[OSM-talk] Islands that will vanish in the license change
Thanks to Paul Norman's efforts and visualizations based on it[1], there has been a lot of activity in remapping coastlines lately and a lot of improvement. However one loophole that Paul's method does not detect is islands that will have their coastlines vanish completely. I decided to take a look at this tonight. So far I have come up with a pretty hackish way of looking at things... but I think it might still be of use. I downloaded all natural=coastline ways from my jxapi. Then I split the world into 4 parts to make them small enough for me to open in JOSM. Then I selected all objects that were last touched by an accepting user and purged them from the data set. What is left is all ways that were last touched by a decliner. Some of these are actually OK from a license standpoint. Maybe the decliner just deleted a tag or added some nodes in the middle of a way which will obviously distort the geometry but the coastline topology will remain intact so they don't show up in Paul's files. Also, some things that I purged may still be heavily impacted or even completely removed by the license change if they were created by a decliner but last touched by someone else. So it isn't perfect. The south/west quadrant of the world is actually pretty much good to go. I already fixed a few islands. The north/west one is still a little large so I may have to do some more tinkering there. The one I have ready to go right now is south/east (Australia) and I saw this topic come up in the talk-au archives a few days ago so I thought I would go ahead and share. Perhaps someone who is subscribed to talk-au can forward this? What I have is a ~10MB .osm file containing 537 ways (plus some stray nodes that should just be ignored): http://ni.kwsn.net/~toby/OSM/coastline_SE_bad.osm.gz This file covers from the equator to the south pole and from 0 to 180 longitude so it is more than Just Australia although that is the most impacted area. The way to use this would be to download it and open it in JOSM. Then do a "type:way" search and run the license plugin on that. Then just look for the big red blobs. DO NOT use this layer to edit and upload or terrible things are likely to happen. Use it only as a guide to find trouble spots. I set the upload=false flag in the file so JOSM should be very clear about this if you try to upload from this layer. So download a problem area to a new layer and replace dirty coastlines to your heart's content. The biggest blob of red is on the northeast side of Australia. Some of them are random rocks along the coastline that cover a few square meters. Some are large islands. Unfortunately it looks like Bing isn't good enough to retrace some of these but I'm hoping the locals may have other sources. Enjoy, Toby [1] http://www.wightpaths.co.uk/coast/CT-only.php ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] POI for Hotel
On Fri, April 13, 2012 12:33, Frans Thamura wrote: > I just thinking > > > Create a web, fill there and save in poi of osm. > > > But, what happen if someone has put there. > > > Still dunno how to communcate if we have data also in my server that > 'must' > share poi Well, it's a classic problem. If you have one database, then you are probably happy. But, if this database does not contain everything you want then you need to link to your own database somehow. Now you have two databases. Which one is correct? I think you have two options. Option 1: Add all data for all hotels into OSM. Now you have only one database. But the problem is that some data should probably not be entered into OSM. For example, number of rooms, or price of rooms. Option 2: Link OSM POIs to your own database. In OSM you can store name, address, phone number. In your own database, rating, price, reviews, etc. To link them together you need something unique in OSM. You can't use the node ID because it might change, or a node could be converted to an area. You could use the ref=* field, or webpage (this is probably unique for each hotel), or a combination of name+addr:housenumber. You could also introduce UUIDs, but the proposal for this never really got off the ground. Once you have a link you can write a program that extracts all hotel POIs in Indonesia from OSM and compares them to your own database. Your program should produce 3 lists: 1. Hotels in OSM that are also in your database 2. Hotels in OSM that are not in your database 3. Hotels in your list that are not in OSM List 1 is very boring. You don't need to do anything. Hotels in list 2 must be added to your database. Hotels in list 3 must be added to OSM. Or maybe they are already there, so you just need to make the link. This is a simplified view, but it's the basic technique you need. Best wishes, Andrew ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] POI for Hotel
I just thinking Create a web, fill there and save in poi of osm. But, what happen if someone has put there. Still dunno how to communcate if we have data also in my server that 'must' share poi On Apr 13, 2012 10:28 AM, "Andrew Errington" wrote: > On Fri, April 13, 2012 11:58, Frans Thamura wrote: > > hi all > > > > we just develop team to collect all the hotel information in Indonesia > > > > choice > > > > 1. create a hotel database outside openstreetmap > > 2. save in openstreet as POI > > > > > > what do u think? > > > > and we will create "rating" also for the hotel... > > Option 2, then (optionally) cross-reference your database outside of OSM > with hotel POIs inside OSM. Alternatively, you can re-generate your > database by extracting hotel POIs from the OSM database. > > For rating you can use the stars=* tag, but it's probably subjective, or > not really comparable between countries. > > Best wishes, > > Andrew > > > > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] POI for Hotel
On Fri, April 13, 2012 11:58, Frans Thamura wrote: > hi all > > we just develop team to collect all the hotel information in Indonesia > > choice > > 1. create a hotel database outside openstreetmap > 2. save in openstreet as POI > > > what do u think? > > and we will create "rating" also for the hotel... Option 2, then (optionally) cross-reference your database outside of OSM with hotel POIs inside OSM. Alternatively, you can re-generate your database by extracting hotel POIs from the OSM database. For rating you can use the stars=* tag, but it's probably subjective, or not really comparable between countries. Best wishes, Andrew ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] POI for Hotel
hi all we just develop team to collect all the hotel information in Indonesia choice 1. create a hotel database outside openstreetmap 2. save in openstreet as POI what do u think? and we will create "rating" also for the hotel... F ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A rendering issue with the maps on OSM homepage?
Op 10-4-2012 17:39, Frank Steggink schreef: On 10-4-2012 15:23, Robert Tromp wrote: Have a look at this area on the west coast of Hokkaido, Japan: http://osm.org/go/7U~IT~Jz Notice the greyed-out ocean and the mis-aligned areas, coastline Looking at the OSM-data itself using JOSM, there seems nothing wrong (other than a few small mapping mishaps) Furthermore, MapOSMatic, for example, creates perfectly good maps (including edits I made to OSM after I first noticed the rendering issue). In the past weeks, neither regular nor forced re-renderings of the map tiles have solved the problem. Robert ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk When I look at [1] the status is: Tile is clean. Last rendered at Mon Oct 10 12:56:45 2011 Forced rerendering seems to solve the problem. The area now looks fine to me. Frank [1] http://a.tile.openstreetmap.org/16/58277/24359.png/status Whatever the problem was with forced re-render, it seems fixed now. As you've noticed yourself, a problem with scheduled re-renders or more accurate, the lack thereof, remains. The area is still showing alignment issues, grey tiles still start to show at zoom level 17, 18. Hopefully that gets solved too, as I'm not eager to manually force-render a few hundred or even thousand map tiles. Robert ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License change/redaction affecting objects geometry
My 2p:
Leave it to [2].
A. since it is no effort
B. any problems created by the redaction should be noticeable by [2] whether it
was caused by the bot or *any other normal edit*
Apart from deletions, but then the gives mappers (including new mappers!)
something to (re)map via local knowledge or other ODBL compatible sources - if
they are so inclined to notice something is missing.
I sort of like the idea of creating out of band info in OpenStreetBugs for
items that are deleted - i.e. just 'something was here' not sure how that can
be legal since that itself is a derivative of a decliners IP.
Be Seeing You - Rob.
If at first you don't succeed,
then skydiving isn't for you.
> Any help in identifying areas that should be eye-balled and possibly
> cleaned up would be welcome help indeed. It seems a small bit to attach
> a tag to any affected ways or relations from which members have been
> redacted. This will be especially helpful when the editing tools catch
> up to show the tags presence and/or highlight what could use attention.
>
> Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ
>
> On 4/12/2012 5:01 AM, Pieren wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > The rebuild team is warning that the relicensing ("redaction" script)
> > will unsurprisingly affect many objects geometry like ways loosing
> > nodes, intersections with unconnected ways, self-intersecting
> > polygons, roundabouts not round, buildings not square anymore, etc..
> > ([1]).
> > The question is to insert in the rebuild script some kind of reports
> > or logs about such affected objects or not. First, I think it has to
> > be discussed widely with the community, not only in a small group (we
> > have enough conspiracy noises in this project).
> > Then, I think that the best option would be to add a specific tag
> > which could facilitate the remapping process for the "crowd". The tag
> > should be enough self-explanatory for all, including newcomers and
> > removed once the issue is fixed.
> > Another option is to set-up some monitoring of the affected objects
> > and consider them as 'fixed' as soon as they are touched after the
> > relicensing (but that could be insufficient imho).
> > Last option is to do nothing since we already have many quality
> > assurance tools ([2]) monitoring the contributions.
