Re: [OSM-talk] Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and regional boundaries for L.A.?

[John Smith]

On 17 June 2010 14:38, Ben Welsh  wrote:
> Thomas, if I understand you right, you are asking about the mapping tiles,
> correct? All of our mapping tiles are drawn from Google. Though we're using
> OpenLayers, rather than the Google API, most of the time to pull them in. In
> the future, I would love to make custom tiles with Mapnik and Cascadenik,
> but I haven't found the time. Burning our hood boundaries into the map is
> almost too much fun to pass up.

His concern is with the ambiguity of Google T&Cs about deriving things
from their map, however Ed Parsons clarified this a little bit when he
stated you could publicly distribute your favourite hiking trail and
so on, but not vectorise every street, it seems to me boundaries
wouldn't really be the same as vectorising every street.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and regional boundaries for L.A.?

[Ben Welsh]

Apollinaris, our boundaries have a classification system we roughed out. How
well they would mesh with OSM is something I'd love to hear a critique on.
Simplifying things a bit, the taxonomy of our database is two tiers:
Neighborhoods and Regions. Neighborhoods come in three types: 1, parts
of a city; 2, complete cities; 3, unincorporated areas. And each
neighborhood (i.e. Santa Monica) belongs to a larger region (i.e. The
Westside).
The regions are, by design, untied from any municipal boundaries, since the
general sense in LA is that many of the commonly understood
regions are broken up into several cities. A great example is the San
Fernando Valley, which has a small island in the middle, namely the city of
San Fernando.
The strangeness of the municipal boundaries is actually one of the main
reasons we wanted to do this.
*
*
Thomas, if I understand you right, you are asking about the mapping tiles,
correct? All of our mapping tiles are drawn from Google. Though we're using
OpenLayers, rather than the Google API, most of the time to pull them in. In
the future, I would love to make custom tiles with Mapnik and Cascadenik,
but I haven't found the time. Burning our hood boundaries into the map is
almost too much fun to pass up.



On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 5:13 PM, Thomas Ineichen wrote:

> Hi Ben,
>
> I'm just wondering: are the suggestions/improvements by your readers based
> on anything else than Google Maps?[1]
>
> Regards,
> Thomas
>
> [1] e.g.
> http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/debates/westside/#comment-form
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>



-- 
palewire.com
work: 213-473-2624
cell: 213-254-5570
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and regional boundaries for L.A.?

[Thomas Ineichen]

Hi Ben,

I'm just wondering: are the suggestions/improvements by your readers based
on anything else than Google Maps?[1]

Regards,
Thomas

[1] e.g.
http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/debates/westside/#comment-form


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

Re: [OSM-talk] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Iván Sánchez Ortega]

On Thursday 17 June 2010 00:41:43 Grant Slater wrote:
> Things beyond the map data I am not interested in.

Aw, c'mon. You ARE interested in beer and map cakes.

:-P

-- 
--
Iván Sánchez Ortega 

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

Re: [OSM-talk] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Grant Slater]

On 16 June 2010 23:09, Tim McNamara  wrote:

> Sorry if I've neglected to look into this issue in more detail. May I ask,
> which community consensus are you referring to? OSM or CC? My understanding
> was the intention behind a share-alike clause is to compel people using the
> work to release their works under similar licences. If the OSM community
> doesn't really care about forcing licencing on others, then I actually think
> we have reached the same conclusion. See my notes in the last paragraph.
>

I am interested in our map data, so that we can make great maps, great
routing apps, [insert other great things here]

So if they improve our _map data_, I want the improvements to be able
to be fed back into our map data.

Things beyond the map data I am not interested in.

/ Grant

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

Re: [OSM-talk] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Tim McNamara]

On 17 June 2010 10:00, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Tim McNamara wrote:
>
>> The whole thing creates a single creative work.
>>
>
> The term "single creative work" is not used in the CC license text.

Displaying OSM content and other content side-by-side does not form a "work
> derived from OpenStreetMap" according to community consensus.


Sorry if I've neglected to look into this issue in more detail. May I ask,
which community consensus are you referring to? OSM or CC? My understanding
was the intention behind a share-alike clause is to compel people using the
work to release their works under similar licences. If the OSM community
doesn't really care about forcing licencing on others, then I actually think
we have reached the same conclusion. See my notes in the last paragraph.


> You need to do more than just display them side by side if you wanted to
> trigger the share-alike clause. (Compare: Just because a music CD contains
> one track licensed CC-BY-SA, this doesn't mean the whole CD has to be, even
> if the CC-BY-SA licensed track has been selected to match the theme. The
> whole has not been "built upon" the part.)


