Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Jo winfi...@gmail.com wrote: It would indeed be great if we could use an arbitrary version of an object to continue to build upon. Now, I have to start all over on each object that was touched by somebody who didn't agree (yet) to the CTs, which is annoying, as it disrupts the entire history. Jo Yes, inas has done this for some objects already, I don't think it is optimal as you break the history of the object (when really such history should be there to give credit to the mapers who helped build up the object in OSM). But on the other hand I can see how leaving the object leads one to consider it a derived work, hence subject to the CC BY-SA license. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote on 06/09/2011 07:37:05 PM: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Jo winfi...@gmail.com wrote: It would indeed be great if we could use an arbitrary version of an object to continue to build upon. Now, I have to start all over on each object that was touched by somebody who didn't agree (yet) to the CTs, which is annoying, as it disrupts the entire history. Yes, inas has done this for some objects already, I don't think it is optimal as you break the history of the object (when really such history should be there to give credit to the mapers who helped build up the object in OSM). Currently I'm using the attribution tag for credit when I work with a CT-compliant earlier version. There is more to the history of an object than just attribution though, and modifying the API to allow it to be preserved would be a step forward. Ian.___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
I would like to make this more complex, for my edits outside of Kosovo, I dont see any problem letting you re-license the data, so feel free. mike On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 6:45 AM, Jo winfi...@gmail.com wrote: It would indeed be great if we could use an arbitrary version of an object to continue to build upon. Now, I have to start all over on each object that was touched by somebody who didn't agree (yet) to the CTs, which is annoying, as it disrupts the entire history. Jo 2011/9/5 Ian Sergeant iserg...@hih.com.au I wrote: To address your question specifically, what happens to data placed in the public domain by the author on the wiki, who then specifically declines the CT? Well in the first case, if the edits are just a trivial modification to a fully CT-compliant version - I'd say just hide them. Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote on 03/09/2011 01:34:09 PM: What problem does this solve? If data in this class is accepted as compliant with the CT then it obviously solves no problem. I think this is your point? Just repeating, like I have in all my emails, that I'm only proposing that the API grants the ability to hide/remove data whose author has specifically rejected the CT, allowing us to better manage the transition to a CT-compliant database. By allowing CT-compliant editors to modify and save CT-compliant earlier versions rather than CT-non-compliant later versions we avoid the possibility of generating more CT-non-compliant tainted data than we have already. The acceptance or otherwise of this peculiar class of data where the author has on the one hand said that anyone can do anything with their data, but later tried to retract that by declining the contributor terms is an interesting issue of policy. I can see both sides of the argument. However, I believe the changes I am suggesting will be of procedural value, regardless of how these policy issues are resolved. Ian. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On 01.09.2011 08:19, Michael Kugelmann wrote: On 31.08.2011 10:44, Nick Whitelegg wrote: I would go so far as to say, don't delete *anything* until legally you absolutely have to. I would like to somehow modyfy this statement: we should replace the data not delete it! So please remap the information that needs to be removed. Well that is deleting. Everything else would be copying. Especially on less common tags that are rather specific or subjective you will not be able to replace them. E.g. tracktype, smoothness, mtb:scale, sac_scale and so on, would definitely need local knowledge to be redone. So if you don't want to have any trouble, best delete any object WITHOUT looking at the tags, else someone who purposely mistagged will quickly find out. Also things like name:en and other languages, simply redoing every tag shouldn't be done at all. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
It would indeed be great if we could use an arbitrary version of an object to continue to build upon. Now, I have to start all over on each object that was touched by somebody who didn't agree (yet) to the CTs, which is annoying, as it disrupts the entire history. Jo 2011/9/5 Ian Sergeant iserg...@hih.com.au I wrote: To address your question specifically, what happens to data placed in the public domain by the author on the wiki, who then specifically declines the CT? Well in the first case, if the edits are just a trivial modification to a fully CT-compliant version - I'd say just hide them. Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote on 03/09/2011 01:34:09 PM: What problem does this solve? If data in this class is accepted as compliant with the CT then it obviously solves no problem. I think this is your point? Just repeating, like I have in all my emails, that I'm only proposing that the API grants the ability to hide/remove data whose author has specifically rejected the CT, allowing us to better manage the transition to a CT-compliant database. By allowing CT-compliant editors to modify and save CT-compliant earlier versions rather than CT-non-compliant later versions we avoid the possibility of generating more CT-non-compliant tainted data than we have already. The acceptance or otherwise of this peculiar class of data where the author has on the one hand said that anyone can do anything with their data, but later tried to retract that by declining the contributor terms is an interesting issue of policy. I can see both sides of the argument. However, I believe the changes I am suggesting will be of procedural value, regardless of how these policy issues are resolved. Ian. ___ 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] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
