Spod OSM wrote:
Looking at the OSM data, it does look as if there is missing maxspeed
data on some of the roads involved (but the maxspeed on the major
length of motorway is correctly tagged), but presumably OSRM uses
sensible scaled down defaults, relative to the way type, in that case?
Any
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Generally it seems that different ideas in different areas of the world,
of what a trunk road is supposed to be, now fall onto our feet ;-)
One option that comes to my mind would be that you change the road
classification in Britain to use trunk only on those ways
Gregory wrote:
I'll definitely be wanting to try this out next time I have somewhere
to go. Thanks Richard.
\o/ Thanks!
Hmm, I think the gridline must be a glitch in the data.
It is, I'm afraid - it's a bug in the way that the SRTM tiles line up which
I haven't ironed out yet.
* The
On 04/12/2013 16:02, Alex Barth wrote:
Congrats, Richard. The site looks awesome. Now I just wish I could make
time for a bike tour in England next year
Thanks!
(John F used an early version of the site for his post-SOTM cycle tour
this year. Maybe I should try and follow SOTM around
Philip Barnes wrote:
Not sure if its been changed recently, but using IE on my corporate
desktop,
there is a close button.
Yes, I submitted a patch and Tom deployed it.
People complaining about lacking communication should IMO volunteer to join
the Communications Working Group (not you,
lsces wrote:
At least we can still access potlatch
in place of Id so the principle has already been adopted here.
That's because iD isn't a replacement for Potlatch, it's a new entry-level
editor to complement the existing intermediate-level one.
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Andy Mabbett wrote:
Perhaps we need an Announce mailing list (with follow-ups set to
the 'talk' list)?
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/announce/ :)
(it's a bit unloved though... needs more people volunteering for CWG to
help)
I miss the slider for zooming in and out. Having to make
Hi all,
Thought I might show you what I've been working on for the last year or
so. :)
http://cycle.travel/ is a new everyday cycling website for Britain and
it won't surprise you to learn it has lots of OSM mapping in there.
Click on 'Map' and you'll find OSM-based route-planning and
Richard Welty wrote:
Josh Doe wrote:
I believe I saw SURFACE and CLUB which might be
useful.
i'm not keeping any of it, the source tag points back to
the original data set and that should be sufficient. [...]
i don't know that i see a mapping from the AT surface
attributes to our surface
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote:
The rules for places of worship
This is OpenStreetMap. We don't have rules. Stop placing so much trust in
the wiki. :)
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Colin Smale wrote:
Calling the transformation from OSM data to international format
trivial does not do justice to the creativity of mappers when
entering phone numbers or to telecoms regulators when defining
numbering plans.
A quick gander at
Colin Smale wrote:
Someone needs to stick up for the data consumers; it's not *all*
about the mappers, and anyway most mappers are not so lazy
that they can't be bothered to conform to conventions.
As a data consumer I wish people would stop sticking up for me and my kin!
IMX more
Tom Hughes wrote:
No, because they each use their own database, which is entirely
separate from the main database.
...and because site improvements often require changes to the database
structure - new columns, new indexes, and so on - so it wouldn't generally
be possible to hook test
Michal Migurski wrote:
Provable evidence that the view tab is not sufficiently
informing visitors of its functionality? Having a button
that says “link” is a great clue that there is an option
to link vs. hunting around.
Perhaps, but this is definitely a pro feature. There _is_ a button
Greg Troxel wrote:
add the shortlink link in the lower right, so you can more easily use
it to get to a URL for the current view, so you can shift-reload to
see what yfou just edited
Click the View tab.
/stuck_record
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Lester Caine wrote:
Note that I'm not saying that the main map should change - this is
mobile technology use, but personally I WOULD like to have
the option to select the old style layout. It's not fundamental to
how the map works - it's only a style sheet, and we could have
several -
Lester Caine wrote:
is there a change log for the code running live?
https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/commits/master
(though changes may take a short while to percolate to the live servers, of
course)
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Michal Migurski wrote:
On Jul 21, 2013, at 5:42 AM, Pieren wrote:
If you missed the discussion because you don't watch the
non-localized 35 mailing lists
[...]
I don't know, and I don't want to have to subscribe to Github
pull requests to find out.
You only have to follow one mailing
James Mast wrote:
I'm personally not liking that they now have hidden the
long/short links to the map location behind buttons.
Instead of just one click to get the map location, now
it's two clicks and is really annoying and slowing down
work for me. :(
Ok, I've said this at least three
Clifford Snow wrote:
We need publicity!
Harry Wood is trying to recruit more volunteers for the Communication
Working Group. You can e-mail him on o...@harrywood.co.uk .
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Andrew Chadwick wrote:
Anyone want to join up with a handful of people from the
Oxfordshire/Cotwolds group for a short mapping expedition to
Aylesbury this coming Saturday?
I can't make it, I'm afraid, but anyone visiting avec velo might like to map
Aylesbury's cycle network:
List of
Guillaume Pratte wrote:
How can users actively contribute to the map if they need to rely
to a competitive service for their daily needs?
No-one has said that.
We want everyone to be using OpenStreetMap data. But OpenStreetMap is much
more than openstreetmap.org. Just because it isn't on
Maarten Deen wrote:
The problem with OSM is that with Google, Google maps is the go-to
site to get everything: map, routing, information. With OSM it is not.
[...]
It just is less userfriendly than having it all on one site.
And that's a great business opportunity for someone... right?
On 08/07/2013 17:45, Andy Robinson wrote:
No schedule but I'd expect it to be a bit of an ad-hoc mapping party before
adjourning to the pub but if something more substantial gets organised
that's cool. We certainly would need:
1. A cake
Banbury Cake!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banbury_cake
On 08/07/2013 17:45, Andy Robinson wrote:
No schedule but I'd expect it to be a bit of an ad-hoc mapping party before
adjourning to the pub but if something more substantial gets organised
that's cool. We certainly would need:
1. A cake
Banbury Cake!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banbury_cake
Hi all,
Swindon Borough Council is organising a mapping party in Swindon on
Saturday 13th July. (How enlightened is that?)
http://www.swindontravelchoices.co.uk/news/contribute-to-swindons-new-map.aspx
The core event is 10am-2pm but people are welcome to come for longer.
Swindon also has a
Pieren wrote:
You cannot say that. Give me an example where the editors decided
how to tag features in the past.
Two off the top of my head:
1. Potlatch popularised the use of a certain set of values for the surface=
tag.
2.
Someoneelse wrote:
Someone's being adding translations of place names using:
These aren't translations, they're transliterations. General consensus is
that we shouldn't add transliterations (which are essentially algorithmic)
to OSM.
Apparently Place names translations are public knowledge and
Kerry Irons wrote:
Nathan,
[...]
Please advise when you will remove these tags.
Nathan (NE2) has been given an indefinite ban from OpenStreetMap on
account of his inability to work with others on what is a crowd-sourcing
project: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/347
It'll therefore
Rick Marshall wrote:
If we use bing imagery for tracing the road geometry, but Google
Maps to discover the name of the road is it incorrect to use
source=google? You are not tracing a road geometry from
Google Maps, but you might be using it for other attribute data.
Ian Dees wrote:
This is what an account block is and it already happens.
For those unaware of account blocks, you can read all those that have been
imposed at http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks .
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Martijn van Exel wrote:
I think I just wrote half of one of my SOTM US talk.
I think you just wrote half of mine too. ;)
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/OSM-Data-Quality-tp5763578p5763648.html
Sent from the USA mailing list archive at
Russ Nelson wrote:
This is ridiculous. I tried ID, and it didn't make my penis bigger
OR harder, my breasts didn't get bigger, I didn't get six-pack
abs, and I didn't get shaplier thighs in just six weeks.
You should submit an issue on github. I believe there's a Math.abs function
in JS so
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
But in the end I think this whole source thing is completely
overestimated.
Yup.
What do you propose to do with source tags found on an object when
you modify this object based on a different source?
OSM has full object history. :)
cheers
Richard
--
View
I've just been bitten by the minority, largely undocumented usage of
railway:historic=rail on a bunch of dismantled/abandoned railways in
Britain. Having exported some OSM data and done a few days' manual
processing on it, I belatedly find that various lines are missing due to
not taking
NopMap wrote:
And putting a simple general or how to question into an
issue tracker is rather weird.
help.openstreetmap.org is the commonly used and expected method of asking
simple general and how to questions. :)
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
It's only because of poor assumtions and a lack of forsight
by renderers and data users that we have this problem now.
I don't think that's fair. We do have the general (and generally
misinterpreted) rule of don't tag for the renderer, but there's also the
Philip Barnes wrote:
Leeds, however it is in the middle of a pedestrianised area, so
makes routing results at best unhelpful as it directs you to a
dead end side street. Would be better on a main road from
which the central car parks are accessible.
http://osrm.at/33S
Agreed that routing
Alex Barth wrote:
This is an updated proposal based on an initial RFC from earlier this
year titled Contributor Mark [1, 2].
Thumbs up. This is really good. I love having Local knowledge in prime
position.
It'd be good to release Leaflet/OpenLayers plugins to do the attribution. If
I were
Steve Bennett wrote:
Assuming I'm happy to simply lose any changes where there really
is a version conflict (which I am), what can I do with it? (I don't
use JOSM at all, so would prefer to avoid that hurdle if
possible...)
The couple of times I've encountered this situation, I've manually
Cartinus wrote:
Most of these are people who didn't read what Openstreetmap was
about before they registered. They most likely thought they would
need to register to _USE_ all the features of Openstreetmap, not
contribute to it.
+1. You'd be surprised how common this is. Our village
Hi all,
Is anyone able to verify the existence or otherwise of NCN 28 from
Exeter to Dartmoor, as shown on OSM right now?
It's been mapped from the DfT cycling data, but when cycling in Devon
last week, I didn't see any signs of it when I'd have expected to do so.
The Sustrans mapping shows
Philip Barnes wrote:
Seems a good idea. I would suggest a new tag, such as bridge_ref.
I have come across cases of canal bridge numbers using the ref tag [...]
Most canal bridge numbers are in the name tag, but I am not sure that is
right either.
There seem to be a lot of canal bridge numbers
Kevin Peat wrote:
The South Devon Link Road construction gives rise to new cycle paths
from Newton Abbot down to Torquay which this document:
http://www.devon.gov.uk/ldfpaper-newtonabbot.pdf
mentions as being part of NCN 28.
Interesting - thanks. That tallies with the Sustrans website and
Dave F. wrote:
I presume someone within OSM has talked to them about it. Do they
have a long term contract, or not consider our data complete
enough? Seems a great shame a charity is paying for something
that could be free.
Some Sustrans maps are now made with OSM data - in particular, the
Andrew Errington wrote:
That's exactly what he did. So what else is he supposed to do? Perhaps
the wiki should be edited to state don't bother making graphical
suggestions because the system is too unwieldy now and we dare not
change it.
No-one has said that. There is an active effort to
[wider issue, so cc:ing talk@]
On 22/03/2013 15:32, Shaun McDonald wrote:
On 22 Mar 2013, at 14:06, Harry Wood m...@harrywood.co.uk wrote:
...we have a strip down the left, and this screen real-estate is
valuable space. Here more than anywhere users are eyeballing the
graphics, text, and user
Hello all,
And in an echo of the C-road thread...
Someone has created relations for the UK parts of several international
cycle routes, such as 2793118, which is EuroVelo 2 - part United
Kingdom [sic].
These are tagged as network=ncn. This, to me, appears to be clearly
wrong. They are not
SK53 wrote:
I'd be interested in what others think (these council based refs do
appear elsewhere in the country: I can't recall ever seeing one on
a road sign).
I agree very, very strongly that unsignposted C-road numbers (or U, or D, or
E, or whatever) should not be placed in the ref tag.
Someoneelse wrote:
Could that, or something more appropriate to road reference
numbers, be used here?
Ah, déjà vu.
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2011-May/011628.html
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Kerry Irons wrote:
I would like to get in contact with the mapper(s) who put these routes
into OpenStreetMap/OpenCycleMap and clarify this. We are always
looking for enthusiastic folks who want to work on the USBR system
but in this case putting detailed routes on maps is a source of
Derick Rethans wrote:
What's wrong with names in different languages?
Names in different languages are genuine content and therefore worth tagging
(e.g. Londres, Moscow).
Simple transliterations aren't content, however. They're essentially just
algorithmic derivatives. AFAICT the Russian names
WhereAmI wrote:
It would appear that any and all data associated with a
website or mobile app becomes fair game once OSM
data is used.
What? No. No, that isn't true. I'm no fan of share-alike but that is
trivially disprovable.
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Eric Sibert wrote:
They established a route that for instance allows to from city A
to city B but not with the short way. Instead, it is going left and
right to visit points of interest, alpine hutch and so on. They
claim that such a work is an original work.
Yes, I can see that. I've
nicholas ingalls wrote:
Just want an opinion from someone a bit more knowledgeable in the
field of license compatibility. In Canada
*paging Richard Weait*
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/License-Review-tp5750426p5750441.html
Sent from the
Rovastar wrote:
Foston Hatton Hilton Bypass, etc don't as far I I know appear on
the ground however I think the some record should appear in
OSM. I am worried about the trend in this case of placing them
as the name of the road as what reference point would people
use for these.
Philip Barnes wrote:
I did briefly discuss this with Andy on IRC and the other issue is
the insertion of soft-hyphens into the names so Hatton becomes
Hat-ton. Not sure why, is he trying to make a satnav pronounce
each syllable?
Or copied and pasted from a document?
cheers
Richard
--
Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
However, I think it's now clear that the whole of both
changesets [3,4] need to be reverted. Presumably, this should be
done as quickly as possible to avoid the risk of subsequent
edits complicating things. I don't have any recent experience of
doing
Paweł Paprota wrote:
Just a last word - I am not proclaiming doom. To the contrary - I
am full of energy and ideas but at the same time I am a bit afraid
that if this energy does not lead anywhere then I will be burnt
out in this project because of the frustration that I cannot
change
Michal Migurski wrote:
We seem to have an OSMF that's not effective at communicating
I tried :(
FWIW Communications Working Group is very good, just under-resourced. There
needs to be more of them, and they need to be given the space to thrive
without interference.
cheers
Richard
(ex-board,
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
Why is Openstreetmap yielding to such blatant appropriation of
the English language ?
Because we have bigger battles to fight. Let Google piss their money away on
defending the term geocode. If OSM has $1m to spend, which it doesn't, I'd
rather it spent it on making
Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
What about mailing list archives? Will the OSMF then start deleting
emails if they contain Google Maps links?
I'd quite like the OSMF to start deleting e-mails that don't quote the
previous message properly. ;)
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Gervase Markham wrote:
Who do we need to talk to or where do we need to file a bug to get this
request considered officially?
Anyone?
If you want to make it happen, the best way to do this is to take part in
the project to port the current stylesheet to Carto:
On 27/01/2013 16:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
IMHO there is no connection between the port to a different style
sheet language and the decision which zoom level gets rendered.
The connection is that the current stylesheet is abandonware. If
anything is to be fixed then it'll be in the Carto
Paul Johnson wrote:
So pick social media that doesn't cater exclusively to a
crowd whose education stopped midway through Grade 2.
It's nearly impossible, in the English-speaking world, to
express an intelligent thought in 140 characters or less.
It's writing system just doesn't work
Paweł Paprota wrote:
The simple fact is that some of the improvements won't ever be
implemented without people working full time on it (look at the Top
Ten Task list to get some idea). How do you propose to solve this
problem without funding people to develop them?
Complete disarming
Toby Murray wrote:
I think it would be great to make more tools support more
external data sets as opposed to dumping *everything* into OSM.
Yep. Absolutely. To my mind this is one of the really nice things about
TileMill. I'm currently playing with it to render (UK) maps that combine OSM
and
Barry Cornelius wrote:
Robert Whittaker wrote:
I wouldn't have thought that listing the authority would be
that useful -- you should be able to work that out from the
county that the way resides in.
My view is that it would be useful to include the id of the council
as I do not think
Tom Chance wrote:
Mapping it as farmland needn't distract anybody
apart from the poor sod editing the data, that is.
yours from the sticks
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Marking-landuse-and-field-boundaries-tp5742119p5742180.html
Sent from the
Tom Chance wrote:
I also cannot understand comments such as Richard's, which arise
every time somebody wants to add additional data that they consider
valuable. Compared to the days of just mapping roads, many cities
today are a dense mass of addressed buildings, metadata-to-the-
eyeballs
Hi all,
The State of the Map 2013 call for venues is out:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/State_Of_The_Map_2013/Call_for_venues
Looking forward to seeing the bids. Please do forward this to/translate
for your local country lists.
cheers
Richard
[sent to both talk@ and osmf-talk@, please
Someoneelse wrote:
o Instead of the mixture of highway=cycleway, highway=path
and highway=track that exists currently, replace with
highway=track throughout (it's all wide enough for the trail
maintenance folks' Land Rovers)
To my mind, the duck tagging principle means that
Robert Whittaker (OSM) wrote:
Instead I've used highway=track based on the physical
appearance, and then added designation=
unclassified_highway to record the legal classification.
Agreed: I often do something similar.
In this case, though, I'm not entirely comfortable with highway=service
http://lanyrd.com/2012/openstreetmap-oxford/
Hope to see some of you there.
cheers
Richard
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
brycenesbitt wrote:
Is there evidence of Google using streetview plus OCR for
addressing data yet?
They've integrated it into ReCaptcha:
http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/29/google-now-using-recaptcha-to-decode-street-view-addresses/
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Jeff Meyer wrote:
Ok... this is sort of an import question, but how do we / should we
credit each imported item with a link or tie to the appropriate use
statement / contributor?
source= is just for showing your working. It is not a means of providing
attribution. That should be done on the
Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
It looks pretty good from what I saw, with the obvious exception
that newer homes aren't tagged. I'm going to clean up my code
a bit and stick it up on github somewhere.
If you chaps are all dead set on doing another massive TIGER import - hey,
it's your funeral - could
On 29/11/2012 22:46, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
None of the Iowa data that I am processing originates with the US
Census or TIGER.
Sure, I should have said big massive ---k-off import rather than
TIGER. They both look the same from several thousand miles away I'm
afraid. :)
As Richard Welty
Kate Chapman wrote:
So is the new dataset a derived database? It seems like it is to
me. What should we be licensing this?
CC-BY is pretty much compatible with ODbL: CC-BY only requires attribution
and ODbL provides that. There may be tiny differences of legalese but
nothing substantive. So
!i! wrote:
Hi, one last personal note on the mapathon and a big thank you
(literally): http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/!i!/diary/18132
And thank you, too. I've always been sceptical about this sort of event - my
vision for OSM is that we need more contributors with local knowledge, not
more
Kate Chapman wrote:
Does anyone have suggestions or a preference?
OpenStreetMap says it all.
As in Hi. We're OpenStreetMap. You may have heard of us.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/What-to-call-OSM-data-tp5737570p5737660.html
Sent from the
Joseph Reeves wrote:
What does different mean? This should be outer?
I'd hazard a guess that's a Potlatch 2 bug resulting from some edge case
when editing the role with multiple items selected. I'll have a look but
feel free to add a trac ticket to remind me.
cheers
Richard
--
View this
Chris Hill wrote:
So the answer, as always with this sort of question, is no we cannot
use that data without written permission of the copyright holder to
use this data in OSM for any purpose. I don't think that is likely to
be forthcoming.
Indeed.
Don't forget, too, that Tesco probably
Igor Brejc wrote:
4.3 Notice for using output (Contents). Creating and Using a
Produced Work does not require the notice in Section 4.2. However, if
you Publicly Use a Produced Work, You must include a notice
associated with the Produced Work reasonably calculated to make any
Person that
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
Talking about that, members of the talk-fr mailing list are
discussing pragmatic solutions that might bring everyone together
Good luck. I tried that last month:
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2012-September/064482.html
and immediately got shouted down
David ``Smith'' wrote:
The banner at the bottom has some issues. Helpful for new and
maybe intermediate users, but i'd like the option to turn it off.
You can do that from the options dialogue (and it remembers your
preference). I tried to put a little 'x' close box in there but, well, Flex
Pierre Enclos wrote:
Henning Scholland wrote:
Just a question: If I filter all buildings with cadastre-source out of
an osm-planet and publish this extract [...] it is illegal?
There is no difference between ODbl and CC-by-SA on this point.
Which may be true but is largely irrelevant. :)
Charlotte Wolter wrote:
What is the status of the Toolbox? When will it be fixed? It is
difficult to do any editing without those tools. And, whose idea was
that banner? Did they ask anyone before they implemented it? Did
they test to make sure it didn't break anything?
Goodness me,
Jani Patokallio wrote:
Any advice would be appreciated, as I still have a faint flicker
of hope that we can get this past the corporate legal team
and possibly even contribute back to OSM!
On this specific issue: I'd suggest you consider whether your combination of
OSM-derived data and other
Philip Barnes wrote:
Does anyone know how I go about getting this added to keepright?
Harald Kleiner, keepright [at] gmx [dot] at
(and +1 to the suggestion)
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Stiles-and-gates-on-roads-tp5729687p5729817.html
Teuxe a écrit:
J'ai l'impression que nous avons été entendus...
Oui. :)
amitiés
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Encore-un-alignement-de-points-abusif-liea-Potlatch-2-tp5729034p5729634.html
Sent from the France mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Nick Whitelegg wrote:
As an aside I'm quite surprised at that, as almost all places ending
in hurst in the UK are south of the M4 and east of two degrees west.
That sort of factoid is surely what OpenStreetMap was invented for. :)
The origin of Fairhursts is quite starkly regional, though:
Philip Barnes wrote:
Select way or node.
Click advanced.
Click way/node number.
Click more details.
You don't even need the fourth step - the dialogue that appears when you
click the way/node id is the history.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Lester Caine wrote:
I did put my hand up for a tag which is automatically applied for those of
us who forget it ;) If I have a background layer up it automatically adds
that tag to each object.
In Potlatch you can simply press 'B' (for 'Background') to add the source=
tag for the current
Someoneelse wrote:
Is there any easy way (in any editor with any plugin) of getting to
this information - preferably a collated list of object / changeset tags?
I've just done this in P2's history dialogue for 'comment' and 'source':
ThomasB wrote:
Seems what you mean and what you wrote differ somehow
I'm not sure where you read the extra requirement for discussion or
bureaucracy in what I wrote. Could you clarify?
But I read it so. Also selecting 10 buildings in JOSM and
pressing Q would fall below your proposal
Tordanik wrote:
If you want to address changes performed by scripts/bots, then
why don't you just say so explicitly and avoid any potential
misunderstandings?
Because it's not just about scripts and bots. The Cadastre situation, which
started all of this off, is often people loading .osm
Christian Quest a écrit:
Richard, en quoi le volume change quelque chose ?
C'est un impact plus grand sur le map (et le communauté) alors on a besoin
de visibilité maximale. Je pense que c'est approprié que, par example,
DaveHansenTiger et xybot sont des comptes dediés.
Mais tout d'abord, c'est
I'm off to bed but would just like to respond to this one before I do.
Tordanik wrote:
On 25.09.2012 19:11, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
- search-and-replace tag changes
- automated geometry fixup
- reverting edits
In my opinion, none of that (if performed though editing software
Nicolas Moyroud a écrit:
C'est vraiment une honte d'avoir effaceacute; le texte de Pieren du Wiki
!
Without wanting to reawaken the argument, I think Pierre's wiki text was a
little injudicious and I can see why Grant removed it. Writing a local
community guideline instructing people to reply
301 - 400 di 1720 matches
Mail list logo
