Re: [OSM-talk] Last Chance for GSoC 2009 Ideas

[Ian Dees]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Adam Schreiber  wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Ian Dees  wrote:
> > Hi everyone, I just submitted the application for GSoC 2009. If you have
> a
> > chance, please check out the GSoC 2009 application ideas page [1]. Feel
> free
> > to make comments on existing ideas, add your own, or add text to an
> existing
> > idea to make it clearer.
>
> You can actually keep submitting ideas.  Only the organization
> application deadline is tomorrow.
>

Yes, thanks to Frederik and Adam for helping clear this up for me. Google's
timeline isn't very clear.

Continue submitting ideas! (I am.)
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Last Chance for GSoC 2009 Ideas

[Mikel Maron]

I may be misinterpreting but .. we should be able to continue to add ideas to 
our list of projects beyond tomorrow. And students who want to apply for GSoC 
with OSM can contribute their own ideas .. in fact, we should welcome those 
ideas and encourage students to hash out the details of potential projects 
before they make their formal application. 

-Mikel





From: Ian Dees 
To: Talk Openstreetmap 
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 4:58:35 PM
Subject: [OSM-talk] Last Chance for GSoC 2009 Ideas

Hi everyone, I just submitted the application for GSoC 2009. If you have a 
chance, please check out the GSoC 2009 application ideas page [1]. Feel free to 
make comments on existing ideas, add your own, or add text to an existing idea 
to make it clearer. Google describes in several spots on their website that 
they encourage organizations to be very clear about what they're looking for, 
so I think it would make perfect sense to add definitions (what is a "slippy 
map", for example) and more details to your ideas.

Thanks!
Ian
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Last Chance for GSoC 2009 Ideas

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Ian Dees wrote:
> If you have a
> chance, please check out the GSoC 2009 application ideas page [1]

Ian Dees did not write:
[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/GSoC_Applications_2009

;-)

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] Last Chance for GSoC 2009 Ideas

[Adam Schreiber]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Ian Dees  wrote:
> Hi everyone, I just submitted the application for GSoC 2009. If you have a
> chance, please check out the GSoC 2009 application ideas page [1]. Feel free
> to make comments on existing ideas, add your own, or add text to an existing
> idea to make it clearer.

You can actually keep submitting ideas.  Only the organization
application deadline is tomorrow.

Cheers,

Adam

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Last Chance for GSoC 2009 Ideas

[Ian Dees]

Hi everyone, I just submitted the application for GSoC 2009. If you have a
chance, please check out the GSoC 2009 application ideas page [1]. Feel free
to make comments on existing ideas, add your own, or add text to an existing
idea to make it clearer. Google describes in several spots on their website
that they encourage organizations to be very clear about what they're
looking for, so I think it would make perfect sense to add definitions (what
is a "slippy map", for example) and more details to your ideas.

Thanks!
Ian
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] immutable=yes Fwd: DEC Lands

[David Lynch]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 12:36, Russ Nelson  wrote:
> No one has been able to refute my claim that if someone would enter it
> by hand, it belongs in OSM regardless of its source.  And if it comes
> from surveyed data, then it makes no sense to edit its position.
> Metadata, perhaps.  But unless you've been out in the field with a
> theolodite, you have no business changing the location of the NYS DEC
> Lands position.

That's because we don't have a problem with data coming from
government sources that we could go out and collect ourselves. I don't
think most in the group disagree with the assertion that it's more
accurate than anything that we're likely to collect. We do have a
problem with the insistence that it can never be changed. (Even if
there's no need to change it.)

It's like agreeing to let someone put their translation of a book onto
a wiki but only under the condition that nobody changes it. It may be
technically flawless, but if you're not going to allow edits, there
are read-only ways of putting it out there.

-- 
David J. Lynch
djly...@gmail.com

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] immutable=yes Fwd: DEC Lands

[Russ Nelson]

On Mar 12, 2009, at 2:19 PM, Matt Amos wrote:
> i would expect that a very small number of people, possibly zero, will
> try and edit this data.

Yeah, that's my conclusion as well.  For some reason, people are  
objecting to being told not to do something they have no reason or  
interest in doing.  Time will tell if it's a problem.  It's not like  
somebody can be making secret edits here.

--
Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson
r...@cloudmade.com - Twitter: Russ_OSM - 
http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Questions from GSoC 2009 Application

[Ulf Möller]

Ian Dees schrieb:

> 1. It appears that they only allow projects with licenses approved by 
> the opensource.org  site [1]. Is our current 
> license up there?

Most of the OSM software is GPS licensed. I think that is the relevant 
license here.

> 3. Is anyone willing to be the "backup administrator" for the group?

I would.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] immutable=yes Fwd: DEC Lands

[Matt Amos]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Russ Nelson  wrote:
> On Mar 12, 2009, at 7:43 AM, Ted Mielczarek wrote:
>> . However, I reject the idea that there is any data that belongs in
>> OSM that "makes no sense to edit". If you can't edit it, then by
>> definition it shouldn't be in a wiki-style map.
>
> No one has been able to refute my claim that if someone would enter it
> by hand, it belongs in OSM regardless of its source.  And if it comes
> from surveyed data, then it makes no sense to edit its position.
> Metadata, perhaps.  But unless you've been out in the field with a
> theolodite, you have no business changing the location of the NYS DEC
> Lands position.

i would argue that it does "make sense to edit" the NYS DEC data -
you'll be editing it every time they give you an updated dataset. of
course, its up to you how you deal with other people editing this
data. i would recommend treating it like any other edit conflict -
message the user, talk and hopefully you can sort it out between
yourselves.