I don't think this is the correct analogy to draw. I feel that a result of a
search query is more like a single track on a CD. Elements within the result
query (or the track) can be divided further, but the whole result/track is a
single work. If you include another artist's work inside that track, I
assume that would trigger the share-alike clause.

The real thrust of my argument was that if widespread adoption of OSM &
attributation is the goal of the community, then OSM should reduce its
licencing requirements. Shifting to CC-BY would align more strongly with the
comments I've seen in this thread.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Frederik Ramm]

Tim,

Tim McNamara wrote:
> The whole thing creates a single creative work.

The term "single creative work" is not used in the CC license text.

Displaying OSM content and other content side-by-side does not form a 
"work derived from OpenStreetMap" according to community consensus. You 
need to do more than just display them side by side if you wanted to 
trigger the share-alike clause. (Compare: Just because a music CD 
contains one track licensed CC-BY-SA, this doesn't mean the whole CD has 
to be, even if the CC-BY-SA licensed track has been selected to match 
the theme. The whole has not been "built upon" the part.)

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] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Gregory]

I think there was a mailing list thread on the wolframalpha attribution
about a month ago, although it might have only been a long IRC conversation.
A key thing was that the sources link didn't work in 1 or 2 key browsers
(must have been IE, FF, Chrome, or Safari).
Other than that problem they technically meet the attribution requirement (I
believe) but it is the view of a lot of us (and the reason I like
attribution) is that when they see the cool map they also see the cool name
rather than having to look for it.

On share alike, well I am free to save the map images of WolframAlpha and
put them on my own site/product (crediting OSM with CC-BY-SA) if I like the
style/cropping/location. I can't take the description of the place of WA,
because they didn't use/need OSM to write it.

On 16 June 2010 20:45, Tim McNamara  wrote:

> On 17 June 2010 03:47, Frank Sautter  wrote:
>
>> WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data
>> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Berlin
>>
>> Is the license attribution they are using OK?
>>
>>
> I think it depends on whether you can seperate the map that Wolfram|Alpha
> have created from the rest of their content. If the map is seen
> as separate from the rest of the page, then I think it's probably fine.
> However, I think that it's a stretch to say that the single map component is
> seperate from the rest of the result. The whole thing creates a single
> creative work. Therefore, I think that every result that uses an OSM map
> should be licenced under CC-BY-SA or similar:
>
> *"Share Alike* — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may
> distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this
> one" [1]
>
> However, from the sounds of this discussion, the OSM community seems to
> really be caring about the attribution requirement. If so, I think the group
> should reduce its licencing requirements to CC-BY. This would reflect the
> intention of what people are after in practice.
>
> -Tim
>
>
> [1] http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>


-- 
Gregory
o...@livingwithdragons.com
http://www.livingwithdragons.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Tim McNamara]

On 17 June 2010 03:47, Frank Sautter  wrote:

> WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data
> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Berlin
>
> Is the license attribution they are using OK?
>
>
I think it depends on whether you can seperate the map that Wolfram|Alpha
have created from the rest of their content. If the map is seen
as separate from the rest of the page, then I think it's probably fine.
However, I think that it's a stretch to say that the single map component is
seperate from the rest of the result. The whole thing creates a single
creative work. Therefore, I think that every result that uses an OSM map
should be licenced under CC-BY-SA or similar:

*"Share Alike* — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may
distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this
one" [1]

However, from the sounds of this discussion, the OSM community seems to
really be caring about the attribution requirement. If so, I think the group
should reduce its licencing requirements to CC-BY. This would reflect the
intention of what people are after in practice.

-Tim


[1] http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Richard Weait]

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Frank Sautter
 wrote:
> WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data
> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Berlin

Nice catch.  That's super.

> Is the license attribution they are using OK?

It looks good to me. Different from what we recommend for what is
predominantly a map, but their page is not predominantly a map.
ccbysa allows appropriate attribution with similar prominence:

"Such credit may be implemented in any reasonable manner; provided,
however, that in the case of a Derivative Work or Collective Work, at
a minimum such credit will appear where any other comparable
authorship credit appears and in a manner at least as prominent as
such other comparable authorship credit. "

I'm thrilled to see OSM on Wolfram Alpha.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Serge Wroclawski]

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Serge Wroclawski  wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Frank Sautter
>  wrote:
>> WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data
>> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Berlin
>
> Cool.
>
>> Is the license attribution they are using OK?
>
> Not according to the FAQ:
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#I_would_like_to_use_OpenStreetMap_maps._How_should_I_credit_you.3F

I didn't see the attribution on the bottom. Seems a little strange to
do half attribution but as long as it's there, great.

- Serge

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

Re: [OSM-talk] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Iván Sánchez Ortega]

On Wednesday 16 June 2010 18:00:11 Ian Dees wrote:
> Down at the bottom of every W|A page they have a "Source Information" link.
> In there, under the "Mapping data source information" they show
> OpenStreetMap (CC-BY-SA). »  with a link to
> OpenStreetMap.org.

Yeah. And that looks fine to me. We get the same attribution as anyone else WA 
is using.

-- 
--
Iván Sánchez Ortega 

Aviso: Este e-mail es confidencial y no debería ser usado por nadie que no sea 
el destinatario original. No se permite la reproducción mediante fotocopia, 
walkie-talkie, emisora de radioaficionado, satélite, televisión por cable, 
proyector, señales de humo, código morse, braille, lenguaje de signos, 
taquigrafía o cualquier otro medio. Bajo ningún concepto debe traducirse al 
francés este e-mail. Este e-mail no puede ser ridiculizado, parodiado, 
juzgado en una competición, o leído en voz alta con un acento gracioso 
llevando un bigote falso y/o cualquier tipo de sombrero, incluyendo pero no 
limitándose a pañuelos. No inciten ni provoquen a este e-mail. Si está 
medicándose, puede experimentar nauseas, desorientación, histeria, vómitos, 
pérdida temporal de la memoria a corto plazo y malestar general al leer este 
e-mail. Consulte a su médico o farmacéutico antes de leer este e-mail. Todas 
las modelos descritas en este e-mail son mayores de 18 años. Este e-mail se 
reserva el derecho de admisión. Si ha recibido este e-mail por error es 
probablemente porque estaba borracho cuando escribí la dirección del 
destinatario.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Jörg Ehrichs]

Am Mittwoch, 16. Juni 2010, um 18:41:36 schrieb Joseph Reeves:
> > It's somewhat discouraging, though, that *every time* anyone uses OSM,
> 
> > we instantly react with this:
> +1
> 
> It's really good to see OSM being used for something that isn't a pet
> project of someone in this community.
> 
> It was great to go to WolframAlpha, type in my home town and see a map
> that I had contributed to. I thought the level of attribution was
> fine. More of this please! Jumping on users of the data with the usual
> "how's the attribution?" will ultimately do more harm than good.

+1 from me
The attribution is given just not to visible. Still fine for me
I like the map beeing used not hidden because everyone fears the licence

Joerg


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

Re: [OSM-talk] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Frank Sautter wrote:
> WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data
> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Berlin

Interesting, they seem to have their own rendering as well. A little 
"yesterday" perhaps with no slippy map and zooming via a dropdown but 
surely a good start. Should like to find out how "current" they are 
(they say "based on current OpenStreetMap data").


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

[OSM-talk] Calling all bulk importers

[Mike Collinson]

Hi,

If you have been involved in bulk import of data from third-parties, may I ask 
you to check that this is on 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue
 .

Why?  Now we have final versions of everything, the License Working Group is 
checking compatibility with the proposed change to the Open Database License. 
We are aware that in some cases the donor's permission will need to asked. We 
like to leave you as much time as possible to do that and to be prepared to 
assist you if needed.  There is a new support page here.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Bulk_Import_Support_Page

Mike 
License Working Group ___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and regional boundaries for L.A.?

[Apollinaris Schoell]

I think it's a good idea but needs a good idea for the tagging with these 
different combinations and dividing.
neighborhood names are common in other cities too and well known to locals. So 
it is valuable info for osm and should be rendered too. currently some are 
added as place nodes and also rendered as such. having them as an area is even 
better.
sure there will be debates about exact boundary but over time either osm 
converges to the locally used ones or osm will tell people where they are and 
they may get used to follow osm




On 16 Jun 2010, at 6:13 , Ben Welsh wrote:

