[OSM-talk] Flash cookies
I discovered that openstreetmap.org stores (flash) cookies on our computers. Since recently was decided that in NL cookies are subject to explicit permission of the users, I'd think that Openstreetmap provides information on what information and settings are actually used by OSM. If you want to check the settings for your computer regarding flash cookies, look here: http://www.macromedia.com/support/documentation/en/flashplayer/help/sett ings_manager09.html And that is the information released by Macromedia/Adobe only. Gert Gremmen - Openstreetmap.nl (alias: cetest) P Before printing, think about the environment. <>___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Pitiful proceedings - as usual
On Wednesday 22 June 2011 02:46:30 Steve Bennett wrote: > but > people aren't suddenly going to become more attentive to mailing lists If they can't be bothered to read the mailinglists, can they please also refrain from posting to them. -- m.v.g., Cartinus ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Pitiful proceedings - as usual
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:16 PM, Cartinus wrote: > 1. How many people are too incompetent to understand the initial announcement. One thing you can generally say about communication is that when communication fails, blaming the receiving party gets you nowhere. If an ad campaign fails, you don't blame consumers - you blame the ad company. If a company-wide email fails to have an effect, you could blame all employees - but that gets you nowhere. I think the same goes here - if the existing communication strategy was perceived as ineffective, it's simply unproductive to blame the people reading those communication channels. You can personally hold that view, but people aren't suddenly going to become more attentive to mailing lists or whatever. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What is ad hominem and bad faith
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:50 PM, TimSC wrote: > Thanks for responding. I moved this to a different thread as it is getting > on to a new topic. I tried to sort the conversation in to chronological > order so we can see the relevant parts. How about we move it to the bin. There's plenty of material on Wikipedia about different forms of argumentation, if anyone is interested. Now, how about discussing OSM, rather than meta-meta-arguments? Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Is it a temporary file or Derivative Database under ODbL
On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 22:49 +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Just like we have a tagging list for tagging-specific discussions. So if someone decided to change every highway=track into highway=unclassified or decided to mass-change aerodrome into airport, would that be an issue for tagging (since it was a change of tag) or would it be an issue for general talk (since it is a major change that affects potentially every user of the system)? > I'm relatively sure that 99.5% of readers of this talk list will never > create a Garmin map with SOTM contours, and are quite uninterested in > the finer details of what exactly a temporary file means in legal terms. Im pretty sure that 99.5% of users would never be sued if they put an OSM map onto their website without proper attribution too, that doesnt mean that we shouldnt talk about it, or move the conversation to some obscure list where even the name is enough to scare interested people away. I for one am interested to know the answer to these sorts of questions, since it appears that this huge licence has been written but very little consideration has been given to the finer details, until they get pointed out 1000 times. At which point someone either makes a concession to the masses or an insult to those users who pointed out the problems. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Is it a temporary file or Derivative Database under ODbL
HI, I am not a lawyer, but if you are creating a file for your private use and not distributing it, then I would say you have no real restrictions on what you can do. mike On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:13 PM, ThomasB wrote: > Hi, > > i have a practical questions. If I want to generate a Garmin map for a > larger country and want to add contour lines, it is impossible to merge the > data only in the RAM. Hence a local temporary file is needed which would > contain both, OSM and SRTM data. This temporary file would be deleted after > the map creation process. Is this temporary file a "Derivative Database" > with all legal requirements? > > -- > View this message in context: > http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Is-it-a-temporary-file-or-Derivative-Database-under-ODbL-tp6501556p6501556.html > Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > -- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova and Albania flossk.org flossal.org ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Is it a temporary file or Derivative Database under ODbL