(very) roughly 15% of data (nodes) in OSM have never been edited. i
would expect that a very small number of people, possibly zero, will
try and edit this data.

cheers,

matt

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] immutable=yes Fwd: DEC Lands

[Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)]

Russ Nelson wrote:
>Sent: 09 March 2009 6:25 PM
>To: Talk Openstreetmap
>Subject: [OSM-talk] immutable=yes Fwd: DEC Lands
>
>Earlier, I proposed that certain datasets should be immutable; whether
>by policy or mechanism as needed.  I propose importing the NYS DEC
>Lands as an immutable set of data.  If you read this exchange with
>Robert Morrell, you can see why they feel that NO changes AT ALL are
>appropriate.  I agree with them.  This dataset constitutes a legal
>description of the property managed by the NYS Department of
>Environmental Conservation, and changes by any OSM editor are not
>consistent with the nature of the data.
>
>How do people feel about me importing this data (with all of their
>metadata), adding an immutable=yes tag, with the intent of tracking
>their dataset, and deleting --outright-- any changes made by OSM
>editors.

-1
Cheers

Andy
>
>Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Robert Morrell 
>> Date: March 9, 2009 2:06:13 PM EDT
>> To: Russ Nelson 
>> Cc: Kurt Swartz , Larry Alber
>> >
>> Subject: Re: DEC Lands
>>
>> Russ,
>>  There is no "creativity" in mapping or displaying of Public
>> owned land. This isn't art, it's legal land rights that impact
>> private land owners.
>>
>> On what bases would someone with no formal training, no legal deed
>> description, or survey map have to determine if a State boundary is
>> correct or incorrect. Simply holding a GPS receiver does not give
>> someone authority.
>>
>> Have you read the metadata on the clearinghouse? Read it. If you
>> have any questions, get back to me.
>>
>> Robert Morrell
>> Senior Land Surveyor
>> Bureau of Real Property
>> Division of Lands and Forests
>> NYS Dept. Environmental Conservation
>> 625 Broadway
>> Albany NY 12233-4256
>> 518-402-9442
>>
> "Russ Nelson"  3/9/2009 1:47 PM >>>
>> So to the best of your ability, the DEC Lands dataset reflects a fact
>> about the world, and there is zero room for creativity?  (I understand
>> why you might feel this way, so if you do, no explanation is needed,
>> just a simple "yes" -- to save you the effort of convincing someone
>> who agrees with you!!)
>> -russ
>>
>> On Mar 9, 2009, at 10:10 AM, Robert Morrell wrote:
>>
>>> Russ,
>>>For anyone to edit this DEC spatial data other than DEC
>>> staff is absolutely inappropriate. This data layer is built using
>>> trained staff using survey maps and deed. If this is your intention
>>> I am asking you not to use our data. There are a whole host of
>>> issues here. For one, non-survey grade GPS accuracies very widely
>>> and can be hundreds of feet wrong. Secondly, sign location is in no
>>> way a indicator of the correct  boundary location. Third, sometime
>>> the Department may transfer in or transfer out land that may not be
>>> reflected in a timely manner on the clearing house data or new land
>>> have been purchased. I can go on and on.
>>>
>>> If you would like to discuss this further you are welcome to call me.
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>> Robert Morrell
>>> Senior Land Surveyor
>>> Bureau of Real Property
>>> Division of Lands and Forests
>>> NYS Dept. Environmental Conservation
>>> 625 Broadway
>>> Albany NY 12233-4256
>>> 518-402-9442
>>>
>> "Russ Nelson"  3/9/2009 9:37 AM >>>
>>> I realize that it's not appropriate to edit the data, and in fact we
>>> can keep track of any changes, and either revert them if they are
>>> obviously incorrect, or submit them back to you if they seem to be
>>> legitimate.  Why would someone make a purposeful edit?  Perhaps they
>>> were out in the field with a GPS, and noticed that the signage
>>> disagrees with the map?  Of course, it may be the signage that's
>>> wrong, but either way it's an issue worthy of resolution.
>>>
>>> OpenStreetMap is a combination of imported data and user-generated
>>> data.  If you're familiar with Wikipedia, OpenStreetMap is very
>>> similar in concept, only for geodata.  Imported data goes into the
>>> map
>>> under its own userid, and all of your metadata is preserved.  If
>>> someone edits anything, it's recorded under their username, so we
>>> know
>>> who made the edit.
>>>
>>> The reason that I ask for permission is that data in OpenStreetMap
>>> may
>>> be further downloaded by users.  We have an API.  Anyone can make API
>>> queries for, say, a bounding box, and received a download of
>>> everything inside that box.  That would include the DEC Lands data.
>>> We try very hard not to infringe anyone's copyright.  No copyright is
>>> claimed in your metadata, but of course under the Berne Convention a
>>> copyright exists nonetheless, and we need your permission to be able
>>> to redistribute the data.
>>>
>>> On Mar 9, 2009, at 8:48 AM, Robert Morrell wrote:
>>>
 Any data the Department puts on the clearing house is open to the
 Public to download.

 I see below you discuss "Anybody who makes additions  or
 corrections to the data must share them with others."

 It would not be appropriate to edit this data in 

Re: [OSM-talk] immutable=yes Fwd: DEC Lands

[Andy Allan]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Russ Nelson  wrote:
>
> On Mar 12, 2009, at 7:43 AM, Ted Mielczarek wrote:
>> . However, I reject the idea that there is any data that belongs in
>> OSM that "makes no sense to edit". If you can't edit it, then by
>> definition it shouldn't be in a wiki-style map.
>
> No one has been able to refute my claim that if someone would enter it
> by hand, it belongs in OSM regardless of its source.  And if it comes
> from surveyed data, then it makes no sense to edit its position.
> Metadata, perhaps.  But unless you've been out in the field with a
> theolodite, you have no business changing the location of the NYS DEC
> Lands position.

So my point of view is that there's no place for data in OSM that
can't be collected and/or maintained by the community. Data imports of
things that we can otherwise collect are useful bootstraps. But if we
don't have the ability to verify/improve/dispute/resolve problems
about it, whether through technical means or issues of
authoritiveness, then there's not much point in it being there.

So I think there's absolutely no point in this boundary data being put
into OSM, since you have described how it's logically impossible for
us to either maintain it or collect it or dispute it. It's not that
it's technically impossible. We have trained surveyors amongst the
community, and I'm sure we could rustle up a theodolite if needs be.
But if we collect evidence of boundaries that disagree with the
dataset, and therefore by definition it's our evidence that's
incorrect, then we've lost already.

OSM isn't a dumping ground for unmaintainable datasets, they can be
kept elsewhere and combined at another point in the toolchain.

Cheers,
Andy

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] mapnik does not display symbols

[Jon Burgess]

On Thu, 2009-03-12 at 18:15 +0530, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
> looks like the problem is missing columns in the lenny install. I checked and 
> find the fedora10 install has 52 columns whereas the lenny one has only 41. I 
> cannot find the file which contains the create table statement - if I can get 
> my 
> hands on that, I could check and manually add the missing columns. btw, the 
> fedora10 install does not have a 'construction' column, but still works. Any 
> idea where this create table statement is and where does it get a list of 
> columns?

The create table command is generated by osm2pgsql. The list of columns
is defined in the default.style I mentioned earlier in this email chain.

Jon



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Questions from GSoC 2009 Application

[Arindam Ghosh]

2009/3/12 Ian Dees :
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm working on the application for GSoC 2009 and have a couple questions
> that others might be able to answer more effectively than I can:
>
> 1. It appears that they only allow projects with licenses approved by the
> opensource.org site [1]. Is our current license up there?
>

AFAIK, [1] & [2] tells that unless otherwise stated openstreetmap
software/tools are in GPLv2 license

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/OpenStreetMap_License
[2] 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#What_is_the_licence_for_the_software.3F

-- 
Arindam Ghosh
[http://arindamghosh.wordpress.com]

GPG Key: 0EE58920
Key Server: http://pgp.mit.edu

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Questions from GSoC 2009 Application

[Matt Amos]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Thomas Wood  wrote:
> I'm guessing the Rails Port is under GPL (although not
> explicitly stated anywhere)

http://svn.openstreetmap.org/LICENSE ?

cheers,

matt

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Questions from GSoC 2009 Application

[Andy Allan]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Ian Dees  wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm working on the application for GSoC 2009 and have a couple questions
> that others might be able to answer more effectively than I can:
>
> 1. It appears that they only allow projects with licenses approved by the
> opensource.org site [1]. Is our current license up there?

*Software* licenses, not data licenses. It's a software project. So
we're fine with whichever license is applied to
JOSM/rails_port/whatever since they are all* OSI approved.

> 2. Who submitted last year's application? How did we fill out some of the
> fields like "Has your group participated previously? If so, please summarize
> your involvement and any past successes and failures." and "What is your
> plan for dealing with disappearing contributors?"

In general, I wouldn't worry about it too much. Google (and GSoC) know
who OSM are, we're a big enough community that we deal with such stuff
all the time. I think we'll get accepted so long as an application
gets submitted.

Cheers,
Andy

* Maybe not Potlatch's license, which whilst clearly open-source might
not be officially OSI approved :-)

> 3. Is anyone willing to be the "backup administrator" for the group?
>
> Thanks!
>
> ___
> 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] immutable=yes Fwd: DEC Lands

[Russ Nelson]

On Mar 12, 2009, at 7:43 AM, Ted Mielczarek wrote:
> . However, I reject the idea that there is any data that belongs in  
> OSM that "makes no sense to edit". If you can't edit it, then by  
> definition it shouldn't be in a wiki-style map.

No one has been able to refute my claim that if someone would enter it  
by hand, it belongs in OSM regardless of its source.  And if it comes  
from surveyed data, then it makes no sense to edit its position.   
Metadata, perhaps.  But unless you've been out in the field with a  
theolodite, you have no business changing the location of the NYS DEC  
Lands position.

--
Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson
r...@cloudmade.com - Twitter: Russ_OSM - 
http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Telephone Debate

[Simon Ward]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 08:30:21AM -0700, SteveC wrote:
> 
> On 12 Mar 2009, at 04:52, Simon Ward wrote:
> > The Foundation could do more to engage with the community by
> > participating more in list discussion.
> 
> With the way you guys treat people, why on Earth should they?

Funny, yet I (we?) am one who feels slighted by their general absence.
If they don't participate, how can we treat them with the respect they
probably deserve?

Simon
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Questions from GSoC 2009 Application

[Thomas Wood]

2009/3/12 Ian Dees :
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm working on the application for GSoC 2009 and have a couple questions
> that others might be able to answer more effectively than I can:
>
> 1. It appears that they only allow projects with licenses approved by the
> opensource.org site [1]. Is our current license up there?

OSM encourages open licenses to be used, but does not require it for
applications that use the data.
Our software is a mish-mash of licenses, potlatch is Public Domain
(afaik), I'm guessing the Rails Port is under GPL (although not
explicitly stated anywhere), osmarender is GPLv2, etc.

-- 
Regards,
Thomas Wood
(Edgemaster)

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Questions from GSoC 2009 Application

[Subhodip Biswas]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Ian Dees  wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm working on the application for GSoC 2009 and have a couple questions
> that others might be able to answer more effectively than I can:
>
> 1. It appears that they only allow projects with licenses approved by the
> opensource.org site [1]. Is our current license up there?

The current licence we are using should get us into GSoC this time,
Licence change is still is in discussion.
>
> 2. Who submitted last year's application? How did we fill out some of the
> fields like "Has your group participated previously? If so, please summarize
> your involvement and any past successes and failures." and "What is your
> plan for dealing with disappearing contributors?"

Sebastian Spaeth submitted last years application . you can mail
directly to him for pointers.
>
> 3. Is anyone willing to be the "backup administrator" for the group?

I can help is nobody minds( I was a GSOC  2008 student last year for OSM)
>
> Thanks!
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>



-- 
Regards
Subhodip Biswas

Fedora Ambassador
West Bengal , India

GPG key : FAEA34AB
Server : pgp.mit.edu
http://subhodipbiswas.wordpress.com
http:/www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/SubhodipBiswas

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Questions from GSoC 2009 Application

[Ian Dees]

Hi everyone,

I'm working on the application for GSoC 2009 and have a couple questions
that others might be able to answer more effectively than I can:

1. It appears that they only allow projects with licenses approved by the
opensource.org site [1]. Is our current license up there?

2. Who submitted last year's application? How did we fill out some of the
fields like "Has your group participated previously? If so, please summarize
your involvement and any past successes and failures." and "What is your
plan for dealing with disappearing contributors?"

3. Is anyone willing to be the "backup administrator" for the group?

Thanks!
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] 0.6 move and downtime (re-scheduled)

[Grant Slater]

Dear all

The API downtime scheduled for the 0.6 API transition has been postponed 
due to delays acquiring the new database server.

The re-scheduled API downtime for the 0.6 API upgrade is now the weekend 
of the 17-20th April 2009.

Original announcement...
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-January/033294.html

Developer information:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Protocol_Version_0.6

/ Grant

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] place=island rendering

[Ian Dees]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Ted Mielczarek  wrote:

> Yeah, the unfortunate thing here is that this import probably brought in a
> few hundred to a few thousand of these place=island POIs, and I would hazard
> a guess that a large (huge?) portion of them don't have the physical island
> boundaries mapped (since a lot of them are so tiny).


Then switch over to Potlatch and map 'em real quick :-)
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] place=island rendering

[Ted Mielczarek]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 8:26 AM, Andy Allan  wrote:

> Interesting issue. The techy in me thinks that tagging the island (tag
> the way) rather than a point may help, since that allows data
> consumers (e.g. renderers) to calculate the size of the island (and
> even, perhaps in future, the longest diagonal to write the name at an
> angle). Defaulting to putting the name in the middle of the polygon is
> easy and done already with buildings. We have a similar area-based
> thing with way_area in mapnik rendering rules already.
>

Yeah, the unfortunate thing here is that this import probably brought in a
few hundred to a few thousand of these place=island POIs, and I would hazard
a guess that a large (huge?) portion of them don't have the physical island
boundaries mapped (since a lot of them are so tiny).

-Ted
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] place=island rendering

[Andy Allan]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Ted Mielczarek  wrote:
> I've noticed that there's a GNIS import going on in the USA recently, and
> one of the types of POIs being imported are islands, which are tagged
> place=island. Of course, the GNIS database contains some very tiny islands,
> but Mapnik renders place=island up to z10. For example:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.69&lon=-75.353&zoom=10&layers=B000FTFT
>
> Allentown is a city with a population of 100,000. Eves Island appears to be
> about 20 feet long, yet the label for it is nearly the size of Allentown. :)
> Someone on IRC suggested that place=islet might be a more correct tagging
> for these, and the map features page for place=island seems to agree:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Disland
> "I am mainly thinking of small coastal or river islands which may have a
> small settlement or a farm"--this indicates that tiny little patches of land
> weren't the original target of this tag.
>
> Thoughts?

Interesting issue. The techy in me thinks that tagging the island (tag
the way) rather than a point may help, since that allows data
consumers (e.g. renderers) to calculate the size of the island (and
even, perhaps in future, the longest diagonal to write the name at an
angle). Defaulting to putting the name in the middle of the polygon is
easy and done already with buildings. We have a similar area-based
thing with way_area in mapnik rendering rules already.

But that might be overcomplicating things, I'm not sure. It would
allow renderers to bring in islands based on how big they were,
whereas making a distinction between island/islet might still have
problems.

Cheers,
Andy

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] mapping driveways

[Ted Mielczarek]

On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Ulf Lamping wrote:

> First of all, you should NEVER remove anything from the database, unless
> you have made certain by your own eye that the object in question is an
> error and not existing in reality! Even than take care not to remove
> anything marked as abandoned or alike, that marks this object was once
> here and the info is kept for historical reasons.
>

I would disagree with this statement in this particular case. The data is
TIGER data, not entered by a human, and there are plenty of errors in the
TIGER data. I routinely delete unnamed highway=residential ways from TIGER
after a brief look at the aerial imagery. It's one thing to delete something
that someone else manually entered, it's another thing entirely to delete
something that came along with a mass import from a data source with known
flaws.

-Ted
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] place=island rendering

[Alex Mauer]

Ted Mielczarek wrote:
> I've noticed that there's a GNIS import going on in the USA recently,
> and one of the types of POIs being imported are islands, which are
> tagged place=island. Of course, the GNIS database contains some very
> tiny islands, but Mapnik renders place=island up to z10. For example:

I opened ticket #1644 (http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/1644) about
the problem.  One solution is to apply the tags to the area rather than
the node. (and thus render appropriately based on the actual size of the
island.  Of course, this also implies deleting the place=island node to
avoid label conflicts.

-Alex Mauer "hawke"


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Beta testers required for new Windows Mobile OSM Client

[Francisco R. Santos]

Hi George

Great program, I'm willing to use it but the OSM data download does
not work with my regional settings (Spanish). I have to change the
settings to something like UK to have OSM data. Map tile downloads
work well, however.

