Re: [OSM-talk] The world’s best addressable map

[Marc Gemis]

First question: how do you build "the world's best addressable map" ?
Through imports or survey ? Is the timeframe that Martin puts forward fur
surveyed addresses acceptable and feasible ?

As for the imports:

Wouldn't it be great that we would have import tools that can be used by
many groups ? Just as we have great editors for "manual" mapping.
Shouldn't the OSMF (or however) invest in a procedure + tools for import ?

So when a group wants to perform an import, they only have make sure the
license is compatible and the data has enough quality. The process of the
import is already described, the tools ( task managers, data conversion,
some quality checks etc.) are in place. They deliver the data and the
import can start.
I have the impression that right now each group has to take all those
obstacles all by themselves.

Maybe I have a totally wrong perception of the import process. please
correct me if that's the case.

regards

m


On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Clifford Snow 
wrote:

> Steve Coast suggested changing the mission statement of OSM to be
> something like “The world’s best addressable map” I thought
> I'd separate out this into a new thread. As some backup, I attended my
> first SOTM-US in 2012 where Steve proposed we build an addressable map. A
> group of us from Seattle decided that we'd take that challenge and import
> addresses for Seattle. That import was completed.
>
> Here are the address related comments:
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:37 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <
> dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 2014-10-22 12:15 GMT+02:00 Steve Coast :
>>
>>> Together, we could do this in 6-12 months and finish addressing in 1-3
>>> years. At that point we wouldn’t have just made the world slightly better,
>>> we would have put a big dent in the universe. Nobody would use a closed map
>>> ever again, and it would be people like you that made it happen.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree with you that addressing is very important for a lot of
>> commercial (and non-commercial) map users. What I don't understand is how a
>> paid board would help us map more addresses. Unfortunately mapping
>> addresses is typically less fun than going to the video arcade. Looking at
>> the current figures we are not doing too bad. Currently there are 130
>> Million buildings in OSM and 46 Million housenumbers. I don't know exactly
>> how many buildings there are in the world, and how many of them don't have
>> addresses, but I guess it will be at least 1 Billion addresses in the
>> world, probably more. According to the stats page we have roughly 25.000
>> active contributors a month (
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Stats#Contributor_Stats ). To get an
>> address on all currently mapped buildings in three years time, (84M to go),
>> every active contributor would have to add 93 addresses a month -
>> constantly. To get 1 Billion addresses mapped by 25.000 contributors in 3
>> yrs, it would be  housenumbers a month per active contributor. Are we
>> planning to pay the mappers as well? The only solution seems to get more
>> contributors mapping, and have them insert addresses.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:59 AM, Marc Gemis  wrote:
>
>> It would be nice to know how many of the buildings and house numbers in
>> OSM were imported versus surveyed / drawn by hand. I have a bad feeling
>> about how feasible it is to crowd surf house numbers.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:04 AM, Oleksiy Muzalyev <
> oleksiy.muzal...@bluewin.ch> wrote:
>
>> It is not necessary to put down a number on each building. It is possible
>> to use *addr:interpolation* (*odd, even*, or *all*).
>>
>> We put down a number on the first building, then on the last, connect
>> them in JOSM, and add *addr:interpolation: all *. For example here:
>> http://osm.org/go/0CFn0AZ_d--?m= . It is also very useful on a street
>> with many small houses. And it is searchable. For example if there is
>> number 15 and number 27 on the map for a street, and they are connected
>> with *addr:interpolation: odd, *and if one searches number 21, the map
>> will show the number 21 all right.
>>
>> Then, there is another approach. We first map addressable large building,
>> where a lot of people live or work. Kind of of going after the low-hanging
>> fruit.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:06 AM, Matthijs Melissen <
> i...@matthijsmelissen.nl> wrote:
>
>> On 22 October 2014 12:37, Martin Koppenhoefer 
>> wrote:
>> > Currently there are 130 Million buildings
>> > in OSM and 46 Million housenumbers.
>>
>> Do we know how many of these addresses come from imports? I wouldn't
>> be surprised if over 90% of the housenumbers in OSM come from imports.
>>
>> The Dutch BAG import accounts for 8 million adresses, and the Czech
>> RUIAN import accounts for 3 million addresses. Then there have also
>> been large imports at least in Germany, Poland, and France, but for
>> these countries I can't find exact numbers.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> @osm_seattle
> osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
> OpenStr

Re: [OSM-talk] Addresses are a tiny fraction of what we do (was: The world’s best addressable map)

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 10/23/2014 08:57 AM, Marc Gemis wrote:
> Wouldn't it be great that we would have import tools that can be used by
> many groups ? 

As far as addresses are concerned, there's "OpenAddresses" (the US
version, not the older Swiss project) that collects openly licensed
address data and to my knowledge they're also looking into how that data
can then be combined with OSM for geocoding, without actually importing
it in OSM.

To my mind that's an excellent solution; you can dump address data into
the pool and have it processed without interfering with the manually
surveyed data that is in OSM. And users can be given the choice of using
only the manually surveyed data, or only the government data, or a
mixture of both.

OSM is not a melting pot for the world's open data and while there is a
place for imports, every import will have to be carefully thought about
and evaluated. Streamlining that process is not necessarily in the best
interest of OpenStreetMap.

Frankly, I don't get all the brouhaha about addresses. Yes, geocoding is
commercially interesting, but is it interesting for us as a project? Are
the mappers in OSM doing what they do because they always wanted to have
a house-level free geocoder? I very much doubt that. Technology wise, I
find it almost insulting to reduce OSM to a geocoding database and
measure OSM in how many addresses it has. There's so much more to the
data we collect than merely placing a latitude and longitude against an
address.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board

[Simon Poole]

Am 23.10.2014 08:22, schrieb Sarah Hoffmann:
..
> 
> It very clear states the obligations of a board member with respect to
> board meetings and transparency. How does the board hold its individual
> members accountable for following the rules of order? How can the
> OSMF membership hold board members accountable for it?
..

The board members are elected by the OSMF members and the board doesn't
really have control over its own composition outside of a couple of
nuclear options that naturally tend to not be invoked.

The rules of order can be seen as a contract between the board members
complementary to the law and articles of association, but just as in the
real world a breach of contract will make people unhappy, but given the
trade-offs tend to not have any consequences of note.

One thing has become obvious, that the current 1/3 of the board stands
for re-election per year rule has provided lots of continuity but not
enough change. Going forward I would suggest tweaking the articles to
limit consecutive terms to two (just reiterating what I've said earlier)
and require a minimum of 3 seats to be available at every election.

There has been some discussion between Michael, the board and myself on
changing the inner workings of the OSMF a bit which potentially could
address some of the remaining issues, however these are at a very early
discussion stage.

Simon







signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The world’s best addressable map

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-10-23 8:57 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis :

> Is the timeframe that Martin puts forward fur surveyed addresses
> acceptable and feasible ?




I believe for surveyed addresses it is completely unrealistic - if our
active user base continues to grow like it did in the past 3 years, and if
the majority of mappers remains concentrated in the urban parts of the
western world. It also depends on how good you expect the coverage to be
(by covering urban areas you'll get a lot of addresses with much fewer
effort than you'll need for surveying the remaining addresses in remote
rural areas).

cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] A Better Map

[Oleksiy Muzalyev]

I usually map house numbers on Sunday morning when there is less
traffic. I use bicycle and a specialized application for smartphone for
collecting address (with a smartphone stylus).

It is better to map addressable first, say, 30 large buildings where
1000 people live or work, than 60 small buildings, where 100 persons live.

And de facto it is always not about house numbers only, as during such
on-the-ground surveys one corrects street names, adds POI, building
names, etc. We just make a photo of a sign or a plaque, again with the
smartphone camera, and see to it later. Nothing can replace an
on-the-ground survey, of being there physically.

Besides, it is interesting, because it is a possibility to visit and
learn areas of a city, which one would never visit otherwise, to make
discoveries for yourself, to maintain an explorer spirit.

It is surprising how much map area one can cover on bicycle during one
Sunday morning expedition. I would say one weekend mapper is capable to
map addressable a medium city in couple of years. Perhaps, not
exhaustively, but major buildings.

brgds,
Oleksiy (Alex-7)

On 22.10.2014 13:59, Marc Gemis wrote:
> ... I have a bad feeling about how feasible it is to crowd surf house
> numbers...
>
> regards
>
> m
>


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

Re: [OSM-talk] The world’s best addressable map

[Jóhannes Birgir Jensson]

I like addresses but they don't behave like you would think. For example 
we have a part of a street that has each individual flat as its own 
address number. We first used the number;number;number; approach but I'm 
now in favor of naming the house what it says on the front (the range 
37-51) and then put address nodes on the building so it appears in 
search, with roughly the position accounting for where in the house the 
apartment is. In this case the numbers closest to the street are at the 
bottom floor (the stadium approach I favor). I'm in favor of moving this 
same method over to the other houses.


http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/64.13635/-21.79883

As for being able to search within a specific town or area then I think 
we should look again at relations and super-relations. You could group 
streets relations into a neighborhood relation and then into a town or 
municipality relation etc. This of course works very differently based 
on country but for Iceland I can't see us hitting any limits.


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Super-Relation

Regards on behalf of the Icelandic Local Chapter applicant,
Jói

Þann 22.10.2014 18:28, skrifaði Clifford Snow:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:04 AM, Oleksiy Muzalyev 
mailto:oleksiy.muzal...@bluewin.ch>> wrote:


It is not necessary to put down a number on each building. It is
possible to use /addr:interpolation/ (/odd, even/, or /all/).

We put down a number on the first building, then on the last,
connect them in JOSM, and add /addr:interpolation: all /. For
example here: http://osm.org/go/0CFn0AZ_d--?m= . It is also very
useful on a street with many small houses. And it is searchable.
For example if there is number 15 and number 27 on the map for a
street, and they are connected with /addr:interpolation: odd,
/and//if one searches number 21, the map will show the number 21
all right.

Then, there is another approach. We first map addressable large
building, where a lot of people live or work. Kind of of going
after the low-hanging fruit.




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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board

[Kathleen Danielson]

>
>
> There has been some discussion between Michael, the board and myself on
> changing the inner workings of the OSMF a bit which potentially could
> address some of the remaining issues, however these are at a very early
> discussion stage.


Simon, would you care to shed light on this? This seems like a good time to
bring conversation out into the open, so that the community can give input,
rather than waiting until things have already been decided. The deadline
for someone to announce their candidacy is in just over 12 hours, so today
is rather critical for OSMF. I would hate for something to come out in a
day or a week that could have compelled someone to run.

Speaking of timelines, I'd like to register my disappointment that it
wasn't made more obviously known that the deadline has already passed to
join the foundation to be eligible to vote in the upcoming election [1]. I
certainly understand why the 30 day rule is in place, but we talk about how
few community members are actually OSMF members, and yet the AGM wasn't
formally announced until *yesterday*, [2] only 17 days in advance. I also
absolutely understand the challenges around scheduling at conferences, but
I wasn't aware of this rule, and I think it's fair to assume many other
people weren't as well.  By failing to publicize this important deadline to
the larger community, a key opportunity has been lost to increase the
membership as well as to hear the voices of more community members in our
annual election. To me, this communicates either satisfaction with the
status quo ("why expand the voting base if we're happy with how elections
have gone in the past?"), or simply apathy. Both are disappointing.

There is still quite a bit that I want to say in response to the messages
of the past few days, but it's taking me some time to formulate the bulk of
my thoughts. That said, I would like to voice my support for Richard's
suggestion that the full board step down. I hope most of them will stand
for re-election, but I think we've heard that whichever 2 people we elect
are likely to be burnt out and sapped of whatever energy they have going
into the election. Don't think that I don't understand the challenge that
comes with the potential loss of institutional memory. It's something we've
discussed many times on the OSM-US board. I do think that it's a drastic
option, but I can't see anything short of a drastic option making a
substantial difference. If the past few days have taught us anything, it's
that the OSMF is fundamentally broken and doesn't have the energy needed to
fix that. This project can and should be able to and *has* done great
things, but it could be so much more. No, we don't always agree with what
"more" means, but with a governing body (which is what OSMF is, even if
that isn't made explicit) that cannot accomplish things, we're not going to
see any version of "more".

Yes, I've decided to stand for election, and no, I don't expect my view to
make me particularly popular (or electable), but I truly care about this
project, and I want to see our community become a healthy one. I think a
shakeup in leadership could help us get there.

[1]
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Articles_of_Association#VOTING_AT_GENERAL_MEETINGS
(see
item 75)
[2]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-announce/2014-October/12.html
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Applications to the Local Chapter Agreement

[Jóhannes Birgir Jensson]

On behalf of the Icelandic applicants we are fairly sure that we are the 
only ones representing our area and we will strive hard to include 
others who will be or are interested in the area.


We have a small blurb in English about us on our webpage, the OSM 
affiliation would be presented under OpenStreetMap á Íslandi (in 
Iceland) where applicable.


http://www.hlidskjalf.is/english/

Regards,
Jói, current chairman

Þann 22.10.2014 23:10, skrifaði Simon Poole:

Hi Rob

  I had the feeling that I had announced something outside of the board,
but that may simply be a figment of my imagination. Applications have
been received from Iceland, Italy and Japan.  All three have the honor
and the pain of having to beta test the procedure, mainly providing us
with some additional documentation. I'm sure translating the respective
articles is the main issue, but I can't see how minimal due diligence
can be avoided without creating a liability nightmare.

There are further organisations that have indicated their willingness to
join us and I would expect a few more applications in the next couple of
months.

Simon


Am 22.10.2014 23:41, schrieb Rob Nickerson:

Simon,

I note in [1] that there are now three applications to the Local
Chapter Agreement [2] and these are being processed now.

In light of the current discussions on transparency and holding the
board to account, can I ask whether it possible to disclose these just
in case there are any other local groups that feel they represent the
geographic regions included in the first three applications.

Also I'm curious :-)

Best,
Rob

[1]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2014-October/002697.html
[2] http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Local_OSMF_Chapters



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


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

Re: [OSM-talk] The world’s best addressable map

[Oleksiy Muzalyev]

I agree that addresses is a complicated field. There are different
historical systems, there are cities where even many streets are without
names, etc. There is a lot of space for innovation, certainly.

What I meant is that it is not obligatory to map a city or a town
addressable from one end to another, one house after another, or wait
until a municipal government releases into public domain its database of
addresses (which may be not without errors or omissions too).

If there are, say, 10% of buildings where 90% of the population lives,
studies and works, it makes sense to map them addressable first. Often
these are large modern buildings with clear addresses.

And it is much easier to return into the same area for the second time,
when there are already at least some large buildings with numbers, much
easier to orientate oneself.

I see from your example that in the city of Reykjavik almost every
building has a number, so you have a more advanced set of priorities.

Best regards,
Oleksiy

On 23.10.2014 10:39, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
> I like addresses but they don't behave like you would think. For
> example we have a part of a street that has each individual flat as
> its own address number. We first used the number;number;number;
> approach but I'm now in favor of naming the house what it says on the
> front (the range 37-51) and then put address nodes on the building so
> it appears in search, with roughly the position accounting for where
> in the house the apartment is. In this case the numbers closest to the
> street are at the bottom floor (the stadium approach I favor). I'm in
> favor of moving this same method over to the other houses.
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/64.13635/-21.79883
>
> As for being able to search within a specific town or area then I
> think we should look again at relations and super-relations. You could
> group streets relations into a neighborhood relation and then into a
> town or municipality relation etc. This of course works very
> differently based on country but for Iceland I can't see us hitting
> any limits.
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Super-Relation
>
> Regards on behalf of the Icelandic Local Chapter applicant,
> Jói
>
> Þann 22.10.2014 18:28, skrifaði Clifford Snow:
>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:04 AM, Oleksiy
>> Muzalyev > > wrote:
>>
>> It is not necessary to put down a number on each building. It is
>> possible to use /addr:interpolation/ (/odd, even/, or /all/).
>>
>> We put down a number on the first building, then on the last,
>> connect them in JOSM, and add /addr:interpolation: all /. For
>> example here: http://osm.org/go/0CFn0AZ_d--?m= . It is also very
>> useful on a street with many small houses. And it is searchable.
>> For example if there is number 15 and number 27 on the map for a
>> street, and they are connected with /addr:interpolation:
>> odd, /and/ /if one searches number 21, the map will show the
>> number 21 all right.
>>
>> Then, there is another approach. We first map addressable large
>> building, where a lot of people live or work. Kind of of going
>> after the low-hanging fruit.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

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

[OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[David Cuenca]

There are many people who record both a gps trace and a video of their
itinerary.
Do you think it would be viable to use these videos as a sort of street
view by associating the frames to a location? When there is no gps trace,
it could be done by interpolation, defining synchronization points between
map and video.

It is not 360°, but at least there would be some images of remote areas.

Cheers,
Micru
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Jóhannes Birgir Jensson]

I think you are looking for Mapillary!

Mapillary images are now built into the iD editor, if you go into 
Background settings you can check the Photo Overlay (Mapillary) option 
and see images from there.


Example area: http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=18/64.08253/-21.80923

Þann 23.10.2014 10:20, skrifaði David Cuenca:
There are many people who record both a gps trace and a video of their 
itinerary.
Do you think it would be viable to use these videos as a sort of 
street view by associating the frames to a location? When there is no 
gps trace, it could be done by interpolation, defining synchronization 
points between map and video.


It is not 360°, but at least there would be some images of remote areas.

Cheers,
Micru


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


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

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Oleksiy Muzalyev]

It is possible to upload photos to the  Crowdsourced Street Level Photos
http://www.mapillary.com/ from its smartphone application or manually.
The photos just must have the following EXIF tags:
["GPSLongitude"]
["GPSLatitude"]
["DateTimeOriginal","DateTimeDigitized","DateTime","GPSDateStamp"]
["Orientation"]

I tried to upload to the Mapillary photos from Canon 70D camera with the
GPS receiver Canon GP-E2. It recognizes them all right and places them
on the map in the right spot.

But GoPro-4 makes about 120 fps (frames per second) in video mode. It
means 120 photos per second, in one minute it will be 720 HD photos. I
think it will overwhelm the server.

Perhaps, in photo mode? Though I do not own GoPro.

brgds
Oleksiy

On 23.10.2014 12:20, David Cuenca wrote:
> There are many people who record both a gps trace and a video of their
> itinerary.
> Do you think it would be viable to use these videos as a sort of
> street view by associating the frames to a location? When there is no
> gps trace, it could be done by interpolation, defining synchronization
> points between map and video.
>
> It is not 360°, but at least there would be some images of remote areas.
>
> Cheers,
> Micru
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

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

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Janko Mihelić]

There is a blog entry about uploading GoPro photos to Mapillary:

http://blog.mapillary.com/technology/2014/07/21/upload-scripts.html

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

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Oleksiy Muzalyev]

Rather, 7200 photos (120 fps х 60 seconds).
brgds
Oleksiy

On 23.10.2014 12:58, Oleksiy Muzalyev wrote:
> ... GoPro-4 makes about 120 fps (frames per second) in video mode. It
> means 120 photos per second, in one minute it will be 720 HD photos. I
> think it will overwhelm the server.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board

[Simon Poole]

Hi Kathleen

Am 23.10.2014 10:47, schrieb Kathleen Danielson:
> 
> There has been some discussion between Michael, the board and myself on
> changing the inner workings of the OSMF a bit which potentially could
> address some of the remaining issues, however these are at a very early
> discussion stage.
> 
>  
> Simon, would you care to shed light on this? This seems like a good time
> to bring conversation out into the open, so that the community can give
> input, rather than waiting until things have already been decided. The
> deadline for someone to announce their candidacy is in just over 12
> hours, so today is rather critical for OSMF. I would hate for something
> to come out in a day or a week that could have compelled someone to run.

I don't believe any of the changes would or should effect anybody
wanting to run for the upcoming election. Any change would not be short
term in any case and likely discussed to death before anything happens.

The issues in discussion are not new, it is simply a renewed attempt at
addressing them:

- role of the board: strategic? oversight? operational? Right now the
OSMF board is a mash up of all three.
- in the same vein revisit the management team concept, given that is
has struggled to get off the ground, does it need changing?
- more participation from the community in the OSMF outside of the
working groups and the board. Do we need to provide additional
structures to facilitate that? For example an advisory board?
- can we do anything to help the working groups? Kate pointed out her
animal shelter experience, however it seems at odds with OSM reality.
The "shoveling manure" working groups are doing fairly well, foremost
the DWG, but naturally the OWG and the LWG too, all the others seem to
have participation and motivation problems.

... and probably a couple of points that I've forgot.


> 
> Speaking of timelines, I'd like to register my disappointment that it
> wasn't made more obviously known that the deadline has already passed to
> join the foundation to be eligible to vote in the upcoming election [1].
> I certainly understand why the 30 day rule is in place, but we talk
> about how few community members are actually OSMF members, and yet the
> AGM wasn't formally announced until *yesterday*, [2] only 17 days in
> advance. I also absolutely understand the challenges around scheduling
> at conferences, but I wasn't aware of this rule, and I think it's fair
> to assume many other people weren't as well.  By failing to publicize
> this important deadline to the larger community, a key opportunity has
> been lost to increase the membership as well as to hear the voices of
> more community members in our annual election. To me, this communicates
> either satisfaction with the status quo ("why expand the voting base if
> we're happy with how elections have gone in the past?"), or simply
> apathy. Both are disappointing.

The 30 day rule is -very- new, this is actually the first time it will
apply, so I apologize if anybody was surprised by it. The scheduling
issue is real and it flatly wouldn't have been possible to formally
announce in time (which would have had to been 60 days back to give
enough time to avoid the cut off without undue haste). The solution to
this will likely be to disassociate GM scheduling from the SOTM event so
that we can plan the GM well in advance.

> There is still quite a bit that I want to say in response to the
> messages of the past few days, but it's taking me some time to formulate
> the bulk of my thoughts. That said, I would like to voice my support for
> Richard's suggestion that the full board step down. I hope most of them
> will stand for re-election, but I think we've heard that whichever 2
> people we elect are likely to be burnt out and sapped of whatever energy
> they have going into the election. Don't think that I don't understand
> the challenge that comes with the potential loss of institutional
> memory. It's something we've discussed many times on the OSM-US board. I
> do think that it's a drastic option, but I can't see anything short of a
> drastic option making a substantial difference.