> At the risk of over complicating things, let me give a little more info. 
> 
> LA County is a fragmented place with many different cities and unincorporated 
> areas puzzled together. Our "neighborhoods" are in fact three different types 
> of areas consolidated.
> 
> 1. Cities divided into neighborhoods. i.e. 
> http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/city/los-angeles/
> 2. Complete cities, drawn by their formal boundaries. i.e. 
> http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/neighborhood/west-hollywood/
> 3. Unincorporated areas that are "Census Defined Places": 
> http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/neighborhood/east-los-angeles/
> 
> On top of that, there are dozens of small unincorporated areas that are 
> basically islands floating between everything else. We've lumped them in with 
> a bordering neighborhood: 
> http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/unincorporated/list/page/1/
> 
> Why did we throw all these together and call them neighborhoods? Because our 
> goal is to have a single common denominator we can spread across the entire 
> county and use for comparison. That's why we build them out of Census tracts, 
> so we could rack up demographics about them all. i.e.: 
> http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/income/median/neighborhood/list/
> 
> As time goes on, we plan to divide up all of the cities into smaller 
> neighborhoods, not just Los Angeles, we did in a first round last year. In 
> cases where cities have official hood boundaries (LA does not) we'll likely 
> use those. 
> 
> More info about the project and process is here: 
> http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/about/
> 
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 5:23 AM, John F. Eldredge  wrote:
> This sounds like a good compromise to me, as most people will have a general 
> agreement of where a given neighborhood is located, but differ about where 
> the boundaries are located.
> 
> --
> John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
> "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to 
> think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Avis 
> Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 08:46:09
> To: 
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk]
>Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and r
>egional boundaries for L.A.?
> 
> A compromose would be to add the centre of each neighbourhood (as 
> locality=place
> or similar) but not the exact boundaries.
> 
> --
> Ed Avis 
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> palewire.com
> work: 213-473-2624 
> cell: 213-254-5570
> ___
> 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] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Joseph Reeves]

> It's somewhat discouraging, though, that *every time* anyone uses OSM,
> we instantly react with this:

+1

It's really good to see OSM being used for something that isn't a pet
project of someone in this community.

It was great to go to WolframAlpha, type in my home town and see a map
that I had contributed to. I thought the level of attribution was
fine. More of this please! Jumping on users of the data with the usual
"how's the attribution?" will ultimately do more harm than good.

Joseph




On 16 June 2010 17:29, Tobias Knerr  wrote:
> 16.06.2010 17:47, Frank Sautter wrote:
>> WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data
>> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Berlin
>
> That's great! It's a useful way to present OSM and it demonstrates
> growing popularity. If we want to reach a larger audience, we need to be
> present on search engines and the like - and as Google is unlikely to
> replace Google Maps with OSM anytime soon, so it's the smaller, more
> specialized services that might adopt OSM as their map link target first.
>
> It's somewhat discouraging, though, that *every time* anyone uses OSM,
> we instantly react with this:
>
>> Is the license attribution they are using OK?
>
> Imo, it is. They name OSM as a data source directly below the image and
> let you access osm.org when you click on the image. They also give more
> detailled attribution (with the license abbreviation and another link to
> osm.org) on the "Source information" page. That's where all the other
> data sources are listed, too - considering the large number of sources,
> it's clearly resonable to have a separate page for sources.
>
> Technically, they don't provide the license URL directly (only
> indirectly through the link to OSM), but I don't consider that a
> relevant problem.
>
> Tobias Knerr
>
> ___
> 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] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/6/16 Tobias Knerr :
> Imo, it is. They name OSM as a data source directly below the image and
> let you access osm.org when you click on the image. They also give more
> detailled attribution (with the license abbreviation and another link to
> osm.org) on the "Source information" page. That's where all the other
> data sources are listed, too - considering the large number of sources,
> it's clearly resonable to have a separate page for sources.


it might be OK or not, but generally we explain in our wiki how we
like to be attributed in the web-context, that is supplying cc-by-sa
linked to creative commons and Openstreetmap, not too difficult, is
it?

cheers,
Martin

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Adding UK post box information

[Richard M Willis]

Ed Avis  writes:
 
> For example the following row from
...
> gets turned into the following in OSM:
> 
> node with lat=51.5729084, lon=-0.0116965, and tags:
> amenity=post_box
> ref=E10 18
> postal_code=E10 5AH
> addr:street=Capworth Street

I would suggest that you DON'T add these extra two
pieces of information, for several reasons, based on
the 400+ PB locations that I've surveyed over the last
18 months:

1. The Street name (indeed, streets plural) can be gleaned
just by looking at the map.
2. When a road gets renamed (or remodeled), you've have
to make sure all the postboxes dependent on that thoroughfare
get renamed.
3. The RM file frequently refers to roads that are misspelled,
don't exist, or are the "non-obvious" choice where several
roads intersect at/near a PB. I've come across e.g. one
called "The Crescent" even though the PB is nowhere near
that road, but it is near *A* crescent, which is just
called XXX road.
4. PBs are not always named after thoroughfares (sometimes
PHs, shops, or colloquial names for an area, which would
not be relevant on a modern map)

Similarly, for Post Codes:
1. Not all boxen have full post codes.
2. Many postboxen have incorrect codes
3. Some have generic codes, such as xxx 1AA, which is usually
the address of a PDO
4. Sometimes the postcode comes from a (not very) nearby building.