Robert Whittaker (OSM) writes: This ambiguity is presumably at least one of the reasons why LWG don't feel they're able to accept arbitrary PD declarations. If they can't accept a PD declaration, then they can't accept the CT. If they can't accept This data is in the public domain, then they can't accept I am free to agree to the CT. If somebody is lying or wrong, they're lying or wrong. Doesn't matter what they're asserting as true. -- --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
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
I wrote: To address your question specifically, what happens to data placed in the public domain by the author on the wiki, who then specifically declines the CT? Well in the first case, if the edits are just a trivial modification to a fully CT-compliant version - I'd say just hide them. Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote on 03/09/2011 01:34:09 PM: What problem does this solve? If data in this class is accepted as compliant with the CT then it obviously solves no problem. I think this is your point? Just repeating, like I have in all my emails, that I'm only proposing that the API grants the ability to hide/remove data whose author has specifically rejected the CT, allowing us to better manage the transition to a CT-compliant database. By allowing CT-compliant editors to modify and save CT-compliant earlier versions rather than CT-non-compliant later versions we avoid the possibility of generating more CT-non-compliant tainted data than we have already. The acceptance or otherwise of this peculiar class of data where the author has on the one hand said that anyone can do anything with their data, but later tried to retract that by declining the contributor terms is an interesting issue of policy. I can see both sides of the argument. However, I believe the changes I am suggesting will be of procedural value, regardless of how these policy issues are resolved. Ian.___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
Simon Poole writes: It is clearly the easier, pragmatic and sensible thing to do to simply accept the CTs. It is clearly the easier, pragmatic,[1] and sensible thing to simply accept public domain contributions to OSM. We've accepted them in the past (and relicensed under CC-By-SA). What is wrong with accepting them in the future and relicensing under the ODbL? We have a two groups of people who are being ninnies here: the people who refuse to sign the CT, and the people who insist that they sign the CT. The question is: who has a rational course of action, and cui bono? OSM benefits by keeping their contributions because it decreases the disruption of removing them. The OSMF doesn't benefit by deleting their contributions, because it is at no more risk by accepting their bald assertion about PD versus CT. Either way, if they're lying or wrong, the OSMF needs to immediately delete their contributions, and make a good-faith effort to stop redistribution. The project has more to gain and nothing to lose by accepting PD contributions. Thus, the OSMF ninnies are the ones who should change their minds. [1] New York Times style guide puts a comma here. -- --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
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On 3 September 2011 05:03, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: The first is a contract of adhesion: Here's my work; I renounce any copyright claims over it. The OSMF has the choice of accepting that contract or rejecting it, just as it does the contract formed by agreeing to the Contributor Terms. I don't understand their choice of accepting the one contract but refusing the other. But Here's my work; I renounce any copyright claims over it. doesn't go as far as the contributor terms do. One would also need to add something along the lines of And I'm reasonably sure that no-one else has any copyright claims over my contributions that would prevent OSMF re-distributing them under the relevant licenses. This ambiguity is presumably at least one of the reasons why LWG don't feel they're able to accept arbitrary PD declarations. Personally, I'd like to see them produce a simple boilerplate PD declaration that does cover everything they want it to, and then allow people to agree to that somehow. It would, however, need to be a wider rights grant than in the Contributor Terms (since those are the minimum rights that LWG feel they need). But from what I've read I think it could be worded so as to get around the objections that the PD advocates have been raising. -- Robert Whittaker ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On 9/3/2011 4:38 AM, Robert Whittaker (OSM) wrote: One would also need to add something along the lines of And I'm reasonably sure that no-one else has any copyright claims over my contributions that would prevent OSMF re-distributing them under the relevant licenses. I hope you realize that many people who have agreed to the contributor terms can't say this either. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
This is really the wrong list for this discussion, but as I've pointed out before there are further minor points that would have to be considered, for example voting rights on future license changes. Obviously you could simply assume that all PD contributors don't care, I'm just not quite sure that this is really the case. It is clearly the easier, pragmatic and sensible thing to do to simply accept the CTs. Simon Am 03.09.2011 10:38, schrieb Robert Whittaker (OSM): On 3 September 2011 05:03, Russ Nelsonnel...@crynwr.com wrote: The first is a contract of adhesion: Here's my work; I renounce any copyright claims over it. The OSMF has the choice of accepting that contract or rejecting it, just as it does the contract formed by agreeing to the Contributor Terms. I don't understand their choice of accepting the one contract but refusing the other. But Here's my work; I renounce any copyright claims over it. doesn't go as far as the contributor terms do. One would also need to add something along the lines of And I'm reasonably sure that no-one else has any copyright claims over my contributions that would prevent OSMF re-distributing them under the relevant licenses. This ambiguity is presumably at least one of the reasons why LWG don't feel they're able to accept arbitrary PD declarations. Personally, I'd like to see them produce a simple boilerplate PD declaration that does cover everything they want it to, and then allow people to agree to that somehow. It would, however, need to be a wider rights grant than in the Contributor Terms (since those are the minimum rights that LWG feel they need). But from what I've read I think it could be worded so as to get around the objections that the PD advocates have been raising. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On 3 September 2011 19:12, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote: This is really the wrong list for this discussion, but as I've pointed out before there are further minor points that would have to be considered, for example voting rights on future license changes. Obviously you could simply assume that all PD contributors don't care, I'm just not quite sure that this is really the case. It is clearly the easier, pragmatic and sensible thing to do to simply accept the CTs. Hardly, the easier, pragmatic and sensible thing to do is just use CC-by-SA then you don't need to try and get everyone to agree to horrible terms... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
Simon Poole wrote: there are further minor points that would have to be considered, for example voting rights on future license changes. I don't see any problem here. There is a definition of active contributors in the CT which does not mention the CT or any of the licenses, just the act of making contributions to the project. Therefore, a contributor who has declared his contributions to be in the PD would be able to vote if and only if he has edited the Project in any three calendar months from the last 12 months. It is clearly the easier, pragmatic and sensible thing to do to simply accept the CTs. This might be the pragmatic thing for contributors to do, but it's not a decision that can be made by the OSMF. The pragmatic thing for OSMF to do would be to accept that PD contributions remain in the CT/ODbL database. -- Tobias Knerr ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 12:03 AM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: Richard Fairhurst writes: [follow-ups should be to legal-talk yadda yadda] Russ Nelson wrote: What about the people who didn't agree to the CT, but whose data is in the public domain? See http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2011-August/006608.html et seq. I only see two people defending the idea, and a lot more questioning it, that somehow a PD declaration is legally any less binding than signing a contract. The first is a contract of adhesion: Here's my work; I renounce any copyright claims over it. This is incorrect. A waiver is not a contract, let alone a contract of adhesion. (I think maybe you meant a unilateral contract rather than a contract of adhesion, but a waiver isn't one of those either.) The CT is a contract of adhesion. The rest of your message continues to repeat this mistaken premise. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 5:34 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 September 2011 19:12, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote: It is clearly the easier, pragmatic and sensible thing to do to simply accept the CTs. Hardly, the easier, pragmatic and sensible thing to do is just use CC-by-SA then you don't need to try and get everyone to agree to horrible terms... In any case (and fortunately), not everyone is a pragmatist. Some people are willing to stand up for their beliefs even when the majority disagrees with them. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
Ian Sergeant writes: To address your question specifically, what happens to data placed in the public domain by the author on the wiki, who then specifically declines the CT? Well in the first case, if the edits are just a trivial modification to a fully CT-compliant version - I'd say just hide them. What problem does this solve? -- --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
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
Richard Fairhurst writes: [follow-ups should be to legal-talk yadda yadda] Russ Nelson wrote: What about the people who didn't agree to the CT, but whose data is in the public domain? See http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2011-August/006608.html et seq. I only see two people defending the idea, and a lot more questioning it, that somehow a PD declaration is legally any less binding than signing a contract. The first is a contract of adhesion: Here's my work; I renounce any copyright claims over it. The OSMF has the choice of accepting that contract or rejecting it, just as it does the contract formed by agreeing to the Contributor Terms. I don't understand their choice of accepting the one contract but refusing the other. Can somebody explain why one contract is superior to the other? Because the CT looks more legal? But PD steps entirely outside the realm of the law by stating that the author will not enforce copyright. That looks like an even *better* contract to accept than the CT. In both cases, if the contract is breached, and the work infringing, the OSMF's actions need to be exactly the same: remove the data from the database, and make a reasonable attempt to ensure that it is not further distributed by any recipients of the data. Since the OSMF has entered into a contract with all contributors (PD or CT both), and the contributors have agreed to this contract (PD or CT both), it has an affirmative defense of innocent infringement. Given that we do everything in an open and public manner, with board meeting minutes, and community discussion being published, breaking that defense would require proof that somebody on the OSMF board agreed to accept somebody's contract with a wink and a nod. That would be somewhere between impossible and expensive. If it's impossible, no worries. If it's merely expensive, you have to look at the harm done. Since there's no one editor (aside from importers of US Federal Government works) who dominates the database, any claim of harm would be difficult to prove. Since 1) the defense is strong, 2) the harm is minimal, 3) cooperation is full, you should expect absolutely nobody to sue the OSMF for infringement of works which are supposedly PD or CT but not really. -- --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
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On 3 September 2011 14:03, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: be difficult to prove. Since 1) the defense is strong, 2) the harm is minimal, 3) cooperation is full, you should expect absolutely nobody to sue the OSMF for infringement of works which are supposedly PD or CT but not really. The position taken over PD seems contradictory to other opinions given over the CTs as well, specifically how minors and others aren't allowed to enter into contracts directly: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Contributor_Terms/Open_Issues#Legal_Capacity ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
Michael Kugelmann michaelk_...@gmx.de wrote on 01/09/2011 04:19:41 PM: we should replace the data not delete it! So please remap the information that needs to be removed. Of course we should, but we need to gives ourselves the tools which allow us to do this effectively and well. Lets think about the current process. When I have a v1 object that is non-CT compliant, then we have to assume the further revisions may be derivatives. If CT-agreed mappers have added tags from a survey in later revisions, then we can possibly grab those, but apart from that it is a remapping effort that needs to be undertaken. Given our tools are already designed from remapping from scratch, with the modifications that have been made to allow us to identify these objects, the remapping proceeds as per normal (survey, imagery, etc), and the tools are good. However, when we have a v2 non-CT compliant object based on a v1 CT-compliant one, it is a different story. We can't use the information added or changed in the v2 object, but sometimes the information in the v1 object can be quite useful, and this could be used as a base for the remapping. Sometimes the v2 object is even a trivial change, and the information in the v2 object isn't even a substantial improvement on the v1 object, for example an addition of a default value, or movements of an object less than the accuracy of even the best gps and imagery that we have available. In the first case, it would be useful to be able to use an earlier (CT-compliant) version of a object as the basis for editing, and make it apparent in the database this has happened (by hiding the non-CT revision). In the second case, we have to ask the question of whether having these trivial improvements in the database actually cause us substantial effort for little gain, especially if they may cause us later (either by editing, or by automation) to discard work derived from these releases that we really shouldn't have to. Our tools are designed to keep whatever history they can in a chain, and work with the latest versions. They aren't currently suited to this task. The objective is a CT-clean database, with the absolute minimum data loss. The discussion is about the best way to accomplish that, especially where we have CT-agreed versions of objects that we want to leverage. Ian.___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
What about this case: v1 is CT-compliant. v2 adds a new tag and is not CT-compliant. Then, v3 changes this tag and adds a bunch of other tags. Will these other tags be considered compliant? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 2:57 AM, Ian Sergeant iserg...@hih.com.au wrote: When I have a v1 object that is non-CT compliant, then we have to assume the further revisions may be derivatives. Why do we have to assume this? If CT-agreed mappers have added tags from a survey in later revisions, then we can possibly grab those, but apart from that it is a remapping effort that needs to be undertaken. How can that remapping effort avoid making a derivative? However, when we have a v2 non-CT compliant object based on a v1 CT-compliant one, it is a different story. Sure, but how do we recognize a v1 CT-compliant object? The average mapper does not have the legal expertise to determine CT compliance. The objective is a CT-clean database, with the absolute minimum data loss. The discussion is about the best way to accomplish that, especially where we have CT-agreed versions of objects that we want to leverage. I would suggest that having amateurs determine what is and is not compliant is most certainly not the best way to accomplish this. Furthermore, the goal is not to have a CT-clean database. You already have a CT-clean database. The goal, apparently, is to have an ODbL-clean database. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: Furthermore, the goal is not to have a CT-clean database. You already have a CT-clean database. The goal, apparently, is to have an ODbL-clean database. I think you mean a CT-clean contributor-base. Much of the database content is un-infected by the CTs. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 8:14 AM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: Furthermore, the goal is not to have a CT-clean database. You already have a CT-clean database. The goal, apparently, is to have an ODbL-clean database. I think you mean a CT-clean contributor-base. Much of the database content is un-infected by the CTs. What I mean is that the database is compatible with the CTs, as the CTs allow the database to be released under CC-BY-SA. Alternatively put, the CTs do not require any content to be removed. Licensing the database under the ODbL *would* require content to be removed. But the CTs do not require this. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
Павел Фомин pavel...@yandex.ru wrote on 01/09/2011 09:24:30 PM: What about this case: v1 is CT-compliant. v2 adds a new tag and is not CT-compliant. Then, v3 changes this tag and adds a bunch of other tags. Will these other tags be considered compliant? This highlights one of the issues. The v3 may or not be derived, and telling whether it is will depend on a curious blend of logical heuristics, subsequent human evaluation combined with an assessment against developing multi-national legal precedents. At the end of the day we may choose to radically include a v3 object where all non-CT-compliant tags have been overwritten or removed, or we may conservatively choose to remove anything that has a possibility of being tainted by an earlier revision. If the v3 editor can optionally just modify the v1 CT-compliant version of the object, then the problem is minimised, and the task simplified. Ian. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote on 31/08/2011 03:43:28 PM: What about the people who didn't agree to the CT, but whose data is in the public domain? Hi Russ, The suggestion here is to streamline a process, more than determine policy.. That is to.. 1. Automatically hide trivial changes to objects originally created by those who have agreed to the CT by people who have specifically declined them. And/Or 2. When edits made by those who have specifically declined the CT are manually reverted, allow them to be hidden from the history of the object, so the object can then be determined to be fully CT-compliant throughout its history. If our objective is a CT-compliant data-set, I see both of these things as advancing us towards that objective, doing little or no damage, saving us considerable manual effort in some areas, and saving the history of objects where we can. It also may avoid unnecessarily large data removal at a later stage. To address your question specifically, what happens to data placed in the public domain by the author on the wiki, who then specifically declines the CT? Well in the first case, if the edits are just a trivial modification to a fully CT-compliant version - I'd say just hide them. In the second case, where a CT-compliant editor has decided to revert the edits made by one of our ambivalent PD editors, they are being reverted anyway, so the only concern is the state of the history of the object and not the state of the object itself. The editor when choosing whether to revert currently could just as well decide to copy and upload to avoid the possibility of contamination, with the effect of losing all the history connection to the object. Which is preferable? I'd say hiding the history of the edit by ambivalent PD contributor is preferable to losing all connection, so I'd recommend that. Ian.___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
Am 31.08.2011 02:19, schrieb Ian Sergeant: I think the strategy to remove all non-CT compliant data in one big bang is flawed. I don't know of anybody who has proposed such a strategy (well at least nobody serious about the matter). It is clear, at the very end, there will be some automated deletes, but with some exceptions these should be very limited in scope. But will probably include cleaning objects that are in principle CTs compliant, but have had edits that are not, there is work going on on the German forum to define a reasonable rule set for that. Right -now- the best thing to do is: - contact mappers that haven't agreed or disagreed to the CTs (see http://odbl.poole.ch). Worldwide we still have a good 60% of pre-CT mappers that haven't reacted to now, with some effort that can be halved. - use the license status tools in Potlatch and JOSM when you are editing anyway to only leave compliant data after an edit (for example by not moving non-compliant nodes in a way, but by replacing them). This is naturally assuming that you have tracks and other information to allow you to do this. - ignore trolling by JohnSmith Simon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On 31 August 2011 17:06, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote: - ignore trolling by JohnSmith Funny way to ignore someone, in any case here's at least one particular example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/aharvey/diary/14416 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On 8/31/2011 3:06 AM, Simon Poole wrote: - use the license status tools in Potlatch and JOSM when you are editing anyway to only leave compliant data after an edit (for example by not moving non-compliant nodes in a way, but by replacing them). This is naturally assuming that you have tracks and other information to allow you to do this. Hoe about this: if you decide to delete data that the OSMF has decided not to accept, look at the history and only delete what's necessary. There's no need to make it harder on ordinary mappers who don't care about the license change. This should be treated similarly to an import: if you're not willing to merge the existing data, don't do it. If your change results in the deletion of tags like highway=traffic_signals and lanes=* that have been added by CT-agreeing mappers, you're doing it wrong. (Oh, and don't forget to change the number of lanes properly if you're changing a dual carriageway to a single carriageway or vice versa. Enough mappers fail to do this even when making ordinary edits.) In short, if you're not willing to fix any damage you create, don't delete non-CT data. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
Am 31.08.2011 09:16, schrieb Nathan Edgars II: Hoe about this: if you decide to delete data that the OSMF has decided not to accept, look at the history and only delete what's necessary. There's no need to make it harder on ordinary mappers who don't care about the license change. I wouldn't over exaggerate the issue, in many many countries it's actually quite difficult to find non-compliant objects and in the countries where there are widespread issues the mappers are in general aware of the situation and, for example in the case of Germany, actively working on the issues. Simon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
I would go so far as to say, don't delete *anything* until legally you absolutely have to. There are a number of non-CT-accepting contributors in my area, for instance, and I don't think the map should be interfered with unless it's absolutely necessary. Remember that by doing so, the quality of the OSM map - already a useful resource for the general public - will be affected. Nick -Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: - To: talk@openstreetmap.org From: Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com Date: 31/08/2011 08:17AM Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data.. On 8/31/2011 3:06 AM, Simon Poole wrote: - use the license status tools in Potlatch and JOSM when you are editing anyway to only leave compliant data after an edit (for example by not moving non-compliant nodes in a way, but by replacing them). This is naturally assuming that you have tracks and other information to allow you to do this. Hoe about this: if you decide to delete data that the OSMF has decided not to accept, look at the history and only delete what's necessary. There's no need to make it harder on ordinary mappers who don't care about the license change. This should be treated similarly to an import: if you're not willing to merge the existing data, don't do it. If your change results in the deletion of tags like highway=traffic_signals and lanes=* that have been added by CT-agreeing mappers, you're doing it wrong. (Oh, and don't forget to change the number of lanes properly if you're changing a dual carriageway to a single carriageway or vice versa. Enough mappers fail to do this even when making ordinary edits.) In short, if you're not willing to fix any damage you create, don't delete non-CT data. ___ 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] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
[follow-ups should be to legal-talk yadda yadda] Russ Nelson wrote: What about the people who didn't agree to the CT, but whose data is in the public domain? See http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2011-August/006608.html et seq. Given that LWG doesn't appear to be changing its IMO daft stance that a user placing their data in the public domain is not good enough for us, I am seriously tempted to delete and reimport TimSC's data[1] under my own account, and say it's good enough for me, it's PD, and I've agreed to the CTs. You have a problem with that?. cheers Richard [1] the stuff that people have built useful stuff on, that is. I doubt anyone would miss the random landuse ;) -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/How-to-start-to-remove-non-CT-compliant-data-tp6744723p6745823.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On 31/08/2011 10:47, Richard Fairhurst wrote: [1] the stuff that people have built useful stuff on, that is. I doubt anyone would miss the random landuse ... or the NPE-derived waterways in Southern England (given that we now have far better sources for those). The problem with that of course is that it takes time - but as a project we don't seem short of remote mappers (and the northern hemisphere long winter nights will soon be upon us). Maybe some sort of armchair mapping party (some time in December) is needed? Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
Why not do what Wikipedia did and work together with the licence authors (in this case Creative Commons and Open Data Commons) to provide an automatic upgrade clause? Then nothing need be deleted. -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
Ed Avis wrote: Why not do what Wikipedia did and work together with the licence authors (in this case Creative Commons and Open Data Commons) to provide an automatic upgrade clause? Then nothing need be deleted. I expressly asked this a couple of years ago: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2009-February/001971.html and was told no: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2009-February/001982.html cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/How-to-start-to-remove-non-CT-compliant-data-tp6744723p6746371.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On 8/31/2011 8:48 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Ed Avis wrote: Why not do what Wikipedia did and work together with the licence authors (in this case Creative Commons and Open Data Commons) to provide an automatic upgrade clause? Then nothing need be deleted. I expressly asked this a couple of years ago: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2009-February/001971.html and was told no: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2009-February/001982.html But, I would remind everyone that the current official CC policy on CC licenses and databases - indeed, on any legal tools other than PD for databases - is the science commons protocol on open access to data, which calls for the PD position only. CC has since changed their position on potentially copyrightable databases (or clarified that they only meant databases of uncopyrightable facts). ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
Richard Fairhurst richard at systemed.net writes: Why not do what Wikipedia did and work together with the licence authors I expressly asked this a couple of years ago: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2009-February/001971.html and was told no: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2009-February/001982.html Right. But since then the situation has changed. CC have made clear they're committed to supporting the use of CC licences (including BY-SA) for databases. Version 4 of the licence would be an excellent opportunity to make the kinds of changes that would improve it for OSM (even though, in my view, version 2 of CC-BY-SA has served us well so far). More broadly, having two separate copyleft silos for open data can't be in anyone's interest and we should try to get compatibility or a merger between the CC and ODC share-alike licences. -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
things have changed since then, might be worth revisiting On 8/31/2011 5:48 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Ed Avis wrote: Why not do what Wikipedia did and work together with the licence authors (in this case Creative Commons and Open Data Commons) to provide an automatic upgrade clause? Then nothing need be deleted. I expressly asked this a couple of years ago: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2009-February/001971.html and was told no: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2009-February/001982.html cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/How-to-start-to-remove-non-CT-compliant-data-tp6744723p6746371.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote on 31/08/2011 05:29:46 PM: I wouldn't over exaggerate the issue, in many many countries it's actually quite difficult to find non-compliant objects and in the countries where there are widespread issues the mappers are in general aware of the situation and, for example in the case of Germany, actively working on the issues. In some areas of the main cities of Australia you have the situation where large areas have been fundamentally mapped by multiple editors who have agreed the CTs, and there are a handful of people who have explicitly rejected the CTs that have touched in some way just about every object the area. Sometimes the change is significant, but in many cases the changes are what I would consider trivial - smoothing a curve, adding a default speed limit tag (without a survey), nudging a node by a metre or so to agree with one imagery set, or one survey. There are situations where the issue is a deep one, where the areas or objects may need remapping to be CT-compliant. In other instances the issues are shallow, and we should have hopefully have a way of reducing the effort required in those areas, rather than requiring all new data. The most valuable thing I can see would be that a person choosing to edit an object could choose to edit a CT-compliant earlier object revision rather modify a non-CT-compliant later revision. The current API forces you to modify the latest revision or to remove the object entirely and replace it with a new one. So the current editor has a choice of modifying a non-CT object, with the possibility that a later decision may see that object removed, or removing and losing the history of the object. Neither of the current options are ideal. If anyone in Germany (or anywhere else) has any ideas to share or is working on the issues, please share. Ian. P.S. I know the people who have rejected the CTs have valid reasons, and have made great contributions. I'm merely looking at the state of affairs, and not meaning to cast aspersions on anyone, so please don't take it that way.___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 1:43 AM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: What about the people who didn't agree to the CT, but whose data is in the public domain? Isn't all data in the public domain? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Given that LWG doesn't appear to be changing its IMO daft stance that a user placing their data in the public domain is not good enough for us, I am seriously tempted to delete and reimport TimSC's data[1] under my own account, and say it's good enough for me, it's PD, and I've agreed to the CTs. You have a problem with that?. What if the node/way/relation was also edited by others? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On 31 August 2011 10:19, Ian Sergeant iserg...@hih.com.au wrote: I think the strategy to remove all non-CT compliant data in one big bang is What about the people that agreed to the CTs that had data compatible with the current license, cc-by-sa ? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
John Smith writes: On 31 August 2011 10:19, Ian Sergeant iserg...@hih.com.au wrote: I think the strategy to remove all non-CT compliant data in one big bang is What about the people that agreed to the CTs that had data compatible with the current license, cc-by-sa ? What about the people who didn't agree to the CT, but whose data is in the public domain? -- --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
Re: [OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..
On 31 August 2011 15:43, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: John Smith writes: On 31 August 2011 10:19, Ian Sergeant iserg...@hih.com.au wrote: I think the strategy to remove all non-CT compliant data in one big bang is What about the people that agreed to the CTs that had data compatible with the current license, cc-by-sa ? What about the people who didn't agree to the CT, but whose data is in the public domain? Exactly, accepting or not accepting the CT might be a suitable indicator for the majority of mappers, but it won't tell you if the data is suitable for relicensing, lots of people have been told they can accept the CTs because they allow for accepting the current license. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