It simply is a very unrealistic option given that it would require a
mechanism that doesn't exist to force all board members to resign.

Kate was complaining about the on boarding of new board members, she got
at least an order of magnitude more support than Frederik and myself
did, I don't think that there is any -accessible- board related
institutional memory of note that is tied to board members. I do have to
point to and thank Andy Robinson for his support in providing filing and
mail services to the foundation for a very long time.

> If the past few days
> have taught us anything, it's that the OSMF is fundamentally broken and
> doesn't have the energy needed to fix that. This project can and should
> be able to and *has* done great things, but it could be 

[OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board

[Richard Fairhurst]

Simon Poole wrote:

Kathleen Danielson wrote:

That said, I would like to voice my support for Richard's
suggestion that the full board step down.

It simply is a very unrealistic option given that it would require a
mechanism that doesn't exist to force all board members to resign.


Absolutely no force required. I would hope that the existing board 
members would recognise the virtue of a fresh mandate and a clean start.


Incidentally, only three of the current board members (Simon, Frederik 
and Kate) have contributed to or shown any sign of being aware of this 
debate. Matt of course is stepping down but I hope Dermot, Henk and 
Oliver will take this chance to engage with the community they represent 
and serve.


Richard


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Addresses are a tiny fraction of what we do (was: The world’s best addressable map)

[Marc Gemis]

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Frankly, I don't get all the brouhaha about addresses. Yes, geocoding is
> commercially interesting, but is it interesting for us as a project? Are
>

So don't you expect "pressure" from companies using OSM for navigation and
geocoding to add more addresses ? Or do you expect them to use many
different datasources ?
And when the mission statement is "The world's best addressable map", don't
you expect that people will feel the need to add more addresses, faster, in
a shorter period of time ?

BTW, I'm just an ordinary mapper without real vision of what OSM has to be.
I'm happy to continue mapping the way I do now: surveys, because this means
exploring the world around me. I don't need imports. It's just that when
OSMF wants more imports (do they ?)  they should support that process with
the necessary tools, doing so would to improve the quality of the imports
IMHO.


regards

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

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[David Cuenca]

The business activity of the for-profit company Mapillary is not new.
Before it was acquired by Google, Panoramio did the same:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panoramio

I don't see any point in working for free for a private company so they can
sell their services to third parties. I was asking here to see if there is
a not-for profit way of reaching the same goal.

Thanks for your support,
Micru

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Janko Mihelić  wrote:

> There is a blog entry about uploading GoPro photos to Mapillary:
>
> http://blog.mapillary.com/technology/2014/07/21/upload-scripts.html
>
> Janko
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>


-- 
Etiamsi omnes, ego non
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Simon Poole]

See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Video_mapping
and
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Video_Mapping_with_the_ContourGPS_Helmet_Camera

It is my preferred way of surveying if not on foot. There are numerous
problems, for example current affordable video cams tend to not have
enough resolution for stuff like house numbers and so on. But for a lot
of larger things it is very efficient.

Simon

Am 23.10.2014 12:20, schrieb David Cuenca:
> There are many people who record both a gps trace and a video of their
> itinerary.
> Do you think it would be viable to use these videos as a sort of street
> view by associating the frames to a location? When there is no gps
> trace, it could be done by interpolation, defining synchronization
> points between map and video.
> 
> It is not 360°, but at least there would be some images of remote areas.
> 
> Cheers,
> Micru
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Jóhannes Birgir Jensson]

Well all the images are under CC-BY-SA license

http://www.mapillary.com/legal.html

I don't see anyone at the moment making another non-profit solution that 
gives an instant benefit to OSM (via iD editor). Storage space and 
bandwidth are never free while volunteer time is, wether it is 
programming or contributing material, so until then anyone offering a 
similar service will require income to pay for it.


Mapillary is the best answer to your question at this point in time. 
That is all I can say.



Þann 23.10.2014 11:33, skrifaði David Cuenca:
The business activity of the for-profit company Mapillary is not new. 
Before it was acquired by Google, Panoramio did the same:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panoramio

I don't see any point in working for free for a private company so 
they can sell their services to third parties. I was asking here to 
see if there is a not-for profit way of reaching the same goal.


Thanks for your support,
Micru

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Janko Mihelić > wrote:


There is a blog entry about uploading GoPro photos to Mapillary:

http://blog.mapillary.com/technology/2014/07/21/upload-scripts.html

Janko

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




--
Etiamsi omnes, ego non


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


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

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[David Cuenca]

Simon,thanks for sharing, it is really cool to see that there are so many
possibilities! And now with 360° HD cameras getting cheaper, maybe it would
be possible to use them for locating street numbers.

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Simon Poole  wrote:

> See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Video_mapping
> and
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Video_Mapping_with_the_ContourGPS_Helmet_Camera
>
> It is my preferred way of surveying if not on foot. There are numerous
> problems, for example current affordable video cams tend to not have
> enough resolution for stuff like house numbers and so on. But for a lot
> of larger things it is very efficient.
>
> Simon
>
> Am 23.10.2014 12:20, schrieb David Cuenca:
> > There are many people who record both a gps trace and a video of their
> > itinerary.
> > Do you think it would be viable to use these videos as a sort of street
> > view by associating the frames to a location? When there is no gps
> > trace, it could be done by interpolation, defining synchronization
> > points between map and video.
> >
> > It is not 360°, but at least there would be some images of remote areas.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Micru
> >
> >
> > ___
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>


-- 
Etiamsi omnes, ego non
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Oleksiy Muzalyev]

I mapped house numbers in this area http://osm.org/go/0CFtB2b71--

As you can see there are service roads with private access. I never had
any problem to cycle on these roads, note the numbers and put down
numbers into a smartphone application. But I would not want to film with
a video-camera continuously in such areas.

I used to employ the /OSMPad/ application for mapping numbers
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OsmPad , but for some reason it
stopped working on my iPhone after iOS 8 update. And there is no update
in App Store.

I took just seconds to map several houses with the /OSMPad/ , no more
than to stop and check an SMS or a Whatsup message. I downloaded
/OSMhunter/ and will give it a try. But I have a feeling that
disappearance of /the OSMPad /would be a major setback/./

brgds
Oleksiy

On 23.10.2014 13:59, David Cuenca wrote:
> ... with 360° HD cameras getting cheaper, maybe it would be possible
> to use them for locating street numbers.
>

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 10/23/2014 01:25 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Absolutely no force required. I would hope that the existing board 
> members would recognise the virtue of a fresh mandate and a clean start.

A radical step, but I like it. I'd be more than happy to withdraw my
candidacy if there was a spirit of rebooting. We wouldn't even need
seven new candidates; we could simply elect a few and they could then
add new un-elected board members as they like (article 79 in the AoA).

Instead of rushing through such an unprecedented measure, we could also
do it in a more orderly fashion: Have this year's AGM decide that the
board should prepare to resign altogether at the next AGM, and prepare
the election of a full new board. This event would then be known long in
advance and people would have time to prepare their bids for a seat on
the rebooted body. Independent of the actual legal powers of the AGM,
certainly no board member could ignore such an express declaration by
the very people they're serving.

Another thing, while we're throwing doors wide open. In many political
systems around the world, the electorate doesn't elect a group of people
with wildly different goals. Instead, people form parties and the
electorate decides for a party, and the party will then form the
government. (Grossly simplifying, I know.) That way, people in
government have to fight each other to a much lesser degree than they
would if government were comprised of people following different
political views and goals.

By appointing seven directors individually, on the one hand we have the
advantage that they can keep each other in check; we, as the electorate,
don't have to be super careful, if we elect someone who's incompetent or
a kleptomaniac, the others on the board will hopefully notice and fix it
somehow. On the other hand, there's the danger of seeding the board with
a couple of difficult personalities that make life hard and reduce
productiveness for the rest of them.

Should we perhaps vote for "teams"? Just like a team can assemble and
bid for holding a SotM, should we allow a team to bid for being the OSMF
board for a year?

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

[OSM-talk] Fwd: An engaged electorate

[Richard Weait]

-- Forwarded message --
From: Richard Weait 
Date: Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 8:50 AM
Subject: An engaged electorate
To: "osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org" 


Talk@ and osmf-talk@ posts suggest that we have an engaged electorate.
Candidates should undertake to engage with their potential voters.

Candidates.  Please address the current questions to candidates on the
wiki page,

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Foundation/AGM14/Election_to_Board

If you are uncomfortable with editing the wiki page directly, post
your answers to osmf-talk@, we can crowd-source it[1]. :-) Please
repeat the question in the email with your answer to avoid ambiguity.

Candidates, please continue to monitor the link above for additional
questions.  With your wiki account, you can see changes in that page
by using your watchlist.

There are fewer than 12 hours to go for candidacy declarations!

[1] so, readers, please help out by transcribing answers posted here
that are not added yet added to the wiki page.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-10-23 13:59 GMT+02:00 David Cuenca :

> And now with 360° HD cameras getting cheaper, maybe it would be possible
> to use them for locating street numbers.



>From my findings the time you are saving by recording everything instead of
selecting at surveytime what you want to map by taking a focused photo or
note, will be spent twice and more when looking for useful pictures in the
video later (and you'll risk to miss a lot of important stuff, but you will
be able to map a lot of detail, re-using the same footage over and over
again and still will find unmapped stuff). It depends on what you map which
method is most useful, e.g. for speed limits or lanes count, automatic
video recording is probably perfect, for housenumbers you'd need a setup
similar to Google's in order to get sufficient detail (and still you can
see in streetview that sometimes the feature you are interested in is
covered by something else or that the light conditions do not allow to
discern what you are after). This might have gotten better with higher
resolution cameras now. For the purpose of mapping my guess is that rather
than 120fps@fullHD you should set the cam to 30fps@4K.

cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Craig Wallace]

On 2014-10-23 11:20, David Cuenca wrote:

There are many people who record both a gps trace and a video of their
itinerary.
Do you think it would be viable to use these videos as a sort of street
view by associating the frames to a location? When there is no gps
trace, it could be done by interpolation, defining synchronization
points between map and video.

It is not 360°, but at least there would be some images of remote areas.


For the GoPro, I find its usually more useful in timelapse model.
ie taking a photo every second, or maybe every 5 or 10 seconds, depends 
on what you are surveying and how fast you are moving.


The still photos are usually much better quality and higher resolution 
than frames from the video. So more useful for reading housenames etc.
Plus its easy to geotag all of the photos (I use GeoSetter), then load 
them into JOSM.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 10/23/2014 08:22 AM, Sarah Hoffmann wrote:
> The problem is that I don't see where the membership has any leverge on
> the board apart from the elections. We have had discussions about
> transparency before but they have been utterly fruitless so far. A good
> part of the current members has promised to report from the work of the
> board in their manifestos.

Let me describe a purely hypothetical situation.

Say there's someone on the board who doesn't really do anything. They
rarely show up for meetings, don't participate in mailing list
discussions, and respond late if at all to inquiries by the rest of the
board. It's not however *so* bad that board would go through the trouble
of calling an EGM to have that board member removed or replaced,
especially since that would always require someone to be the first to
stand up and spread disharmony by pointing out the obvious.

