Re: [OSM-talk] license change map
Am 11.11.10 schrieb Anthony: What exactly does it mean for a way to be "created and edited only by people who did accept the ODBL"? Specifically, are you looking at the underlying nodes, or not? At the moment I'm only looking at the ways as it is visible in the API history. So an edit consists of editing tags, adding or removing nodes. I don't check if a node is moved., but only if there is a new version of a way. Fabian. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] importing excel sheets
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 2:45 AM, David Murn wrote: > On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 22:52 +0100, Mike Dupont wrote: > > > Are the sheets with the gas stations from austraila imported yet? we > > can use that as the test data. > > Assuming you mean fuel stations, and not gas stations, then yes a lot > have been imported. A lot of this information was released under CCBYSA > licence, so be very careful what accounts you use to upload the data. > > The big issue, is that the imports were done a while ago, and the data > has been slowly being corrected since then. This would mean if you > imported a new copy, youd end up with duplicates, or at the very least, > pollute the data that surveyors have cleaned up since the import. On my > recent cross-country trip, I corrected maybe 50 locations of BP stations > that were slightly incorrectly marked. Unless you plan on doing the > 8000km drive to re-survey them after importing, I suggest you be careful > about what youre importing. > Well, we have to clear this up. The import of sheets is into its own table, each sheet will get imported into its own table. then we will allow connecting of that table to osm data. The idea is to manage imports better, instead of creating osm data, we create structured data in the rails database. The osm data can then be compared and corrected, changed tracked. at leas that is my plan. mike ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Historical Data in OSM database
Andrew Errington wrote: It would be more logical to have the date construction started be > start_date, and the date construction completed be completed_date. > Having the completion date tagged as start_date doesn't make sense. I agree. We have this 'opportunity' in Korea to record the start and end dates for construction of bridges, tunnels and buildings. This information is often visible on a plaque on or near the structure: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Korea_bridges At the moment there is are 'temporary' tags to record this: construction_start_date=2003-05-09 construction_end_date=2004-12-09 Since there are only a few instances of it they would be easy to change. I asked on the tagging list if there was a better way to do this but we didn't really reach a conclusion. I think 'start_date' on its own is insufficient, and really not the right tag to mean 'construction has ended and people started using the building/structure/whatever'. However, if it's defined that way then it's fine, but we then need a way to tag the start of construction. My take on things relates to routing and so ANY way that has a start_date or an end_date should basically be ignored if it is outside the current time frame. So when a new bridge opens to traffic then that should be the simple start_date. construction_start_date then also makes sense, but so does route_approved_date and some others relating to the development process. I'm not sure that all of the potential dates are really necessary, but if the information IS available, then it would be nice to be able to include it? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] license change map
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 08:01:40 +0100 Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > On 11/12/10 02:37, David Murn wrote: > > From looking at a few different cities in this map, it is quite > > telling what areas support the licence and which areas will be > > devastated by the data loss. > > Everyone please keep in mind that a very large number of people who > have contributed to OSM don't even *know* about the license change > yet. So while it is great to have such tools in place, they will only > become a relicable indicator of "data loss" once we have emailed each > and every contributor. > > Bye > Frederik > I have been asking for such a visual tool for a while, so thanks to fabian for providing it. Sadly it can't show a large area as it is restricted to higher zoom levels. I took the opportunity to examine the main towns in the vast area of my State that I have surveyed and note that almost all of this is completely red. I note that some areas which I surveyed are "green", which means that there is some *small* difficulty with the data, as it is not respecting initial work done by myself. Perhaps where roads have been split and the history is lost for one half these things have happened. Of course the nodes would still be CCbySA and need to be "red". ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] license change map
David Murn incanberra.com.au> writes: >From looking at a few different cities in this map, it is quite telling >what areas support the licence and which areas will be devastated by the >data loss. Please. _Would_ be devastated by data loss, if someone decided to delete all that data. -- Ed Avis ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Historical Data in OSM database
2010/11/11 Laurence Penney : > On 11 Nov 2010, at 20:30, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> IMHO the wiki is clear here: "start_date is the date the construction >> of feature finished." It is not about the construction being >> commissioned or started. > > The wiki may be clear but that doesn't mean it's any good. Cologne Cathedral > deserves more dating richness than start_date=1880 and, following the current > wiki spec, the Sagada Familia won't be allowed a start_date tag until around > 2050. Yes, but you tag for a church sanctification_date and for the beginning of the constructions construction:start_date (or would that be start_date:construction ?). Of course you cannot tag all kind of aspects in one tag. If you are interested in these other dates I suggest you make a proposal. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Historical Data in OSM database
2010/11/11 : > It would be more logical to have the date construction started be start_date, > and the date construction completed be completed_date. Having the completion > date tagged as start_date doesn't make sense. I disagree, because start_date is the beginning of the tagged feature, this is IMHO not the date when someone first thought about it, or the plan got approved or the construction started but it is the date when the feature was actually there as it is now. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Historical Data in OSM database
2010/11/12 Andrew Errington : > At the moment there is are 'temporary' tags to record this: > > construction_start_date=2003-05-09 > construction_end_date=2004-12-09 IMHO those are fine. If you use them regularly might be worth to document them as feature in the wiki so that others use them as well (if you haven't already done so, I didn't check). > I think 'start_date' on its own is insufficient, and really not the right > tag to mean 'construction has ended and people started using the > building/structure/whatever'. I think it is a misconception to see it as "construction ended" it is "feature starts", and the end of construction is just a coincidence. IMHO start_date is OK for what it is documented, but other dates are possible and need different tags. > However, if it's defined that way then it's > fine, but we then need a way to tag the start of construction. didn't you write above that you already invented this? ;-) cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Historical Data in OSM database
On 12 Nov 2010, at 11:57, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2010/11/11 Laurence Penney : >> On 11 Nov 2010, at 20:30, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: >>> IMHO the wiki is clear here: "start_date is the date the construction >>> of feature finished." It is not about the construction being >>> commissioned or started. >> >> The wiki may be clear but that doesn't mean it's any good. Cologne Cathedral >> deserves more dating richness than start_date=1880 and, following the >> current wiki spec, the Sagada Familia won't be allowed a start_date tag >> until around 2050. > > Yes, but you tag for a church sanctification_date and for the > beginning of the constructions construction:start_date (or would that > be start_date:construction ?). Of course you cannot tag all kind of > aspects in one tag. If you are interested in these other dates I > suggest you make a proposal. All in good time... I just made a proposal about date formatting, so I'll let that settle in people's stomachs first! - L ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Historical Data in OSM database
Am 12.11.2010 12:00, schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer: 2010/11/11: It would be more logical to have the date construction started be start_date, and the date construction completed be completed_date. Having the completion date tagged as start_date doesn't make sense. I disagree, because start_date is the beginning of the tagged feature, this is IMHO not the date when someone first thought about it, or the plan got approved or the construction started but it is the date when the feature was actually there as it is now. partly disagree. If I tag a construction site, I can add start_date - describing "start of construction". If the building is finished, it's no construction site any more, but the osm object may be the same one; re-tagged as building=yes without construction and start_date describing the date the building is finished "as it is now". start_date, as you see in this example, is a generic tag, like e.g. width is. Refinements like start_date:construction, start_date:usage; start_date:planning; start_date:disusage; start_date:abandonment are possible - but start_date should not be used to be one of these. regards Peter ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] license change map
Ed Avis wrote:
>
> David Murn incanberra.com.au> writes:
>
>>From looking at a few different cities in this map, it is quite telling
>>what areas support the licence and which areas will be devastated by the
>>data loss.
>
> Please. _Would_ be devastated by data loss, if someone decided to delete
> all
> that data.
>
If we go by what the JOSM introduction page says ("OpenStreetMap is changing
its license"), "will" is correct.
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/license-change-map-tp5729307p5732108.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] license change map
> Ed Avis wrote: >> Please. _Would_ be devastated by data loss, if someone decided to delete >> all >> that data. Noone decideto "delete all that data", in fact, we are still in phase 2 of the migration, and the data deletion will come up in phase 5... so we stillhave plenny of time to talk to people that still hadn't agreed on the new license. Also, in phase 3 all the users will be notified of the existence of a new license. This will surely increase a lot the number of people who accept the new license, since I'm sure the iggest part of the people that hadn't yet accepted have no idea that there is a new license coming up. -- Fabio Alessandro Locati Home: Segrate, Milan, Italy (GMT +1) Phone: +39-328-3799681 MSN/Jabber/E-Mail: fabioloc...@gmail.com PGP Fingerprint: 5525 8555 213C 19EB 25F2 A047 2AD2 BE67 0F01 CA61 Involved in: KDE, OpenStreetMap, Ubuntu, Wikimedia ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] license change map
Hi,
On 11/12/10 13:04, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
If we go by what the JOSM introduction page says ("OpenStreetMap is changing
its license"), "will" is correct.
Please stop this immediately.
