Re: [Talk-us] OSM map use w/o attribution at US News & World Report
On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 11:51 AM Steve Friedl wrote: > So, I think I should be following the procedure here: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution > > with a polite note to them. > > Am I on the right track? > Yep! Feel free to shoot them a polite email asking to provide the required attribution (and thanking them for using OSM). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] OSM map use w/o attribution at US News & World Report
[trying this again] Good morning, I've never done a use-without-attribution case before, would like to get some suggestions before I dive in. I'm pretty sure this is a "substantial" violation. It seems that US News & World Report is using OSM data/maps without attribution in their Health website; my opthalmologist's page https://health.usnews.com/doctors/jared-younger-768369 includes a map that I instantly recognized as OSM. I make it a point to enhance the maps every time I have an appointment somewhere, and I had done substantial cleanup of the maps in the northeast corner of Brookhurst & Ellis in Fountain Valley. The *current* map doesn't look much like the one in the US News page: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62921271#map=18/33.69463/-117.95174 because of my subsequent changes, but - among other things - the spurious and incorrect segment of "Ellis Street" just below the main Ellis Street was leftover Tiger data that I'd fixed as well on changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62921271 Digging in, it seems that US News runs their own tile server (example tile): https://maptile.usnews.com/tile0/12/707/1640.png so this is clearly them and not (say) Leaflet. Their terms & conditions page https://www.usnews.com/info/features/terms has a helpful email address copyrightag...@usnews.com that invites contacts about copyright issues. So, I think I should be following the procedure here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution with a polite note to them. Am I on the right track? Steve --- Steve Friedl // Software & Network Security Consultant // 714-345-4571 st...@unixwiz.net // Southern California USA // I speak for me only ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] TIGER place confusion
Just comparing relations with place= tags to the corresponding nodes works: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/CjI Obviously not an OSM place=city there. Max ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] TIGER place confusion
Max, Can you give an example or better yet a overpass query that we can use to view some in our back yard? Thanks, Clifford On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 4:48 AM Max Erickson wrote: > Many of the administrative boundaries imported from TIGER have a > place= tag that reflects the legal type of incorporation of the > municipality rather than a sensible value for the OSM place tag (which > would give some hint about the relative prominence of the place). > > This confusion has gone under the radar, as openstreetmap-carto > doesn't render place labels from ways and relations: > > https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/2816 > > Deleting the imported place= values (or perhaps moving them to some > other tag, say something like incorporation=) would directly make the > data more accurate and improve maps that render place areas without > accounting for the confusion in the data. > > What do people think about deleting (or adjusting) the place tag from > imported US administrative boundaries? > > > Max > > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] TIGER place confusion
Use border_type=* for this. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:border_type Usage is spotty at best but it looks fairly consistent to me. For example in Pennsylvania admin_level=8 can have a border_type of city, township, borough, municipality(?), or town (there's just one "town"). In New York admin_level=7 can have a border_type of town or city, but I'm only seeing this on two cities and about a third of the towns. Since a combo admin+place has both a boundary and a label node, is there a rule of thumb for what tags go where? Does place=whatever go on both? What about wikidata? (?) border_type=municipality definitely came from TIGER, as it matches Bethel Park, Monroeville, and Murrysville having an LSAD of municipality. Pennsylvania's classification of home rule municipalities is a bit fuzzy, since it's *also* still considered to be a township or borough. I'll leave that one alone for now. On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:50 AM Max Erickson wrote: > > Many of the administrative boundaries imported from TIGER have a > place= tag that reflects the legal type of incorporation of the > municipality rather than a sensible value for the OSM place tag (which > would give some hint about the relative prominence of the place). > > This confusion has gone under the radar, as openstreetmap-carto > doesn't render place labels from ways and relations: > > https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/2816 > > Deleting the imported place= values (or perhaps moving them to some > other tag, say something like incorporation=) would directly make the > data more accurate and improve maps that render place areas without > accounting for the confusion in the data. > > What do people think about deleting (or adjusting) the place tag from > imported US administrative boundaries? > > > Max > > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] TIGER place confusion
Many of the administrative boundaries imported from TIGER have a place= tag that reflects the legal type of incorporation of the municipality rather than a sensible value for the OSM place tag (which would give some hint about the relative prominence of the place). This confusion has gone under the radar, as openstreetmap-carto doesn't render place labels from ways and relations: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/2816 Deleting the imported place= values (or perhaps moving them to some other tag, say something like incorporation=) would directly make the data more accurate and improve maps that render place areas without accounting for the confusion in the data. What do people think about deleting (or adjusting) the place tag from imported US administrative boundaries? Max ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