> 
> It appears to me that adding these two extra tags postal_code and
> addr:street (and sometimes addr:housenumber) from the data file should
> be okay, but I wanted to check with this list.  If these are felt to be
> a step too far then I will just add the lat,lon and ref.

Yes, just please add the lat/long and ref fields. People don't
really care about what the strict postcode or name is for a given
PB; they just want to know where it is. If they've already found
it on the map, there's nothing to be gained by saying that this
box is called "High Street".

Adding the last collection times would be an idea, but then this would
suffer from needing to be updated and might fall foul of copyright stuff.

As I've said, I've collected data (and pictures) for some 400 PB in
SGxx and ALxx. These were originally collected for postboxr, but
that site has become unmaintained, and I'd rather upload them to a saner
platform such as OSM.

Should I be uploading them to OSM or to dracos's place, given the questions over
the directionality ?

What mechanism exists for people doing a mass upload, but only for
a small part of the UK's boxen ? How would duplicates be managed ?

What do people think ?

Richard M Willis [in SG2]


> 





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

Re: [OSM-talk] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Tobias Knerr]

16.06.2010 17:47, Frank Sautter wrote:
> WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data
> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Berlin

That's great! It's a useful way to present OSM and it demonstrates
growing popularity. If we want to reach a larger audience, we need to be
present on search engines and the like - and as Google is unlikely to
replace Google Maps with OSM anytime soon, so it's the smaller, more
specialized services that might adopt OSM as their map link target first.

It's somewhat discouraging, though, that *every time* anyone uses OSM,
we instantly react with this:

> Is the license attribution they are using OK?

Imo, it is. They name OSM as a data source directly below the image and
let you access osm.org when you click on the image. They also give more
detailled attribution (with the license abbreviation and another link to
osm.org) on the "Source information" page. That's where all the other
data sources are listed, too - considering the large number of sources,
it's clearly resonable to have a separate page for sources.

Technically, they don't provide the license URL directly (only
indirectly through the link to OSM), but I don't consider that a
relevant problem.

Tobias Knerr

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and regionalboundaries for L.A.?

[John F. Eldredge]

Nashville, Tennessee, where I live, is much the same way.  In the last sixty 
years, Nashville has gone from being a city perhaps three or four miles across 
to being a metro area perhaps twenty-five miles across, swallowing up numerous 
smaller communities and subdivisions in the process.  Those areas that have 
retained some degree of local government have formal boundaries, but there are 
disagreements about where one unincorporated area shades into another.

-- 
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to 
think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria

-Original Message-
From: Richard Weait 
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 10:23:12 
To: 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and regional
boundaries for L.A.?

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Ben Welsh  wrote:
> At the risk of over complicating things, let me give a little more info.
> LA County is a fragmented place with many different cities and
> unincorporated areas puzzled together. Our "neighborhoods" are in fact three
> different types of areas consolidated.
[ ... ]

Dear Ben,

It must have been great fun to participate in this project.  I see
that you and the Los Angeles Times understand the problems related to
crowd sourcing neighborhood boundaries perfectly.

See "You gotta stop is somewhere"
http://www.latimes.com/includes/projects/img/thumb-westside-300x100.png

Also this neighborhood map for Tarzana is wonderful.
http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/comments/11501/

Your consultation with the community in Los Angeles (650
user-generated maps, 100 revisions) sounds like you have substantial
interest and perhaps even consensus locally.  I think that's
wonderful.  Presuming that the participation in your project is likely
to reduce border disagreements, I think it would be a nice addition to
OSM.

I notice that you publish your data as cc-nc-sa.  To include it in OSM
you would have to agree to allow OSM to publish it as cc-by-sa and
then ODbL after the license upgrade.  Of course you would lose the
explicit Los Angeles Times credit as well since OSM expects a
simplified "Maps and Data CCBYSA OpenStreetMap (and Contributors)"

And again, I think it is important to get feedback from others in the
Los Angeles OSM community.  Have a look over at talk-us.  They might
have something similar in the works.  I'm sure you find the conjecture
by all of us "seagulls" interesting but we all know that one active
local mapper on the ground is better than a self-important expert from
Toronto.  ;-)

Best regards,
Richard

___
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] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Ian Dees]

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 10:47 AM, Frank Sautter
wrote:

> WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data
> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Berlin
>
> Is the license attribution they are using OK?
>
>
Down at the bottom of every W|A page they have a "Source Information" link.
In there, under the "Mapping data source information" they show OpenStreetMap
(CC-BY-SA). »  with a link to
OpenStreetMap.org.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Jochen Topf]

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 05:47:05PM +0200, Frank Sautter wrote:
> WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data
> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Berlin

I can't see anything about OSM on that page!? What does it show you?

Jochen
-- 
Jochen Topf  joc...@remote.org  http://www.remote.org/jochen/  +49-721-388298


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

Re: [OSM-talk] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Serge Wroclawski]

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Frank Sautter
 wrote:
> WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data
> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Berlin

Cool.

> Is the license attribution they are using OK?

Not according to the FAQ:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#I_would_like_to_use_OpenStreetMap_maps._How_should_I_credit_you.3F

- Serge

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

[OSM-talk] WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data

[Frank Sautter]

WolframAlpha uses OpenStreetMap data
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Berlin

Is the license attribution they are using OK?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and regional boundaries for L.A.?

[Richard Weait]

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Ben Welsh  wrote:
> At the risk of over complicating things, let me give a little more info.
> LA County is a fragmented place with many different cities and
> unincorporated areas puzzled together. Our "neighborhoods" are in fact three
> different types of areas consolidated.
[ ... ]

Dear Ben,

It must have been great fun to participate in this project.  I see
that you and the Los Angeles Times understand the problems related to
crowd sourcing neighborhood boundaries perfectly.

See "You gotta stop is somewhere"
http://www.latimes.com/includes/projects/img/thumb-westside-300x100.png

Also this neighborhood map for Tarzana is wonderful.
http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/comments/11501/

Your consultation with the community in Los Angeles (650
user-generated maps, 100 revisions) sounds like you have substantial
interest and perhaps even consensus locally.  I think that's
wonderful.  Presuming that the participation in your project is likely
to reduce border disagreements, I think it would be a nice addition to
OSM.

I notice that you publish your data as cc-nc-sa.  To include it in OSM
you would have to agree to allow OSM to publish it as cc-by-sa and
then ODbL after the license upgrade.  Of course you would lose the
explicit Los Angeles Times credit as well since OSM expects a
simplified "Maps and Data CCBYSA OpenStreetMap (and Contributors)"

And again, I think it is important to get feedback from others in the
Los Angeles OSM community.  Have a look over at talk-us.  They might
have something similar in the works.  I'm sure you find the conjecture
by all of us "seagulls" interesting but we all know that one active
local mapper on the ground is better than a self-important expert from
Toronto.  ;-)

Best regards,
Richard

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Search index not updated?

[john whelan]

There is a find command in Maperitive so you can work directly with the .osm
data and tags and aren't restricted to the indexing.

Cheerio John

On 16 June 2010 08:17, Bernhard R. Fischer  wrote:

> On Wednesday 16 June 2010 10:38:55 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> > 2010/6/16 Bernhard R. Fischer :
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > Several months ago I added some farms (place=farm) in my region. I also
> > > added names (name=... + place_name=...) as well as addresses using the
> > > "addr:*="
> >
> > You might also want to look at place=isolated_dwelling (and probably a
> > subtag for the farm like isolated_dwelling=farm, and or
> > landuse=farmyard, or building=farm, ...)
>
> Martin,
>
> Thanks FYI.
> It is really very difficult to orient yourself in this jungle of available
> tags
> and if they are already accepted or "just" proposed.
>
> I also tried to add some lights to the marine map but this is even more
> difficult. At least for me, it looks like if there are 5 different
> proposals for
> one and the same thing
>
> Best regards,
> Bernhard
>
> ___
> 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] Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and regional boundaries for L.A.?

[Ben Welsh]

At the risk of over complicating things, let me give a little more info.

LA County is a fragmented place with many different cities and
unincorporated areas puzzled together. Our "neighborhoods" are in fact three
different types of areas consolidated.