Bye
Frederik
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] license change map
On 12 November 2010 22:47, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 11/12/10 13:04, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>>
>> If we go by what the JOSM introduction page says ("OpenStreetMap is
>> changing
>> its license"), "will" is correct.
>
> Please stop this immediately.
“Methinks He Doth Protest Too Loudly”
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] New Community Updates
That is great keep it up! And consider posting to OpenGeoData.org == Mikel Maron == +254(0)724899738 @mikel s:mikelmaron http://mapkibera.org/ http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Haiti From: Matthias Meißer To: OpenStreetMap Talk Sent: Fri, November 12, 2010 10:11:05 AM Subject: [OSM-talk] New Community Updates Hi, a new week, a new Community updates Newsletter by EMerzh is out: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Community_Updates/2010-11-01 By the way, he needs further helpers to monitor all the channels :) regards Matthias ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] license change map
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 4:02 AM, Fabian Schmidt wrote: > > Am 11.11.10 schrieb Anthony: > >> What exactly does it mean for a way to be "created and edited only by >> people who did accept the ODBL"? Specifically, are you looking at the >> underlying nodes, or not? > > At the moment I'm only looking at the ways as it is visible in the API > history. So an edit consists of editing tags, adding or removing nodes. I > don't check if a node is moved., but only if there is a new version of a > way. Ah, that explains it. I thought it looked a little bit more green than I was expecting. Still, more accurate than the raw "percentage of edits" figures. Thanks for releasing this. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] license change map
Hi Fabian, Thanks for creating this good visualization of ways affected by the acceptance of ODbL + CT. May I make a suggestion? It seems that only roads are being marked. How about all the other ways like landuses, boundaries, riverbanks, and others? I think you can create a really simple Mapnik style to show this, perhaps thin red, yellow, and green lines on a black background? Maybe other people can suggest a way to also visualize nodes. Thanks, Eugene On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:41 AM, Fabian Schmidt wrote: > > As the license thermometer[1] turns greener I was interested in how far this > already effects the map data. So using the planet history I took a closer > look on the ways. > > So far 3700 mappers agreed to the new license. Out of 68 million ways 46% > are created and edited only by people who did accept the ODBL. 42% were not > edited by a proponent of ODBL, the remaining 12% of the ways have a mixed > history. You will find a map of the ways colored according to their license > (red = CCBYSA, green = ODBL, yellow = partly ODBL) at > http://osm.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/map/ > > > Fabian. > > [1] http://matt.dev.openstreetmap.org/treemap.png > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > -- http://vaes9.codedgraphic.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Historical Data in OSM database
On 12 November 2010 12:28, Peter Wendorff wrote: > start_date, as you see in this example, is a generic tag, like e.g. width is. > Refinements like start_date:construction, start_date:usage; > start_date:planning; start_date:disusage; start_date:abandonment are possible > - but start_date should not be used to be one of these. Actually the Sagrada Familia is a good example of the problem with modifier tags like "width": it's not clear which feature they apply to if one node or way or relation represents more than one feature. The Sagrada Familia is at the same time a building, a place of worship and a construction site. The start_date values are different for each, but I guess if I see these three tags on a closed way + name + a start_date I'd assume the latter applies to the place_of_worship... no, actually I wouldn't be sure. Programs using the data will have the same problem here, or they will assume it applies to all three, like "name", which will be wrong. Cheers ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Historical Data in OSM database
The problem is, and therefore it's not possible to get a good solution without changing the database layout: history information apply to attributes, not to objects, but tags only apply to to objects as a whole. That's also a problem at some other issues discussed repeatingly, e.g. different opening_hours of two poi tagged on a shared node (e.g. one as amenity, one as shop). regards Peter ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] South Pole?
Did the South Pole move? http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=0&lon=0&zoom=17&layers=M More seriously there is no data there and I am wondering why it displays "South Pole" Thanks, N. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] New Community Updates
2010/11/12 Matthias Meißer : > a new week, a new Community updates Newsletter by EMerzh is out: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Community_Updates/2010-11-01 > > By the way, he needs further helpers to monitor all the channels :) thanks! It is a long desired "feature" of OSM... :) -- -S ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] South Pole?