Regards,
Quico

2009/2/12 George Styles :
> Hi,
>
> Ive written some software for Windows Mobile to make on-the-road contribution 
> to OSM possible. If any Windows Mobile 6 owning people would like to 
> beta-test it, ive stuck it up at
>
> http://release.georgestyles.co.uk/GeorgeMap
>
> ive stuck some screenshots here
>
> http://release.georgestyles.co.uk/GeorgeMap/ScreenShots/Default.aspx
>
> Its only currently useful for filling in missing names from streets which 
> already exist (without a name tag). It cannot yet create / edit the actual 
> nodes that make a street (apart from splitting an existing street).
>
> At the moment its simply freeware. I want to GPL it, but need to open a 
> sourceforge account etc etc, and havent had time yet...
>
> Features are
>
>    *  GPS Support (using WM GPS driver)
>    * Display OSM tiles from MapNik, OSMARender, CycleMap or CloudMade
>    * Query OSM for streets and nodes in the visible area
>    * Displays unnamed streets in red, named ones in green (and ones named by 
> you in lighter green so you can see the difference you are making)
>    * Can query GPS points (although until I add node editing, that is kind of 
> useless)
>    * Program can check for newer versions and automatically install them (if 
> you ask it to...)
>    * Multi-threaded - tiles /data are downloaded in the background, as are 
> uploads of changes.
>    * Ability to name unnamed streets (or change the name of existing ones)
>    * Offline edit model - edits are held in the phone until you choose to 
> sync them. This is needed because mobile coverage is not 100%
>    * Split / join ways (join dosent quite always work properly yet)
>    * Current GPS trail overlaid on map so you can see where you have been 
> (plan to upload trails to OSM in near future)
>
> Should I email this to the dev list as well, since ive done some dev???
>
> g
>
>
> ___
> 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-legal-talk] [Spam] Re: License Telephone Debate

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Existing avenues for
> feedback are of course:
> 
> - this list and talk@
> - international mailing lists
> - co-ment
> - the wiki
> - odc-discuss
> - (have I missed any?)

Yes, the ODC (OKFN) wiki have meanwhile started their own FAQ section 
which partly overlaps with discussions we had and are having, and 
they're inviting further contributions:

http://wiki.okfn.org/wg/odol/odc/odbl

It is really quite difficult; there are three things mixed up in the 
whole discussion, all three of which require attention:

1. The ODbL;
2. The concrete effects of applying ODbL to OSM;
3. The transition plan for actually making the license change.

It is my understanding that the working group initially hoped to have to 
do only (3) while ODC/OKFN/Jordan have repeatedly said that they try to 
stick to (1). Most OSMers who think about the license obviously have (2) 
on their minds.

Bye
Frederik

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Spam] Re: License Telephone Debate

[Grant Slater]

Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> As long as the phone conference is _additional_ to the existing processes,
> not replacing them, I don't really see a problem. Existing avenues for
> feedback are of course:
>
> - this list and talk@
> - international mailing lists
> - co-ment
> - the wiki
> - odc-discuss
> - (have I missed any?)
>
> and I'm sure the working group will be taking them all into consideration.
>
>   

Addition and not as a replacement.

The wiki is the Licensing Working Group's main focus, we are looking in 
other mediums and the telephone call should be viewed as part of this.

We're made up of native English and Dutch speakers, we need assistance 
from people who speak other languages.

Ironically I've had to suspend my Open University German course for few 
months because of the amount of time I'm currently spending on 
OpenStreetMap. (Licensing working group, Tech working group + planning, 
vandalism working group, Hardware fund raising, Server orders, Sysadmin, 
ZA Gov Data release, +minutes, other)... I have a full time day job too.

Regards
 Grant

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-talk] immutable=yes Fwd: DEC Lands

[Ted Mielczarek]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Russ Nelson  wrote:

>  If it's "This is what NYS DEC says it manages", then no, it doesn't make
> ANY sense
> to change it.


Then this data clearly doesn't belong in OSM.


>  If the data is "These are NYS's State Forests", then
> there's plenty of reason to change them.  Perhaps there's a typo, or
> some piece of data which simply doesn't make sense.  Data is produced
> by people, and can have mistakes it.


This data is fine for OSM. Someone imported the PA state forests from some
government source a while back without any discussion, and they're doing
just fine. Perhaps you just need to shift your perception of what you're
importing? The canonical source of official government boundaries is not
going to be the OSM data, and should never be. However, the presence of a
state forest is useful data that belongs in OSM. This does not mean that the
latter has to imply the former, even if that's the original source. We've
also imported state and county borders from the TIGER data set. These may be
quasi-official, but they've still been edited in multiple ways (as mentioned
by others). What makes NY state forests so special?

In short, I think you have every right to monitor data you've
edited/imported and revert incorrect edits (within reason). However, I
reject the idea that there is any data that belongs in OSM that "makes no
sense to edit". If you can't edit it, then by definition it shouldn't be in
a wiki-style map.

-Ted
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Telephone Debate

[Simon Ward]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 11:21:49AM +, Nick Black wrote:
> The purpose of the call on Saturday is to offer an additional channel of
> communication around the license - its intended to supplement the mailing
> lists and wiki

Thanks, that’s what I expected to hear.

> What I'd hope would come out of it is a clearer understanding of the process
> of the license change and some of the specifics around changing it.  Please
> see this as the Foundation doing everything we can to open up and engage
> with the community.

The Foundation could do more to engage with the community by
participating more in list discussion.

Hey, if the community directly gets answers, it might argue the price of
fish a little less.

> As for the language and timing, its a bit of a damned if you do, damned if
> you don't.  Its always 2am somewhere and the fact is that the majority of
> people involved with OSM are in the EU.  As Andy said, if there's enough
> demand we can host calls for other time zones.

Well, that’s just it:  You’re seeking ways to engage with the community,
yet placing the burden on them to represent themselves, asking them to
rearrange their schedules to participate in a call at a specific time.
That’s not helping members of the community trust the process any more
than before.

> As always, please let us know any constructive ideas.  So far there have
> been no constructive suggestions from people who are criticizing the call,
> for a better way to run this on this thread.

Active participation in the list.  Take part in the discussion threads,
give your opinions where you have them, answer questions if you have the
answers, etc.

Simon
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Telephone Debate

[Simon Ward]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 11:21:01AM +, Rob Myers wrote:
> coast of the US for example. But I've been involved in both of two
> meetings where decisions arrived at in the morning were reversed in
> the evening, and that didn't make the first group very happy at all.

I think that, due to the inaccessibility, the phone calls should be
rather seeking to hilight issues and answer questions, and not make any
decisions as such.  I’m assuming someone will be recording minutes,
which can then be summarised back to the list and on the wiki, so the
community can make the decisions.

Simon
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

[OSM-talk] place=island rendering

[Ted Mielczarek]

I've noticed that there's a GNIS import going on in the USA recently, and
one of the types of POIs being imported are islands, which are tagged
place=island. Of course, the GNIS database contains some very tiny islands,
but Mapnik renders place=island up to z10. For example:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.69&lon=-75.353&zoom=10&layers=B000FTFT

Allentown is a city with a population of 100,000. Eves Island appears to be
about 20 feet long, yet the label for it is nearly the size of Allentown. :)
Someone on IRC suggested that place=islet might be a more correct tagging
for these, and the map features page for place=island seems to agree:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Disland
"I am mainly thinking of small coastal or river islands which may have a
small settlement or a farm"--this indicates that tiny little patches of land
weren't the original target of this tag.

Thoughts?

-Ted
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Activity Level in My Area?

[Gregory Williams]

> -Original Message-
> From: Peter Miller [mailto:petermille...@googlemail.com]
> Sent: 11 March 2009 14:00
> To: Gregory Williams
> Cc: Daniel A Carleton; talk@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Activity Level in My Area?
> 
> 
> On 11 Mar 2009, at 09:16, Gregory Williams wrote:
> 
> > Daniel,
> >
> > One easy solution would be to sign up for a free OSM Mapper account
> > from
> > ITO World:
> >
> > http://www.itoworld.com/static/osmmapper
> >
> > This'll allow you to view changes and additions to the data on a map
> > for
> > an area that you choose from which you'll be able to judge the level
> > of
> > activity.
> 
> Fyi, we recently upgraded OSM Mapper and increased the area which can
> be monitored at one time so do try creating some bigger areas!
> 
> Do note however that our product only shows who the 'last' person to
> touch the way was. It is very possibly that in some areas there are
> major 'hidden' contributors and see the open question to the lawyers
> on how we should deal with ways touched by multiple people, only some
> of whom are contactable or who sign up to the new license.
>
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Open_Issues#Featur
>
es_touched_by_multiple_contributors.2C_not_all_of_whom_sign_up_to_new_t
> erms
> 
> That being said, it would be a really good idea for people to know who
> the current contributors in their area are and to get into contact
> with them. I am doing that in my area for sure.

Yes, certainly in my area I've been adding extra levels of detail (such
as maxspeed, maxweight, motorcar=destination, etc.) to ways mapped by
others. So viewing those areas will show my name as the most recent
contributor, but I didn't go down all of those roads originally.

There are also a few places where I've fixed the topology (several
almost-connecting ways when I know that they do connect in reality). So,
again, I'm listed at the most recent contributor when in reality the
majority of the work there was done by someone else.

So, it's not necessarily so easy to see who the major contributor to the
data is. However it would give Daniel a good idea of whether the data is
being actively maintained, which I think was the gist of the question.

Gregory

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: "We are the Wikipedia of maps"

[paul youlten]

... never-the-less we should start tagging lamp-posts so we can easily
find somewhere to hang those filthy cloudmade running dogs.

 ;-)

> On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 11:44 AM, 80n <80n...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Mark Boslet, the Editor of Techpulse360 has modified the article to "correct
>> any misimpression".
>>
>> The title is now "OpenStreetMap wants to be the Wikipedia of Maps" and the
>> body of the article now clearly distinguishes between CloudMade and us.
>>
>> 80n
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>    as an OSM community member, I'm taking offence at the following
>>> article:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://techpulse360.com/2009/03/10/startup-cloudmade-wants-to-be-the-wikipedia-of-maps/
>>>
>>> The article says that Cloudmade "relies on its OpenStreetMap project",
>>> and:
>>>
>>> “This is going to be the map of the future,” says founder Steve Coast of
>>> his company. “We’re the Wikipedia of maps.”
>>>
>>> This is of course wrong; OpenStreetMap is no Cloudmade's project, and
>>> Cloudmade is not the Wikipedia of maps.
>>>
>>> Further down, the article suggests that Cloudmade money was somehow
>>> related to mapping the world:
>>>
>>> "But it’s also a daunting task. The company raised $3.5 million from
>>> Sunstone Capital, but, well, the world is a large place."
>>>
>>> And:
>>>
>>> "Coast says the goal is to give away the mapping data for free and
>>> charge for services."
>>>
>>> Of course, there is no mapping data that Cloudmade could give away for
>>> free because they don't own any.
>>>
>>> I know that the press always write what they want (or what they think
>>> they understand) and not necessarily what you tell them. Also, to their
>>> credit, the Cloudmade web page clearly and correctly states that "We
>>> source our map data from OpenStreetMap, the community mapping project
>>> which is making a free map of the world".
>>>
>>> However, this is not the first time that the OpenStreetMap project has
>>> been confused with Cloudmade by the press, and I can hardly imagine that
>>>  whoever wrote that article did so without relying on Cloudmade
>>> statements that somehow pointed in that direction.
>>>
>>> I would appreciate if Cloudmade PR people, especially in the US, would
>>> take more care in explaining the situation to the press, or if that is
>>> too much to ask, then at least refrain from misrepresenting the situation.
>>>
>>> If anyone is "the Wikipedia of maps" then it is the OpenStreetMap
>>> project which exists independently of Cloudmade. A very tiny portion of
>>> OpenStreetMap data is acquired during Cloudmade-sponsored events for
>>> which the project is grateful, but that does not give Cloudmade the
>>> right to act as if they own the project.
>>>
>>> I know that in the early days of the web, some access providers touted
>>> their dial-in plans as if the web was theirs - "buy our package and get
>>> access to all these cool sites". Maybe it is hard for the public to
>>> understand, but an effort should be made to say that Cloudmade is an
>>> access provider, not a content provider.
>>>
>>> I'll try to make it a habit to point this out in the comment boxes of
>>> the relevant web pages if I see articles like that.
>>>
>>> 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
>>
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Tel: +44(0) 7814 517 807
>