1. Cities divided into neighborhoods. i.e.
http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/city/los-angeles/
2. Complete cities, drawn by their formal boundaries. i.e.
http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/neighborhood/west-hollywood/
3. Unincorporated areas that are "Census Defined Places":
http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/neighborhood/east-los-angeles/

On top of that, there are dozens of small unincorporated areas that are
basically islands floating between everything else. We've lumped them in
with a bordering neighborhood:
http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/unincorporated/list/page/1/

Why did we throw all these together and call them neighborhoods? Because our
goal is to have a single common denominator we can spread across the entire
county and use for comparison. That's why we build them out of Census
tracts, so we could rack up demographics about them all. i.e.:
http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/income/median/neighborhood/list/

As time goes on, we plan to divide up all of the cities into smaller
neighborhoods, not just Los Angeles, we did in a first round last year. In
cases where cities have official hood boundaries (LA does not) we'll likely
use those.

More info about the project and process is here:
http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/about/

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 5:23 AM, John F. Eldredge wrote:

> This sounds like a good compromise to me, as most people will have a
> general agreement of where a given neighborhood is located, but differ about
> where the boundaries are located.
>
> --
> John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
> "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not
> to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Avis 
> Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 08:46:09
> To: 
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk]
>Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and r
>egional boundaries for L.A.?
>
> A compromose would be to add the centre of each neighbourhood (as
> locality=place
> or similar) but not the exact boundaries.
>
> --
> Ed Avis 
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>



-- 
palewire.com
work: 213-473-2624
cell: 213-254-5570
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and regional boundaries for L.A.?

[John F. Eldredge]

This sounds like a good compromise to me, as most people will have a general 
agreement of where a given neighborhood is located, but differ about where the 
boundaries are located.

-- 
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to 
think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria

-Original Message-
From: Ed Avis 
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 08:46:09 
To: 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk]
Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and r
egional boundaries for L.A.?

A compromose would be to add the centre of each neighbourhood (as locality=place
or similar) but not the exact boundaries.

--
Ed Avis 


___
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] Search index not updated?

[Bernhard R. Fischer]

On Wednesday 16 June 2010 10:38:55 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2010/6/16 Bernhard R. Fischer :
> > Hi!
> > 
> > Several months ago I added some farms (place=farm) in my region. I also
> > added names (name=... + place_name=...) as well as addresses using the
> > "addr:*="
> 
> You might also want to look at place=isolated_dwelling (and probably a
> subtag for the farm like isolated_dwelling=farm, and or
> landuse=farmyard, or building=farm, ...)

Martin,

Thanks FYI.
It is really very difficult to orient yourself in this jungle of available tags 
and if they are already accepted or "just" proposed.

I also tried to add some lights to the marine map but this is even more 
difficult. At least for me, it looks like if there are 5 different proposals 
for 
one and the same thing

Best regards,
Bernhard


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [HOT] Humanitarian Presets in French (assistance needed)

[Kate Chapman]

Hi Jean-Guilhem,

That is correct about the "key=" and the "values=".

Thank you so much for your help!

-Kate

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Jean-Guilhem Cailton  wrote:
> Hi Kate,
>
> A translation proposal is now in github, under a fork at :
> http://github.com/rodo/OpenStreetMap-Humanitarian-Tags/blob/master/humanitarian_presets_josm.xml
>
> I have assumed that, like the "key=..." content, the "values=..." was not to
> be translated, for interoperability (it was sometimes already in French).
> Please let me know if this assumption was wrong.
>
> Nice to be able to contribute to help Haiti remotely again.
>
> Jean-Guilhem
>
>

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and regional boundaries for L.A.?

[Pieren]

We already had a discussion about something smaller than suburbs last year:
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-September/041903.html

But I don't know if you consider "quarters" or "districts" differently as
"neighborhoods".

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [HOT] Humanitarian Presets in French (assistance needed)

[Jean-Guilhem Cailton]

Hi Kate,

A translation proposal is now in github, under a fork at :
http://github.com/rodo/OpenStreetMap-Humanitarian-Tags/blob/master/humanitarian_presets_josm.xml

I have assumed that, like the "key=..." content, the "values=..." was 
not to be translated, for interoperability (it was sometimes already in 
French). Please let me know if this assumption was wrong.

Nice to be able to contribute to help Haiti remotely again.

Jean-Guilhem


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and regional boundaries for L.A.?

[John Smith]

On 16 June 2010 19:17, Tom Hughes  wrote:
> Does that matter if the boundaries are essentially guesswork inventions
> anyway?

If we used that logic we would only ever map from very hi-res very
high accurate aerial imagery then because anything less is mostly
guess work...

> It sounds like these aren't any sort of officially defined areas, but more
> the kind of fluid local names for approximate areas.