> >
> > Pieren
> >
> >
> > [1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/rebuild/2012-April/000199.html
> > [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Quality_Assurance
> >
> > ___
> > 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] Geofabrik downloads post-licence-change
Thank you for the answers. And many thanks too for all the unique webservices and the exceptional work you all are doing in the machinery halls. Yours, S. 2012/4/12 Richard Fairhurst : > Stefan Keller wrote: >> Am I right that there are currently no updates available since >> April 9th at /osm/ and there doesn't exist the new >> /openstreetmap/ directory neither because we are waiting for >> the OSM board's approval of the new license? > > No, it's nothing to do with OSM(F) board approval. As explained at > http://blog.osmfoundation.org/2012/04/05/license-change-update-getting-it-right/ > , the coders working on the rebuild code are ironing out a few final issues > before the process can begin. > > cheers > Richard > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Geofabrik-downloads-post-licence-change-tp5588668p5635061.html > Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > ___ > 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] An example photo/video mapping trip
Am 11. April 2012 14:11 schrieb Nikhil Upadhye : > My aim is to make the photo/video mapping process faster and reduce > mapper's effort in going through all the photos/videos for > information. It becomes very tedious job for mapper to go through > several hundreds of photos or hours of long videos to detect signs and > integrate to map manually. This might be true for video, but if we are talking about photos this seems useless to me. Usually I take a photo at every point where I want to map something, so there are very few photos from a mapping survey that are useless. I doubt you will see many street signs with road names on occasional video recordings (unless you do it like Google in 360 degrees and with sufficent resolution). Apart from that street names and road signs are by far not the only information you will usually record on a mapping survey, and most of the work is drawing and tagging what you want to map rather than finding pictures which contain relevant information. This might be different for video, I agree. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License change/redaction affecting objects geometry
Any help in identifying areas that should be eye-balled and possibly
cleaned up would be welcome help indeed. It seems a small bit to attach
a tag to any affected ways or relations from which members have been
redacted. This will be especially helpful when the editing tools catch
up to show the tags presence and/or highlight what could use attention.
Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ
On 4/12/2012 5:01 AM, Pieren wrote:
Hi,
The rebuild team is warning that the relicensing ("redaction" script)
will unsurprisingly affect many objects geometry like ways loosing
nodes, intersections with unconnected ways, self-intersecting
polygons, roundabouts not round, buildings not square anymore, etc..
([1]).
The question is to insert in the rebuild script some kind of reports
or logs about such affected objects or not. First, I think it has to
be discussed widely with the community, not only in a small group (we
have enough conspiracy noises in this project).
Then, I think that the best option would be to add a specific tag
which could facilitate the remapping process for the "crowd". The tag
should be enough self-explanatory for all, including newcomers and
removed once the issue is fixed.
Another option is to set-up some monitoring of the affected objects
and consider them as 'fixed' as soon as they are touched after the
relicensing (but that could be insufficient imho).
Last option is to do nothing since we already have many quality
assurance tools ([2]) monitoring the contributions.
Pieren
[1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/rebuild/2012-April/000199.html
[2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Quality_Assurance
___
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] License change/redaction affecting objects geometry
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Jacek Konieczny > The tag sounds like a good idea, but it has one problem: untouched tags > would stay forever even if there is no real problem there. It will be > only unneeded data in the database. Of course, the tags could be removed > by some bot later… but we don't like bots, do we? Remapping was really effective only when we had the tools identifying the affected elements (the special license API, its support on editors, the maps on OSMI or poole.ch). Once the redaction will be complete, it will be much harder to find the errors mentionned above. If the remapping tools disappear, it will simply stop or go much slower. The main advantage of the tag is that the people motivated by the remapping (and we had many in the past weeks, see [3]) will be able to continue with monitoring tools which can be easily adapted (e.g. special rendering rule for the special tag). > Would these tools catch all of the problem you mentioned? Only for some cases but surely not for all without comparing with the old dataset (which might be a legal issue). Pieren [3] http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/munin.html ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License change/redaction affecting objects geometry
Am 12.04.2012 13:15, schrieb Jacek Konieczny: Then, I think that the best option would be to add a specific tag which could facilitate the remapping process for the "crowd". The tag sounds like a good idea, but it has one problem: untouched tags would stay forever even if there is no real problem there. It will be only unneeded data in the database. Of course, the tags could be removed by some bot later… but we don't like bots, do we? Well... I think, we don't like bots for tasks, that are complex and error prone. For well defined, well thought tasks bots are okay, I think, and relatively widely accepted. As the license change will be done by a bot, inventing one specific, not yet used tag to mark changes and removing exactly the same tag (not object) later should not make trouble as far as I can see. regards Peter ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License change/redaction affecting objects geometry
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:01:46AM +0200, Pieren wrote: > The question is to insert in the rebuild script some kind of reports > or logs about such affected objects or not. Log with id-s and/or location of the detected/expected problems may be helpful and probably easiest to generate without complicating the redaction script too much. > Then, I think that the best option would be to add a specific tag > which could facilitate the remapping process for the "crowd". The tag sounds like a good idea, but it has one problem: untouched tags would stay forever even if there is no real problem there. It will be only unneeded data in the database. Of course, the tags could be removed by some bot later… but we don't like bots, do we? > Another option is to set-up some monitoring of the affected objects > and consider them as 'fixed' as soon as they are touched after the > relicensing (but that could be insufficient imho). Sounds like an extra work for the people who already have much to do. With the logs or the tags anyone can make use of the data and make tools (visualisations) to handle it. The data from the logs could be overlaid over any OSM rendering, tags can also be overlaid or rendered with other data. > Last option is to do nothing since we already have many quality > assurance tools ([2]) monitoring the contributions. Would these tools catch all of the problem you mentioned? Greets, Jacek ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License change/redaction affecting objects geometry
2012/4/12 Simon Poole : > > > Am 12.04.2012 11:01, schrieb Pieren: >> .. >> Last option is to do nothing since we already have many quality >> assurance tools ([2]) monitoring the contributions. >> > This is IMHO by far the best way of handling any post redaction issues > (not necessarily the easiest one). Do you think it would be possible to keep the tags of ways or nodes that were thrown away by the redaction bot because the first contributor did not accept the CTs somewhere? (only those added by accepting contributors, excluding bot edits, of course) Maybe as bugs in Openstreetbugs at the rough center position of the deleted way. This would (imho) be 100% clean odbl data and could help a lot in remapping afterwards. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License change/redaction affecting objects geometry
Am 12.04.2012 11:01, schrieb Pieren: > .. > Last option is to do nothing since we already have many quality > assurance tools ([2]) monitoring the contributions. > This is IMHO by far the best way of handling any post redaction issues (not necessarily the easiest one). Simon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] An example photo/video mapping trip
Am 11.04.2012 10:57, schrieb hbogner: I was thinking of doing something similar, but I was thinking of buying a car camera (something like this http://is.gd/D3WNYL ) but don't know is it any good for mapping. Anyone used video recordings for mapping. I tried video mapping plugin for josm, but it won't load. Well as it turned out on my bachelor thesis about videomapping, the most devices are good enough. Pay attention to 15$ keycams from china, as the compression is quit high and they are very buggy. But anything like iPhone or Pocket Camcorder will work, if you consider some restrictions (reflections in windows, limited field of view, ...) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Video_mapping Matthias (user:!i!) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Geofabrik downloads post-licence-change
Stefan Keller wrote: > Am I right that there are currently no updates available since > April 9th at /osm/ and there doesn't exist the new > /openstreetmap/ directory neither because we are waiting for > the OSM board's approval of the new license? No, it's nothing to do with OSM(F) board approval. As explained at http://blog.osmfoundation.org/2012/04/05/license-change-update-getting-it-right/ , the coders working on the rebuild code are ironing out a few final issues before the process can begin. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Geofabrik-downloads-post-licence-change-tp5588668p5635061.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] License change/redaction affecting objects geometry
Hi,
The rebuild team is warning that the relicensing ("redaction" script)
will unsurprisingly affect many objects geometry like ways loosing
nodes, intersections with unconnected ways, self-intersecting
polygons, roundabouts not round, buildings not square anymore, etc..
([1]).
The question is to insert in the rebuild script some kind of reports
or logs about such affected objects or not. First, I think it has to
be discussed widely with the community, not only in a small group (we
have enough conspiracy noises in this project).
Then, I think that the best option would be to add a specific tag
which could facilitate the remapping process for the "crowd". The tag
should be enough self-explanatory for all, including newcomers and
removed once the issue is fixed.
Another option is to set-up some monitoring of the affected objects
and consider them as 'fixed' as soon as they are touched after the
relicensing (but that could be insufficient imho).
Last option is to do nothing since we already have many quality
assurance tools ([2]) monitoring the contributions.
Pieren
[1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/rebuild/2012-April/000199.html
[2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Quality_Assurance
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Geofabrik downloads post-licence-change
Hi, On 04/12/12 10:02, Stefan Keller wrote: Am I right that there are currently no updates available since April 9th at /osm/ A hiccup in the rsync process that I fixed this morning; new files will be available shortly. and there doesn't exist the new /openstreetmap/ directory neither That's right. I will probably amend my original plan slightly, adding to /osm (current CC-BY-SA data) and /openstreetmap (new ODbL data) a third URL named /osm-old or so, where I keep a pre-redaction-bot static CC-BY-SA version of everything. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Geofabrik downloads post-licence-change
Hi Frederik 2012/3/23 Frederik Ramm : > Hi, > > this is a small heads-up to users of the Geofabrik downloads from > download.geofabrik.de. > > After the OSM license change is complete and the first ODbL planet is > published, it will take another day or so to generate the first round of > extracts and shape files, and daily production will then resume normally, > with all extracts published under ODbL. > > However, to avoid people downloading the new, differently-licensed extracts > without knowing, we will change the download URL (most likely from /osm/... > to /openstreetmap/...). The last version of the CC-BY-SA extracts will > remain, un-updated, under /osm for a while, and then we will make /osm > point to a big "url has changed" page. > > There will be no automatic redirects. > > Bye > Frederik Am I right that there are currently no updates available since April 9th at /osm/ and there doesn't exist the new /openstreetmap/ directory neither because we are waiting for the OSM board's approval of the new license? Ciao, S. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