I guess is created from the position of north pole... On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Nakor wrote: > Did the South Pole move? > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=0&lon=0&zoom=17&layers=M > > More seriously there is no data there and I am wondering why it displays > "South Pole" > > Thanks, > > N. > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > -- Fabio Alessandro Locati Home: Segrate, Milan, Italy (GMT +1) Phone: +39-328-3799681 MSN/Jabber/E-Mail: fabioloc...@gmail.com PGP Fingerprint: 5525 8555 213C 19EB 25F2 A047 2AD2 BE67 0F01 CA61 Involved in: KDE, OpenStreetMap, Ubuntu, Wikimedia ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Changeset 6234414
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 5:25 AM, vitor wrote: > It seems to be a new user from Brazil trying to upload a .dwg without much > knowledge. I´ll try to contact him. Did you find out anything? I see the changeset hasn't been reverted yet Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Changeset 6234414
I didn't had time this week to contact him, but I sent a message a few minutes ago. I'll wait for the answer before to proceed with the revert. Vitor On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 7:54 PM, Toby Murray wrote: > On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 5:25 AM, vitor wrote: > > It seems to be a new user from Brazil trying to upload a .dwg without > much > > knowledge. I´ll try to contact him. > > Did you find out anything? I see the changeset hasn't been reverted yet > > Toby > > ___ > 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] South Pole?
OH NO!!! It has started! We're all gonna DIE11!!! Nakor wrote: > Did the South Pole move? > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=0&lon=0&zoom=17&layers=M > > More seriously there is no data there and I am wondering why it displays > "South Pole" > > Thanks, > > N. > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] license change map
On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 10:54 +, Ed Avis wrote: > David Murn incanberra.com.au> writes: > > >From looking at a few different cities in this map, it is quite telling > >what areas support the licence and which areas will be devastated by the > >data loss. > > Please. _Would_ be devastated by data loss, if someone decided to delete all > that data. People keep bringing up this issue that its only a matter of time until contributors agree to the terms. If 100% of people agreed to the terms, surely that means that some are agreeing, who have uploaded licenced data. So, in other words, part of the question as part of the licence acceptance, is that you arent agreeing to relicence anyone elses works, only your own. As an individual, you dont have the right to change the licence of data that youve imported previously, just the same way that (hopefully) no-one has the right to change the licence of data theyve extracted from OSM, to suit their own needs. Re-writing CTs or your own licence, doesnt in any way give you any rights over someone elses work, in the same way that Id hope someone cant just write up some terms they decide, then import the OSM data, re-licence under their terms, and re-distribute. The outcome of this, since we already know that a number of major sources do NOT agree to the terms, is that either the data will either be deleted or alternatively, it will be re-licenced without the original licence-holders permission, which either leaves OSM deprived of data, or leaves the legal usage of such data, up-in-the-air just like every other mapping service with unusable data because of so many different data owners. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] New Community Updates
Am 12.11.2010 um 22:34 schrieb Simone Cortesi : > 2010/11/12 Matthias Meißer : >> a new week, a new Community updates Newsletter by EMerzh is out: >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Community_Updates/2010-11-01 >> >> By the way, he needs further helpers to monitor all the channels :) > > thanks! It is a long desired "feature" of OSM... :) For everyone who understands German: We're doing something very similar on the German OSMBlog. It's called “Wochennotiz” and we've already made 16 versions of it. You can read the latest one here: http://blog.openstreetmap.de/2010/11/osm-wochennotiz-nr-16/ -Jonas > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] South Pole?
Nakor Osm wrote: > > Did the South Pole move? > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=0&lon=0&zoom=17&layers=M > > More seriously there is no data there and I am wondering why it displays > "South Pole" > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/436012592 Remember that the Mercator projection chokes on infinities at the poles; apparently Mapnik resolves it by using 0 latitude. -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/South-Pole-tp5734054p5734276.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] South Pole?
if(lat > 85 || lat < -85)
{
do_not_render();
}
(and yep, something went wrong with my emails...)
2010/11/13 Peter :
> oops, yes...
>
> 2010/11/13 Nathan Edgars II :
>> Did you mean to send this to the list?
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Peter wrote:
>>> Oops, must be:
>>> if(lat > 85 || lat < -85)
>>> {
>>> do_not_render();
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>> 2010/11/13 Peter :
if(lat > 85)
{
do_not_render();
}
2010/11/13 Nathan Edgars II
>
>
> Nakor Osm wrote:
> >
> > Did the South Pole move?
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=0&lon=0&zoom=17&layers=M
> >
> > More seriously there is no data there and I am wondering why it displays
> > "South Pole"
> >
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/436012592
>
> Remember that the Mercator projection chokes on infinities at the poles;
> apparently Mapnik resolves it by using 0 latitude.
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/South-Pole-tp5734054p5734276.html
> Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
--
Groeten,
Peter
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Groeten,
>>> Peter
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Groeten,
> Peter
>
--
Groeten,
Peter
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