re-routing from talk@ On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 4:13 PM, ThomasB wrote: > Hi, > > i have a practical questions. If I want to generate a Garmin map for a > larger country and want to add contour lines, it is impossible to merge the > data only in the RAM. Hence a local temporary file is needed which would > contain both, OSM and SRTM data. This temporary file would be deleted after > the map creation process. Is this temporary file a "Derivative Database" > with all legal requirements? Dear Thomas, Just my perspective on this. I haven't made garmin maps with contours, so you'll have to forgive me if I get some of the steps or terms incorrect. I can see good points for arguing that a contour map is any one of a Collective Database, a Derivative Database or a Produced Work, depending on the details of how the contour map is implemented. I think that a strict reading of ODbL suggests that your temporary file is a Derivative Database. Under §3.1d this is permitted, "Creation of temporary or permanent reproductions by any means and in any form, in whole or in part, including of any Derivative Databases or as a part of Collective Databases;" I think that your temporary file is also exempt from further conditions if you do not Publicly Convey it. §4.2 "Notices. If You Publicly Convey this Database, any Derivative Database, or the Database as part of a Collective Database, then You must:" If you do not Publicly Convey the temporary file you would have no further obligations due to it. I presume that the final file(s) will be created from the temporary file. Those final file(s) would also be, in my opinion, a Derivative Database. Again, if you do not Publicly Convey it, and only use it yourself, you would have no further obligations. Otherwise, if you plan to share, sell, etc. the file(s) you would do so under the terms of §4 and the rest of ODbL. In addition to reading the ODbL, the OSM community has the opportunity to set community norms and guidelines[2]. I would suggest that creating maps for mobile devices is an ideal topic for such a community norm. These norms allow us to agree on practices that are sensible to our community. There has been little discussion of these norms to date. The Trivial Transformation guideline might well include such a mobile map conversion. [3] Best regards, Richard [1] http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/ [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Community_Guidelines [3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Trivial_Transformations_-_Guideline ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-talk] Leaflet 0.2 released
Hi! After one month of active development since the first public release, Leaflet, a new JavaScript library for interactive maps by CloudMade, recently reached version 0.2. Highlights of this release include: - WMS layers support - GeoJSON support - different projections support (with EPSG:4326, 3857 and 3395 out of the box) - lots of bugfixes (especially for mobile browsers) - performance, usability and API improvements See the full list of changes here: https://github.com/CloudMade/Leaflet/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md On a side note, despite being more and more feature-complete as a map library, the JS code of a full Leaflet build still weights under 18kb gzipped. Found out more about Leaflet on the official website: http://leaflet.cloudmade.com/ -- Vladimir Agafonkin Front-End Architect, CloudMade +380 93 745 44 61 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Is it a temporary file or Derivative Database under ODbL
ThomasB wrote: > And what do you think a laywer will say when asked > when the community using the license has no idea? The community has a perfectly good idea, as indeed you would do if you actually read the licence. ;) Under ODbL you are "publicly using" a Produced Work from a Derived Database. Your obligations are therefore to produce either the Derivative Database itself or, more practical in this instance, "A file containing all of the alterations made to the Database or the method of making the alterations to the Database (such as an algorithm), including any additional Contents, that make up all the differences between the Database and the Derivative Database." There is no stipulation that the algorithm is machine-readable, simply an expectation that it could be followed by anyone reasonably competent in such matters. So a readme.txt detailing the steps required to transform OSM data into the derivative database will be fine. "Show your working", if you like. Now, please stop being such a self-righteous arse and post to the proper mailing list in future. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Is-it-a-temporary-file-or-Derivative-Database-under-ODbL-tp6501556p6501822.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] Is it a temporary file or Derivative Database under ODbL
Frederik Ramm wrote: > > I'm relatively sure that 99.5% of readers of this talk list will never > create a Garmin map with SOTM contours, > I guess your mean SRTM. Anyway, I am relativly sure that more than 0.5% of the readers here USE maps with contours lines. And this only the OSM community. There are some others like Geocacher that use such maps. Who do you think will produce these maps with this point requiring legal advice? And what do you think a laywer will say when asked when the community using the license has no idea? -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Is-it-a-temporary-file-or-Derivative-Database-under-ODbL-tp6501556p6501702.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] Is it a temporary file or Derivative Database under ODbL
Hi, ThomasB wrote: I can not accept this answer, Frederik. [...] I don't want to talk with lawyers on legal. Legal has one or two lawyers, plus a lot of ordinary mappers like you and me who think about about legal matters. The list exists not to entertain lawyers but simply to separate traffic on the community lists. Just like we have a tagging list for tagging-specific discussions. I'm relatively sure that 99.5% of readers of this talk list will never create a Garmin map with SOTM contours, and are quite uninterested in the finer details of what exactly a temporary file means in legal terms. If you cannot be bothered to adhere to the simplest protocols that make all our lives easier, then don't expect us to help you. 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] Is it a temporary file or Derivative Database under ODbL
I can not accept this answer, Frederik. Generating a Garmin map with contour lines is not something special. I guess all programs that generate such maps for larger areas need local temp files. And now there is no answer available? What is with all these Garmin Maps? If a local temp file would constitute a database according to ODBL, it would make it very hard to generate it. I don't want to talk with lawyers on legal. I always get headaches when talking with lawyers. And I am part of this community and don't want to talk with legal people when asking such an easy question. If such an easy question requires legal advice, then something is wrong. -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Is-it-a-temporary-file-or-Derivative-Database-under-ODbL-tp6501556p6501636.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] Is it a temporary file or Derivative Database under ODbL
Hi, ThomasB wrote: Is this temporary file a "Derivative Database" with all legal requirements? We have a specalist mailing list, legal-talk, to discuss these matters. However, in this particular question you are unlikely to find a firm answer, given that the question whether temporary files constitute a proper manifestation of data or are just an implementation detail of an algorithm is something that lots of lawyers are discussing (see current cases about streaming media and if consumers need a copyright license). 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] Is it a temporary file or Derivative Database under ODbL
Hi, i have a practical questions. If I want to generate a Garmin map for a larger country and want to add contour lines, it is impossible to merge the data only in the RAM. Hence a local temporary file is needed which would contain both, OSM and SRTM data. This temporary file would be deleted after the map creation process. Is this temporary file a "Derivative Database" with all legal requirements? -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Is-it-a-temporary-file-or-Derivative-Database-under-ODbL-tp6501556p6501556.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] MapQuest Open Flash Maps API just released!
We're happy to announce the latest improvement to the MapQuest Flash Maps API – now in support of the MapQuest Open Initiative! This latest release is called Open Flash Maps API, and is very similar to the standard MapQuest Flash Maps API except it relies solely on open data. It includes support of OpenStreetMap, Open Aerial Tiles, Open Directions Service, Nominatim Search Service and other Open Services. Here's the link to the blog post for information and links to documents and sample code: http://devblog.mapquest.com/2011/06/21/open-flash-maps-api-with-openstreetmap-support/ We're also working on a OSM Flash Maps API for mobile devices - iOS, Android and BlackBerry Tablet using Adobe Flash Builder 4.5.1. It'll be ready for beta testing in a week or two, if you're interested! Cheers! MapQuest Open and Developer Services Teams ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Fwd: [Talk-us] overwhelmed with responses on the imagery priorities
whoops meant to go to talk... Original Message Subject:[Talk-us] overwhelmed with responses on the imagery priorities Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 11:26:16 -0700 From: Steve Coast To: talk-us I had tons of emails in response to my request for ideas of where we could prioritise imagery. This is not to be taken that we will prioritise based on your input but that's my hope. I've put the salient bits of every email in here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bing/Priorities If you can help me figure this in to a coherent page with some idea of how to prioritise all the requests that would help me take this to the next stage. Thanks Steve ___ Talk-us mailing list talk...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Pitiful proceedings - as usual
On Tuesday 21 June 2011 10:30:06 Ulf Lamping wrote: > I've read the whole thread now and have some lessons learned: > > 1. You don't have to wear a suit to be incompetent I am mainly amazed by two other things: 1. How many people are too incompetent to understand the initial announcement. 2. How many prominent contributors take the time to reply to this nonsense. -- m.v.g., Cartinus ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Pitiful proceedings - as usual
>You do realize that there are thousands of people reading this list, from >all around the world? Please contact LWG in private or at least move to >legal-talk@, where all trolls go. Thank you. Legal-talk = troll ?? : this guy/gall *is* funny !! Gert Gremmen - Openstreetmap.nl (alias: cetest) Before printing, think about the environment. -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Ilya Zverev [mailto:zve...@textual.ru] Verzonden: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 1:26 PM Aan: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Pitiful proceedings - as usual [] IZ ___ 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] Pitiful proceedings - as usual
TimSC, > Your definition of ad hominem is slightly wrong. An ad hominem is always > against the author of the argument being criticised. An attack on a > third party (e.g. my mother) would be merely an insult and can never be > ad hominem. You do realize that there are thousands of people reading this list, from all around the world? Please contact LWG in private or at least move to legal-talk@, where all trolls go. Thank you. IZ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Pitiful proceedings - as usual