Actually it's worst than that, at least here, because when you are
near a suburb border different databases can place you in different
suburbs.

I think most databases are generated from extrapolations, but the
original boundaries would have been drawn up on paper, and some times
they do shift but older suburbs tend to be pretty static. Also suburb
boundaries here sometimes have signs up on major roads when you move
between them. That said, suburbs are somewhat different in Australia
to similarly named places in the US, there is more of them and they
cover smaller areas.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and regional boundaries for L.A.?

[Tom Hughes]

On 16/06/10 10:04, John Smith wrote:
> On 16 June 2010 18:46, Ed Avis  wrote:
>> A compromose would be to add the centre of each neighbourhood (as 
>> locality=place
>> or similar) but not the exact boundaries.
>
> That doesn't tell you what objects exist inside those boundaries...

Does that matter if the boundaries are essentially guesswork inventions 
anyway?

It sounds like these aren't any sort of officially defined areas, but 
more the kind of fluid local names for approximate areas.

Tom

-- 
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and regional boundaries for L.A.?

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/6/16 Steve Bennett :
> OSM does need to think more carefully about what exactly is in and out
> of scope.


The scope is IMHO the worldmap drawn with the knowledge of locals,
that's why I'd consider these informal neighbourhoods precious to our
data, even more as they are not "official" boundaries so OSM could
maybe become the main source for them.

I'm actually against too much discussion about relevancy of things to
be put into the db. It might be problematic to insert ephemeral stuff,
especially if it does not get maintained, but besides this I'd
personally like to see as much information as possible inserted.
Things (e.g. those areas, alternative names, ...) that only the locals
know of (but to them is commonly known), and that is not written in
other publications or even on the ground I'd consider the most
precious data to collect.

cheers,
Martin

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and regional boundaries for L.A.?

[John Smith]

On 16 June 2010 18:46, Ed Avis  wrote:
> A compromose would be to add the centre of each neighbourhood (as 
> locality=place
> or similar) but not the exact boundaries.

That doesn't tell you what objects exist inside those boundaries...

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Q: Is OSM interested in neighborhood and r egional boundaries for L.A.?

[Ed Avis]

A compromose would be to add the centre of each neighbourhood (as locality=place
or similar) but not the exact boundaries.

-- 
Ed Avis 


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Search index not updated?

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/6/16 Bernhard R. Fischer :
> Hi!
>
> Several months ago I added some farms (place=farm) in my region. I also added
> names (name=... + place_name=...) as well as addresses using the "addr:*="


You might also want to look at place=isolated_dwelling (and probably a
subtag for the farm like isolated_dwelling=farm, and or
landuse=farmyard, or building=farm, ...)

cheers,
Martin

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Search index not updated?

[Dan Karran]

On 16 June 2010 08:15, Bernhard R. Fischer  wrote:

> Several months ago I added some farms (place=farm) in my region. I also added
> names (name=... + place_name=...) as well as addresses using the "addr:*="
> scheme. I also added roads with names.
> Nevertheless, if I try to find them by using the search bar of the OSM online
> viewer they do not show up.
>
> What am I doing wrong?

The Nominatim search index is dated back at the start of March[1] so
it's nothing you've done wrong, just that the search index is running
behind a little. Not sure what the status is there, but perhaps
someone else has some more information about when it's expected to be
updated next.


[1] http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/

Dan

-- 
Dan Karran
d...@karran.net
www.dankarran.com

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Outline of island does not change

[Dan Karran]

On 16 June 2010 07:48, Bernhard R. Fischer  wrote:
> More than one month ago I tracked a small harbor in Croatia (Lucina, Dugi
> Otok) and edited and uploaded the new map data using Josm. Nevertheless, if I
> look at the map using the OSM online viewer the new outline of the island is
> not rendered. It still shows the old imprecise one.
>
> What is the reason for that behavior?

The coastline rendering is only updated infrequently (monthly or so,
if I recall correctly) so you may need to wait just a little longer to
see your changes on the Mapnik map. I think you should see the new
outline if you switch the map style to the Tiles at Home map though.


Dan

-- 
Dan Karran
d...@karran.net
www.dankarran.com

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

[OSM-talk] Search index not updated?

[Bernhard R. Fischer]

Hi!

Several months ago I added some farms (place=farm) in my region. I also added 
names (name=... + place_name=...) as well as addresses using the "addr:*=" 
scheme. I also added roads with names.
Nevertheless, if I try to find them by using the search bar of the OSM online 
viewer they do not show up.

What am I doing wrong?

Best regards,
Bernhard


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk