Re: [OSM-talk] shameless copying: still going on !!
On 9 Aug 2012, at 14:10, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: Now the map cleaning phase has been completed (according to the message of the day in JOSM) Per today 8/9/2012 I still find most of my contributions that were contributed under the CC-BY-SA license in the new map, mostly simply cutted pasted This time I focused on my contributions in Israel. Literally all of the unique features I added to the Israel map have been copied by a so-called Mr_Israel, including the home of my family, as the only building in a circle of a few kilometers around their home. It’s impossible that Mr_Israel choose this home by hazard and made the effort of re-survey himself. Same for the red walk I actually walked and surveyed myself with a GPS, it still in an unmodified version in the map, just the author changed. Same for the numerous fish farms I drew, and apparently are the only one in Israel according to Mr_Israel called Fish_farming in English. The rest of the hundreds of fish farms in only marked is only water. Same for the entire kibbutz Geva , all details I draw are still there, including voluntary mistakes in introduced. No changes but the name of the author. Mr_israel even for the sake of making less efforts copied the Places name Geva and left the original source. On none of the modified data a new source such as BING or GPS survey is mentioned, so I keep it on shameless copying ! If this is how the OSM community respects copyrights, then I have to fear for the rest of the map. I declare the new map still to be CC-BY-SA and not ODBL 1) I hope someone very quickly bans the above accounts and removes your copyrighted data from the map. 2) Just a tiny semantic point... You don't get to declare that, it's being shipped under the ODbL license. What you do get to declare is that OSM is currently infringing your copyright and ask them to fix that! Bob___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Image of the Week: Olympic stadium athens ccbysa2
On 7 Aug 2012, at 13:38, Gregory nomoregra...@googlemail.com wrote: The image of the week These are Featured images, which have been identified as the best examples of OpenStreetMap mapping, or as useful illustrations of the OpenStreetMap project. This week, The Olympic stadium in Athens is one of many things currently only visible on the CC-BY-SA map and not OSM since the license change http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Olympic_stadium_athens_ccbysa2.png I disagree that this image is a best example or a useful illustration of the project, and I think it's very negative. Within a day, it's out of date because someone has mapped it (and better than it was in CC-BY-SA). The person proposing or adding the image of the week could have been more useful by doing that mapping. It conveys a message of OSM is not as good as it was or things are missing. I'd say that's an excellent message about what OSM can do – it took a whole of 1 day for the whole place to get remapped in better detail than anyone else! Bob___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Explanation for image of the week 31?
On 30 Jul 2012, at 17:26, Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl wrote: What's the joke on the current image of the week? It's a reference to Harry Potter and the Olympics? Is it a rendering of a real Olympics stadium or what? And why are the locations and such scrambled? I would guess the locations are scrambled because the London Olympics have been litigous bastards to people who use more than two of the words London, Olympic, 2012, or stadium in the same sentence. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] One town, two featured images
On 30 May 2012, at 08:45, Andrew wrote: Should a map of the whole world really have two images of Oxford featured in three weeks? If Oxford has two special things in it in 3 weeks, I don't see why not. Thanks Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
It's So Funny has not copied your data here, he has simply modified it (in this case, changing highway=residential to highway=unclassified). When the redaction bot is unleashed, if you have still not accepted the CTs (do you have a particular reason not to?), this data will be deleted. There is no problem here. Thanks Tom Davie On 29 May 2012, at 06:06, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.984706lon=4.351842zoom=18layers=M Look at Caracasstraat ! (among others in the region). Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] Verzonden: maandag 28 mei 2012 21:53 Aan: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen CC: talk@openstreetmap.org; osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 3:42 PM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: [ ... ] However, it was not meant that the data were simply to be copied, deleted and re-pasted into the map using a fake account. True. Copy / pasting is not the same as remapping from permitted sources. Could you provide a link or ID to one of the nodes, ways or relations that concern you? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
Certainly Apple mark footpaths as roads in the data that they have used from us, but that's a rendering issue, not a data issue. Tom Davie On 29 May 2012, at 09:14, Nick Whitelegg wrote: Whatever. I've certainly seen footpaths classified as roads in commercial online maps for instance. This is a very one sided argument and assumes that commercial online maps are accurate. It also completely neglects the fact that you can use OSM data without a fee andf without someone telling you what you can and cannot do with it. I'd imagine they're running scared at the move away from the restrictive, closed-source model for electronic data. Nick -Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl wrote: - To: talk@openstreetmap.org From: Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl Date: 29/05/2012 08:45AM Subject: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us Ok, they don't name us, but I think a leading open source map does refer to us. http://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/licensing/newsletter/201205/didyouknow/ Oh wauw. We're not perfect. Let's close up the shop. Thanks to SteveC for all the effort, but it wasn't enough. Well, probably one of the very positive effects from OSM is the fact that when we start mapping something, the closed-source mappers follow suit. The fact that Google needs to add gimmicks like kajak routing across the pacific to beat us says enough. It's a win-win situation. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
To be honest, if a road has no classification, and is made of mud and gravel, it's a track... If it's an official road in some way, then clearly it is classified ;) Thanks Tom Davie On 29 May 2012, at 09:32, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2012/5/29 John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com: footpaths as roads --- I don't think I've seen any of those, but I have found quite a few unclassified roads that look more like tracks on Bing (and have adjusted them accordingly where confident of it). +1 to the rest, but I don't think we should change classification of roads from unclassified to track based on aerial imagery. There are unpaved unclassified roads also in Europe (I guess in all countries you might find them at least in very remote areas). cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
If I remember correctly (someone correct me if I don't), a lawyer has agreed that it's okay to keep node positions and ways where a user would reasonably have created the same way from an ODbL compatible data source. So for example, in this case, the user could reasonably create the exact same way by tracing bing, and hence is fine in terms of copyright breach. The less destructive way to do this would be to simply mark the way as odbl=clean rather than deleting the original and creating a new one with the same node positions though. Thanks Tom Davie On 29 May 2012, at 09:43, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: Apparently this ownership is more complex then at first sight. A way is defined by its nodes and its tags. Maarten only took a look at the tags. cetest did not only add a residential tag, but created the nodes (Version 1) that defines this particular way with GPS acquired data, later assisted by satellite data, even before Bing became available. way data: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7539781/history Nodes data (just one) http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/44729547/history The whole area is full of this type of copyright breaches, and I did not investigate anywhere else. Next topic of action: Analyzing the bicycle routes that I personally biked (GPS available, though not uploaded) through large parts of the south west in Holland, will show if the new author actually drove the route, copied the data that I created, or just took the GPX files from the fietsersbond. Regards Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Maarten Deen [mailto:md...@xs4all.nl] Verzonden: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 10:11 AM Aan: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!! On 2012-05-29 09:49, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 5/29/2012 3:00 AM, Maarten Deen wrote: On 2012-05-29 08:41, Thomas Davie wrote: It's So Funny has not copied your data here, he has simply modified it (in this case, changing highway=residential to highway=unclassified). When the redaction bot is unleashed, if you have still not accepted the CTs (do you have a particular reason not to?), this data will be deleted. There is no problem here. It's So Funny changed a way that was created by CeesW on 2012-01-09: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/144917597/history The previous way was deleted by CeesW in the same changeset. http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/way/7539781/history So the person to confront would be CeesW, not It's So Funny. Offending changeset seems to be http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10345339 I don't see anything wrong with CeesW's change either: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/7539781/history AND has accepted the CT. The only thing cetest did was change unclassified to residential. This was kept by CeesW, but the whole area is a residential landuse, so I see no problem with that tag. The official stance from AND is that the data in the OSM database on march 1 2010 can be used under ODbL, but previously not-entered data from the original dataset is also not allowed to enter OSM under ODbL. That clarification came on april 5th (discussed on talk-nl): http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-nl/2012-April/013870.html This is months after the changes made by CeesW. So his actions (deleting and recreating) were extremly premature, in hindsight unnecessary and can be called strange at any point in time. You'd almost think it was an error on his part, but deleting and recreating the same ways in the one changeset does not support that view very much. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
On 29 May 2012, at 10:15, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: At the time it was judged to be important to keep reference to the original and data. I remember copying lots of old AND tags onto my created roads. I think what should be leading here is the version number, as recorded by the server. Whatever excuse there may be, including reference to anonymous lawyers, it's simply a shame using cut and paste to change ownership of nodes and ways. It was me that basically change the majority of this area into a nice, well aligned and usable map from the mess (in terms of layout) we got from AND. It is up to the new author to use GPS or Bing and create a new way, using new nodes. That is the intend of OSM, it has always been that and it's not because some users are bad/lazy losers that cheating can be justified. I'm sorry that you feel it's cheating to take the path of least resistance to valid, ODbL licensed data, personally, I would rather this guy had taken a path of even less resistance – simply tagged the way odbl=clean. Thanks Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
On 29 May 2012, at 10:27, Floris Looijesteijn wrote: That's some great imagery if he can read the name signs on that street... The fact that all the tags were ODbL safe had already been established – they were created by another user who had accepted. Thanks Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
On 29 May 2012, at 10:36, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: Off list ! No need to annoy the list with comments with suggestion on how to cheat even more. No, I'd rather keep it on list, as I'd really like people to know the quickest and best methods for keeping as much data as possible; keeping as much history as possible and keeping making progress with a great open map. I honestly don't care if one user considers the methods involved to be cheating because they're easier than another method. BTW I and FOSM and a few more would be happy in the end, because if all were like you ( I'll take a look at your edits later) OSM would soon stop to exist as the first lawyer would declare OdBL non applicable. Feel free to enjoy looking through massive piles of buildings and coastline rearrangement. Is your assertion here that FOSM would enjoy watching the destruction of a large, free, open database of map data? That doesn't exactly caste FOSM in the best light does it? I am stupid to advise OSM for free on how to keep their data really OdBL clean. No one asserted that you were stupid, you've made some pretty intelligent comments. Please don't spoil that by putting FOSM in a bad light and making rash ones now. Thanks Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] (dis)Honesty and Copyright
On 29 May 2012, at 10:50, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: I am really astonished about the way some users on this list react to a claim to respect (my and CC-by-SA) copyright . Do you have an example of such a reply that astonishes you? Thanks Tom Davie___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
On 29 May 2012, at 12:51, Worst Fixer wrote: Hello. I ask you to review my planned edit. There are lot of ways to tag intermittent water feature found in database. Most popular is intermittent=yes. All others come from different old imports. Date ist 2009-2010 year. I countiered ~350 000 features tagged in different such ways. Most is done by 10 users. I ask users iandees and SK53 join discussion, as most of such tags were imported by them. Others welcome too. I propose unification of tagging in all this imports. Following tags converted to intermittent=yes: frequency=intermittent occurrence=intermittent stream=intermittent water=intermittent type=intermittent Following tags converted to intermittent=no: frequency=perennial stream=perennial stream=ephemeral converted to intermittent=ephemeral. Just removed stream=fixme. Converted fdate field from NHD imports in iso8601 date, moved to check_date tag. Removed all id-like tags. If no valid objections will be raised, I upload this change on 2012-06-12. Here is overview: Short, to get the idea: http://worstfixer.000a.biz/04-intermittent/overview-short.html Long, for exact analysis: http://worstfixer.000a.biz/04-intermittent/overview-full.html.gz I currently looking for place to upload exact .osm.gz for a preview. Suggestions welcome. Hi WorstFixer, I think this one might need a little more thought – what happens to something previously tagged water=intermittent... it becomes intermittent=yes... intermittent what? I doubt there's a nice way of predicting what water= should become to make it correctly tagged. Bob___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
Actually, the conclusion, while it involved that, also involved that there are potential other uses (e.g. on river=intermittent; stream=intermittent etc) that need to be checked too, and that this seems like an arbitrary renaming of tags that doesn't gain anything, but may destroy data. Thanks Tom Davie On 29 May 2012, at 20:08, Worst Fixer wrote: Hello. I used reply to instead of reply to all in my mail agent. We had a small thread with Thomas. Here is major result we achived. Thomas expressed opinion that not 100% of water=intermittent have other tags, so we have no way count them as water. In my sub-extract of water=intermittent: 127310 become intermittent=yes; 124417 have already natural tag; 749 get natural=wetland because NHD:FType=Inundation Area; 2123 have waterway tag; 21 has landuse tag. 127310-124417-749-2123-21=0. Check sum passed. This tag came from imports only, that is why it kann be cleaned up perfectly. -- WorstFixer, twitter: http://twitter.com/WorstFixer ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
Hi Gert, First, I'd like to make a semantic point – you were not banned from OSM for not signing up to the CTs, you are still welcome to contribute, as long as you contribute in a way that's compatible with the new license. More importantly though, what's happened here is absolutely reprehensible. They've violated your copyright, and endangered the whole project. Do you have a link to the changeset in which your data has been copied? I'm sure people will be more than willing to revert the change, and construct data from the sources we can use. Thanks Tom Davie On 28 May 2012, at 20:42, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: After having been banned from OSM for not signing the CT, my contributions, that have been well received by the community in the past have been removed by the april 1st license shift. The Foundation has called anyone in the community to reduce lost by remapping the concerned areas. However, it was not meant that the data were simply to be copied, deleted and re-pasted into the map using a fake account. This seems to be the case however, where my contributions were shamelessly copied and pasted back into the map. Of course I kept a dump from before april 1st where my name is linked to a number of roads in a specific area showing I denied the CT. And if I download the same area in OSM of today I find that this area has NOT been changed for a fraction of an inch. The old and new area projected on different layers in JOSM fit exactly on each other, even at the highest magnification available (15 cm = 1 inch on screen) The user involved is called “ It’s so funny” and I believe that fake account with obfuscated characters was not chosen for nothing, because it cannot be retrieved in OSM, at least not using JOSM “Show info” , and osm.org does not provide a contact info (otherwise I would have contacted this user first). However, it means that the current copy of the OSM database is not ODBL compliant anymore because parts of it remain clearly CC-by-SA , and these areas are plain copies of the work I carried out. This is sooo low….. OSM, how low can you get ! Providing all the tools to check for ODBL compatibility and accepting copy and paste just like that by any stupid looser contributor. Why is there no tool for checking on copy paste copyright infringement… Because no-one meant to check on that ? user: cetest Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl www.cetest.nl Kiotoweg 363 3047 BG Rotterdam T 31(0)104152426 F 31(0)104154953 Before printing, think about the environment. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: building=levels=N
On 20 May 2012, at 20:31, Worst Fixer wrote: Hello. 2012/5/20 Paul Norman penor...@mac.com The mechanical edit policy calls for a wiki page with the details of the proposed upload, as well as contact info (i.e. main account). Thanks. I created a wiki page on this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/WorstFixer Thanks a lot – I can now actually see the documentation for this edit... However, there's still one major thing missing. To make any sane decission we need a *concise* description of 1) What tags you're targetting 2) Why you think the current values are erroneous 3) What you are doing to fix the errors 4) Why you think this won't hit any valid data. Please please please come back and give this simple short explanation. I'm pretty sure you have good intentions at heart, but I can't tell what's going on until you give a description of what you're trying to do that doesn't involve 101 tables with 0 explanation of what's in them. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: ele=0
+1, there's plenty of places with 0 elevation above sea level... what's the issue with it? Bob On 19 May 2012, at 15:10, Cartinus wrote: Can you explain in plain English what kind of problem you see with the ele=0 tag? On 05/19/2012 03:57 PM, Worst Fixer wrote: Hello, all. I ask you to review my planned mechanical edit. Main changed tag is ele=0. While doing this edit, I also want clean other tag. Also is_in tag was parsed into a set of more detailed tags. I also created overview.html that might help your review. https://docs.google.com/open?id=0BzI7ljRzQhp4VnFPVkhZa096LWM If you see something bad in this, please explain what exactly is bad in this edit (not all edit is bad!). Also I want you suggest ways to improve this edit if it needs to. If no good and valid responses come until 2012-05-22, I will upload this. If you want do some other big mechanical edits, but have no time or enthusiasm to do it, write me in person. WorstFixer, twitter: @worstfixer -- --- m.v.g., Cartinus ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: ele=0
So what you're saying is I know there's broken data there, I'll fix this by deleting good data. That doesn't sound like a good plan to me in any way shape or form. Bob On 19 May 2012, at 15:28, Worst Fixer wrote: Hello. Most of ele=0.0|0|0.000 tags were produced by bad import scripts or automatical GPS track conversion software. I propose removal not all ele=0.0|0|0.000. All that had source:ele tag were preserved. 2012/5/19 Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl Can you explain in plain English what kind of problem you see with the ele=0 tag? On 05/19/2012 03:57 PM, Worst Fixer wrote: Hello, all. I ask you to review my planned mechanical edit. Main changed tag is ele=0. While doing this edit, I also want clean other tag. Also is_in tag was parsed into a set of more detailed tags. I also created overview.html that might help your review. https://docs.google.com/open?id=0BzI7ljRzQhp4VnFPVkhZa096LWM If you see something bad in this, please explain what exactly is bad in this edit (not all edit is bad!). Also I want you suggest ways to improve this edit if it needs to. If no good and valid responses come until 2012-05-22, I will upload this. If you want do some other big mechanical edits, but have no time or enthusiasm to do it, write me in person. WorstFixer, twitter: @worstfixer -- --- m.v.g., Cartinus ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: ele=0
On 19 May 2012, at 18:24, Worst Fixer wrote: Hello. If you download archive (or at least read my mail one line further before replying) you notice overview.html containing information you requested. Here is it separated: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0BzI7ljRzQhp4dFFOTDI3dDcwMVk Also there you can see that 93% of ele=0 tags clearly come different from imports. Which can basically be summed up as automated work has cocked up ele tags, I'd like to do more automated work and cock up some of the ones that weren't cocked up yet. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] handheld gps unit
I'm very pleased with my Garmin eTrex Vista HCx.
Bob
if (*ra4 != 0xffc78948) { return false; }
On 19 Apr 2012, at 13:20, kenneth gonsalves wrote:
hi,
what are recommendations for a handheld reasonably priced gps unit?
--
regards
Kenneth Gonsalves
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] ODbL-clean Coastlines
One advantage of remapping is the possibility that there are now better data sets available for import than the PGS data which was originally used. I'm particularly thinking here of the US Canada. This is exactly what I've been doing – non-safe coastline in the UK using the OS OpenData StreetView MHWS to go by, it's a massive amount more detailed than the PGS stuff as an added bonus. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] FourSquare and OSM
In their blog they made some cryptic comments about helping OSM with data... No
idea what they actually meant though, could just be helping direct users to
OSM, could be employing people to map stuff... who knows.
Bob
if (*ra4 != 0xffc78948) { return false; }
On 5 Mar 2012, at 11:17, Joseph Reeves wrote:
I think they're just using tiles for mapping background on their
(not-mobile) website. No api, no POIs, no data sharing, just raster
images. Having said that, I can't remember reading anything proper
about this and appear to have learnt it all through osmosis.
Cheers, Joseph
On 5 March 2012 10:59, Frans Thamura fr...@meruvian.org wrote:
mmm i want to know deeply about POI inside 4SQ and OSM, will 4SQ share with
OSM database for POI?
F
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote:
Would it be possible for Foursquare to let us use the information users
type in (restaurant names, addresses)? There is a lot of good information
there.
Janko
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Printed map books
I had vaguely considered this as something that could be done with
OpenStreetPad. It ought to be pretty easy with its rendering architecture to
get OS X to output a PDF document instead of some pretty images on the screen.
If you're able to hack on an obj-c project then it could be a good route.
Bob
if (*ra4 != 0xffc78948) { return false; }
On 19 Feb 2012, at 08:10, Paul Norman wrote:
In my car I still use a printed map book, which I'd like to replace with one
using OSM data and was wondering if anyone had any suggestions.
The features I consider requirements are
- Tiled pages with an index map at the front of the book
- Arrows on each page indicating the number of the adjacent pages
I'd also like
- A street index at the back, indicating the street, city, map page and map
grid
I've looked at the wiki, but all of the programs I saw used osmarender
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Critical Mass for license change-over
On 28 Jan 2012, at 11:00, Lester Caine wrote: Michal Migurski wrote: (*) There is no final algorithm. There is the best that OSMF can come up with but it will have problems, and there*will* be things deleted which will be reinstated later, and there*will* be things kept which have to be deleted later after a complaint. In a way, the algorithm that OSMF comes up with is just a best guess, much like the algorithm currently used by the OSM inspector. Yeah, but it will come from the OSMF, which makes it authoritative. Unlike every other tool that has been suggested and developed. Since the algorithm will be so provisional at launch, there should be a parallel data and tile service set prior to launch and an old data set and tile service post-launch. Can I get a little clarity here ... I am assuming that 'undecideds' have until the 1st April to finally make a decision? Which is an utter pain for me since the main blocks I have left now are undecides. The 'declines' can simply be dealt with except where they are wrapped in a large 'undecided' as well. Personally I would prefer to see anything left as 'undecided' simply switched to a new user account called 'undecided'. If people have simply disappeared or are simply not 'declining' just to be difficult, then they had their opportunity to decline and didn't? So we just accept that work as clean. Unfortunately, copyright doesn't work like that – to be allowed to copy something, you must have a license – they have not accepted the CTs, and thus not granted any license, so we can't use their work. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Spam in user diaries
On 20 Jan 2012, at 10:15, Andreas Labres wrote: On 20.01.12 10:25, Tom Hughes wrote: Sorry, I wasn't trying to be negative, just trying to explain that it was nothing to do with the OSM admins as such and it wasn't something we had any direct control over. To get to the root of the problem: How is the spam happening? I would suspect: * registration, email validation and diary post within a short timeframe? * without anything else (especially OSM editing) in between? Maybe this could be identified by kind of a bonus point system where you * get some minus points in the first place * get bonus points by uploading tracks and/or editing OSM * maybe even get bonus points as time goes by * and get allowed to post, finally * or at least prohibit links if you don't have enough points IMO this doesn't have to be a great obstacle, just prohibit instantaneous diary posting right after registrating (that's what comment spam is all about, IMHO). Wouldn't this result in a new process for spamming: • Register • email validation • Spam the database with some bogus data, perhaps spelling out your spam with motorways • Post diary entry. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] Mapping guidelines
On 17 Jan 2012, at 13:37, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2012/1/17 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com: On 1/17/2012 8:10 AM, Simone Saviolo wrote: I'm not suggesting either of these. But a single chunk of houses is clearly all residential, whether it's the size of a few lots or a huge subdivision. +1. public streets are not part of it. Have a look how others deal with this at a scale of 1:2000 (zoom 18). Aren't they? Why then do we tag them as residential roads then? Could it be because they're part of the residential area? Splitting it at roads gives no benefit and complicates editing greatly. This is just ridiculous: http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=35.323225lon=-119.077089zoom=18 how does that complicate anything? Connecting roads to landuses and other areas complicates editing greatly. A mapping like the above eases editing and is more precise then a huge landuse-polygon. I don't find anything ridiculous in this. It complicates things greatly because you have to draw a much more complex polygon that goes around every single road on the map. Worse, editing that road then becomes a case of editing the landuse areas around it too to make them follow the new road. Ultimately though, this gets back to the same old problem that we have a disparity between how we tag roads and how we tag everything else. For pretty much everything we make an area, and label what it is, for roads, we make a single way. In my book, until we're making areas for roads (and possibly even then), the residential area extends all the way across the road. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Mixing OSM and FOSM data
On 15 Jan 2012, at 16:49, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
Hi,
Have sent this both here and to the fosm mailing list.
Anyway, to summarise I don't care about the licence and am fully intending to
continue contributing to OSM after the licence change.
However I am concerned about severe loss of footpath data in my area and
consequently I'm looking to contribute both to OSM and to fosm. I could remap
some of the data to be lost (Andy Street's in particular) and probably will
from time to time, but not *every* weekend.
First question: could I contribute a set of new ways to both projects without
invalidating the licence? e.g. do a GPS survey, add the paths to OSM, and
then, add the same paths to fosm.
Secondly, I run my own copy of the OSM database on my Freemap server. Could
I, if necessary, mix-and-match OSM and fosm data as necessary in Freemap's
database?
Hey Nick,
Certainly you can do this, in fact, I understand that FOSM are importing newly
added data from OSM to FOSM, so if you continue to contribute to OSM your edits
should make their way to FOSM too.
if (*ra4 != 0xffc78948) { return false; }
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Coastline rerender
Is there any way we can get a coastline rerender some time soon? It's been broken (but fixed in the data) around inverness for nearly a month now. Thanks Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say
On 30 Dec 2011, at 14:23, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 12/30/11 11:26, Kai Krueger wrote: There is a second aspect to this too though, motivation. If every time someone suggests some improvements into the consumer side of things, they get shot down by the oldtimers and other people who decide what happens in the project, because they want to stay as geeky as possible and not adapt to becoming more consumer oriented, then the motivation to code any feature in that direction is close to zero. There's a lot of untrue statements in that long sentence, but I would like to concentrate on the overall untrue-ness: If OSM doesn't want to be what I would like it to be then the motivation to code ... is close to zero. This couldn't be more wrong. If *I* had a great idea for a map platform, and I suggested that to OSM, and those grey-haired conservative OSM oldtimer geek bastards said no thanks we'd rather remain small and unknown, then of course the first thing I would do is set it up myself, attract all the consumers to *my* site and then smile at OSM when for every 1000 visitors they get, I get a million! You make it sound so easy to run a site getting a million visitors each loading a good few thousand (relatively) large data files. As I said in one of my earlier postings; if you want to make a consumer map platform based on OSM, what's to stop you? OSM delivers data, you package it and make a great experience out of it. It doesn't even have to be you alone, or a MapQuest-like enterprise. Start a project - the open cartography project or the open map portal or the free map network or whatever. Gather UI whizkids, cartography buffs, build a nice consumer-oriented site; team up with naturalearthdata.com... all this is possible *today*, and is possible *with* (not against!) OpenStreetMap. The point is that the understanding that OSM is about *only* map data is *incorrect. The hint is in the name – it's OpenStreet *Map*, not OpenMapDatabase. Yes, the database is a *very* important part of the project, and indeed should be our main focus, but we shouldn't forget that the goal of the process is to provide high quality maps for people to use. I doubt SteveC (and he can correct me if I'm wrong), set out thinking hey, you know what would be cool? A huge database of map data that we don't show to anyone! That we I can be really useless without a third party making something interesting out of it! Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say
You're right – it needs to be a bit clearer that there's more than one map
available, perhaps the right way to do this though is to make the layers box a
bit more obvious, and give the various layers rather more user friendly names,
so that people will experiment with a few of them.
Tom Davie
if (*ra4 != 0xffc78948) { return false; }
On 30 Dec 2011, at 14:51, Russ Nelson wrote:
Frederik Ramm writes:
For me, the idea of a user friendly map portal (with a nice brand name
and matching apps, with maps, routing, geocoding, aerial imagery,
streetview imagery and all) is not a *bad* idea, and if someone made
such a portal they should certainly be encouraged to use OSM for it.
When I worked for Cloudmade I found a nice book on map
projections. They bought it for me because they were nice that
way. Without going into any of the projections, lesson #1 from that
book is: every map has its compromises. All of them. So, purely from a
technical standpoint, we shouldn't be telling people that Mapnik is
the be-all and end-all of map tile sets.
IMHO, Mapnik is the tile set for OSM editors. As such, it should be
more concerned about completeness than anything else. And as such, map
editors will be happy to click on a http://mapnik.osm.org link on the
front page of OSM. It's probably MUCH better for our community of
users if we give them a list of links to maps, than if we show them
just one map. Make it a bunch of screen shots of the same place with
links.
--
--my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com
Crynwr supports open source software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say
On 30 Dec 2011, at 15:02, Cartinus wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/30/2011 03:41 PM, Thomas Davie wrote:
we shouldn't forget that the goal of the process is to provide high
quality maps for people to use.
Have you ever read the tile usage policy?
How many iDroid apps were blocked from using OSM's tile server and
told to brew their own tiles?
The OSM project doesn't have the resources to provide ready made maps
for everyone. If you want OSM to be able to do that, then start
working on a viable plan to get those resources.
The tile usage policy that says roughly use this for your personal benefit,
don't scrape them – iDroid apps don't get blocked because they let people look
at the map, they get blocked because they create unnecessary load in some way
(e.g. by scraping)
Tom Davie
if (*ra4 != 0xffc78948) { return false; }
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say
On 30 Dec 2011, at 15:11, Cartinus wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/30/2011 04:06 PM, Thomas Davie wrote: On 30 Dec 2011, at 15:02, Cartinus wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/30/2011 03:41 PM, Thomas Davie wrote: we shouldn't forget that the goal of the process is to provide high quality maps for people to use. Have you ever read the tile usage policy? How many iDroid apps were blocked from using OSM's tile server and told to brew their own tiles? The OSM project doesn't have the resources to provide ready made maps for everyone. If you want OSM to be able to do that, then start working on a viable plan to get those resources. The tile usage policy that says roughly use this for your personal benefit, don't scrape them – iDroid apps don't get blocked because they let people look at the map, they get blocked because they create unnecessary load in some way (e.g. by scraping) Tom Davie And if everyone is going to use our map, then we run into exactly the same problem as when a single person is scraping. You're still only demanding and don't have a plan, worse you actually deny we need a plan. The problem with this being that what you're suggesting comes much further down the line. The whole world using and caring about open street map is rather a nice problem to have is it not? Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say
On 30 Dec 2011, at 15:16, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
On 30/12/2011 16:05, Thomas Davie wrote:
You're right – it needs to be a bit clearer that there's more than one map
available
I believe that the side-scrolling banner at http://openstreetmap.de does it
quite well.
I disagree – it's poor UI – it takes more clicks for a user to get to what they
care about – the map. Instead, we should simply have something similar to what
google maps had at the top of the map – a series of buttons that let you select
the style you want to view it in.
Then oh no, there's no satellite view turns into oh wow, there's loads of
views that are more useful than just trees from above.
Tom Davie
if (*ra4 != 0xffc78948) { return false; }
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say
First of all, one would have to define the exact difference between OSM is providing maps and another project is providing maps. Why exactly would OSM have to provide maps; Perhaps because that's the original, and stated purpose of the project – to make open maps. As I've said many times – a database of map data is a *really* useful thing, it's probably the single most important contribution OSM can make, but ultimately, the *point* of the project is to make maps. Pretty much everything you say is based on the premise that the point of the project is to make an enormous collection of map data, and damn actually being able to use it. This premise is false. Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say
if (*ra4 != 0xffc78948) { return false; }
On 30 Dec 2011, at 15:57, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree wholeheartedly with the view that OSM should be providing
maps. I think as long as we continue to cling to this idea that we
want third parties to make the maps, then we limit the project's
viability, its success and its overall accuracy.
I've allready express my own opinion, but i do not really understand the
point.
OSM hosted one rendering on its own server (using mapnik software)... Do
you want OSM to provide other maps (with different rendering) ?
Sure – and we already do, e.g. OpenCycleMap the transport map, the osmarenderer
layer, etc.
I assume that what you want is OSM to provide a service without limit
for other to use their tile server as base ?
Not at all – though I can imagine that we could make some cash by offering to
serve tiles to people if they pay for our hardware/bandwidth, plus a bit. Ofc,
this requires quite a major investment in people to run it, so it's probably
not immediately possible right now.
I feel very unconfortable with this option. Managing a tile server has a
cost (OSMF handle it now) and this cost goes higher has many user use
it. We see actual limitation this summer (limited bandwidth).
I agree, providing unlimited tile data to unlimited numbers of people, for free
is clearly not a reasonable option. The status quo works pretty well though.
So their is here 2 options :
1. providing a free service open to everyone with no limits (google
competitor to summurize) that will be adapt to demand (more power, more
RAM...) so more cost every user use it.
To handle cost there is 2 options : keep the service free (more
donation, more money from ?)or made the service commercial (big users
pay, this is what google is providing). This will require adding an API
key (like google, bing or cloudmade).
2. providing a basic service for small users (as it's now) and limit big
usage without providing an laternative and let commercial compagny
(cloudmade or openstreetmap has start this) providing services for big
users.
Note that option 1 has a terrible issue : been a competitor to
commercial compagny that would do business with OSM data...
Is that a terrible issue? If a company is offering OSM with no added value on
top of it, why do we care about competing with them? If they're doing a better
job than us, and make it financially unviable for us to do it, then all the
better – we can stop worrying about this problem.
My opinion is that OSM should provide a basic service (as now) without
commercial issue (option 2). Big users should build their own tile
servers or buy this service from commercial compagny : it's not OSM
business (OSM is not in business).
There's no reason why it can't be run like one though – charities and
philanthropic organisations usually are for one very good reason – it gives
them sustainability.
Note – I have no problem with carrying on with 2 either for now, or
indefinitely. What I don't think is a good option though is option 3 that some
people seem to be kicking about – that is, drop all rendered output to users or
people considering what they can do with OSM, and instead concentrate on just
having a huge database.
Tom Davie___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say
On 30 Dec 2011, at 16:15, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 12/30/11 16:55, Thomas Davie wrote: Perhaps because that's the original, and stated purpose of the project – to make open maps. When I started using OSM, the project wasn't making maps; it was making files that you could download and feed into a renderer and then you could see a map. I probably saw the potential back then; I saw that you could make maps right there on your computer, and quite possibly I also thought that one could make a slippy map - but it never occurred to me that what I was seeing then was somehow *not* the original purpose. A good 5000 people who joined OSM before me must have seen the same thing. Everything has to start somewhere. Just because the best that it was possible to do back then was to download and render, doesn't mean that it's the best we can do now. Pretty much everything you say is based on the premise that the point of the project is to make an enormous collection of map data, and damn actually being able to use it. This premise is false. Where did you get that idea about the original, and stated purpose being to make open maps? From the Wiki history, I can see that on 26 May 2005, Steve Coast added this sentence as the very first sentence on our main page: OpenStreetMap is a project aimed squarely at providing free geographic data such as street maps to anyone who wants them. Such as Street Maps ;) That was 6.5 years ago, OSM must have had about 500 members back then. I only joined a year later, when that sentence was still up on the Wiki, and today, the sentence has only slightly changed: OpenStreetMap creates and provides free geographic data such as street maps to anyone who wants them. Keeping the nice important bit there. As I said in another message, SWG are debating core values etc., and before we know it that sentence may read OpenStreetMap offers map tile downloads free of charge or something, but most people who have joined the project in the last 6.5 years will probably have read in the very first sentence that OSM says about itself: OpenStreetMap creates free geographic data. If that is indeed false then where can I complain about having been misled for so long? ;) You've not been misled, you've misread. Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say
Instead, we should simply have something similar to what google maps had at the top of the map – a series of buttons that let you select the style you want to view it in. And how will this let the user find out that there is an iPhone app for planning outdoor running tracks based on OSM? That they can turn their Android tablets into car navigation systems powered by OSM? That there is an educational 3D globe for their desktop? That there is an entire map portal dedicated to wheelchair accessibility? We should actively advertise the many third-party products made from OSM, many of which go far beyond putting a map into your browser. We should work hard on the database that makes them all possible. But we don't have to build and offer these products ourselves. We should – but not directly on the front page. The single biggest mistake I've seen any open source project make is to have a web page which is all links to other stuff. I don't want on my first visit to open street map to be confronted with a wall of text that I'll read the first paragraph of and then close my browser... Instead, I want to see immediately oh hay, this is a project that creates maps, oh look, there's one that shows all the busses in my city, oh cool, there's one for wheelchair accessibility, wow, they show paths on some of their maps... and *then* go I wonder, could I get this really awesome cool thing on my iPhone. Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say
On 30 Dec 2011, at 16:36, Richard Weait wrote: On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com wrote: First of all, one would have to define the exact difference between OSM is providing maps and another project is providing maps. Why exactly would OSM have to provide maps; Perhaps because that's the original, and stated purpose of the project – to make open maps. As I've said many times – a database of map data is a *really* useful thing, it's probably the single most important contribution OSM can make, but ultimately, the *point* of the project is to make maps. Pretty much everything you say is based on the premise that the point of the project is to make an enormous collection of map data, and damn actually being able to use it. This premise is false. The point of a project to create a really good text editor is to provide a tool for editing text. Nobody expects vim or emacs to provide you with the finished document when you download vim or emacs. Right, just like we don't provide where to go for a walk, only the map of the place you could go for a walk. Our situation in OSM is not exactly the same as a text editor. Agreed. Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say
On 28 Dec 2011, at 10:21, Frederik Ramm wrote: I think that this person is also caught between the I'm in the USA / I'm not in the USA divide. It seems to me that while 90% of OSM activity happens outside the US, 90% of activity in that thread comes from inside the US, so I am not surprised at seeing a distorted image. Nowhere in the world would someone claim that OSM was using the exact same data as Google, except maybe in the US. And in many European countries a statement like 80% of my town is unmapped would simply be impossible. You are over-exagerating. Within the last 12 months my town (in scotland) was 100% unmapped. The most that was there was the major road that travels through it's centre and a label saying Elgin is here. I would be *very* surprised if there weren't significant towns in europe that are still totally unmapped. Setting up your own tile infrastructure is something that's easier now thanks to all the work that's gone into Mapnik, Planet replication and other tools. Can we make it easier in the eyes of a business, by showing how the costs too are predictable and doable? I think we could, but then I don't think that we need to worry. I do this as a business, and I am by far not the only person to do it. At the moment the market is still small but it is only a question of time until many other players big and small will start offering ready-made OSM tile servers, and they will become a commodity with lots of competition. Companies selling them will make sure that their advantages vis-a-vis a GMaps service are well known and advertised - better, I like to think, that we could do it ourselves. I don't think that we need to spend valuable volunteer resources on making OSM fly commercially; we can count on capitalism to do that for us. I think this actually may be an opportunity for OSM to make some money. Could we not (given the appropriately motivated person, and I freely admit I'm not he) set up distributing images for servers that are able to run right out the box... Want to run OpenStreetMap? Download this iso, clone it into a VM or onto a real machine, boot, access http://machines-ip/ and there's your map, all set up and ready to go. Want to tweak the rendering? Choose from a number of pre-defined stylesheets. Worried about data replication? Don't worry, it's already set up in cron to update its data from planet files reasonably regularly. Worried about the hardware you need? Here's the specs necessary to get this to work at various loads... Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say
On 28 Dec 2011, at 21:26, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 12/28/2011 09:58 PM, John Sturdy wrote: I think we need to keep the big map with a search box quite prominently, partly because that is a major use, and partly because that is what will attract newcomers' attention and give them a way to evaluate the quality of our data This is all nice discussion among us osm educated people but as the thread that Mike was referring to shows: The average newcomer will measure us against somthing like Bing or Google and say things like, then I searched for the satellite view and could you believe it, shabby OpenStreetMap doesn't even offer that. We're not a map/imagery/streetview portal and we should be upfront about that. This is a lot better though than Can you believe it, OpenStreetMap doesn't even have an open street map on their home page!. Thanks Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Things People Say
On 28 Dec 2011, at 21:50, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 12/28/2011 10:41 PM, Thomas Davie wrote: This is a lot better though than Can you believe it, OpenStreetMap doesn't even have an open street map on their home page!. We've been using http://www.openstreetmap.de/ in its current form for 6 weeks now. I'll let you know when someone complains that it has no map. (The earlier version did have an OpenLayers map on the front page but using only about 1/3 of screen real estate.) I would imagine that the reason you've had no such complaints is because there's an easily visible link (even to a non-german-speaker) to the OSM front page there. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-legal-talk] License Change View on OSM Inspector
The key is to have your own valid source for the information. If your can
source the data in a license compatible way and recreate the node yourself
without the use of the old node, then it's all good.
if (*ra4 != 0xffc78948) { return false; }
On 13 Dec 2011, at 09:29, Floris Looijesteijn wrote:
So now we're remapping???
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Remapping
states you can just delete a node and add a new one to resolve a license
issue.
I can hardly imagine that is legally right.
Greets,
Floris Looijesteijn
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
apologies if this is the 2nd or 3rd time you're reading this, I have
posted to dev and legal-talk yesterday in the hope that any major bugs could
be ironed out before I announce this to a wider audience.
I have added a world-wide license change map to OSM Inspector:
http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=wtfelon=-1.80469lat=35.88371zoom=2
This is based on the per-object data I have on wtfe.gryph.de, combined with
a current planet file. The view is updated nightly.
There's also statistics on the number of objects here:
http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/munin.html
And detailed information here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Remapping/License_Change_View_on_OSM_Inspector
Bye
Frederik
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Roundabouts and routing
On 8 Sep 2011, at 22:39, SomeoneElse wrote: Thomas Davie wrote: Would it be possible to include a link to an example roundabout in OSM? Within the UK there seems to be a variety of tagging approaches, everything from not tagging flares to tagging individual roundabout lanes. I'm guessing that you're using an mkgmap-generated map, in which case there are options that alter roundabout handling (including the delightfully named --frig-roundabouts). The problem that usually gets me is miscounting exits (when two exits' adjacent flares share the same node), but late announcment of exit number can also be annoying. By the way, if you are using mkgmap then you might want to have a look on http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev - that's where most mkgmap discussion takes place. Cheers, Andy My apologies, it appears my initial in-the-car guess at what was causing the GPS to have a spaz was incorrect, sorry, I should have checked first... This is one of the roundabouts that caused the issue when approaching from the north on the A9: Shortlink Clearly it's not the issue with flares that I described, as the A9 is a dual carriageway at that point, and the approaches are not tagged as part of the roundabout. I wonder what could be causing this then? The particular conversion I was using was taken from here http://talkytoaster.info/ukmaps.htm. Does anyone see what might be going on? Thanks Tom Davie___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Roundabouts and routing
Hi,
Today I experimented with using OSM maps on my Garmin sat-nav. The one thing
that I noticed was that roundabouts do not work well. The problem seems to be
the slip roads entering the roundabout. The sat-nav recognises them as a
roundabout in themself, and because of that gives some fairly poor directions,
for example:
• Drive 10 miles then enter roundabout.
(Drive 10 miles)
• Enter roundabout.
(Enter the slip road to the roundabout)
• Enter roundabout and take the third exit.
As you can see, because of the slip road's existence the GPS does not announce
which exit you're expecting to take until the last minute. This means that you
can't get in the right lane early enough.
Proposed solutions (all of which are horrible):
1) Don't tag sliproads onto roundabouts as junction=roundabout, instead use
some other tagging scheme. Not greatly desirable because it involves a *whole*
lot of retagging.
2) Ask garmin to fix it (doesn't sound likely).
3) Write some fancy heuristics in the conversion from OSM to routable garmin
maps that figure out when you're looking at slip roads and when it's an actual
roundabout (sounds unreliable).
Can anyone thing of a better solution to this?
Bob
if (*ra4 != 0xffc78948) { return false; }
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Removing non-CT data method?
Look at the whole change set, notably, it includes adding this way:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/128541629
Bob
if (*ra4 != 0xffc78948) { return false; }
On 1 Sep 2011, at 23:06, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 9/1/2011 5:39 PM, Mike N wrote:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/469532416/history
The last 2 edit authors have accepted the CTs, but the feature is still
deleted?
Looks like vandalism by rw__.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] shortened names
On 27 Jul 2011, at 10:15, Steve Doerr wrote: On 27/07/2011 03:04, Stephen Hope wrote: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name#Notes Um - no. If a place wants to be written St Albans, then that's the name. Just because you pronounce it Saint Albans makes no difference. If they'd just shortened it for some signs to save space (like street, road etc), then I'd agree with you. But if they want the proper name to be St Albans, not Saint Albans, we should respect that. If it is how the name is officially spelt, then it's not an abbreviation, even if it looks and sounds like one. I personally prefer 'St' over 'Saint', but I wouldn't go so far as to assert what Stephen Hope does. After all, in alphabetical lists, names beginning 'St' have traditionally been sorted as if they were written 'Saint'. I don't think how they're sorted has anything to do with it, if every time the place name is written, it's written St Albans, even in official documentation of what the town is called, it's name is St Albans, simple as that. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] mapnik bug? construction bridge site (over the water)
On 18 Jul 2011, at 08:33, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Bugzilla from j...@kub.cz wrote: I think there is a but in Mapnik. Look at the: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.023336lon=12.097374zoom=18layers=M the construction site (northern part of the Steinere Brucke is UNDER the river even though it has layer=1 Does highway=construction construction=pedestrian render elsewhere? I'm not sure how that's relevant – isn't he referring to the landuse=construction with layer=1? Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] mapnik bug? construction bridge site (over the water)
On 18 Jul 2011, at 09:17, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 7/18/2011 3:38 AM, Thomas Davie wrote: On 18 Jul 2011, at 08:33, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Bugzilla from j...@kub.cz wrote: I think there is a but in Mapnik. Look at the: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.023336lon=12.097374zoom=18layers=M the construction site (northern part of the Steinere Brucke is UNDER the river even though it has layer=1 Does highway=construction construction=pedestrian render elsewhere? I'm not sure how that's relevant – isn't he referring to the landuse=construction with layer=1? Ah. I was looking at the way in the middle which has the text displayed. Generally you want water to render over landuse. I'm not sure that construction should be an exception, since a pond in the middle of a construction site should be displayed. Perhaps it would be better if landuse=construction were like landuse=military. Is the layer=1 appropriate? The bridge is above the water, but the construction site presumably exists in the water as well as on the bridge, and is drawn to include area around the bridge. At least in my mental model of how rendering is expected to work, layer= should have priority over *all* other rendering order stuff. Sure, normally, you'd want landuse to be below water, if the layer was equal. But the point of layer is to be able to force stuff up or down. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License/CT issues: Let's not punish the world's disadvantaged, pls.
On 24 Jun 2011, at 06:32, Mike Dupont wrote: but being locked out of osm is also not pretty. No one is locked out of OSM. You are free to contribute under the CTs, as you always have been. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Users who disagree to ODbL but want PD / CC0
On 16 Jun 2011, at 16:04, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote: No, it would be simpler for OSM. If you're willing to public domain your work, you're willing to give it to anyone under any terms. Why would you not contribute under the new CTs if you're willing to accept any terms? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Users who disagree to ODbL but want PD / CC0
On 16 Jun 2011, at 16:27, Floris Looijesteijn wrote: On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Dermot McNally derm...@gmail.com wrote: Works for me - I'm an OSM mapper and the work in question is from OSM mappers. Floris' comments talk about saving as much data as possible, by context, saving it for OSM. The easiest way to do this is as I have suggested. I indeed meant saving it for OSM, and I myself have happily agreed. Unfortunately there are users who do not want to agree with the CT but we might be able to convince them releasing their contributions under PD. If we convince them to release under PD, then we can take their work and then license it as ODbL, so not wanting their work licensed ODbL precludes releasing under PD. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Join the OSMF !
On 10 Jun 2011, at 23:01, Nathan Edgars II wrote: You're still conflating two decisions. To continue with your referendum analogy, someone may vote no on construction of a new arts center, yet still patronize it once it's complete. But one cannot 'vote' no on the license change and then continue to edit once the process continues. You're misunderstanding what's going on – no one is voting to change the license or not. You are accepting a license or not. If you are unwilling to contribute under the terms the project needs your data under the project has no use for your data and asks you not to edit.___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Unlicensed use of the logo in iPhone app?
On 18 May 2011, at 07:04, Russ Nelson wrote: can Ken assign copyright in the logo to OSMF. He can, but I see no reason why he should (other than if he particularly wants to). The point of the licensing of this project is for people to get credit for what they did, I don't see why Ken should have to say actually, it was the whole of the OSMF. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Skip geographical (redundant) address tags
On 3 May 2011, at 08:57, Jaak Laineste wrote: Hello, It looks like trivial suggestion, but could not find any past discussions with quick search. Is there good reason to add addr:country, addr:county, addr:city and other regional tags to all the address tags, if OSM database already has administrative regions for given area? These admin areas already create implicit relation, which can be used in any application to add city,country,district,state and other regions. So buildings would have only addr:street, addr:housenumber (and possibly house:housename and addr:full tags). Depending on country, addr:postcode could be geographical also. Searching a database for a way that surrounds a potentially enormous area (certainly enormous in the case of country) when you want to find out what city/country/... is this in is *far* less efficient than simply looking at the tags. Plus, Addresses are not always as straightforward as you make out, it's not possible to tell which administrative areas should be included in an address by simply looking at which ones happen to encompass the building. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] New Logo in the Wiki
On 2 May 2011, at 11:18, Dave F. wrote: On 02/05/2011 05:53, Andrew Gregory wrote: I just had to comment on this because I could hardly believe what I was reading. In a global, world-wide-web, no matter what time is selected for an IRC (or whatever) meeting, it's going to be inconvenient for *someone*. Deal with it! No. Don't use IRC!!! Discuss on this forum instead of IRC. It's self recording of *everything* that's said allows *all* to contribute at *all* times. It's really simple. Even enough for you to deal with it. But causes discussions that could be had in 10 minutes to get spread out over 10 weeks ;) Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On 19 Apr 2011, at 01:15, David Murn wrote: On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 11:53 -0700, Steve Coast wrote: ...which is ignoring the 70% or so of all of those people who never edited and can be switched over without incident. That sounds like the thinking of the parties in a real vote, 'if everyone who didnt vote, voted for us, we would have wiped the floor' Changing that 70% doesnt have any 'incident' but they can hardly be counted has casting their vote either way. This means that if 30% are active users, 3.8% means just over 12% of people have voted. The thing you're not understanding is that this isn't a vote. It's an agreement to distribute your work under a new license. That 70% *have* agreed to distribute their work under the new license. It is entirely valid for the camp that wants to move to the ODbL sooner rather than later to count the 70% in their stats, because accepting the new license is all that matters, not some imaginary war between yes and no. Bob___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] the 70% , was Re: License graph
On 19 Apr 2011, at 09:41, David Groom wrote: - Original Message - From: Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com The thing you're not understanding is that this isn't a vote. It's an agreement to distribute your work under a new license. No, the CT's are an agreement to contribute work, not to distribute it. Sorry, I misspoke. That 70% *have* agreed to distribute their work under the new license. It is entirely valid for the camp that wants to move to the ODbL sooner rather than later to count the 70% in their stats, because accepting the new license is all that matters, not some imaginary war between yes and no. It's not valid to count people who haven't voted in the YES statistics. Its valid to say all the people who have never edited would automatically have agreed to the CT's, any more than it is valid to say that all the people who have never edited would not have agreed to the CT's. But again – it's not a matter of voting yes, it's a matter of agreeing to contribute under a license. There's no voting going on here, just a bunch of people letting OSM use their changes after the switch, and a bunch not letting them. No one is counting the 70% in the yes vote – instead, they are saying this 70% have no impact on us changing to the new license because no data will be deleted if we simply dump these users. Nor is it valid to simply switch these people over to the new CT's without incident. OK, don't let these people edit without agreeing to the new CT's, but to simply switch their accounts to the new CT's on the assumption they would agree, and it doesn't affect ant data currently in the OSM database, is not right. No one is proposing switching them to the new CTs – what's going to happen is that their data (all none of it) is simply going to be dropped. The biggest impact this will have on OSM is that 2 or 3 people will come back in a while going didn't I have an account here 2-3 years ago? Hmm, can't remember the name, I'll create a new one and will agree to the new CTs when they sign up again. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] the 70% , was Re: License graph
On 19 Apr 2011, at 11:09, David Groom wrote: - Original Message - From: Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com On 19 Apr 2011, at 09:41, David Groom wrote: It's not valid to count people who haven't voted in the YES statistics. Its valid to say all the people who have never edited would automatically have agreed to the CT's, any more than it is valid to say that all the people who have never edited would not have agreed to the CT's. But again – it's not a matter of voting yes, it's a matter of agreeing to Note, I did not use the word vote. It's not valid to count people who haven't voted in the YES statistics.[David Groom] Pretty sure you did. contribute under a license. There's no voting going on here, just a bunch of people letting OSM use their changes after the switch, and a bunch not letting them. No one is counting the 70% in the yes vote – instead, they are saying this 70% have no impact on us changing to the new license because no data will be deleted if we simply dump these users. In your earlier email you said It is entirely valid for the camp that wants to move to the ODbL sooner rather than later to count the 70% in their stats. I'm glad you are now not proposing this should happen Absolutely I am – the stats are counting the number of people who we will not lose data from in the transition. We will not lose any data from these people whether they agree or not, so they're safe and should be counted in the stats. Nor is it valid to simply switch these people over to the new CT's without incident. OK, don't let these people edit without agreeing to the new CT's, but to simply switch their accounts to the new CT's on the assumption they would agree, and it doesn't affect ant data currently in the OSM database, is not right. No one is proposing switching them to the new CTs – In an earlier post it was written which is ignoring the 70% or so of all of those people who never edited and can be switched over without incident. I took this to mean that someone was suggesting they could be switched to the new CT's. My appologies, maybe they, or I have misunderstood. I would agree entirely that it would be invalid to decide that these people have agreed to the new license without letting them ever tick a box. It would however not be invalid simply to block their account and force them to agree, and it would be of no detriment to the project. Bob___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On 18 Apr 2011, at 18:45, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2011/4/18 Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com: While I agree that there is a problem with the no votes disapearing if you show the whole graph, it would be useful to show the same *range* on each scale. I.e., as we are currently showing 10300 - 10900 on the yes scale, show 0 to 600 on the no scale. This will give a much clearer indication of the trend. no. Why? I will still be much less readable then it is now. Because it will show the genuine trend – at the moment, a quick glance at the graph would suggest that the no vote is expanding at the same rate, and at the same level as the yes vote. I agree that we can't clearly show that they're not at the same level, because it would involve scaling the no vote to 1 100th of the size of the yes vote, but we can clearly show that they're not expanding at the same rate. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
On 18 Apr 2011, at 19:03, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Thomas Davie wrote: Because it will show the genuine trend – at the moment, a quick glance at the graph would suggest that the no vote is expanding at the same rate, and at the same level as the yes vote. I agree that we can't clearly show that they're not at the same level, because it would involve scaling the no vote to 1 100th of the size of the yes vote, but we can clearly show that they're not expanding at the same rate. If you want it to be a true representation of a vote, you need to look at only older users, not new users with their ballots already filled in. I believe this graph is already looking at exactly that. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License graph
I agree that we can't clearly show that they're not at the same level, because it would involve scaling the no vote to 1 100th of the size of the yes vote, but we can clearly show that they're not expanding at the same rate. This is just a simple graph. It is also important to see, how much data the single accounts have uploaded for instance. Graphs never are to bee viewed with a quick glance ;-) On the contrary – the entire purpose of a graph is to make data understandable quickly. I think you should be more confident about the other mappers who look at this statistics (this is not a graph to show at the prime time news in tv). That doesn't mean that it should be a graph that deliberately doesn't clarify the data it's meant to clarify. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Some tiles not rendering?
On 14 Apr 2011, at 14:44, Nakor wrote: On 4/14/2011 9:40 AM, Vladimir Vyskocil wrote: Hi, You can see here : http://munin.openstreetmap.org/openstreetmap/yevaud.openstreetmap/index.html#renderd that the render queue is filed, and if I understand it well new render requests are rejected until the render queue decrease... Vlad. On 14 avr. 2011, at 15:16, Nakor wrote: So why would some tiles render and some other not? If it is full all requests should be rejected right? Suppose the queue has 998 tiles in it. Two will get added, the next few will be rejected... Suppose now that the renderer finishes another meta-tile, dropping the queue down again, and allowing some more to be added to the end. The result is seemingly random tiles will get rendered and others won't. Also from the graph it looks like the queue when almost empty during the past 24 hours so why would the tile not be rendered in that case? Really? The queue has been full 18 hours a day or more for the past two weeks. Bob___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] We Need to Stop Google's Exploitation of Open Communities
On 11 Apr 2011, at 16:27, Mikel Maron wrote: http://brainoff.com/weblog/2011/04/11/1635 Meh – the great thing about being open is that you get to take the moral high ground because you're not stopping other people doing what they like. Why spoil that by trying to stop google doing what they like? Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] We Need to Stop Google's Exploitation of Open Communities
On 11 Apr 2011, at 16:43, Mikel Maron wrote: Meh – the great thing about being open is that you get to take the moral high ground because you're not stopping other people doing what they like. Why spoil that by trying to stop google doing what they like? Sorry, no time for moral relativism right now. If you don't mind about being open, why are you not just using Google's data already?___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] We Need to Stop Google's Exploitation of Open Communities
On 11 Apr 2011, at 17:16, Emilie Laffray wrote: On 11 April 2011 16:48, Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com wrote: If you don't mind about being open, why are you not just using Google's data already? Hello, thank you for your insightful comment, I will move immediately to Google and start using their data directly. Can you point out to me where I can access their data so I can make an efficient use of them? Congratulations, I believe a whoosh is in order. The original post is essentially suggesting that we should paint ourselves as black as google already is – he's suggesting that letting google work with our ideas and data is a bad thing... How is this in any way better than google saying that us working with their ideas and data is bad? Tom Davie___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Licensing Working Group
On 23 Mar 2011, at 09:52, Stephan Knauss wrote: Elizabeth Dodd writes: I hope there are no errors in these figures for later correction. In my opinion there are. From the LWG minutes, 163,732 users have not made any edits at all and 9277 users have signed up to the ODbL and CTs. 9277 / (37-163732) = 4.5% all users from ID 286582 on have already agreed to new CT. So you missed 83418 users in your calculation. your calculation would be (9277+83418) / (37-163732) = 45% Not forgetting that's what's really important is what percentage of edits come under the new license – the stats for that seem much more healthy. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Licensing Working Group
On 23 Mar 2011, at 09:55, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2011/3/23 Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net: I hope there are no errors in these figures for later correction. From http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Stats the total number of users is approaching 375,000. From the LWG minutes, 163,732 users have not made any edits at all and 9277 users have signed up to the ODbL and CTs. 9277 / (37-163732) = 4.5% All newer users (don't recall the amount of users we had last summer, but I guess it was around 250 000) have automatically accepted the ODbL and CTs and are not included in the 9277. So the numbers could be: (9277+37-25) / (37-163732)= 62% Making the assumption of course that all of the people who have made no edits are not new users. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Licensing Working Group
On 23 Mar 2011, at 10:09, John Smith wrote: On 23 March 2011 19:57, Thomas Davie tom.da...@gmail.com wrote: Not forgetting that's what's really important is what percentage of edits come under the new license – the stats for that seem much more healthy. Considering that about 1/3rd to 1/2 of the edits in that figure would be for some of the big imports skewing things... Lies, damn lies and statistics and all that... I'm not sure this is the lie though. The lie would be zomg, not many users are accepting the ODbL, when what we care about is how much of the map would survive a transition, not how many users would. As an aside – I only recently ticked the box because I had in error thought that I'd done it a long time ago. Perhaps it would be intelligent to nag users more about moving over. If we really want to push it, simply state that we won't accept more contributions until they accept the ODbL. This would solve two problems: 1) It would get those who are simply too lazy/uninformed (like myself) to move over. 2) It would stop people who don't want the change to happen from diving in and recreating geometry for no reason other than to have had it created by someone who hasn't agreed to the ODbL. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] the coastline
On 21 Mar 2011, at 21:59, Andy Robinson wrote: I'd place the coastline at the low water mark because you know then that its always true. The coastline at the high water mark is only true a couple of times a day or whatever. Then it needs a high_water_mark way adding and ideally rendered in the long run. Depending on your definition of true – you used the definition everything outside the coastline mark is water, and by that definition it is indeed true. Equally valid though is everything inside the coastline mark is land, and that's only true a couple of times a day if you put it at low water, while it's always true if you put it at high water. The proposal for both a high water mark and a low water mark seems ideal to me – though hard to gather data for. My guess is that the current data marks high water though, given that that's what's typically marked on most map serieses. Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Zero tolerance on imports
On 21 Feb 2011, at 07:09, yvecai wrote: IMO, 'imports' should be simply considered as datasources, not data. We lack tools to properly use this data. Having great tools like for imagery or GPS tracks in the various editors, maybe with a copy/paste feature to import data semi-manually would be very valuable. Then the 'import' job could just be to make the datasource easy to use to contributors. A server to centralize this datasets could help for visibility. Just to throw another anecdote out there – I did look at OSM many years ago. At the time I thought pt, they haven't even got my country on the map, let alone the little town I'm in, there's no way this'll get anywhere. A few years later I became a contributer because there was at least *some* data available that made the map useful – all I had to do was make it *more* useful. What I'm saying is that to me, no data was more of a turn off than some data. I'd suggest that instead of simply banning imports we need better tools for monitoring map quality and for showing users what our monitoring tool thinks of their area. If we tell new users hey, look at this bug list/source/date of origin overlay and see what you can add/change/delete/fix/... rather than simply presenting them with a map that may or may not be correct we might get more communities spring up. Essentially – tell people what they can do to help more clearly! Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Zero tolerance on imports
Do you think that when MapQuest started using OSM data to generate their maps, they performed all the necessary data transformations BY HAND? Do you think that MapQuest would be using OSM data at all if it was no more accurate than the data they could automatically import themselves? Bob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] It's fun while it lasts
On 12 Feb 2011, at 08:43, Lester Caine wrote: pec...@gmail.com wrote: I think we can call it a day. I really doubt Microsoft will be that interested in OSM anymore when they got Nokia on their hook. I think it's probably another example of M$ trying to stifle the THIRD horse while they come in at number 4. I don't want FG windows on my Nokia phone. Now that I have found a phone that works - with LINUX on it - I was at least happy. WHO is going to be supplying LINUX (meego). And do say 'Use Android' THAT is not linux and just as crap as iphone when it comes to using EXISTING applications. At risk of feeding a troll... what exactly has this got to do with OSM? Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] highway=unsurfaced
On Fri, 2011-01-21 at 19:30 +, Steve Doerr wrote:
Nothing official, but it would be very unusual for anybody to call
something that wasn't surfaced a road.
Appologies if I'm repeating something that's already been said – I've only just
joined the list, but what's inappropriate about highway=track, surface={dirt |
gravel | ...} for this?
Tom Davie___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