A new election comes up and, lo and behold, that same board member even
stands for re-election. The other board members are a bit puzzled but
what can they do, they can't suddenly start a campaign against one of
their own, can they? In the absence of any communications from other
board members, the OSMF membership assumes that the board member in
question must have been doing a good job, and promptly re-elects them.

End of hypothetical situation. It is obvious that something has gone
wrong, but what, and how could it have been better? Can we expect board
members to report to the membership about the (perceived?) lack of
performance of their peers? Or does the membership have to ask questions
to find out what happens or does not happen?

Board members are expected to keep board matters confidential, something
that is also enshrined in the Rules of Order that you mention. This is
to avoid reading about the board meeting in 5 different twitter feeds
instead of on the OSMF wiki ;) but maybe the balance is not right. Maybe
individual board members should be asked to report about their work to
the electorate. But that would of course hardly be objective. Currently
not only have we no such reporting, but the secretary (me) has even been
asked not to specifically minute *who* voted for *what* in those few
cases where board votes on something.

> It very clear states the obligations of a board member with respect to
> board meetings and transparency. How does the board hold its individual
> members accountable for following the rules of order?

Not at all, really. The rules of order is something we spent quite some
time on during our face-to-face meeting last year. I had introduced that
document because I felt that being clear about expectations and
obligations would remove some of the problems. The bill didn't pass
fully (I think the draft is still on my user page on the OSM Foundation
Wiki, something I caught flak for internally BTW) but at the time I
hoped that the bits that passed, like that board members shouldn't keep
information from each other, would clear some obstacles. I think that
was one of those occasions where I was naive.

> How can the
> OSMF membership hold board members accountable for it?

Watch what the board are doing, and ask questions. Read the answers you
get, and ask the questions that arise from them. That's what I would
suggest, and as a board member I'd actually value it if I saw that
members were interested in my work. Even if I'd probably have to give
many an embarrassing answer.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Addresses are a tiny fraction of what we do (was: The world’s best addressable map)

[Nick Whitelegg]

I'd go along with this to some extent; I certainly don't think OSM should be 
"primarily" about addressing as Steve's email appears to indicate.
It should be about whatever we as mappers want it to be. If addressing's your 
thing, then fine, do it, but if it isn't, that's fine also.

I don't think we should be singling out one "mission" at all - other than to 
gather free geodata. Instead, we as mappers should be contributing whatever 
personally turns us on, so to speak.
There are enough people with enough diverse interests that we end up with a map 
showing a wide range of things.

There are still a good number of things besides addressing that are missing. 
Plenty of footpaths even here in the UK are still missing, for instance - to 
mention my own personal area of interest.

By focusing on one aim you're going to potentially turn people off whose 
mapping interests lie elsewhere.

Nick



-Frederik Ramm  wrote: -
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
From: Frederik Ramm 
Date: 23/10/2014 08:44AM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Addresses are a tiny fraction of what we do (was: The 
world’s best addressable map)

Hi,

On 10/23/2014 08:57 AM, Marc Gemis wrote:
> Wouldn't it be great that we would have import tools that can be used by
> many groups ? 

As far as addresses are concerned, there's "OpenAddresses" (the US
version, not the older Swiss project) that collects openly licensed
address data and to my knowledge they're also looking into how that data
can then be combined with OSM for geocoding, without actually importing
it in OSM.

To my mind that's an excellent solution; you can dump address data into
the pool and have it processed without interfering with the manually
surveyed data that is in OSM. And users can be given the choice of using
only the manually surveyed data, or only the government data, or a
mixture of both.

OSM is not a melting pot for the world's open data and while there is a
place for imports, every import will have to be carefully thought about
and evaluated. Streamlining that process is not necessarily in the best
interest of OpenStreetMap.

Frankly, I don't get all the brouhaha about addresses. Yes, geocoding is
commercially interesting, but is it interesting for us as a project? Are
the mappers in OSM doing what they do because they always wanted to have
a house-level free geocoder? I very much doubt that. Technology wise, I
find it almost insulting to reduce OSM to a geocoding database and
measure OSM in how many addresses it has. There's so much more to the
data we collect than merely placing a latitude and longitude against an
address.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

[OSM-talk] Overpass turbo Has it been amended?

[Dave F.]

Hi

Has the wizard in Overpass Turbo been updated in the past couple of 
days, or have I somehow amend its way of working? Looked in the wiki but 
could see no mention.


Wizard query of landuse=recreation_ground produces a much less verbose 
query (No 'query' or 'k=' etc)


/*
This has been generated by the overpass-turbo wizard.
The original search was:
“landuse=recreation_ground”
*/
[out:json][timeout:25];
// gather results
(
  // query part for: “landuse=recreation_ground”
  node["landuse"="recreation_ground"]({{bbox}});
  way["landuse"="recreation_ground"]({{bbox}});
  relation["landuse"="recreation_ground"]({{bbox}});
);
// print results
out body;
>;
out skel qt;

Also, Where are the saved queries stored? It's failing to load a couple 
of mine & I'd like to manually retrieve them if possible.


Cheers
Dave F.


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection 
is active.
http://www.avast.com


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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board

[Ian Dees]

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> End of hypothetical situation. It is obvious that something has gone
> wrong, but what, and how could it have been better? Can we expect board
> members to report to the membership about the (perceived?) lack of
> performance of their peers? Or does the membership have to ask questions
> to find out what happens or does not happen?
>
> ...
> > How can the
> > OSMF membership hold board members accountable for it?
>
> Watch what the board are doing, and ask questions. Read the answers you
> get, and ask the questions that arise from them. That's what I would
> suggest, and as a board member I'd actually value it if I saw that
> members were interested in my work. Even if I'd probably have to give
> many an embarrassing answer.


I've seen members and non-members alike ask questions like "What does the
OSMF do?" and the response is something about putting on a conference (but
really volunteers outside the board do that) and holding on to money.
Essentially, the answer is "Nothing, on purpose." When the community (not
just the membership) is told the board is designed not to do anything, then
we stop asking questions because one assumes you can't get "doing nothing"
wrong. It sounds like that's not the case, though.

The board-membership communications channel is definitely a two-way street,
though. In every other organization I've been a part of, we endeavored to
make sure the membership was aware of what we were doing. They had elected
us and expect results (or at least leadership to facilitate volunteers'
results), after all.

I would expect the board members that *want* to get things done to work as
hard as they can to expose the board-internal squabbles that prevent
action. I'm glad you started that conversation, Frederik.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Overpass turbo Has it been amended?

[Martin Raifer]

Hi Dave,

Yes. There was an update [0] today in which I've changed the wizard to
produce Overpass QL queries instead of the old XML-styled Overpass
language. This is maily because we wanted to be more consistent in
which query language should be the "recommended" one (see this ticket
on github [1]). There is more and more documentation and help material
available for the QL language, and advanced users seemed to have
always preferred it anyways. I know that the XML syntax was more
verbose, thus more easy to understand for beginners, but in long-term
it simply doesn't make sense to maintain two languages in parallel.

> Also, Where are the saved queries stored? It's failing to load a couple
> of mine & I'd like to manually retrieve them if possible.

This sounds like a bug. I've opened a ticket for that on github: [2].
Can you please try to open the developer tools in your browser (see
http://debugbrowser.com/ for instructions) and look if there any error
messages? If you have an account, please post anything to the github
ticket, otherwise please contact me directly.

The saved queries are stored in your browser's "local Storage" which
you can usually also access via your browser's developer tools (look
out for a "Resources" tab).

Bye,
Martin

[0] https://github.com/tyrasd/overpass-ide/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md
[1] https://github.com/tyrasd/overpass-ide/issues/101
[2] https://github.com/tyrasd/overpass-ide/issues/106

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Dave F.  wrote:
> Hi
>
> Has the wizard in Overpass Turbo been updated in the past couple of days, or
> have I somehow amend its way of working? Looked in the wiki but could see no
> mention.
>
> Wizard query of landuse=recreation_ground produces a much less verbose query
> (No 'query' or 'k=' etc)
>
> /*
> This has been generated by the overpass-turbo wizard.
> The original search was:
> “landuse=recreation_ground”
> */
> [out:json][timeout:25];
> // gather results
> (
>   // query part for: “landuse=recreation_ground”
>   node["landuse"="recreation_ground"]({{bbox}});
>   way["landuse"="recreation_ground"]({{bbox}});
>   relation["landuse"="recreation_ground"]({{bbox}});
> );
> // print results
> out body;
>>;
> out skel qt;
>
> Also, Where are the saved queries stored? It's failing to load a couple of
> mine & I'd like to manually retrieve them if possible.
>
> Cheers
> Dave F.
>
>
> ---
> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
> protection is active.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board

[Kate Chapman]

Hi Simon

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 4:06 AM, Simon Poole  wrote:

>
> Kate was complaining about the on boarding of new board members, she got
> at least an order of magnitude more support than Frederik and myself
> did, I don't think that there is any -accessible- board related
> institutional memory of note that is tied to board members. I do have to
> point to and thank Andy Robinson for his support in providing filing and
> mail services to the foundation for a very long time.
>

I suggest you rethink your choice of words about me "complaining". I was
suggesting there are better ways to onboard people to the board. Frankly I
was fine with my on boarding, simply because I've served on other boards
before so I understand generally how it works. That is not the case for
everyone else who becomes part of the OSMF Foundation board.

Perhaps the issues in the board is a lack of respect for each other.

-Kate

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] A Better Map

[Kate Chapman]

Hi Sarah,

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:04 PM, Sarah Hoffmann  wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:24:10PM -0700, Kate Chapman wrote:
> > I'd say the size of the board to me is not necessarily the issue. I do
> > think however having a board elected completely just from the OSMF
> > membership isn't the best approach. Those elected from OSM contributors
> (I
> > frequently have seen in the past people post people's OSM edits for board
> > elections) are not necessarily the best to be on a board.
>
> This statement seems at odds with your complaint that members are not
> enough involved. The board elections are at the moment pretty much the
> only means for the OSMF members to voice their opinion, precisely by
> electing those candidates who are most likely to steer the OSMF in the
> direction the membership wants. I dare say that previous elections have
> shown a very clear trend towards electing people that are firmly routed
> in the community.
>

I did not complain that members are not enough involved. I said we don't
know what they want. I do not think there are enough members, but I'm not
sure we need specifically members to be involved.


>
> > It does not allow
> > the flexibility to seek out board members with specialized skills. For
> > example most of the board would not claim to be experts in finance, or
> > legal matters. I certainly think election from part of the community is
> not
> > a bad thing, but perhaps it isn't the only way.
>
> Among all the problems I perceive with the board, lack of skills is very,
> very low on the list. What the board needs are foremost people
> that are able to work with others, that can listen and compromise.
> We need people who are really interested in bringing OSM forward
> instead of just following their own agenda.
>

I have previously said that we need people to run who can work with others.
I do also think having flexibility for different skills would be useful.
There seems to be a lack of people that can "work with others" that do run
for the board. Look at how often people end up resigning.