-- 
Tel: +44(0) 7814 517 807

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: "We are the Wikipedia of maps"

[80n]

Mark Boslet, the Editor of Techpulse360 has modified the article to "correct
any misimpression".

The title is now "OpenStreetMap wants to be the Wikipedia of Maps" and the
body of the article now clearly distinguishes between CloudMade and us.

80n

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Hi,
>
>as an OSM community member, I'm taking offence at the following article:
>
>
> http://techpulse360.com/2009/03/10/startup-cloudmade-wants-to-be-the-wikipedia-of-maps/
>
> The article says that Cloudmade "relies on its OpenStreetMap project", and:
>
> “This is going to be the map of the future,” says founder Steve Coast of
> his company. “We’re the Wikipedia of maps.”
>
> This is of course wrong; OpenStreetMap is no Cloudmade's project, and
> Cloudmade is not the Wikipedia of maps.
>
> Further down, the article suggests that Cloudmade money was somehow
> related to mapping the world:
>
> "But it’s also a daunting task. The company raised $3.5 million from
> Sunstone Capital, but, well, the world is a large place."
>
> And:
>
> "Coast says the goal is to give away the mapping data for free and
> charge for services."
>
> Of course, there is no mapping data that Cloudmade could give away for
> free because they don't own any.
>
> I know that the press always write what they want (or what they think
> they understand) and not necessarily what you tell them. Also, to their
> credit, the Cloudmade web page clearly and correctly states that "We
> source our map data from OpenStreetMap, the community mapping project
> which is making a free map of the world".
>
> However, this is not the first time that the OpenStreetMap project has
> been confused with Cloudmade by the press, and I can hardly imagine that
>  whoever wrote that article did so without relying on Cloudmade
> statements that somehow pointed in that direction.
>
> I would appreciate if Cloudmade PR people, especially in the US, would
> take more care in explaining the situation to the press, or if that is
> too much to ask, then at least refrain from misrepresenting the situation.
>
> If anyone is "the Wikipedia of maps" then it is the OpenStreetMap
> project which exists independently of Cloudmade. A very tiny portion of
> OpenStreetMap data is acquired during Cloudmade-sponsored events for
> which the project is grateful, but that does not give Cloudmade the
> right to act as if they own the project.
>
> I know that in the early days of the web, some access providers touted
> their dial-in plans as if the web was theirs - "buy our package and get
> access to all these cool sites". Maybe it is hard for the public to
> understand, but an effort should be made to say that Cloudmade is an
> access provider, not a content provider.
>
> I'll try to make it a habit to point this out in the comment boxes of
> the relevant web pages if I see articles like that.
>
> 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
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-legal-talk] Possible datasources: Corine Land Cover 2000 dataset

[Ciprian Talaba]

Hi all,

I know the discussion lately have been towards agreeing about an OSM 
license, and probably this is not the best time to ask this question.
But I came across Corine Land Cover 2000 datasets and I want to make 
sure that they can be use in OSM. The organization behind CLC 2000 is 
European Environment Agency (EEA) and the website where the dataset is 
available have some legal information like:

1. on the page http://www.eea.europa.eu/legal/copyright
"/Unless otherwise indicated, the information available from this site 
is within the public domain. Public domain information on the EEA web 
pages may be downloaded free of charge, and reproduced provided the 
source is acknowledged^* .

.
//^* Citing this website"/

2. on the page http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/landuse/clc-download from 
where you can download the datasets, in the tab "My details" where is 
the following notice:
"/The information available in this application is under copyright of 
EEA and within the public domain. Public domain information in this 
application may
be used free of charge, provided the source is acknowledged. The 
acknowledgment should read (c) EEA, Copenhagen, 2007/"


So my opinion is that we can use data from CLC 2000 as long as we add 
the source as a tag to each imported element. So you see any problems in 
using this dataset?


Thanks,
Ciprian
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - basin=infiltration

[Michael]

Hi,

Ed Loach schrieb:
>
> > this is my second approach to get some votes for my proposal
>
> > basin=infiltration [1]. Until now I got two approvals.
>
> > Because the recommended period of two weeks ended yesterday I
>
> > extended
>
> > the voting period and would like to remind you of this
>
> > proposal.
>
>  
>
> Could you perhaps add an image to show an example? I don't know what a
> basin or infiltration basin look like, so would be unable to map them.
>
I added two links to images and a more detailed description (English
Wikipedia [1] and the German Wikipedia [2]).

Cheers,
Michael
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infiltration_basin
[2]: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regenwasserversickerung



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Spam] Re: License Telephone Debate

[Peter Miller]

On 12 Mar 2009, at 08:55, Nick Black wrote:




On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Frederik Ramm   
wrote:

Hi,

SteveC wrote:
> In the past couple of license working group meetings we've been  
trying

> to figure out how to get more input from the community on everything
> without descending in to a free-for-all.


For a second day in a row you're jumping straight in with abject  
criticism of a process put in place by people working to help the  
whole community - you included.  If you are that concerned about  
this, why not suggest a way to make this work better?  Why not offer  
to translate for any German speakers who would like to take part if  
the call was only in English?


I've always felt that you were completely aligned behind the aims of  
OSM - we can disagree, but at the end of the day we're all here for  
the same reason.  Right now, its really hard to find anything  
positive or constructive in your ongoing bombardment of these lists.



I do agree Frederik has possibly over-reacted on this one, but equally  
I think it would have been helpful for Steve to have acknowledged the  
good work that has been going on on this list and on the wiki in his  
absence. Equally I think SteveC is behaving pretty strangely around  
this. He should put the 'evil' thing aside and get stuck into the  
process - he must know answers to some of the questions we are  
raising, why does he leave us trying to work it all out again?


In response to one of Frederik's questions I do know that the Use  
Cases and Open Issues pages are being used by the working group  
because I have read the minutes. I hope that is not about to change.  
Incidentally no one from the licensing group has ever edited the 'Open  
Issues' page or the 'Use Cases' pages - why not?


The voice call idea might work, however I would ask the working group  
to provide any answers they  already have to questions on the Open  
Issues page before the event so that we don't waste time and also ask  
you to be sensitive to Frederik's observation that voice calls make it  
much harder for non-native speakers and are therefore the 'last  
choice' for an international project such as this,



Regards,


Peter





___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - basin=infiltration

[Ed Loach]

> this is my second approach to get some votes for my proposal

> basin=infiltration [1]. Until now I got two approvals.

> Because the recommended period of two weeks ended yesterday I

> extended

> the voting period and would like to remind you of this

> proposal.

 

Could you perhaps add an image to show an example? I don't know what
a basin or infiltration basin look like, so would be unable to map
them. There is a big ditch near here which usually just has a few
reeds in, but when the ground is saturated and/or there is lots of
rainfall it fills with water for a while, helping drain the runoff
from the nearby industrial estate. It recently overflowed flooding
some adjacent houses [1] and there were tankers there for almost 48
hours first of all pumping out the houses and then bringing the
water level in the ditch/basin/whatever down to a safe level again. 

 

I have not added that feature yet, as I don't know how it would be
tagged. I'd probably have gone with big ditch, but perhaps basin or
infiltration basin is more appropriate?

 

Thanks

 

Ed

 

[1]
http://www.gazette-news.co.uk/search/4114725.Clacton__Residents_evac
uated_from_flooded_homes/

 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] SOTM: Latest Working Group Meeting

[Igor Shubovych]

Now it works fine.

2009/3/12 Nick Black 

> Igor - it works for me.  Try again maybe?
> Nick
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Igor Shubovych  > wrote:
>
>> Seems, Register button doesn't work.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Igor
>>
>> 2009/3/11 Nick Black 
>>
>>> Hello,
>>> Full minutes of the latest SOTM working group meeting are available
>>> here: http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dhdfbm9s_4dq7jchhn
>>>
>>> Summary:
>>>
>>> * Registration is open, so tell everyone:
>>> http://www.stateofthemap.org/register-now/
>>> * Early bird registration closes on the 29th March - so get moving
>>> * There is early interest from sponsors
>>> * There will be a new competition to create a refreshed logo - the winner
>>> win's free entry to the conference.  More details will follow this week.
>>> * We're aiming to open the Call for Papers on the 16th March.
>>>
>>> What kind of themes do you want to see discussed at this year's
>>> conference?  What talks worked for you, what excited you and what bored you?
>>>  This is your chance to influence this years event.
>>>
>>> Please add all ideas below:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Nick Black
>>> n...@osmfoundation.org
>>> twitter.com/nick_b
>>>
>>> ___
>>> talk mailing list
>>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> --
> Nick Black
> twitter.com/nick_b
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - basin=infiltration

[Michael]

Hi all,

this is my second approach to get some votes for my proposal
basin=infiltration [1]. Until now I got two approvals.
Because the recommended period of two weeks ended yesterday I extended
the voting period and would like to remind you of this proposal.

Cheers,
Michael

[1]:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/basin%3Dinfiltration

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] SOTM: Latest Working Group Meeting

[Nick Black]

Igor - it works for me.  Try again maybe?
Nick

On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Igor Shubovych
wrote:

> Seems, Register button doesn't work.
>
> Regards,
> Igor
>
> 2009/3/11 Nick Black 
>
>> Hello,
>> Full minutes of the latest SOTM working group meeting are available here:
>> http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dhdfbm9s_4dq7jchhn
>>
>> Summary:
>>
>> * Registration is open, so tell everyone:
>> http://www.stateofthemap.org/register-now/
>> * Early bird registration closes on the 29th March - so get moving
>> * There is early interest from sponsors
>> * There will be a new competition to create a refreshed logo - the winner
>> win's free entry to the conference.  More details will follow this week.
>> * We're aiming to open the Call for Papers on the 16th March.
>>
>> What kind of themes do you want to see discussed at this year's
>> conference?  What talks worked for you, what excited you and what bored you?
>>  This is your chance to influence this years event.
>>
>> Please add all ideas below:
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Nick Black
>> n...@osmfoundation.org
>> twitter.com/nick_b
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>>
>


-- 
-- 
Nick Black
twitter.com/nick_b
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk