Re: [OSM-talk] JOSM: Java issue & font size
On 5/4/20 7:53 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: >> if you do have the Mapillary plugin installed, you can see if the >> following "fixes" the problem: >> Go to JOSM Preferences -> Display Settings -> Mapillary and then uncheck >> "Use JavaFX for better looking dialogs". > I have Mapillary installed. I see no such option in the location described.. That option was added in Mapillary v1.5.22. You probably haven't updated your plugins in the past month. > You did - disabling the Mapillary plugin and restarting JOSM has > resolved the issue. Thank you. > The other option was updating the plugin and then disabling the JavaFX option. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] JOSM: Java issue & font size
[replying again, this time to the list] On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 14:22, Taylor Smock wrote: > > On 5/4/20 5:00 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > > I recently upgraded Java on my Windows 10 laptop, to the latest version. > > > > I now have the tiny font and icon issue > There is a reason why bug reports _require_ the JOSM status report. From where? > if you do have the Mapillary plugin installed, you can see if the > following "fixes" the problem: > Go to JOSM Preferences -> Display Settings -> Mapillary and then uncheck > "Use JavaFX for better looking dialogs". I have Mapillary installed. I see no such option in the location described.. > Alternatively, you may have to update Java. Java 8 does not support > HiDPI displays well. (You state that you recently upgraded Java to the > latest version, but which latest version? The latest Java 8 version? The > latest Java 14 version? One of the Java 15 Early Access builds?) Version 8, (build 1.8.0_251-b08) - which is described by the Java update wizard as "the latest version". > I'm sorry I couldn't help You did - disabling the Mapillary plugin and restarting JOSM has resolved the issue. Thank you. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] JOSM: Java issue & font size
On 04/05/2020 12:00, Andy Mabbett wrote: I recently upgraded Java on my Windows 10 laptop, to the latest version. Unfortunately, there are several possible "latest versions" - which one do you have installed and what version is it? To give an example on Windows 10 here I have (installed via chocolatey package manager): java --version openjdk 14.0.1 2020-04-14 OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 14.0.1+7) OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 14.0.1+7, mixed mode, sharing) That's one possible "latest version", but depending on where you got Java from in the first place you might be running something different. I've no idea about the font question, unfortunately. If I run "java -jar josm-tested_14945.jar" (which is the version I have installed) things look "OK" on a 1920x1080 screen. Best Regards, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] JOSM: Java issue & font size
On 5/4/20 5:00 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > I recently upgraded Java on my Windows 10 laptop, to the latest version. > > I now have the tiny font and icon issue, that I previously resolved by > following the steps outlines at: > > https://superuser.com/questions/652606/is-there-a-way-to-increase-the-default-font-size-for-java-gui-applications > > However, despite repeating those steps, i still have the tiny sizes, > even after restarting the machine. > > JOSM is therefore virtually unusable. > > Can anyone advise, please? > What you have told us isn't very useful. It would be nice to know what plugins (if any) you are using. There is a reason why bug reports _require_ the JOSM status report. For example, if you have Mapillary installed, there is an interaction between the dependent JavaFX plugin and the display environment that I haven't had time to track down. There is a workaround, but if you need to use date filters for Mapillary, you will have to type in the date in -MM-DD format. So, if you do have the Mapillary plugin installed, you can see if the following "fixes" the problem: Go to JOSM Preferences -> Display Settings -> Mapillary and then uncheck "Use JavaFX for better looking dialogs". Alternatively, you may have to update Java. Java 8 does not support HiDPI displays well. (You state that you recently upgraded Java to the latest version, but which latest version? The latest Java 8 version? The latest Java 14 version? One of the Java 15 Early Access builds?) I'm sorry I couldn't help, Taylor signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] JOSM: Java issue & font size
I recently upgraded Java on my Windows 10 laptop, to the latest version. I now have the tiny font and icon issue, that I previously resolved by following the steps outlines at: https://superuser.com/questions/652606/is-there-a-way-to-increase-the-default-font-size-for-java-gui-applications However, despite repeating those steps, i still have the tiny sizes, even after restarting the machine. JOSM is therefore virtually unusable. Can anyone advise, please? -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Let's talk Attribution
On Sun, 3 May 2020 at 23:01, Kathleen Lu via talk wrote: > OSM has imported sources that are ODbL. The attribution to those sources does > not appear on the map, but rather after several clicks (usually first to the > copyright page, then the contributors page). If that's not acceptable under > ODbL for a map that has multiple data sources, then OSM would be violating > others' ODbL licenses. In clause 4.3, the ODbL explicitly does not actually require any copyright notices (which I guess includes attribution statements) on produced works. Instead the notice that must be included (reasonably calculated to ensure that everyone viewing the produced work aware of it) is to say that the work has been made using an ODbL database, with details of how it can be obtained. So in this sense OSM is failing to comply with the ODbL on the main map, but it's not through lack of attribution of sources. What we actually *need* to include on the map is a mention of the "OpenStreetMap" database, that the data is available under the ODbL, and a link to where it can be obtained. I'd suggest we should be using something like "Map data (c) OpenStreetMap, ODbL." Downstream users of OSM need to do the same (or equivalently reference their own ODbL-or-equivalent-licensed Derivative Database). This text on produced works cannot be hidden behind other links. (Presumably, the way the ODbL was envisaged working with produced works, is that people viewing them are made away that that underlying data is re-usable and how to get hold of it. The copyright notices, attribution etc. then must be delivered if/when they try to access the raw data.) Robert. -- Robert Whittaker ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
