://www.weeklyosm.eu/de/archives/13108/

 Viel Spaß beim Lesen.  

 Euer Wochennotizteam
 
 Wusstet ihr, dass ihr auch selbst Meldungen für die Wochennotiz
 einreichen könnt? Einfach auf https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/ 
 mit eurem OSM-Benutzerkonto anmelden und dann den Gastzugang benutzen. 

 weeklyOSM? 
 who: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
 where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

[talk-au] OSGeo Oceania Local Chapter application

[Joost Schouppe [OSMF secretary]]

Hello OSM people of Australia,

You may be aware that OSGeo Oceania has applied to become an official Local
Chapter of the OpenStreetMap Foundation. We would like to know how the
various OSM communities of Oceania feel about this application. Have you
heard of OSGeo Oceania? Do you like and support them? Would you want to
join them?

Please share your opinion, questions, comments or concerns! You can do so
here, or contact us privately. I am sending this message together with Rory
McCann. Because we live as far from Oceania as is possible on this planet,
we will be sending out messages to a sample of active mappers in the region
to get a feel of the region. Feel free to send us a private message at
rory.mcc...@osmfoundation.org and jo...@osmfoundation.org.

You can find all the information about this Local Chapter application on
the OSMF website:
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Local_Chapters/Applications/Oceania .

The group's page is at: https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Oceania

We will keep the discussion open for 30 days, starting today, May 3rd.

Looking forward to your opinions, and thank you to the OSGeo Oceania team
for applying!
All the best,

Joost Schouppe
*Secretary*
*OpenStreetMap Foundation*

Name & Registered Office:

*OpenStreetMap Foundation*
*St John’s Innovation Centre*
*Cowley Road*
*Cambridge*
*CB4 0WS*
*United Kingdom*

*A company limited by guarantee, registered in England and
WalesRegistration No. 05912761*
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki (ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

[Andrew Hain]

See 
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2018/10/16#Q29637965
 for another artificial item.

--
Andrew


From: Andrew Hain 
Sent: 03 May 2020 18:22
To: Joseph Eisenberg ; osm 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki 
(ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

Getting rid of the search link is definitely a good idea, there are also links 
to artificial Wikidata items such as Q57977870 highway key in OpenStreetMap to 
consider.

--
Andrew


From: Joseph Eisenberg 
Sent: 03 May 2020 17:10
To: osm 
Subject: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki 
(ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

I propose removing the "wikidata=" parameter from the descriptions of keys and 
tags on the OpenStreetMap wiki. See discussion:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template_talk:ValueDescription#Wikidata

"While it is sometimes possible to state that all OSM elements with that tag 
are an instance of some Wikidata item, it is not possible in other situations. 
For example, roads with bridge=yes crossing a man_made=bridge are not instances 
of "bridge". Furthermore, a lot of OSM tags don't represent an instance 
relationship with some class of objects at all, but are properties instead. So 
I doubt that mapping Wikidata onto OSM tags in that manner is feasible. 
--Tordanik 21:47, 1 September 2014 (UTC)"

"I don't think the "Wikidata" link adds anything useful for OSM mappers and I 
would be in favour of dropping it. Also, if there is no Wikidata link set, then 
currently the template displays a "search in Wikidata..." link which gives the 
whole "linked data" religion unnecessary prominence. The template has many 
optional parameters, and "wikidata" is the only parameter where, when it is 
missing, Wiki users are nudged in the direction of researching and adding it. 
This makes it look as if adding the "wikidata" parameter was a more valuable 
use of an editor's time than completing other missing bits of information. This 
is a value judgement that I oppose. --Frederik Ramm 16:02, 8 November 2018 
(UTC)"

"Now we have our own Wikibase there’s another problem. The Wikidata link has a 
database link (Q number) that is different from the Q number in our own 
Wikibase instance. The WMF developers were very un-keen on Yuri’s suggestion of 
us using a different prefix letter to distinguish the two. Getting rid of the 
Wikidata parameter would solve this.--Andrew (talk) 06:26, 9 November 2018 
(UTC)"

I've also noted that often the links are wrong, because a tag like "craft=*" is 
not the same as the wikidata definition of "crafts". You would need to link to 
several wikidata concepts to describe one OpenStreetMap tag in that case.

-- Joseph Eisenberg
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki (ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

[Andrew Hain]

Getting rid of the search link is definitely a good idea, there are also links 
to artificial Wikidata items such as Q57977870 highway key in OpenStreetMap to 
consider.

--
Andrew


From: Joseph Eisenberg 
Sent: 03 May 2020 17:10
To: osm 
Subject: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki 
(ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

I propose removing the "wikidata=" parameter from the descriptions of keys and 
tags on the OpenStreetMap wiki. See discussion:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template_talk:ValueDescription#Wikidata

"While it is sometimes possible to state that all OSM elements with that tag 
are an instance of some Wikidata item, it is not possible in other situations. 
For example, roads with bridge=yes crossing a man_made=bridge are not instances 
of "bridge". Furthermore, a lot of OSM tags don't represent an instance 
relationship with some class of objects at all, but are properties instead. So 
I doubt that mapping Wikidata onto OSM tags in that manner is feasible. 
--Tordanik 21:47, 1 September 2014 (UTC)"

"I don't think the "Wikidata" link adds anything useful for OSM mappers and I 
would be in favour of dropping it. Also, if there is no Wikidata link set, then 
currently the template displays a "search in Wikidata..." link which gives the 
whole "linked data" religion unnecessary prominence. The template has many 
optional parameters, and "wikidata" is the only parameter where, when it is 
missing, Wiki users are nudged in the direction of researching and adding it. 
This makes it look as if adding the "wikidata" parameter was a more valuable 
use of an editor's time than completing other missing bits of information. This 
is a value judgement that I oppose. --Frederik Ramm 16:02, 8 November 2018 
(UTC)"

"Now we have our own Wikibase there’s another problem. The Wikidata link has a 
database link (Q number) that is different from the Q number in our own 
Wikibase instance. The WMF developers were very un-keen on Yuri’s suggestion of 
us using a different prefix letter to distinguish the two. Getting rid of the 
Wikidata parameter would solve this.--Andrew (talk) 06:26, 9 November 2018 
(UTC)"

I've also noted that often the links are wrong, because a tag like "craft=*" is 
not the same as the wikidata definition of "crafts". You would need to link to 
several wikidata concepts to describe one OpenStreetMap tag in that case.

-- Joseph Eisenberg
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Talk-it] nuovo modello autocertificazione (4/5/2020)

[Lorenzo Rolla]

È disponibile il *modello di autodichiarazione*

per
gli spostamenti dal 4 maggio 2020.

https://www.interno.gov.it/sites/default/files/allegati/nuovo_modello_autodichiarazione_editabile_maggio_2020.pdf


Può essere ancora utilizzato il precedente modello *barrando le voci non
più attuali*

.


https://www.interno.gov.it/sites/default/files/allegati/precedente_modello_autodichiarazione_barrato.pdf


-- 
Lorenzo Rolla
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki (ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

[Joseph Eisenberg]

I propose removing the "wikidata=" parameter from the descriptions of keys
and tags on the OpenStreetMap wiki. See discussion:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template_talk:ValueDescription#Wikidata

"While it is sometimes possible to state that all OSM elements with that
tag are an instance of some Wikidata item, it is not possible in other
situations. For example, roads with bridge=yes crossing a man_made=bridge
are not instances of "bridge". Furthermore, a lot of OSM tags don't
represent an instance relationship with some class of objects at all, but
are properties instead. So I doubt that mapping Wikidata onto OSM tags in
that manner is feasible. --Tordanik 21:47, 1 September 2014 (UTC)"

"I don't think the "Wikidata" link adds anything useful for OSM mappers and
I would be in favour of dropping it. Also, if there is no Wikidata link
set, then currently the template displays a "search in Wikidata..." link
which gives the whole "linked data" religion unnecessary prominence. The
template has many optional parameters, and "wikidata" is the only parameter
where, when it is missing, Wiki users are nudged in the direction of
researching and adding it. This makes it look as if adding the "wikidata"
parameter was a more valuable use of an editor's time than completing other
missing bits of information. This is a value judgement that I oppose.
--Frederik Ramm 16:02, 8 November 2018 (UTC)"

"Now we have our own Wikibase there’s another problem. The Wikidata link
has a database link (Q number) that is different from the Q number in our
own Wikibase instance. The WMF developers were very un-keen on Yuri’s
suggestion of us using a different prefix letter to distinguish the two.
Getting rid of the Wikidata parameter would solve this.--Andrew (talk)
06:26, 9 November 2018 (UTC)"

I've also noted that often the links are wrong, because a tag like
"craft=*" is not the same as the wikidata definition of "crafts". You would
need to link to several wikidata concepts to describe one OpenStreetMap tag
in that case.

-- Joseph Eisenberg
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Adding missing roads using Facebook detections

[Andy Townsend]

In each case nothing will happen unless changesets with bad edits are 
commented on.  Given that the messages here last month didn't get a 
reply from Amazon I'm pretty sure that Amazon's mappers or their 
handlers don't read talk-gb.  Of course - this is a perfect opportunity 
for them to prove me wrong!


If there's no reply on changeset comments report the mappers concerned 
to the DWG so that we can "remind" them to reply to community comments.


Like Chris, I've been generally impressed by the quality of Amazon 
Logistics edits, at least compared to other paid mappers around the 
world, but there are real problems with the "auto detect layer" used for 
these "AI" edits - it's quite badly offset and the original imagery on 
which the edge detection was made is I think no longer available making 
QA difficult.


Best Regards,

Andy (from the DWG)

On 03/05/2020 16:27, Andrew Hain wrote:


Also seen: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/84550786

--
Andrew


*From:* Chris Fleming 
*Sent:* 03 April 2020 14:06
*To:* Guthula, Jothirnadh 
*Cc:* talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
*Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Adding missing roads using Facebook detections
I've spotted some edits using this, such as:

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=82807938=true

After a ropey start, in general I've been quite impressed by Amazon's 
edits, but this one looks quite ropey, the service road drawn in is 
very ropey and it looks like you've missed the connection back to the 
main road (shown in OS Openview), in addition I don't think that 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/785788619 loops back on itself, or 
at least I wouldn't draw that conclusion from imagery?


Cheers
Chris

On Fri, 27 Mar 2020 at 10:02, Guthula, Jothirnadh via Talk-GB 
mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org>> wrote:


Hi UK OSM community,

As you might already know, Facebook released its AI-based
detections publicly on 08/09/2019

(https://github.com/facebookmicrosites/Open-Mapping-At-Facebook/wiki/Available-Countries).
With a team of mappers @Amazon we are planning to improve missing
roads in UK using Facebook detections as a source. Please let us
know if you have any ongoing projects using this data source.
While adding missing roads, we will be adding all the associated
access tags as per available on-ground resources. Our team will
edit roads manually using a normal iD editor and satellite
imageries available with FB detections as a background source and
will not use RapidID editor or JOSM. Also changeset comments will
be addressed by our team on top priority.

Regards,

Jothirnadh

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Adding missing roads using Facebook detections

[Andrew Hain]

Also seen: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/84550786

--
Andrew


From: Chris Fleming 
Sent: 03 April 2020 14:06
To: Guthula, Jothirnadh 
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Adding missing roads using Facebook detections

I've spotted some edits using this, such as:

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=82807938=true

After a ropey start, in general I've been quite impressed by Amazon's edits, 
but this one looks quite ropey, the service road drawn in is very ropey and it 
looks like you've missed the connection back to the main road (shown in OS 
Openview), in addition I don't think that 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/785788619 loops back on itself, or at least I 
wouldn't draw that conclusion from imagery?

Cheers
Chris

On Fri, 27 Mar 2020 at 10:02, Guthula, Jothirnadh via Talk-GB 
mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org>> wrote:

Hi UK OSM community,



As you might already know, Facebook released its AI-based detections publicly 
on 08/09/2019 
(https://github.com/facebookmicrosites/Open-Mapping-At-Facebook/wiki/Available-Countries).
 With a team of mappers @Amazon we are planning to improve missing roads in UK 
using Facebook detections as a source. Please let us know if you have any 
ongoing projects using this data source. While adding missing roads, we will be 
adding all the associated access tags as per available on-ground resources. Our 
team will edit roads manually using a normal iD editor and satellite imageries 
available with FB detections as a background source and will not use RapidID 
editor or JOSM. Also changeset comments will be addressed by our team on top 
priority.