Michael Collinson schrieb: >The link looks good. I'll make sure any future license change related >stuff goes here as well as our normal "announce" mailings. For me the preferred and most natural way of receiving announcements is the announce mailing list. Announcements on talk might get drowned in all the other traffic about the license change process. :/) Subscribing to announce should be strongly recommended to everyone. Matthias ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Pitiful proceedings - as usual
On 20/06/2011 19:18, Jason Cunningham wrote: I think using the word "pitiful" goes a bit far, but it got the intended response. As someone who spends little time reading through the mailing list I would expected this important step to be very well publicised, and that does not appear to be the case. After reading a few of these emails, and not having heard of this Phase 4 before, I went to the Wiki Main Page nothing there. Main reason for replying was some of the emails implied it would be more helpful to actually find ways to advertise the change rather than go around in circles arguing about it not been advertised. I've added it to the News Section on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Main_Page but obviously someone who understands what is going on should improve what I've done and add an appropriate link (hopefully very quickly). Yes, a simple and effective improvement to communication. Thanks, Jason. The link looks good. I'll make sure any future license change related stuff goes here as well as our normal "announce" mailings. Mike ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What is ad hominem and bad faith
On 6/20/2011 8:03 AM, TimSC wrote: It would be nice if the committee would be aware of this long standing problems and as[k] for help from the community too. We have considerable human resources in the community and if people are over worked, perhaps they should delegate more? Also, it can be that someone tried to do something they think constructive, they risk the ire of someone else who believes it should be done differently. Credo experto - believe me, i've tried. On 20/06/11 16:33, Steve Coast wrote: I'd take a long look at how you have sucked up the LWGs time, Tim, before you make these kinds of statements. Steve, can you stop changing the subject on to me? It's ad hominem and a violation of etiquette. And it is off topic and doesn't assume good faith. Do you understand what I am asking, as you keep doing it even when I ask you to stop? On 21/06/11 06:00, SteveC wrote: An ad hominem attack would be something where you complained about what the LWG spent it's time on and I replied with a comment about your mother. Instead, I replied pointing out that you are in fact the one using most of their time recently. That would be called a rebuttal or perhaps a riposte, but it's not an ad hominem attack. Steve, Thanks for responding. I moved this to a different thread as it is getting on to a new topic. I tried to sort the conversation in to chronological order so we can see the relevant parts. Your definition of ad hominem is slightly wrong. An ad hominem is always against the author of the argument being criticised. An attack on a third party (e.g. my mother) would be merely an insult and can never be ad hominem. A better definition is an attempt to undermine an argument with perceived negative attributes or character of the author (paraphrased from [1][2]). You did so. The highlighted a negative attribute because I supposedly "sucked up the LWGs time", and claimed I can't make my point because of that alleged fact: "I'd take a long look [...] before you make these kinds of statements". It's the same as criticising a poltician's stance on family values because they had an alleged affair. Tabloids say "how dare that hypocrite make statements on family values". Both your point and this are classic ad hominem. I think this is an important point. If we can try to rid the mailing lists of these personal attacks, we might be more productive. Steve, do you understand what I am trying to say? Regards, TimSC [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ad+hominem [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Pitiful proceedings - as usual
Am 20.06.2011 09:09, schrieb NopMap: I don't know how you feel, but for me it is very hard to remain supportive of the matter in the face of such consequent incompetence handling it. I've read the whole thread now and have some lessons learned: 1. You don't have to wear a suit to be incompetent 2. It's difficult and needs a lot of manpower to write a 2-liner: "We've now entered phase 4 of ..." 3. It's even more difficult to acknowledge that 2 would have been a good idea Regards, ULFL ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Japan KSJ2 Import
The MLIT 'import' is an on-going process. User:Tatata wrote some scripts, and others are using those scripts to do the imports bit-by-bit. As Brad wrote, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue/Japan_KSJ2_Import links to info that should show what has been imported and by whom. -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Japan-KSJ2-Import-tp6497451p6499073.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] Join the OSMF !
On 6/21/2011 12:49 AM, SteveC wrote: I only said +1 for a start, Which means "I agree with the quoted post". ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
