Yes, I remember ed's recommendation. Although I can't find the
discussion in the mailinglist, I also remember I asked the group on
whether I should remove the POIs. As far as I can recall nobody
responded (or I may have missed the message).
Update: the user accepted responsibilty for adding roa
Maning, they have this remarks from their forum "what they are doing is
like stealing". If these roadguide.ph contributors is also contributing
to OSM using their own data then I see nothing wrong about it. Copying
the data from roadguide.ph to OSM is a big no-no. Can they point the
specific data t
I remember a bulk update a while back where POIs from roadguide were added
to OSM. Funny thing is, as I have pointed out to Maning then, that update
included several POIs which originally came from contributors of
waypoints.ph where it also included some of my "easter eggs" and the POIs
were given
I already wrote emails to:
1. roadguide.ph mod (jan) regarding this issue.
2. One user whom I believe is adding gps traces from roadguide.ph
Will wait for them to reply (hopefully in the next few days). I also
plan to write an email to the rest of the roadguide contributors
(through waypoints.ph
We need to do some repairing jobs now. Remove those contribution copied
from roadguide.ph. Any other way to mend this error?
murlwe
<-Original Message->
>From: maning sambale [emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com]
>Sent: 8/17/2009 9:04:20 AM
>To: talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [talk-ph] ht
Stumbled into this one today:
http://roadguide.ph/forums/showthread.php?t=937
--
cheers,
maning
--
"Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden
wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/
blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/
To put it simply for addressing:
addr:housenumber
addr:street
addr:city
and don't delete any existing is_in tags (just leave em there)
Did I get it right?
> (there's actually a whole academic subject on the topic of database
> normalization
> just to remove every redundancy in the data)
You ar
I think Eugene and I have reasonably covered both sides of the argument. I
think what I am trying to say is that de-normalization (putting some redundancy
back) is good for speeding things up both for getting data out AND for putting
it in. I may not have a copyright-free boundary (or just be
Hi guys,
Here's the response of Nick, of the Local Chapters working group about the
concerns of setting up a local chapter for the Philippines.
Eugene / seav
-- Forwarded message --
From: Nick Black
Date: Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 12:52 AM
Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Draft "MoA" between
Well, after thinking about it, maybe using only addr:city (for both cities
and municipalities) is a good compromise.
Some Q&As on my point of view:
Q. Why is duplication bad?
A. Well, I come from a software engineering background and in designing
database systems, redundancies are not good as Mik
At 03:55 PM 13/08/2009, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
>Here's my two cents regarding this:
>
>I don't favor using addr:city, addr:village, is_in to specify where a POI is.
>Here are the cons:
>
>1. Duplication of info with admin borders (and potential mismatch issues)
>2. Increased data size with res
11 matches
Mail list logo