Regards,

Jothirnadh



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-it] Fwd: Village / Town

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

vi inoltro uno scambio per completezza che per sbaglio si è tenuto fuori 
lista...

sent from a phone

Begin forwarded message:

> Il 03/05/20 13:45, Martin Koppenhoefer ha scritto:
>> 
>> sent from a phone
>> 
 On 3. May 2020, at 11:38, Marcello  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Per me i capoluoghi di comune che hanno servizi (per esempio scuole, uffici 
>>> pubblici, ospedale, ecc.) utilizzati anche dai comuni limitrofi più piccoli 
>>> sarebbero da classificare come town
>> 
>> penso una scuola elementare o media la trovi anche in un village, per licei 
>> è più difficile, uffici pubblici si possono anche trovare in un villagge, ma 
>> dipende dal tipo di ufficio. Tanti uffici, tante scuole, università, negozi 
>> con un bacino di utenza più largo, specializzati, ecc. per me indicano town, 
>> anche il titolo città.
>> 
>> Ciao Martin
>> 
>> 
> Martin,
> 
> si intendevo scuole superiori, non elementari e medie che sono sempre o quasi 
> in tutti i comuni, ho dimenticato di specificare. Per uffici pubblici intendo 
> uffici tipo INPS, imposte o altri uffici finanziari dipendenti dal governo, 
> che sono nelle sedi di provincia e nei centri più importanti, non in tutti i 
> comuni.
> 
> P.S. hai mandato la mail solo a me, non alla lista, penso volutamente data la 
> tua esperienza, te lo segnalo nel caso fosse stata una dimenticanza.
> 

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] attributions par l'Est Républicain

[Cédric Frayssinet]

Le 03/05/2020 à 15:32, Marc M. a écrit :
>> Quand commence la désintoxication aux cartes Google de votre rédaction?/
> amusant depuis un compte GM :)

Ah ah :) Combien de libristes utilisent Gmail et ne font pas l'effort de
migrer leurs mails vers des solutions plus vertueuses.

Tout le monde est malheureusement bien trop gentil avec Google :(


>
> On e-manifeste devant le siège de l'est-republicain ? :)
> direction régionale 60 Grande rue - 25000 Besançon
> https://manif.app/?lat=47.23756786062618=6.024199873209=20
> :)

Déjà 3 !


-- 

Sur Mastodon : @bristow...@framapiaf.org 

Promouvoir et soutenir le logiciel libre 

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-GB] City centre landuse tagging

[SK53]

I've always been of the view

that one should map the primary landuse at ground level, so for a typical
UK city or town centre retail would generally apply. Most usually have some
obvious ancillary commercial areas of mainly offices. We don't have a
specific landuse for entertainment dominated areas, although that might be
useful. I'd reserve landuse=mixed for areas where retail, office and
residential are really heavily interspersed at the street level (unusual in
the UK except perhaps where retail is in retreat). An alternative is to use
a broad brush landuse=commercial. My general experience of consuming these
tags is that broad-brush tags are actually much less useful than apparently
more restrictive ones. Basically, its far more useful to know that
somewhere is a shopping area than that it's not residential.

For suburban shopping parades I think landuse=retail is fairly standard,
although most will have flats above (these are often quite hard to use as
security for mortgages, apparently fast food outlets have quite a high risk
of fire).

Although one could add a secondary_landuse tag, in general I think it's
better to just subtag the type of retail area and this can be used to
inform likely secondary uses (a parade likely has residential use, a retail
park no other secondary uses, a town centre both commericial &
residential).

Specific problems currently arising are the conversion of former office
blocks or offices in a mixed-use retail/office block to flats (mainly
student flats). It's difficult to be precise but my impression is that city
centre offices are declining fast in favour of student flat conversions.
Some of this, at least, is driven by parking restrictions favouring some
office businesses to relocate out-of-town. One could do more detailed
microtagging of building use or of operator. I think identifying student
flats is something of general interest as it is quite a significant change
in many places.

Elsewhere with less restrictive planning categories (and associated
potential rental income) it can be very hard to categorise. As far as I
could see most places in Buenos Aires were completely mixed landuse.

Last point is that it is possible to programmatically identify some of
these areas, providing that shops and other POIs are mapped in detail. See
my old blog posts

and Stefan Keller's presentation

at SotM18 on Areas of Interest.

Jerry

On Fri, 1 May 2020 at 12:23, Nick Whitelegg 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Meant to include this in my other post, but...I'm noticing that several
> cities in the UK (Bristol, Bath and Chester are good examples) don't seem
> to tag the city centre area with an appropriate landuse tag (presumably
> retail, commercial or residential).
>
> This is something I've missed over the years... but what is the common
> practice for tagging city centre areas? Presumably the above three landuses
> are not used because city centres are typically a mixrure of all three.
>
> What I'm trying to achieve is a 'built-up-area' rendering which covers the
> whole of the built up area of a town or city. Not looking for
> administrative boundaries - but the actual physically built-up area.
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] attributions par l'Est Républicain

[Marc M.]

Bonjour,

Le 03.05.20 à 00:44, Donat ROBAUX a écrit :
> Dans un article de l'Est Républicain 
> https://www.estrepublicain.fr/societe/2020/05/01/une-appli-pour-manifester-depuis-son-canape

j'ai aussi posté un commentaire sur l'article.
Votre commentaire sur "Une appli pour manifester depuis son canapé !" a
été rejeté par un modérateur.
Raison invoquée : "L'erreur a été corrigée"

La correction a consisté à supprimer le mot google (sans mettre
le mot OpenStreetMap).
A l'heure ou la presse écrite souffre de la concurrence G-news,
c'est assez mesquin et étonnant.

> Il ne s'agit pas d'une carte Google, mais #OpenStreetMap comme l'indiquent
> les mentions en bas.

perso je ne la vois pas.

> Quand commence la désintoxication aux cartes Google de votre rédaction?/

amusant depuis un compte GM :)

On e-manifeste devant le siège de l'est-republicain ? :)
direction régionale 60 Grande rue - 25000 Besançon
https://manif.app/?lat=47.23756786062618=6.024199873209=20
:)

Cordialement,
Marc

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[Talk-ca] hebdoOSM Nº 510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[theweekly . osm]

Bonjour,

Le résumé hebdomadaire n° 510 de l'actualité OpenStreetMap vient de paraître 
*en français*. Un condensé à retrouver sur :

https://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/archives/13108/

Bonne lecture !

Saviez-vous que vous pouvez vous aussi soumettre des messages pour la note 
hebdomadaire sans être membre ? Il vous suffit de vous connecter sur 
https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login avec votre compte OSM. Pour en savoir plus 
sur la rédaction d'un article, cliquez ici: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm

hebdoOSM ? 
Qui : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
Où : 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

[OSM-talk-fr] hebdoOSM Nº 510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[theweekly . osm]

Bonjour,

Le résumé hebdomadaire n° 510 de l'actualité OpenStreetMap vient de paraître 
*en français*. Un condensé à retrouver sur :

https://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/archives/13108/

Bonne lecture !

Saviez-vous que vous pouvez vous aussi soumettre des messages pour la note 
hebdomadaire sans être membre ? Il vous suffit de vous connecter sur 
https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login avec votre compte OSM. Pour en savoir plus 
sur la rédaction d'un article, cliquez ici: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm

hebdoOSM ? 
Qui : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
Où : 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[Talk-es] semanarioOSM Nº 510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[theweekly . osm]

Hola, el semanario Nº 510, el sumario de todo lo que está ocurriendo en el 
mundo de openstreetmap está en línea en *español*:

https://www.weeklyosm.eu/es/archives/13108/

¡Disfruta!

¿Sabías que también puedes enviar mensajes para la nota semanal sin ser 
miembro? Simplemente ingresa a https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login con tu 
cuenta de OSM. Lee más sobre cómo escribir una publicación aquí: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/es/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

semanarioOSM? 
¿Dónde?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
¿Quién?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

[Talk-ht] hebdoOSM Nº 510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[theweekly . osm]

Bonjour,

Le résumé hebdomadaire n° 510 de l'actualité OpenStreetMap vient de paraître 
*en français*. Un condensé à retrouver sur :

https://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/archives/13108/

Bonne lecture !

Saviez-vous que vous pouvez vous aussi soumettre des messages pour la note 
hebdomadaire sans être membre ? Il vous suffit de vous connecter sur 
https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login avec votre compte OSM. Pour en savoir plus 
sur la rédaction d'un article, cliquez ici: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm

hebdoOSM ? 
Qui : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
Où : 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-ht mailing list
Talk-ht@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ht
Notez! Vous pouvez utiliser Google Translate (http://translate.google.com) pour 
traduire les messages.

[Talk-africa] hebdoOSM Nº 510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[theweekly . osm]

Bonjour,

Le résumé hebdomadaire n° 510 de l'actualité OpenStreetMap vient de paraître 
*en français*. Un condensé à retrouver sur :

https://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/archives/13108/

Bonne lecture !

Saviez-vous que vous pouvez vous aussi soumettre des messages pour la note 
hebdomadaire sans être membre ? Il vous suffit de vous connecter sur 
https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login avec votre compte OSM. Pour en savoir plus 
sur la rédaction d'un article, cliquez ici: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm

hebdoOSM ? 
Qui : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
Où : 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-africa mailing list
Talk-africa@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-africa

[Talk-cl] semanarioOSM Nº 510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[theweekly . osm]

Hola, el semanario Nº 510, el sumario de todo lo que está ocurriendo en el 
mundo de openstreetmap está en línea en *español*:

https://www.weeklyosm.eu/es/archives/13108/

¡Disfruta!

¿Sabías que también puedes enviar mensajes para la nota semanal sin ser 
miembro? Simplemente ingresa a https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login con tu 
cuenta de OSM. Lee más sobre cómo escribir una publicación aquí: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/es/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

semanarioOSM? 
¿Dónde?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
¿Quién?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-cl mailing list
Talk-cl@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cl

[OSM-co] semanarioOSM Nº 510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[theweekly . osm]

Hola, el semanario Nº 510, el sumario de todo lo que está ocurriendo en el 
mundo de openstreetmap está en línea en *español*:

https://www.weeklyosm.eu/es/archives/13108/

¡Disfruta!

¿Sabías que también puedes enviar mensajes para la nota semanal sin ser 
miembro? Simplemente ingresa a https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login con tu 
cuenta de OSM. Lee más sobre cómo escribir una publicación aquí: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/es/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

semanarioOSM? 
¿Dónde?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
¿Quién?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-co mailing list
Talk-co@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-co

[Talk-cu] semanarioOSM Nº 510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[theweekly . osm]

Hola, el semanario Nº 510, el sumario de todo lo que está ocurriendo en el 
mundo de openstreetmap está en línea en *español*:

https://www.weeklyosm.eu/es/archives/13108/

¡Disfruta!

¿Sabías que también puedes enviar mensajes para la nota semanal sin ser 
miembro? Simplemente ingresa a https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login con tu 
cuenta de OSM. Lee más sobre cómo escribir una publicación aquí: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/es/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

semanarioOSM? 
¿Dónde?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
¿Quién?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-cu mailing list
Talk-cu@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cu

[Talk-bo] semanarioOSM Nº 510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[theweekly . osm]

Hola, el semanario Nº 510, el sumario de todo lo que está ocurriendo en el 
mundo de openstreetmap está en línea en *español*:

https://www.weeklyosm.eu/es/archives/13108/

¡Disfruta!

¿Sabías que también puedes enviar mensajes para la nota semanal sin ser 
miembro? Simplemente ingresa a https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login con tu 
cuenta de OSM. Lee más sobre cómo escribir una publicación aquí: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/es/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

semanarioOSM? 
¿Dónde?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
¿Quién?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-bo mailing list
Talk-bo@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-bo

[talk-latam] semanarioOSM Nº 510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[theweekly . osm]

Hola, el semanario Nº 510, el sumario de todo lo que está ocurriendo en el 
mundo de openstreetmap está en línea en *español*:

https://www.weeklyosm.eu/es/archives/13108/

¡Disfruta!

¿Sabías que también puedes enviar mensajes para la nota semanal sin ser 
miembro? Simplemente ingresa a https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login con tu 
cuenta de OSM. Lee más sobre cómo escribir una publicación aquí: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/es/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

semanarioOSM? 
¿Dónde?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
¿Quién?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
talk-latam mailing list
talk-latam@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-latam

Re: [Talk-it] Village / Town

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 3. May 2020, at 11:38, Marcello  wrote:
> 
> Per me i capoluoghi di comune che hanno servizi (per esempio scuole, uffici 
> pubblici, ospedale, ecc.) utilizzati anche dai comuni limitrofi più piccoli 
> sarebbero da classificare come town


penso una scuola elementare o media la trovi anche in un village, per licei è 
più difficile, uffici pubblici si possono anche trovare in un villagge, ma 
dipende dal tipo di ufficio. Tanti uffici, tante scuole, università, negozi con 
un bacino di utenza più largo, specializzati, ecc. per me indicano town, anche 
il titolo città.

Ciao Martin 



___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-br] semanárioOSM Nº 510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[theweekly . osm]

Bom dia,

O semanárioOSM Nº 510, o resumo de tudo o que acontece no mundo OpenStreetMap, 
está publicado *em português* : 

https://www.weeklyosm.eu/pb/archives/13108/

Aproveite!

Você sabia que também pode enviar mensagens para o OSM semanal/semanárioOSMſ 
sem ser membro? Basta fazer login em https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login com 
sua conta OSM e usar a conta de convidado. Leia mais sobre como escrever um 
post aqui: http://www.weeklyosm.eu/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm

semanarioOSM? 
Quem?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
Onde?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

[Talk-pt] semanárioOSM Nº 510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[theweekly . osm]

Bom dia,

O semanárioOSM Nº 510, o resumo de tudo o que acontece no mundo OpenStreetMap, 
está publicado *em português* : 

https://www.weeklyosm.eu/pb/archives/13108/

Aproveite!

Você sabia que também pode enviar mensagens para o OSM semanal/semanárioOSMſ 
sem ser membro? Basta fazer login em https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login com 
sua conta OSM e usar a conta de convidado. Leia mais sobre como escrever um 
post aqui: http://www.weeklyosm.eu/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm

semanarioOSM? 
Quem?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
Onde?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-pt mailing list
Talk-pt@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pt

[Talk-GB] weeklyOSM #510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[weeklyteam]

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 510,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of a lot of 
things happening in the openstreetmap world:

 https://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/13108/

Enjoy! 

Did you know that you can also submit messages for the weeklyOSM? Just log in 
to https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login with your OSM account. Read more about 
how to write a post here: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

weeklyOSM? 
who: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-de] weeklyOSM #510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[weeklyteam]

Die Wochennotiz Ausgabe Nr. # 510, ist nun verfügbar - 
 wie immer mit vielen Nachrichten aus dem OSM-Universium:

 https://www.weeklyosm.eu/de/archives/13108/

 Viel Spaß beim Lesen.  

 Euer Wochennotizteam
 
 Wusstet ihr, dass ihr auch selbst Meldungen für die Wochennotiz
 einreichen könnt? Einfach auf https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/ 
 mit eurem OSM-Benutzerkonto anmelden und dann den Gastzugang benutzen. 

 weeklyOSM? 
 who: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
 where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

[Talk-in] weeklyOSM #510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[weeklyteam]

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 510,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of a lot of 
things happening in the openstreetmap world:

 https://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/13108/

Enjoy! 

Did you know that you can also submit messages for the weeklyOSM? Just log in 
to https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login with your OSM account. Read more about 
how to write a post here: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

weeklyOSM? 
who: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

[OSM-talk-ie] weeklyOSM #510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[weeklyteam]

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 510,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of a lot of 
things happening in the openstreetmap world:

 https://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/13108/

Enjoy! 

Did you know that you can also submit messages for the weeklyOSM? Just log in 
to https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login with your OSM account. Read more about 
how to write a post here: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

weeklyOSM? 
who: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-ie mailing list
Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie

[Talk-us] weeklyOSM #510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[weeklyteam]

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 510,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of a lot of 
things happening in the openstreetmap world:

 https://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/13108/

Enjoy! 

Did you know that you can also submit messages for the weeklyOSM? Just log in 
to https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login with your OSM account. Read more about 
how to write a post here: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

weeklyOSM? 
who: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[talk-ph] weeklyOSM #510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[weeklyteam]

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 510,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of a lot of 
things happening in the openstreetmap world:

 https://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/13108/

Enjoy! 

Did you know that you can also submit messages for the weeklyOSM? Just log in 
to https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login with your OSM account. Read more about 
how to write a post here: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

weeklyOSM? 
who: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

[Talk-ca] weeklyOSM #510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[weeklyteam]

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 510,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of a lot of 
things happening in the openstreetmap world:

 https://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/13108/

Enjoy! 

Did you know that you can also submit messages for the weeklyOSM? Just log in 
to https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login with your OSM account. Read more about 
how to write a post here: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

weeklyOSM? 
who: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

[Talk-africa] weeklyOSM #510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[weeklyteam]

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 510,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of a lot of 
things happening in the openstreetmap world:

 https://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/13108/

Enjoy! 

Did you know that you can also submit messages for the weeklyOSM? Just log in 
to https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login with your OSM account. Read more about 
how to write a post here: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

weeklyOSM? 
who: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-africa mailing list
Talk-africa@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-africa

[OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #510 2020-04-21-2020-04-27

[weeklyteam]

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 510,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of a lot of 
things happening in the openstreetmap world:

 https://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/13108/

Enjoy! 

Did you know that you can also submit messages for the weeklyOSM? Just log in 
to https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login with your OSM account. Read more about 
how to write a post here: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

weeklyOSM? 
who: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-it] Village / Town

[Fintocubano]

>Secondo me andrebbe rivista anche la pagina
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Tag:place%3Dvillage, dove si indica
di usare village per paesi tra 200 e 10.000 abitanti (forse intorno al 90%
in Italia).

Son d'accordo, la pagina andrebbe rivista anche in luce della sua
equivalente inglese: ''Village = a smaller distinct settlement, smaller than
a town, with few facilities available, with people traveling to nearby towns
to access these. [...] for larger settlements consider place=town.''

Se applicassimo il tag ''village'' alle tante cittadine italiane con < 10k
ab. ma con ospedali e/o scuole superiori, uffici, numerosi negozi, strutture
turistiche, industrie e/o molte altre facilities rispetto ai (ed accessibili
dai) centri minori limitrofi sarebbe, a mio avviso, un po' fuorviante.



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Village / Town

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 3. May 2020, at 09:47, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
> 
> Nereto is the legal seat of a union of 12 municipalities, and the town hall 
> looks quite impressive for a “village”
> https://it.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unione_dei_comuni_Città_Territorio-Val_Vibrata
> 
> I believe it’s an edge case.


there are also many hits for città di Nereto in a searchengine, which means 
there are people who refer to Nereto as a town:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22citt%C3%A0+di+Nereto%22=iphone=web

Ciao Martin ___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Village / Town

[Marcello]

Il 03/05/20 07:46, Alessandro Sarretta ha scritto:


Riporto la discussione in italiano, così che tutti in lista possano 
partecipare.


Il lista ci sono state varie discussioni simili nel passato, sui 
criteri da usare per assegnare i vari valori possibili alla chiave 
/place/ (l'ultima "intensa" mi pare quella di febbraio 2019) e mi 
sembra che si sia tutti d'accordo che il valore guida NON debba essere 
SOLAMENTE il numero di abitanti. Se qualcuno invece pensa debba 
esserlo... parliamone.


Se invece siamo d'accordo su questo, credo che dobbiamo passare alla 
correzione delle pagine che descrivono questo criterio come quello 
principale da seguire.


Io ho trovato queste pagine con riferimenti espliciti, può darsi ce ne 
siano altre:


  * 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Map_Features#Insediamenti_abitati.2C_urbani_e_rurali
  * https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:It:Generic:Map_Features:place
  * https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Key:place
  * https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Tag:place%3Dtown
  * https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Item:Q5053

Mi sono permesso di fare piccole modifiche sul testo (aggiuntendo il 
termine "indicativamente") che rendano meno perentorie le soglie 
numeriche presenti. In particolare, sulla pagina place=town, ho 
eliminato la frase "Regole specifiche per l'Italia. In Italia il tag 
place=town si usa per le città tra i 10.000 e i 100.000 abitanti e per 
i capoluoghi di provincia fina a 50.000 abitanti."


In questo modo, chi legge il wiki non dovrebbe avere l'impressione che 
il numero di abitanti sia l'unico criterio da usare. Che ne pensate?


Personalmente, sarei favorevole a riallineare il più possibile quelle 
pagine con le corrispondenti pagine in inglese, che mi sembrano più 
descrittive. Se siamo d'accordo anche su questo, coordiniamoci e 
vediamo di farlo avvenire a breve :-)


Ale

Secondo me andrebbe rivista anche la pagina 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Tag:place%3Dvillage, dove si 
indica di usare village per paesi tra 200 e 10.000 abitanti (forse 
intorno al 90% in Italia), i comuni autonomi e i capoluoghi di comuni 
sparsi, senza alcun riferimento oggettivo all'importanza del centro. In 
Umbria su 92 comuni solo 8 hanno un centro abitato (non l'intero 
territorio comunale) con più di 10.000 abitanti, per fare qualche 
esempio Orvieto, Assisi e Todi sarebbero village, penso che molti di voi 
conoscano quelle città, ditemi se è possibile classificarle come una 
frazione sperduta in mezzo alla campagna di 200 abitanti.


Per me i capoluoghi di comune che hanno servizi (per esempio scuole, 
uffici pubblici, ospedale, ecc.) utilizzati anche dai comuni limitrofi 
più piccoli sarebbero da classificare come town, essendo più importanti 
delle entità amministrative di pari livello confinanti, anche se la 
popolazione non è significativamente superiore.


--
Ciao
Marcello

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-es] Datos IET - Xunta de Galicia

[Miguel Branco]

Bos días,

Os comento los avances con respecto al permiso por parte del IET - Xunta de
Galicia para usar los datos que tienen alojados.
En los enlaces compartidos vereis:
- (1) la carta abierta indicando la compatibilidade de la licencia de sus
datos con la CC-BY 4.0 (ya compartida), y
- (2) un permiso explícito para incorporar datos CC-BY a OSM.

(1) 
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_GWMibZX0pwjr6jKyAokEhZhE5oPXQhy/view?usp=sharing

(2) 
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1h5580MNt8fFRS_BKTD1eaEdhJNq0wGEJ/view?usp=sharing


En el primer documento dicen explícitamente que "therefore the mentioned
information can be integrated in OpenStreetMap cartography without any
limitation of restriction, with the only condictions of attributing the
authorship of IET. Xunta de Galicia...".

En el segundo, " indican explícitamente que es sufuciente que se le citen
por parte de OSM en "http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors;
usando "IET".

En el primero -ellos- (el IET) indican que la licencia de sus datos es
"compatible con la CC BY 4.0". En el segundo, que nos autorizan
expresamente para su libre uso, siempre que los citemos en la web.

A mayores quiero citar aquí otro punto. Los derechos de uso de los datos
del IET se pueden comprobar en "http://mapas.xunta.gal/aviso-legal;.
Indican puntos como el siguiente:

"A información dispoñible neste Portal, salvo indicación expresa en
contrario, é susceptible de reutilización, quedando autorizada a súa
reprodución total ou parcial, modificación, distribución e comunicación,
para usos comerciais e non comerciais, con suxeición ás seguintes
condicións: - Queda prohibida en calquera circunstancia a desnaturalización
do contido da información. -O usuario queda obrigado a citar a fonte dos
documentos obxecto da reutilización. [...]".

Es decir, sus datos "son susceptibles de ser reutilizados" siempre que se
los cite. Y ademas, los datos del IET se pueden usar libremente excepto si
se deturpan gravemente (p.ej. modificando los topónimos o los nombres de
espacios naturales). [Lo comento de cara a una importación]

Así que, ahora entiendo que ya podríamos iniciar un proceso de importación
de los datos del IET. Si aún no os parecen correctos los dos documentos
otorgando los permisos, por favor, indicadme claramente cuál es el
problema, justificadlo y proponedme qué y cómo resolverlo.

Finalmente, perdonad que haya tardado tanto en completar esta solicitud.

Id comentando, graciñas!

O mar., 7 de maio de 2019 ás 10:03, Miguel Branco ()
escribiu:

>
> Buenos días,
>
> Sobre la licencia, resalto que citan:
> - es "compatible" con la CC BY 4.0, no dice explícitamente que sean datos
> con esa licencia, y
> - en el último párrafo dan permisos de uso de sus datos alojados en
> mapas.xunta.gal "sin restricciones" para ser usados siempre que se cite la
> fuente, el IET.
>
> Yo entiendo que es suficiente -- pero no hay problema por pedir que
> especifiquen más. Para escribirles con lo que necesitamos ahora, sugerís
> que indiquen:
>
> "With respect to all IET data products available in its portal
> http://mapas.xunta.gal, Instituto de Estudos do Territorio agrees that
> attribution by OpenStreetMap and its users through
> http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Contributors with the formula "Cartografía
> cedida por © Instituto de Estudos do Territorio. Xunta de Galicia" is
> sufficient to provide attribution to IET."
>
> ¿Llega con el párrafo anterior o les remito igualmente la carta que está
> preparada para las CC BY 4.0? ¿Quedaría algo más? Comentad y les envío la
> petición de nuevo.
>
> Rafa, gracias, de momento lo puedo tramitar yo. Es solo comentárselo y
> realizar una solicitud por la sede electrónica da Xunta. Si surge algo a
> mayores te pido ayuda. Eso si, para comentar en imports y la wiki
> necesitaré revisores ;)
>
> Saúdos!
>
> --
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 2 May 2019 15:15:40 +0200
> From: Rafael Avila Coya 
> To: talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-es] Datos IET - Xunta de Galicia
> Message-ID: <827f279d-655a-1bc7-319a-15cc51727...@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> Hola:
>
> Estoy de acuerdo con Santiago. Lo que hay que hacer es conseguir un
> permiso explícito, pues la CC-by 4.0, aunque parezca raro, no es
> compatible con la ODbL, como ya dejó claro el LWG y la OSM Foundation.
>
> Miguel: reitero que, si quieres, te puedo ayudar en este pequeño trámite
> que nos dará la tranquilidad de saber que todo el esfuerzo subsiguiente
> - escribir wiki, discutir con comunidad local (galega y estatal),
> discusión en imports - no va a chocar con el único obstáculo insalbable,
> que es el de no disponer de una licencia compatible. Además, ese permiso
> nos permitirá importar, no sólo los datos de parroquias, sino otros que
> consideremos de utilidad para OSM.
>
> Si quieres y hace falta, no tengo 

Re: [Talk-it] Village / Town

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 3. May 2020, at 09:59, Fintocubano  wrote:
> 
> Partendo dalla regola generale (Wiki inglese - uso la versione
> inglese di OSM e mi sono rifatto a quelle regole, credendo fossero le stesse
> in IT, ma sbagliavo)


invece sì, le regole sono quelle inglesi, ed il wiki italiano è una traduzione 
in italiano di queste regole. Dove non è così, sarebbe da aggiornare la 
traduzione. Se non si operasse così vorrebbe dire che finiremmo con definizioni 
diversi per tutti i tag, in tutte le lingue, e non potremmo più fare mappe 
globali, ne mappare all’estero.

Ciao Martin 
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Village / Town

[Francesco Ansanelli]

Ciao,

mi riallaccio al discorso dei criteri per chiedere se qualcuno reputa
necessario trasformarli in tag.
Esistono degli strumenti come OSMinspector che segnalano errori sui Place
in base alla popolazione.
Forse sarebbe il caso di creare una serie di tag per fare in modo che tali
strumenti si adeguino all'evoluzione delle linee guida senza diventare
eccessivamente complessi.
Es:

place:university=yes
place:post_office=yes

Cosa ne dite?

Francesco



Il dom 3 mag 2020, 09:59 Fintocubano  ha scritto:

> Personalmente sono d'accordo con Alessandro Sarretta ed il suo suggerimento
> di riallineare il più possibile le pagine italiane con le corrispondenti
> pagine in inglese e forse di aggiungere qualche criterio (come quelli che
> ho
> usato io? Forse) in piu' per permetterci una classificazione town/village
> piu' accurata.
>
> Oppure di creare il tag ''cittadina'' che semanticamente e' la ''town'' in
> inglese:
>
> *Town:* a place with many houses, shops, etc. where people live and work.
> It
> is larger than a village but smaller than a city.>> (Oxford Learner's
> Dictionaries, Oxford University Press)
>
> Secondo me, classificare un centro - con le caratteristiche che descrivo
> piu' giu' - sotto i 10,000 ab. come ''village'' e' abbastanza riduttivo ed
> impreciso ma, soprattutto, non fornisce agli utilizzatori della mappa
> un'informazione completa e corretta.
>
> Cortina, Camerino, Vallo della Lucania, possono essere ''village''? Non
> credo, ed infatti sono taggati ''town'' perche' essenzialmente lo sono,
> certo non per il numero degli abitanti. E non credo neppure Guardiagrele,
> Casoli, Agnone e molti altri (forse non tutti) della mia lista.
>
> Il mio edit si e' basato su dei *criteri * specifici, che ho descritto caso
> per caso per ogni centro nel box della Discussione del Changeset
> (#84052102). Partendo dalla regola generale (Wiki inglese - uso la versione
> inglese di OSM e mi sono rifatto a quelle regole, credendo fossero le
> stesse
> in IT, ma sbagliavo) ho valutato:
>
> - il fatto che i centri siano degli ''hub'' per i centri limitrofi dove la
> popolazione si reca per lavoro/scuola/shopping o altri motivi e per la
> presenza di ospedali e/o scuole superiori, tribunali, sede di
> diocesi/parchi nazionali, strutture turistiche e alberghi, zone
> industriali/artigianali e di produzioni agricole, oppure importanti per la
> loro storia e beni culturali presenti, cioe' dei centri che servono da
> punto
> di riferimento per la comunita' limitrofa e importanti per
> l'industria/commercio/logistica ecc;
>
> - esempi di altri centri taggati come tali: Cortina (6,000 ab.), Sapri ecc.
> (potete leggerli nei commenti) paragonabili - per caratteristiche urbane,
> geografiche e storiche ed economiche - ai centri da me taggati;
>
> - il fatto che la legge italiana assegni tale titolo non solo per
> l'importanza storica ma anche per l'<> (Testo Unico
> degli Enti Locali, Dlgs 18 agosto 2000, n. 267, articolo 18).
>
> Solo poi entrando nell'eccezione (Wiki italiana, IT:Key:place) che dice che
> < popolazione prossimi alle soglie prevale l'importanza dell'abitato in
> relazione al contesto geografico>> ho compreso che, forse, qualcuno dei
> centri editati dovesse essere rivisto (non meritasse il tag ''town''), ma
> che sostanzialmente il mio criterio di valutazione fosse abbastanza
> corretto.
>
> Contrariamente a quanto afferma Francesco di Nardo, che:
>
> >Date: Sun, 3 May 2020 02:13:57 +0200
> >From: Francesco Di Nardo 
>
> > the user [cioe' il sottoscritto] used historical or touristic importance
> > to assign the town tag to places which are really nothing more than
> > villages like many others [...] Places like Nereto, Civitella del Tronto,
> > Pescasseroli, Fossacesia, Gissi, etc. are nothing more than villages.
>
> i parametri da me utilizzati sono stati *ben piu' ampi* di < touristic>> e ben circostanziati (vedi Discussione del Changeset). E,
> credo,
> i centri di cui sopra ed altri, non siano tutti ''villages'' alla pari
> degli
> altri ''villages'' limitrofi e satelliti ad essi da 100-400-1,000-2,000
> abitanti.
>
> Ciao,
> Ferdinando
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] highway=residential con access=permissive

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 3. May 2020, at 08:59, canfe  wrote:
> 
> L'accesso permissive lo può dare solo il proprietario e revocarlo quando
> vuole.
> Ma quando capita un caso simile in Italia?
> Se la strada viene sbarrata. E' un caso che ben conosco perche' abbiamo
> avuto una querelle col vicinato e il sindaco, che abita pure lui nella zona
> ha ben dipanato la cosa.
> Se la strada è privata ma di pubblico accesso non si può interdire.
> Pertanto penso che la casistica dove effettivamente si puo' applicare tale
> tag si debba ridurre notevolmente.
> Anzi, forse andrebbero s-taggati molti tratti.


esattamente. Spesso il mappatore ha visto un cartello “strada privata”, ed ha 
pensato che fosse “permissive” perché si poteva usare la strada, ma in realtà 
permissive lo è solo quando il proprietario ha il diritto di vietare l’uso.

Ciao Martin 


___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Prova di "nuova grafica" per su.openstreetmap.it

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 3. May 2020, at 01:13, Cascafico Giovanni  wrote:
> 
> Sul "solo asporto" in tempi non covid credo sia implicito nel tipo di 
> esercizio: un bar non fa mai solo asporto, un panificio sempre.


intorno a me, tutti i panifici hanno tavoli (sono 3 che mi vengono in mente), e 
vendono
pizza oltre al pane.
Le gelaterie alle volte vendono solo in asporto, alcuni bar non hanno posti a 
sedersi, ecc.

Ciao Martin 
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Village / Town

[Fra00]

Io semplicemente mi stavo adeguendo alle linee guida. Dato che queste sono
cambiate e l'opinione generale vuole togliere l'importanza dei numeri, va
benissimo. Mi adeguo e modifico la mappa di conseguenza anche io. Quindi, a
questo punto, centri taggati come town dovrebbero diventare city (Avezzano,
Ascoli Piceno, ecc...)? E quale valore dare alla guida inglese che parla di
"size" per distinguere town e city? In questo caso si deve vedere al numero
di abitanti?



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Village / Town

[Fintocubano]

Personalmente sono d'accordo con Alessandro Sarretta ed il suo suggerimento
di riallineare il più possibile le pagine italiane con le corrispondenti
pagine in inglese e forse di aggiungere qualche criterio (come quelli che ho
usato io? Forse) in piu' per permetterci una classificazione town/village
piu' accurata. 

Oppure di creare il tag ''cittadina'' che semanticamente e' la ''town'' in
inglese:

*Town:* a place with many houses, shops, etc. where people live and work. It
is larger than a village but smaller than a city.>> (Oxford Learner's
Dictionaries, Oxford University Press)

Secondo me, classificare un centro - con le caratteristiche che descrivo
piu' giu' - sotto i 10,000 ab. come ''village'' e' abbastanza riduttivo ed
impreciso ma, soprattutto, non fornisce agli utilizzatori della mappa
un'informazione completa e corretta. 

Cortina, Camerino, Vallo della Lucania, possono essere ''village''? Non
credo, ed infatti sono taggati ''town'' perche' essenzialmente lo sono,
certo non per il numero degli abitanti. E non credo neppure Guardiagrele,
Casoli, Agnone e molti altri (forse non tutti) della mia lista.

Il mio edit si e' basato su dei *criteri * specifici, che ho descritto caso
per caso per ogni centro nel box della Discussione del Changeset
(#84052102). Partendo dalla regola generale (Wiki inglese - uso la versione
inglese di OSM e mi sono rifatto a quelle regole, credendo fossero le stesse
in IT, ma sbagliavo) ho valutato:

- il fatto che i centri siano degli ''hub'' per i centri limitrofi dove la
popolazione si reca per lavoro/scuola/shopping o altri motivi e per la
presenza di ospedali e/o scuole superiori, tribunali, sede di
diocesi/parchi nazionali, strutture turistiche e alberghi, zone
industriali/artigianali e di produzioni agricole, oppure importanti per la
loro storia e beni culturali presenti, cioe' dei centri che servono da punto
di riferimento per la comunita' limitrofa e importanti per
l'industria/commercio/logistica ecc;

- esempi di altri centri taggati come tali: Cortina (6,000 ab.), Sapri ecc.
(potete leggerli nei commenti) paragonabili - per caratteristiche urbane,
geografiche e storiche ed economiche - ai centri da me taggati;

- il fatto che la legge italiana assegni tale titolo non solo per
l'importanza storica ma anche per l'<> (Testo Unico
degli Enti Locali, Dlgs 18 agosto 2000, n. 267, articolo 18).

Solo poi entrando nell'eccezione (Wiki italiana, IT:Key:place) che dice che
<> ho compreso che, forse, qualcuno dei
centri editati dovesse essere rivisto (non meritasse il tag ''town''), ma
che sostanzialmente il mio criterio di valutazione fosse abbastanza
corretto.

Contrariamente a quanto afferma Francesco di Nardo, che:

>Date: Sun, 3 May 2020 02:13:57 +0200
>From: Francesco Di Nardo 

> the user [cioe' il sottoscritto] used historical or touristic importance
> to assign the town tag to places which are really nothing more than
> villages like many others [...] Places like Nereto, Civitella del Tronto,
> Pescasseroli, Fossacesia, Gissi, etc. are nothing more than villages.

i parametri da me utilizzati sono stati *ben piu' ampi* di <> e ben circostanziati (vedi Discussione del Changeset). E, credo,
i centri di cui sopra ed altri, non siano tutti ''villages'' alla pari degli
altri ''villages'' limitrofi e satelliti ad essi da 100-400-1,000-2,000
abitanti.

Ciao,
Ferdinando



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Village / Town

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 3. May 2020, at 02:14, Francesco Di Nardo  wrote:
> 
> More precisely, places like Nereto,


Nereto is the legal seat of a union of 12 municipalities, and the town hall 
looks quite impressive for a “village”
https://it.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unione_dei_comuni_Città_Territorio-Val_Vibrata

I believe it’s an edge case. The official website also has a page about the 
“town”
https://www.comune.nereto.te.it/la-citta

Civitella del Tronto apparently has the città title.

Cheers Martin 


___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] highway=residential con access=permissive

[canfe]

Io vorrei riportare la discussione al concetto più generale di
'proprietario'.
L'accesso permissive lo può dare solo il proprietario e revocarlo quando
vuole.
Ma quando capita un caso simile in Italia?
Se la strada viene sbarrata. E' un caso che ben conosco perche' abbiamo
avuto una querelle col vicinato e il sindaco, che abita pure lui nella zona
ha ben dipanato la cosa.
Se la strada è privata ma di pubblico accesso non si può interdire.
Pertanto penso che la casistica dove effettivamente si puo' applicare tale
tag si debba ridurre notevolmente.
Anzi, forse andrebbero s-taggati molti tratti.
Per contro l'interdizione puo' avvenire per ordine di un'autorità pubblica,
che pero' deve essere proprietaria della strada. Pero' ben raramente vedo
divieti ad personam o a categorie, sebbene ho trovato cartelli in tal senso
per gli zingari. 



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Prova di "nuova grafica" per su.openstreetmap.it

[Alessandro Sarretta]

Ti segnalo solamente che i due link in alto a destra (Italiano | 
English) puntano a https://su.openstreetmap.it/?setLng=it-IT invece che 
a https://naposm.github.io/suosm/?setLng=it-IT


Ale


On 30/04/20 20:12, Nap Osm wrote:
Buonasera a tutti! In questi ultimi due giorni ho provato a "rifare" 
il look a su.openstreetmap.it, utilizzando Bootstrap come base, quindi 
è molto simile alla grafica del tool degli indirizzi (anche lì l'ho 
utilizzato), giusto per provare a rendere il sito un po' più moderno e 
mobile-friendly. Naturalmente non è il top, ma volevo comunque sapere 
cosa ne pensavate. Il link alla prova è questo 
https://naposm.github.io/suosm/.Ho lasciato il layout originale 
invariato.

Spero vi piaccia!

P.S. Naturalmente il codice è su GitHub se volete effettuare modifiche.
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it