-Kate


>
> Accountants and lawyers can be hired.
>
>
> Sarah
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Hans De Kryger]

I completely agree with David. I  disagree with mapillary's terms of
service.

Regards,
Hans
On Oct 23, 2014 6:03 AM, "Craig Wallace"  wrote:

> On 2014-10-23 11:20, David Cuenca wrote:
>
>> There are many people who record both a gps trace and a video of their
>> itinerary.
>> Do you think it would be viable to use these videos as a sort of street
>> view by associating the frames to a location? When there is no gps
>> trace, it could be done by interpolation, defining synchronization
>> points between map and video.
>>
>> It is not 360°, but at least there would be some images of remote areas.
>>
>
> For the GoPro, I find its usually more useful in timelapse model.
> ie taking a photo every second, or maybe every 5 or 10 seconds, depends on
> what you are surveying and how fast you are moving.
>
> The still photos are usually much better quality and higher resolution
> than frames from the video. So more useful for reading housenames etc.
> Plus its easy to geotag all of the photos (I use GeoSetter), then load
> them into JOSM.
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Mike Thompson]

Does anyone know if the video plugin for JOSM works under Windows? I tried
it about a year ago and couldn't get it to work. If it is not working, is
anyone working on a fix or another video plugin?

Mike



On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 5:53 AM, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson 
wrote:

>  Well all the images are under CC-BY-SA license
>
> http://www.mapillary.com/legal.html
>
> I don't see anyone at the moment making another non-profit solution that
> gives an instant benefit to OSM (via iD editor). Storage space and
> bandwidth are never free while volunteer time is, wether it is programming
> or contributing material, so until then anyone offering a similar service
> will require income to pay for it.
>
> Mapillary is the best answer to your question at this point in time. That
> is all I can say.
>
>
>  Þann 23.10.2014 11:33, skrifaði David Cuenca:
>
>   The business activity of the for-profit company Mapillary is not new.
> Before it was acquired by Google, Panoramio did the same:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panoramio
>
>  I don't see any point in working for free for a private company so they
> can sell their services to third parties. I was asking here to see if there
> is a not-for profit way of reaching the same goal.
>
>  Thanks for your support,
>  Micru
>
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Janko Mihelić  wrote:
>
>> There is a blog entry about uploading GoPro photos to Mapillary:
>>
>> http://blog.mapillary.com/technology/2014/07/21/upload-scripts.html
>>
>>  Janko
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Etiamsi omnes, ego non
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing 
> listtalk@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Tom MacWright]

Panoramio didn't state any open license for uploaded content, so it was
easy for them to go closed with Google. Mapillary does, so it should be as
safe as contributing data to OSM, in terms of "what happens if it all goes
away or becomes evil".

I'm sure that everyone would be very supportive of a not-for-profit
alternative, but given the reality of how expensive it is to run and
continuously develop services that intake and distribute a lot of data,
you'd probably need to get a sizeable grant, which would then be
time-limited so would have to pursue another grant every year or two. Or
you would have to take another route that would ruin the idea of open
community purity, like advertising.

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Mike Thompson  wrote:

> Does anyone know if the video plugin for JOSM works under Windows? I tried
> it about a year ago and couldn't get it to work. If it is not working, is
> anyone working on a fix or another video plugin?
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 5:53 AM, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson 
> wrote:
>
>>  Well all the images are under CC-BY-SA license
>>
>> http://www.mapillary.com/legal.html
>>
>> I don't see anyone at the moment making another non-profit solution that
>> gives an instant benefit to OSM (via iD editor). Storage space and
>> bandwidth are never free while volunteer time is, wether it is programming
>> or contributing material, so until then anyone offering a similar service
>> will require income to pay for it.
>>
>> Mapillary is the best answer to your question at this point in time. That
>> is all I can say.
>>
>>
>>  Þann 23.10.2014 11:33, skrifaði David Cuenca:
>>
>>   The business activity of the for-profit company Mapillary is not new.
>> Before it was acquired by Google, Panoramio did the same:
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panoramio
>>
>>  I don't see any point in working for free for a private company so they
>> can sell their services to third parties. I was asking here to see if there
>> is a not-for profit way of reaching the same goal.
>>
>>  Thanks for your support,
>>  Micru
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Janko Mihelić  wrote:
>>
>>> There is a blog entry about uploading GoPro photos to Mapillary:
>>>
>>> http://blog.mapillary.com/technology/2014/07/21/upload-scripts.html
>>>
>>>  Janko
>>>
>>> ___
>>> talk mailing list
>>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Etiamsi omnes, ego non
>>
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing 
>> listtalk@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board

[Kate Chapman]

Hi Frederik,

I like this idea of having the mandate to redesign how the board works.

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 5:47 AM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 10/23/2014 01:25 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> > Absolutely no force required. I would hope that the existing board
> > members would recognise the virtue of a fresh mandate and a clean start.
>
> A radical step, but I like it. I'd be more than happy to withdraw my
> candidacy if there was a spirit of rebooting. We wouldn't even need
> seven new candidates; we could simply elect a few and they could then
> add new un-elected board members as they like (article 79 in the AoA).
>

Interesting, the idea of maybe people elect who they think is best
qualified to reboot how the board rather than just someone they generally
agree with.

>
> Instead of rushing through such an unprecedented measure, we could also
> do it in a more orderly fashion: Have this year's AGM decide that the
> board should prepare to resign altogether at the next AGM, and prepare
> the election of a full new board. This event would then be known long in
> advance and people would have time to prepare their bids for a seat on
> the rebooted body. Independent of the actual legal powers of the AGM,
> certainly no board member could ignore such an express declaration by
> the very people they're serving.
>

I think this process could be outlined and set-up in such a way that it
could happen. Certainly with a year (okay perhaps less since we want people
to have plenty of time to be candidates). I think the board over the next
year would need to commit to a couple in person meetings and more rigorous
reporting that currently happens.

>
>
> Should we perhaps vote for "teams"? Just like a team can assemble and
> bid for holding a SotM, should we allow a team to bid for being the OSMF
> board for a year?
>

I think voting for teams would probably put us in a similar situation
around election time but it would be all or nothing. Though I am interested
in ways to help with cohesion. Perhaps part of it is simply an issue of
general exhaustion from serving on the OSMF board for too long right now.

-Kate


> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Simon Poole]

It has all kinds of problems not that they are not fixable, but stuff
like assuming a fixed 1s GPS recording interval and similar and AFAIK
there was never a stable version released. Given that one of the nice
things about videos is that you don't actually need an exact position
for them to be useful, I never felt motivated enough to spend the time
to fix it.

Simon



Am 23.10.2014 16:48, schrieb Mike Thompson:
> Does anyone know if the video plugin for JOSM works under Windows? I
> tried it about a year ago and couldn't get it to work. If it is not
> working, is anyone working on a fix or another video plugin?
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 5:53 AM, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson  > wrote:
> 
> Well all the images are under CC-BY-SA license
> 
> http://www.mapillary.com/legal.html
> 
> I don't see anyone at the moment making another non-profit solution
> that gives an instant benefit to OSM (via iD editor). Storage space
> and bandwidth are never free while volunteer time is, wether it is
> programming or contributing material, so until then anyone offering
> a similar service will require income to pay for it.
> 
> Mapillary is the best answer to your question at this point in time.
> That is all I can say.
>  
> 
> Þann 23.10.2014 11:33, skrifaði David Cuenca:
>> The business activity of the for-profit company Mapillary is not
>> new. Before it was acquired by Google, Panoramio did the same:
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panoramio
>>
>> I don't see any point in working for free for a private company so
>> they can sell their services to third parties. I was asking here
>> to see if there is a not-for profit way of reaching the same goal.
>>
>> Thanks for your support,
>> Micru
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Janko Mihelić > > wrote:
>>
>> There is a blog entry about uploading GoPro photos to Mapillary:
>>
>> http://blog.mapillary.com/technology/2014/07/21/upload-scripts.html
>>
>> Janko
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Etiamsi omnes, ego non
>>
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board

[Kathleen Danielson]

Sorry-- looks like I forgot to copy the whole list.

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Kathleen Danielson <
kathleen.daniel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Frederik,
>
> You've got a few really interesting ideas in here. Some quick questions:
>
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Frederik Ramm 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 10/23/2014 01:25 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>> > Absolutely no force required. I would hope that the existing board
>> > members would recognise the virtue of a fresh mandate and a clean start.
>>
>> A radical step, but I like it. I'd be more than happy to withdraw my
>> candidacy if there was a spirit of rebooting. We wouldn't even need
>> seven new candidates; we could simply elect a few and they could then
>> add new un-elected board members as they like (article 79 in the AoA).
>>
>
> I really like this idea, although, as I acknowledged earlier, I definitely
> know there are some challenges.
>
>
>
>>
>> Instead of rushing through such an unprecedented measure, we could also
>> do it in a more orderly fashion: Have this year's AGM decide that the
>> board should prepare to resign altogether at the next AGM, and prepare
>> the election of a full new board. This event would then be known long in
>> advance and people would have time to prepare their bids for a seat on
>> the rebooted body. Independent of the actual legal powers of the AGM,
>> certainly no board member could ignore such an express declaration by
>> the very people they're serving.
>>
>
> What if we had some sort of compromise, and we asked the membership if we
> could hold another AGM in 3 months, followed 2 weeks (or so) later by an
> election? We've already talked about decoupling it from SOTM, and given
> what a global project it is, it's unrealistic to expect a majority of
> voting members to be able to attend SOTM. I haven't checked the bylaws, but
> I would guess there's no rule against having *more* than one AGM per year.
> OSM-US has started holding our AGMs remotely. I'm sure other groups do as
> well.
>
> If we did a 3 month time scale, we still wouldn't be making rash
> decisions, but we would have more chance of maintaining the momentum we've
> seen over the past month or so. The current board could also focus energy
> on preparing things so that there can be a smooth transition, even if there
> is high turnover in the board.
>
>
>>
>> Another thing, while we're throwing doors wide open. In many political
>> systems around the world, the electorate doesn't elect a group of people
>> with wildly different goals. Instead, people form parties and the
>> electorate decides for a party, and the party will then form the
>> government. (Grossly simplifying, I know.) That way, people in
>> government have to fight each other to a much lesser degree than they
>> would if government were comprised of people following different
>> political views and goals.
>>
>> By appointing seven directors individually, on the one hand we have the
>> advantage that they can keep each other in check; we, as the electorate,
>> don't have to be super careful, if we elect someone who's incompetent or
>> a kleptomaniac, the others on the board will hopefully notice and fix it
>> somehow. On the other hand, there's the danger of seeding the board with
>> a couple of difficult personalities that make life hard and reduce
>> productiveness for the rest of them.
>>
>> Should we perhaps vote for "teams"? Just like a team can assemble and
>> bid for holding a SotM, should we allow a team to bid for being the OSMF
>> board for a year?
>>
>
> This is a really fun idea. I'm not sure if I agree with it, but I LOVE the
> creative thinking for the organization of OSMF.
>
>
>
>>
>> Bye
>> Frederik
>>
>> --
>> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board

[Simon Poole]

Sorry for sounding like a broken record to some: there are no EGMs or
AGMs any more under UK law, there are simply general meetings, there is
not even a requirement to have any at all (that is why we are suggesting
adding such a clause to the articles at the GM in Argentina) and you
could just as well have one on 365 days of the year.

The board could realistically schedule a GM with or without elections in
March or April, remote participation is possible since last year so
there are multiple ways to participate. Obviously this depends on the
board actually agreeing to do so except if you want to require one via
the mechanics of a request by the members (needs 5% of the regular
members). As I've pointed out there are other reasons to disassociate
the meeting from SOTM in any case so I wouldn't expect much resistance.

Simon

Am 23.10.2014 17:23, schrieb Kathleen Danielson:
> Sorry-- looks like I forgot to copy the whole list.
>
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Kathleen Danielson
> mailto:kathleen.daniel...@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Frederik,
>
> You've got a few really interesting ideas in here. Some quick
> questions:
>
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Frederik Ramm
> mailto:frede...@remote.org>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 10/23/2014 01:25 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> > Absolutely no force required. I would hope that the existing
> board
> > members would recognise the virtue of a fresh mandate and a
> clean start.
>
> A radical step, but I like it. I'd be more than happy to
> withdraw my
> candidacy if there was a spirit of rebooting. We wouldn't even
> need
> seven new candidates; we could simply elect a few and they
> could then
> add new un-elected board members as they like (article 79 in
> the AoA).
>
>  
> I really like this idea, although, as I acknowledged earlier, I
> definitely know there are some challenges. 
>
>  
>
>
> Instead of rushing through such an unprecedented measure, we
> could also
> do it in a more orderly fashion: Have this year's AGM decide
> that the
> board should prepare to resign altogether at the next AGM, and
> prepare
> the election of a full new board. This event would then be
> known long in
> advance and people would have time to prepare their bids for a
> seat on
> the rebooted body. Independent of the actual legal powers of
> the AGM,
> certainly no board member could ignore such an express
> declaration by
> the very people they're serving.
>
>
> What if we had some sort of compromise, and we asked the
> membership if we could hold another AGM in 3 months, followed 2
> weeks (or so) later by an election? We've already talked about
> decoupling it from SOTM, and given what a global project it is,
> it's unrealistic to expect a majority of voting members to be able
> to attend SOTM. I haven't checked the bylaws, but I would guess
> there's no rule against having *more* than one AGM per year.
> OSM-US has started holding our AGMs remotely. I'm sure other
> groups do as well.
>
> If we did a 3 month time scale, we still wouldn't be making rash
> decisions, but we would have more chance of maintaining the
> momentum we've seen over the past month or so. The current board
> could also focus energy on preparing things so that there can be a
> smooth transition, even if there is high turnover in the board. 
>  
>
>
> Another thing, while we're throwing doors wide open. In many
> political
> systems around the world, the electorate doesn't elect a group
> of people
> with wildly different goals. Instead, people form parties and the
> electorate decides for a party, and the party will then form the
> government. (Grossly simplifying, I know.) That way, people in
> government have to fight each other to a much lesser degree
> than they
> would if government were comprised of people following different
> political views and goals.
>
> By appointing seven directors individually, on the one hand we
> have the
> advantage that they can keep each other in check; we, as the
> electorate,
> don't have to be super careful, if we elect someone who's
> incompetent or
> a kleptomaniac, the others on the board will hopefully notice
> and fix it
> somehow. On the other hand, there's the danger of seeding the
> board with
> a couple of difficult personalities that make life hard and reduce
> productiveness for the rest of them.
>
> Should we perhaps vote for "teams"? Just like a team can
> assemble and
> bid for holding a SotM, should we allow a team to bid for

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

On 23/10/2014 15:00, Craig Wallace wrote:
taking a photo every second, or maybe every 5 or 10 seconds, depends 
on what you are surveying and how fast you are moving. 


Do none of those cameras offer the logical alternative to timelapse - a 
'spacelapse' mode that uses the camera's knowledge of position through 
its GPS receiver to capture a picture every ten meters instead of every 
ten seconds ?



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

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Craig Wallace]

On 2014-10-23 16:59, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:

On 23/10/2014 15:00, Craig Wallace wrote:

taking a photo every second, or maybe every 5 or 10 seconds, depends
on what you are surveying and how fast you are moving.


Do none of those cameras offer the logical alternative to timelapse - a
'spacelapse' mode that uses the camera's knowledge of position through
its GPS receiver to capture a picture every ten meters instead of every
ten seconds ?


None of the GoPro cameras have GPS built in, so not possible with them. 
Don't know about other brands.


But you can do this with TriggerTrap mobile app. It works with a dongle 
to control a variety of cameras. It has a 'distancelapse' mode, nice 
tutorial here: http://howto.triggertrap.com/howto/road-trip-timelapse/


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

Re: [OSM-talk] The world’s best addressable map

[steve]

I'm adding OSMF-talk since it concerns what I outlined in the original “vision 
statement” email.


I was perhaps too specific and jumped ahead saying “world’s best addressable 
map”.


What I really mean is the “world's most complete open map”. There are three 
pieces to a modern map. There's the display piece, the routing and the 
geocoding.


We won the display piece. It looks great. We are ok at routing. Not perfect or 
great, but ok. We're really lacking on the addressing. If we can get addressing 
even to the “ok” stage then a lot more people will use OSM, which means more 
editors, more community and more data. This is because the main use for maps 
today by the public is to get somewhere, and we can't help with that without 
all three pieces. Right now we have 2/3.


I jumped ahead because I see this every day, and I understand not everybody 
does. I think all the other things are good too, even every tree in OSM! I just 
know that if we had to pick one thing to focus on it would be addressing, as it 
will get all the other things to happen faster too. But that doesn't mean you 
can't add trees in to OSM at the same time, just that the shortest path to 
getting more of everything is to get more of addressing.




Also let's be clear - addressing isn't easy. It's complicated and hard. But 
that's a good goal to have, and OSM was complicated and hard in the first place.




Steve





From: Oleksiy Muzalyev
Sent: ‎Thursday‎, ‎October‎ ‎23‎, ‎2014 ‎2‎:‎53‎ ‎AM
To: Jóhannes Birgir Jensson, talk@openstreetmap.org




I agree that addresses is a complicated field. There are different historical 
systems, there are cities where even many streets are without names, etc. There 
is a lot of space for innovation, certainly.

What I meant is that it is not obligatory to map a city or a town addressable 
from one end to another, one house after another, or wait until a municipal 
government releases into public domain its database of addresses (which may be 
not without errors or omissions too).

If there are, say, 10% of buildings where 90% of the population lives, studies 
and works, it makes sense to map them addressable first. Often these are large 
modern buildings with clear addresses.

And it is much easier to return into the same area for the second time, when 
there are already at least some large buildings with numbers, much easier to 
orientate oneself. 

I see from your example that in the city of Reykjavik almost every building has 
a number, so you have a more advanced set of priorities.

Best regards,
Oleksiy


On 23.10.2014 10:39, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:


I like addresses but they don't behave like you would think. For example we 
have a part of a street that has each individual flat as its own address 
number. We first used the number;number;number; approach but I'm now in favor 
of naming the house what it says on the front (the range 37-51) and then put 
address nodes on the building so it appears in search, with roughly the 
position accounting for where in the house the apartment is. In this case the 
numbers closest to the street are at the bottom floor (the stadium approach I 
favor). I'm in favor of moving this same method over to the other houses.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/64.13635/-21.79883

As for being able to search within a specific town or area then I think we 
should look again at relations and super-relations. You could group streets 
relations into a neighborhood relation and then into a town or municipality 
relation etc. This of course works very differently based on country but for 
Iceland I can't see us hitting any limits.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Super-Relation

Regards on behalf of the Icelandic Local Chapter applicant,
Jói


Þann 22.10.2014 18:28, skrifaði Clifford Snow:



On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:04 AM, Oleksiy Muzalyev  
wrote:



It is not necessary to put down a number on each building. It is possible to 
use addr:interpolation (odd, even, or all).

We put down a number on the first building, then on the last, connect them in 
JOSM, and add addr:interpolation: all . For example here: 
http://osm.org/go/0CFn0AZ_d--?m= . It is also very useful on a street with many 
small houses. And it is searchable. For example if there is number 15 and 
number 27 on the map for a street, and they are connected with 
addr:interpolation: odd, and if one searches number 21, the map will show the 
number 21 all right.

Then, there is another approach. We first map addressable large building, where 
a lot of people live or work. Kind of of going after the low-hanging fruit.





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

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[Toby Murray]

I am interested in this as well. I have two Biking Across Kansas tours
worth of video and GPS traces that I still haven't gotten around to
processing into map data yet. I briefly looked at the JOSM video plugin a
while ago and, like someone else reported, couldn't get it working. Maybe
once I finish my current project of getting support for OSM notes into
JOSM-core, I'll take a look at it again...

Toby


On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 5:20 AM, David Cuenca  wrote:

> There are many people who record both a gps trace and a video of their
> itinerary.
> Do you think it would be viable to use these videos as a sort of street
> view by associating the frames to a location? When there is no gps trace,
> it could be done by interpolation, defining synchronization points between
> map and video.
>
> It is not 360°, but at least there would be some images of remote areas.
>
> Cheers,
> Micru
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] The world’s best addressable map

[Clifford Snow]

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 9:56 AM,  wrote:

> I'm adding OSMF-talk since it concerns what I outlined in the
> original “vision statement” email.
>
> I was perhaps too specific and jumped ahead saying “world’s best
> addressable map”.
>
> What I really mean is the “world's most complete open map”. There are
> three pieces to a modern map. There's the display piece, the routing and
> the geocoding.
>

That makes for a better vision statement in my mind that best addressable
map. I might even shorten it to world's most complete map. Why limit
ourselves. We have the means to be the best map, open or otherwise. Getting
to our vision requires setting goals. One of which certainly should be
addressing. I'd like to see the OSMF lead a group to first define our
vision and once complete, to set goals to help us achieve our vision. I'm
one of the crowd that feels the OSMF Board needs to set goals, certainly
with input from the community and user of our data. Those goals should help
the Board prioritize where to spend our limited resources. That requires
leadership from the Board.


> We won the display piece. It looks great. We are ok at routing. Not
> perfect or great, but ok. We're really lacking on the addressing. If we can
> get addressing even to the “ok” stage then a lot more people will use OSM,
> which means more editors, more community and more data. This is because the
> main use for maps today by the public is to get somewhere, and we can't
> help with that without all three pieces. Right now we have 2/3.
>
> I jumped ahead because I see this every day, and I understand not
> everybody does. I think all the other things are good too, even every tree
> in OSM! I just know that if we had to pick one thing to focus on it would
> be addressing, as it will get all the other things to happen faster too.
> But that doesn't mean you can't add trees in to OSM at the same time, just
> that the shortest path to getting more of everything is to get more of
> addressing.
>

Talk to emergency response teams, not only do they need addressing to get
to response sites, but they need to know where every member of their team
resides and how to get them to the response site. This is an area where OSM
can shine.

>
> Also let's be clear - addressing isn't easy. It's complicated and hard.
> But that's a good goal to have, and OSM was complicated and hard in the
> first place.
>

Clifford


-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The world’s best addressable map

[Oleksiy Muzalyev]

This is selfevident. Without more or less complete addresses the map
cannot be used in, say, an ambulance application, or in a delivery
service application, etc. It is unusable.

But if there is a /critical mass/ of addresses for a town or a city,
then the rest could be completed by the same ambulance or delivery
service drivers. They actually drive to a certain address, and may mark
it on the map for future calls or deliveries.

On the other hand, in mountains I always rely on GPS traces, as a GPS
trace means that someone really walked this way. A GPS trace is the most
important in mountains. So "World's most complete map" seems to be OK.

brgds
Oleksiy


On 23.10.2014 18:56, st...@asklater.com wrote:
> ...
> What I really mean is the “world's most complete open map”. There are
> three pieces to a modern map. There's the display piece, the routing
> and the geocoding.

> We won the display piece. It looks great. We are ok at routing. Not
> perfect or great, but ok. We're really lacking on the addressing...

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

Re: [OSM-talk] The world’s best addressable map

[Jóhannes Birgir Jensson]

Thanks for creating this project in the first place Steve.

In an interview earlier this year you said pretty much the same thing. I 
believe this is a vital step forward in the First World countries where 
other competing solutions, both local and global, are not delivering enough.


However I disagree that this might be THE key issue. Where we are 
lacking even more at the moment is the world we knew previously as Third 
World but as Hans Rosling has demonstrated that name does not mean 
anything anymore.


Let me take Botswana as an example, a project I've been trying to get 
rolling for the past year as Mapping Botswana. They do not have many 
addresses at all, in the newest areas they are creating US-style 
cul-de-sacs and putting addresses and streetnames but in the capital 
itself, Gaborone, the older areas are designed as plots, arbitrarily 
sized areas that encompass many buildings so your address will be Plot 
525 and then you need to look for the correct sign to find the correct 
building. This plot data is currently not under a license we can work with.


Elsewhere the rural villages are a mishmash of roads and paths and 
arbitrarily placed buildings mostly, with no street names or anything. 
The only thing we could use there is a census number that each 
residential building is supposed to be assigned. I doubt they were 
intended as addresses but we are looking into it.


The offline apps and tools are vital here - in Africa, Asia and Latin 
America where mobile networks are still slow, still unreliable for 
coverage and data usage often pricey. Not to mention the map coverage is 
often limited to a name on commercial maps. This is where OSM makes a 
huge difference.


I live in a country where Google has already StreetViewed most of it, a 
local service ja.is has imported all official address data (including 
bad data) and they also made their own version of StreetView called 
360°. In Iceland we are up against corporations who are doing their 
utmost to make a good map and so we try even harder to be better. But we 
don't kid ourselves, if Iceland were deleted from OSM then there would 
still be good online maps from these other providers. The offline 
feature starts to give OSM an edge - they are something we should strive 
to make better, something done by many app makers, some of the good and 
some of the poor.


If however Botswana were deleted then there are small parts of Botswana 
who would still enjoy pretty decent coverage on Bing and Google but all 
the rural areas, villages and hamlets, are not there. The HOTOSM 
projects and related ones are what is giving OSM the bite, in my view.


Delete the ebola-affected areas from OSM and you set back local efforts 
and local knowledge with devastating results. Delete New York City data 
and you can still get around on Google or Bing or whatever, although you 
are missing out on many great improvements that have been made.


This is my view of OSM, it matters most where there are no other 
alternatives.


Best wishes,
Jóhannes


Þann 23.10.2014 16:56, skrifaði st...@asklater.com:
I'm adding OSMF-talk since it concerns what I outlined in the 
original “vision statement” email.


I was perhaps too specific and jumped ahead saying “world’s best 
addressable map”.


What I really mean is the “world's most complete open map”. There are 
three pieces to a modern map. There's the display piece, the routing 
and the geocoding.


We won the display piece. It looks great. We are ok at routing. Not 
perfect or great, but ok. We're really lacking on the addressing. If 
we can get addressing even to the “ok” stage then a lot more people 
will use OSM, which means more editors, more community and more data. 
This is because the main use for maps today by the public is to get 
somewhere, and we can't help with that without all three pieces. Right 
now we have 2/3.


I jumped ahead because I see this every day, and I understand not 
everybody does. I think all the other things are good too, even every 
tree in OSM! I just know that if we had to pick one thing to focus on 
it would be addressing, as it will get all the other things to happen 
faster too. But that doesn't mean you can't add trees in to OSM at the 
same time, just that the shortest path to getting more of everything 
is to get more of addressing.


Also let's be clear - addressing isn't easy. It's complicated and 
hard. But that's a good goal to have, and OSM was complicated and hard 
in the first place.


Steve

*From:* Oleksiy Muzalyev 
*Sent:* ‎Thursday‎, ‎October‎ ‎23‎, ‎2014 ‎2‎:‎53‎ ‎AM
*To:* Jóhannes Birgir Jensson , 
talk@openstreetmap.org 


I agree that addresses is a complicated field. There are different 
historical systems, there are cities where even many streets are 
without names, etc. There is a lot of space for innovation, certainly.


What I meant is that it is not obligatory to map a 

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board

[Stefan Keller]

Hi Kate


2014-10-23 16:37 GMT+02:00 Kate Chapman  wrote:
> Perhaps the issues in the board is a lack of respect for each other.

I don't see any disrespect from Simon when he referred to you speaking
about you (and others) wishing to see more OSMF members.
On the other hand I assume that you are aware that your accusation to
Simon is explicit and sidetracks this thread.

I'd love to come back to your suggestions - as far as I can follow you
- and to questions raised before I don't see any statements so far:

* I don't see any evidence that the OSMF is fundamentally broken.
* And I don't see enough reasons why the full board should step down
(not speaking about the lack of alternatives and bad timing)
* Of course community should be involved - but there are enough items
now on the agenda Frederik suggested (and I summarized above) which
simply need to be put on the boards agenda.
* Given board members are coming from several continents, I don't see
why the board should meet face-to-face when there exist video meeting
facilities.
* On the other hand I'd like to really know what you (and others)
think about Frederik's points raised in his manifesto as well as these
questions to the board members: [1].

Yours, Stefan

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Foundation/AGM14/Election_to_Board


2014-10-23 16:37 GMT+02:00 Kate Chapman :
> Hi Simon
>
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 4:06 AM, Simon Poole  wrote:
>>
>>
>> Kate was complaining about the on boarding of new board members, she got
>> at least an order of magnitude more support than Frederik and myself
>> did, I don't think that there is any -accessible- board related
>> institutional memory of note that is tied to board members. I do have to
>> point to and thank Andy Robinson for his support in providing filing and
>> mail services to the foundation for a very long time.
>
>
> I suggest you rethink your choice of words about me "complaining". I was
> suggesting there are better ways to onboard people to the board. Frankly I
> was fine with my on boarding, simply because I've served on other boards
> before so I understand generally how it works. That is not the case for
> everyone else who becomes part of the OSMF Foundation board.
>
> Perhaps the issues in the board is a lack of respect for each other.
>
> -Kate
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>

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

Re: [OSM-talk] GoPro video traces?

[David Cuenca]

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Craig Wallace  wrote:

> But you can do this with TriggerTrap mobile app. It works with a dongle to
> control a variety of cameras. It has a 'distancelapse' mode, nice tutorial
> here: http://howto.triggertrap.com/howto/road-trip-timelapse/


Nice feature! I have sent a couple of emails to action cam manufacturers
requesting a "distance lapse" function.

It would be practical if the cams had it included already.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] The world’s best addressable map

[David Cuenca]

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 6:56 PM,  wrote:

>  What I really mean is the “world's most complete open map”. There are
> three pieces to a modern map. There's the display piece, the routing and
> the geocoding.
>
> We won the display piece. It looks great. We are ok at routing. Not
> perfect or great, but ok. We're really lacking on the addressing. If we can
> get addressing even to the “ok” stage then a lot more people will use OSM,
> which means more editors, more community and more data. This is because the
> main use for maps today by the public is to get somewhere, and we can't
> help with that without all three pieces. Right now we have 2/3.
>

A map is a representation of the world, and the most accurate it is, the
more it helps. Given the current circumstances OSM is doing great at
displaying, but the circumstances keep changing all the time and other
actors are pushing forward, building up 3d models that later on can be used
in mixed applications, and overlaying all kinds of data.

I agree that most people just want to know how to get from A to B, the
travel options available, and how long it takes. But then there is the
whole business/tourism searching, etc. because a map is never just "a map",
it is a tool to make the most of the world.

If you want to build "the world's most complete open map", then you need to
take into account all aspects needed for representing the world, which is
basically *everything*.

Anyhow, as mission it is challenging enough :)

Cheers,
Micru
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Een klein verhaaltje / A little story

[Marc Gemis]

Via de tool van Sander zag ik een straat waar ik nog geen huis nummers van
had. Het was verleidelijk om de nummers gewoon snel te copiëren. Maar omdat
ik toch met de honden buiten moest, besloot ik maar om een ommetje te maken
langs die voor mij onbekende straat. Wat bracht deze kleine survey op naast
de huisnummers ? Een zone 30, een gedenksteen aan Frans Abels (een
toondichter 1899-1962) en een ontbreken pad en een vuilbak. En dat enkel op
en ommetje van 10 minuten.
Moraal van het verhaal ? Voor mij volstaat het kopieren van nummertjes uit
AGIV Crab niet, ik kan beter met de honden gaan wandelen. Dan vergaar ik
meer gevarieerde data en leer ik nog iets bij :-)


>From Sander's tool for the AGIV Crab import I saw a street in which I
didn't collect house numbers so far. It was tempting to just copy the
numbers. But since I needed to walk the dogs I decided to pass through that
street. So what did I discover during this short survey ? A zone 30, a
memorial for Frans Abels, and a missing path. It was just 10 minutes extra
compared to our normal walk.
Conclusion ? For me it is not sufficient to just copy numbers from a
database. It's better to go out for a walk with the dogs. Using this method
I collect more diverse data en I learn something along the way

groeten/regards

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

[OSM-talk] AGM announcements

[Rob Nickerson]

Simon wrote:

>The scheduling issue is real and it flatly wouldn't have been possible to
formally
>announce in time (which would have had to been 60 days back to give
>enough time to avoid the cut off without undue haste). The solution to
>this will likely be to disassociate GM scheduling from the SOTM event so
>that we can plan the GM well in advance.
>

Indeed the task of organising the SotM program is a challenging one making
it difficult to provide an exact time early on (a few more days earlier
could be possible, but not 60).

What is however possible is to confirm the day. It was probably always
going to be the Saturday as the Friday before is a paid conference day and
we like to have the last day to reflect on what the new membership means
for the Foundation.

I often feel that we let perfection get in the way of getting on and doing.
Sometimes perfection is a good thing, but in this case I feel we could have
got an initial message out with the formal confirmation following.

Best,
Rob
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Modus operandi of the board

[Clifford Snow]

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 8:23 AM, Kathleen Danielson <
kathleen.daniel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> What if we had some sort of compromise, and we asked the membership if we
> could hold another AGM in 3 months, followed 2 weeks (or so) later by an
> election? We've already talked about decoupling it from SOTM, and given
> what a global project it is, it's unrealistic to expect a majority of
> voting members to be able to attend SOTM. I haven't checked the bylaws, but
> I would guess there's no rule against having *more* than one AGM per year.
> OSM-US has started holding our AGMs remotely. I'm sure other groups do as
> well.
>
> If we did a 3 month time scale, we still wouldn't be making rash
> decisions, but we would have more chance of maintaining the momentum we've
> seen over the past month or so. The current board could also focus energy
> on preparing things so that there can be a smooth transition, even if there
> is high turnover in the board.
>

I think it is reasonable postpone elections for three months considering
current turmoil. With apologies to those that submitted their name in a
timely fashion, let's ask for more candidates. We should also expect them
to answer questions from the community. And as Richard said, maybe it the
time for the rest of the Board to step down. They are more than welcome to
submit their name for re-election. It appears to this outsider that not all
Board members have been "present."

The new Board should take up a strategy to prevent burnout. As anyone who
has ever served on a board, it is a tireless job with people constantly
complaining about your decisions. At the same time, Board members need to
step down if they can continue to actively participate. If they don't the
Board needs to ask for their resignation.

There has also been derogatory comments made about Steve. While only have
playing with OSM for the past three years, I've known Steve that entire
time. He has been an energetic supporter of OSM. Hurricane and Steve
started and actively participated in the Seattle Meetup Group, which is one
of the more successful groups in the US. Steve even led by example. He
walked the streets in my neighborhood to prove that addresses don't have to
come from imports. Of course it turned out we were too lazy and decided on
an import instead.

I can't speak to the "old" Steve, but my experiences for the past three
years have been nothing but positive. (and no I didn't join Map Club.)

Lastly, I'd like to remind everyone that the Board works for us. We should
expect them to get our input before changing directions. As Kate has
proposed, the Board should annually survey the community to get our input.
As much as I respect Steve, if he get elected, even he needs consult with
the community before setting goals. And we the community needs to hold the
Board accountable to us. I'd like to propose that the new Board survey the
community annually. We should also expect them to build a vision for OSM.
While it appears that our current mission statement was constructed by the
board, the vision statement needs to be developed by the community with the
Board acting as a facilitator.

Clifford
-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Candidate reminder: Membership status and questions to canidates

[Paul Norman]

This a reminder to candidates that board members need to be members, not 
associate members. You should contact members...@osmfoundation.org to change 
your status from associate member to member if needed. I am not sure what would 
happen if someone with the most votes was not eligible to be a board member. 
Let's not find out, so make sure to mail to change it.

See 82 of the AoA, as well as probably the Companies act.

There are also a number of questions to candidates at 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Foundation/AGM14/Election_to_Board. 
This has been the primary method of asking candidates questions in the past, so 
please make an effort to answer them. I haven't yet myself, but intend to this 
weekend.___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The world’s best addressable map

[Johan C]

2014-10-23 8:57 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis :

> First question: how do you build "the world's best addressable map" ?
> Through imports or survey ? Is the timeframe that Martin puts forward fur
> surveyed addresses acceptable and feasible ?
>
> As for the imports:
>
> Wouldn't it be great that we would have import tools that can be used by
> many groups ? Just as we have great editors for "manual" mapping.
> Shouldn't the OSMF (or however) invest in a procedure + tools for import ?
>
> So when a group wants to perform an import, they only have make sure the
> license is compatible and the data has enough quality. The process of the
> import is already described, the tools ( task managers, data conversion,
> some quality checks etc.) are in place. They deliver the data and the
> import can start.
> I have the impression that right now each group has to take all those
> obstacles all by themselves.
>
> Maybe I have a totally wrong perception of the import process. please
> correct me if that's the case.
>
> regards
>
> m
>
>
I partially share your impression that each group has to take obstacles by
themselves. Since OSM is a social project I think it's good that people
with experience on (importing) addresses and buildings share their
experience. I see this happen on the @import list, user diaries etc. The
somewhat scattered knowledge around could however be shared more
centralized to make it a bit more accessible, so I created a page on the
wiki (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Importing_buildings_and_addresses)
in which anybody can share their knowledge (I will do so this November).
Furthermore, SOTM Buenos Aires hosts 2 presentations on addresses.

I don't see manual work for OSM as an obstacle. Any import (or survey :-) )
requires some manual work because the current map is far from blank, so the
almost full-automatic import you describe is IMHO not possible. Though
semi-automatic assistance by tools (like the wonderful Geofabrik inspector
address view) help a lot keeping the work fun.

As for tools: it would help when more tools for importing and updating
could be programmed. As an example: I'm not aware of any tool which makes
it possible to semi-automatically compare building outlines to the outlines
of an updated government database, highlighting major differences in
geometry.

On the role of the OSMF: I think it shouldn't be the OSMF investing in a
procedure + tools. It would already be great and an energizing factor when
(members of) OSMF would express support for having more address and
building data in OSM, be it either from surveys or from imports.

Cheers, Johan


>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Clifford Snow 
> wrote:
>
>> Steve Coast suggested changing the mission statement of OSM to be
>> something like “The world’s best addressable map” I thought
>> I'd separate out this into a new thread. As some backup, I attended my
>> first SOTM-US in 2012 where Steve proposed we build an addressable map. A
>> group of us from Seattle decided that we'd take that challenge and import
>> addresses for Seattle. That import was completed.
>>
>> Here are the address related comments:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:37 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <
>> dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 2014-10-22 12:15 GMT+02:00 Steve Coast :
>>>
 Together, we could do this in 6-12 months and finish addressing in 1-3
 years. At that point we wouldn’t have just made the world slightly better,
 we would have put a big dent in the universe. Nobody would use a closed map
 ever again, and it would be people like you that made it happen.

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree with you that addressing is very important for a lot of
>>> commercial (and non-commercial) map users. What I don't understand is how a
>>> paid board would help us map more addresses. Unfortunately mapping
>>> addresses is typically less fun than going to the video arcade. Looking at
>>> the current figures we are not doing too bad. Currently there are 130
>>> Million buildings in OSM and 46 Million housenumbers. I don't know exactly
>>> how many buildings there are in the world, and how many of them don't have
>>> addresses, but I guess it will be at least 1 Billion addresses in the
>>> world, probably more. According to the stats page we have roughly 25.000
>>> active contributors a month (
>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Stats#Contributor_Stats ). To get an
>>> address on all currently mapped buildings in three years time, (84M to go),
>>> every active contributor would have to add 93 addresses a month -
>>> constantly. To get 1 Billion addresses mapped by 25.000 contributors in 3
>>> yrs, it would be  housenumbers a month per active contributor. Are we
>>> planning to pay the mappers as well? The only solution seems to get more
>>> contributors mapping, and have them insert addresses.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:59 AM, Marc Gemis  wrote:
>>
>>> It would be nice to know how many of the buildings and house numbers in
>>> OSM were im

[OSM-talk] Simon Poole resigns

[Rob Nickerson]

I've only spotted this on OSMF-talk so far but feel it should be shared
here:

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2014-October/002773.html

I'm still reading through the OSMF-talk mailing list, but so far it looks
like Simon has not yet provided any reason (which is fine for now as heat
of the moment messages can turn out to be very bad).

Thank you Simon for your work and input into the OSMF Board.

Regards,
Rob
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The world’s best addressable map

[Marc Gemis]

It was not my intention to set up a full-automatic import. I wanted to come
to a automatic process where the data is made available to mappers for
import. E.g. the complete tool chain used by the Dutch import could be
available to other countries. So they can easily use the same programs,
infrastructure, etc. They just need to provide the data to be imported. The
tool chain processes the data and makes it available for download by e.g. a
JOSM plugin , a task manager or whatever. From there the manual step starts
(downlaod, merge + correct + upload).

Hope this clarifies what my ideas are.

My apologies for my ignorance, but even after looking at some video's of
SOTM on what OSMF and the different working groups are doing it is still
not clear to me whether there is a group that could start looking for
funding such an import tool chain and infrastructure.
For me, when someone states "our mission is XXX', they also have to provide
the resources to achieve that, or at least support people that want to work
on it. So on one hand I read a mission statement and a question on how to
define the new playground, but you are now saying that a question for toys
on the playground should not asked at that group ? Or am I mixing people
and groups ?

regards

m

On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Johan C  wrote:

> 2014-10-23 8:57 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis :
>
>> First question: how do you build "the world's best addressable map" ?
>> Through imports or survey ? Is the timeframe that Martin puts forward fur
>> surveyed addresses acceptable and feasible ?
>>
>> As for the imports:
>>
>> Wouldn't it be great that we would have import tools that can be used by
>> many groups ? Just as we have great editors for "manual" mapping.
>> Shouldn't the OSMF (or however) invest in a procedure + tools for import ?
>>
>> So when a group wants to perform an import, they only have make sure the
>> license is compatible and the data has enough quality. The process of the
>> import is already described, the tools ( task managers, data conversion,
>> some quality checks etc.) are in place. They deliver the data and the
>> import can start.
>> I have the impression that right now each group has to take all those
>> obstacles all by themselves.
>>
>> Maybe I have a totally wrong perception of the import process. please
>> correct me if that's the case.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> m
>>
>>
> I partially share your impression that each group has to take obstacles by
> themselves. Since OSM is a social project I think it's good that people
> with experience on (importing) addresses and buildings share their
> experience. I see this happen on the @import list, user diaries etc. The
> somewhat scattered knowledge around could however be shared more
> centralized to make it a bit more accessible, so I created a page on the
> wiki (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Importing_buildings_and_addresses)
> in which anybody can share their knowledge (I will do so this November).
> Furthermore, SOTM Buenos Aires hosts 2 presentations on addresses.
>
> I don't see manual work for OSM as an obstacle. Any import (or survey :-)
> ) requires some manual work because the current map is far from blank, so
> the almost full-automatic import you describe is IMHO not possible. Though
> semi-automatic assistance by tools (like the wonderful Geofabrik inspector
> address view) help a lot keeping the work fun.
>
> As for tools: it would help when more tools for importing and updating
> could be programmed. As an example: I'm not aware of any tool which makes
> it possible to semi-automatically compare building outlines to the outlines
> of an updated government database, highlighting major differences in
> geometry.
>
> On the role of the OSMF: I think it shouldn't be the OSMF investing in a
> procedure + tools. It would already be great and an energizing factor when
> (members of) OSMF would express support for having more address and
> building data in OSM, be it either from surveys or from imports.
>
> Cheers, Johan
>
>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Clifford Snow 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Steve Coast suggested changing the mission statement of OSM to be
>>> something like “The world’s best addressable map” I thought
>>> I'd separate out this into a new thread. As some backup, I attended my
>>> first SOTM-US in 2012 where Steve proposed we build an addressable map. A
>>> group of us from Seattle decided that we'd take that challenge and import
>>> addresses for Seattle. That import was completed.
>>>
>>> Here are the address related comments:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:37 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <
>>> dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 2014-10-22 12:15 GMT+02:00 Steve Coast :

> Together, we could do this in 6-12 months and finish addressing in 1-3
> years. At that point we wouldn’t have just made the world slightly better,
> we would have put a big dent in the universe. Nobody would use a closed 
> map
> ever again, and it would be people like