Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: [HOT] About " openstreetmap " Name Conflict

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 23/06/2015 16:43, john whelan wrote:
> It should probably be dealt with here.
> 

...dealt with my letting everyone know this is a scam and can safely be
ignored.

In any case issues with trademarks need to be dealt with by OSMF since
it would own any OSM-related trademarks that needed registering.

J.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Mechanically Cleaning Up FIXME Tags

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 26/02/2015 08:43, Andreas Labres wrote:
> This confirmation of course could be automated: show the user the
> object with the tags on some areal imagery background and she/he can decide 
> (in
> most cases, I'd say).

No -- the aerial imagery could be out of date, and it may not be
possible to tell if the problem has been fixed (or even existed in the
first place) *only* from aerial images. Confirmation by survey would
reliable.

If the "problem" is in an area where there's no-one to survey, then so
what? Fixmes don't show up on any end-user (as opposed to mapping QA)
rendering, they don't mess up routing, they don't affect geocoding or
have any other negative consequences for consumers of the data. So just
leave them be until someone can get to the area to survey.

J.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Mechanically Cleaning Up FIXME Tags

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 25/02/2015 17:23, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> Hold on, you may have misunderstood.

Actually I think you've misunderstood:

You've said these are Junk Tags, and I think everyone has agreed with
you on that. However people have also pointed out that they are probably
attached to Junk Data.

This means deleting the tags mechanically won't do anything to solve the
problem of junk data, only make it harder to find for the average
mapper. Therefore we shouldn't mechanically delete any tags, because the
net result will be to make OSM *as a whole* worse.

Hopefully that makes sense to you.

J.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Mechanically Cleaning Up FIXME Tags

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 25/02/2015 07:01, Frederik Ramm wrote:

+1 to all that.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] What is "OS OpenMap" (UK)?

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 22/02/2015 12:11, Stefan Keller wrote:
> 1. Is this "OS OpenMap" worldwide or UK bound?

Neither. It's GB only -- none of the island of Ireland is included.

> 2. How does this "world-leading" digital map look like (map style)?

It doesn't -- it's data only, so needs to be rendered to make a map,
using whatever style you choose.

> 3. And what does this mean to OSM?

Probably not much. The quality of the data in previous OS Open products
has been variable, to say the least. The GB community will probably
discuss how best to deal with it on the talk-gb mailing list. Pop over
if you want to join in.

J.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Addresses interpolation

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 27/01/2015 10:24, Dmitry Kiselev wrote:
> 
>> Have you asked cquest, the editor who created it? They're the best
>> person to answer this question.
> 
> I have a validator or at least addr:interpolation parser, so I have a
> lots of examples like this
> made by different editors.
> 
> So, if it's not an local trait, it's much more easy for me to just fix them.

...and leave that editor free to make the same mistake again and again.
They probably didn't realise they'd made a mistake, and a friendly note
from you might stop the problem occurring again.

Also, while they're correcting the mistake they've made, they may also
spot places in the same area where the map needs updating. As a remote
mapper, you're not going to be able to do this.

That's why using QA tools is fine, but just blindly "fixing" errors
without communicating with local mappers doesn't produce the best
outcome for OSM overall.

I do understand the urge to "fix" inconsistencies in the data like this,
but until every single geographic feature on the face of the Earth is
represented in OSM somehow, it shouldn't be our highest priority.

J.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Addresses interpolation

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 27/01/2015 06:05, Dmitry Kiselev wrote:

Hi everyone.

There is a strange addr:interpolation way:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/104241240



Is it a mistake or examples like this may be interpreted in some usable way?


Have you asked cquest, the editor who created it? They're the best 
person to answer this question.


J.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] new mailing list request - OSM outdoor/natural phenomena mapping

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 05/03/2014 20:30, Richard Z. wrote:

despite beeing sometimes tricky I still consider it pretty important to know
that a certain area is eg part of the tundra climate, permafrost or monsoon.


...and as I said, five messages ago:

"The main OSM database only stores relatively permanent features. That's 
not to say that this information isn't useful and valuable, just that 
the main OSM database isn't the right place to store it."


The people discussing this issue with you are not questioning the value 
of this information to you or any other person. They are just pointing 
out that the OpenStreetMap database is not the correct place to store 
this information, because we're trying to build a crowdsourced map of 
the world where you don't need to be a domain expert to be able to 
contribute.


J.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] new mailing list request - OSM outdoor/natural phenomena mapping

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 05/03/2014 13:42, Richard Z. wrote:

climatic zones
vegetation zones
soil biology
vegetation layers


Are any of these things verifiable? Are they relatively static or do 
they change with the weather/season/year-to-year? The main OSM database 
only stores relatively permanent features. That's not to say that this 
information isn't useful and valuable, just that the main OSM database 
isn't the right place to store it.


J.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Sending a message to a user from the website

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 08/02/2014 10:08, Maarten Deen wrote:

If I try to find the user Frederik Ram, I still won't find you and have
no idea why.


Why would you be trying to find a user with that name? The messaging 
system is there to allow mappers to contact each other over edits 
they've made, in which case you always know their user name.


Messaging isn't meant to be a full-fledged replacement for email or 
these mailing lists. That's what, err, email and mailing lists are for.

If it helps, try to think of it like the User:Talk pages in MediaWiki.

J.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Survey on the OSM Wiki

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 25/06/2013 16:48, Mulone Moligiangi wrote:
> (Apologies for cross-posting)

Since you don't appear to have cross-posted, I wonder why you're
apologising for it. However, there are plenty of other things that
perhaps you should explain:

* Are you "Mulone Moligiangi" or "Andrea Ballatore"?
* Which institution do you work for? You say you're doing academic
research, but don't say who for.
* What are you hoping to show with this survey? What use do you see this
information being to the OSM community, and will they see the results?
* Your questions are quite vague, loosely-worded and open-ended. How
will this help your research?
* Are you aware of the difference between "what gets written in the
wiki" versus "what tags actually get used"?

Sorry to be so harsh, but if you expect the OSM community to help you,
you need to explain better why it's in their interests to do so.

J.





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

Re: [OSM-talk] Branding?

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 23/02/2013 07:24, Robin Paulson wrote:

How do we reconcile relatively permissive use of the OSM database, with
relatively restrictive use of the Open Street Map name? For the moment,
I put to one side Stallman's argument that "there is no such thing as
intellectual property" [1].


In the same way that Stallman, via the GPL, says "To protect your 
rights, we need to prevent others from denying you these rights or 
asking you to surrender the rights."


To prevent other people from fooling you into thinking what they're 
distributing is Free, open geodata, we need to protect OpenStreetMap as 
a trademark. It stands for something, and that something is too 
important to simply let anyone use our name for anything they choose.


There's work going on to strike a balance between protecting ourselves 
as a community, and allowing local groups to self-organise. As a member 
of CWG I'm contributing to that work, but anyone else is welcome to join in.


J.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] State of the Map 2013 venue selected.

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 17/02/2013 00:00, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:

Its not that, its convincing my wife to let me be away for 1 week vs 2 :)


Bring her with you!


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Simple improvement(s) to openstreetmap.org

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 09/01/2013 13:57, Greg Troxel wrote:
> Personally, I find it puzzling that open data (and open source) projects
> are willing to (as projects) use services with bad data policies and bad
> privacy policies.  While I wouldn't advocate that OSMF take a position
> in the culture battle against such services, using them takes the
> opposite position (that they are ok).


>From CWG's point of view, it's a pragmatic decision: Many people *are
already using* those networks (for better or worse), so we may as well
use them to get the OSM(F) message out there. We'll certainly never drop
more open methods of communication in favour of social networks, but
offering people a choice seems better than being dogmatic.

> Perhaps a Diaspora pod?  (I realize that currently, that probably
> reaches few people.)

As you say, the audience we'd reach that way would be minimal. It's also
not clear how we could create an unambiguous "official" OSM Diaspora
account and have it managed by several people, as is the case with the
closed social networks. Any help or advice on this would of course be
gratefully received.

J.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Simple improvement(s) to openstreetmap.org

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 09/01/2013 13:43, Paweł Paprota wrote:
> OSM does have an
> official Facebook account[1] and official Twitter account

...and an official Google+ page:

https://plus.google.com/+OpenStreetMap

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Simple improvement(s) to openstreetmap.org

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 08/01/2013 21:31, Rovastar wrote:
> My idea is simple can someone add modern social media networks logos/links
> to the home page.

As a member of the OSMF Communications Working Group (CWG), I have
perhaps the greatest level of involvement in the various OSM-branded
pages/accounts on various social networks.

This idea has been discussed in CWG, and at some point* a mock-up will
appear. It's not straightforward because we can't use the standard
network-supplied widgets -- they leak information back to those
networks, so are an unacceptable risk to mappers' privacy.

If and when badges are put on the home page, it will be for a set period
initially to see if they do result in increase signups and views of OSM
information on those networks. If they do, they could stay. If they
don't then they can come off again.

Jonathan

* Maybe the next week or so.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Bad (wrong?) OSM publicity?

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 02/10/2012 12:29, woll wrote:
> The New York Times has not amended the article, so it still contains the
> statement that:
> 
> "The biggest problem with Apple’s map...is that much of its data appears to
> be drawn from OpenStreetMap, a Wikipedia-like service that contains a lot of
> incorrect and outdated information."
> http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/25/japanese-look-for-alternatives-to-apples-maps/

It is not the NYT making that statement, but reporting the fact that
someone else made it. Whatever we think of its accuracy, Mapion's
spokesman did actually say that, so the NYT has made no factual error
that needs correcting. At best we could expect a right to reply, which I
believe the second article gave us.


-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] diversity amongst DWG members

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 20/09/2012 12:46, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> It would certainly be helpful if more local communities would have one
> of their members amongst the DWG members.

It certainly would -- those local communities who feel they need better
representation should decide amongst themselves who they want to
nominate, and then that person can join in with DWG (and any other OSMF
WG they feel is appropriate).



-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Import guidelines proposal update

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 19/09/2012 17:26, Pieren wrote:
> So, theoretically, we might have the same issue when tracing from Bing
> for instance. Should we use a different account for Bing imagery
> contributions as well, just in case we move later to a licence
> incompatible with Bing ?

No, because tracing over Bing isn't the same as importing data. It's
producing data from scratch by interpreting an image. There are still
legal arguments about this, but there are heavy hints that, providing
the T&Cs of the imagery provider don't forbid it (i.e. Bing doesn't,
Google does), no copyright or licence carries across from the imagery to
what's traced from it.

There are similar issues with using imagery to create data as importing
it, but they're related to accuracy, not licensing.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Import guidelines & OSMF/DWG governance

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 18/09/2012 13:42, Vincent Privat wrote:
> What happened on 15th september looks like an abuse of authority to me,
> as this largely exceeds the limits of the mandate given to the DWG. I
> expect a clarification from the OSMF board on this point.

OK, if we're playing WikiLawyer pissing games, the statement about DWG's
power says "authorised", not "limited to". Part of DWG's remit is to
deal with disputes, and this is very clearly a dispute over data. Ergo...


-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Icons

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 27/06/2012 23:06, john whelan wrote:

Could someone or a group come up with a more standard set of icons please?


Yes. You could.

If not you, who?

Seriously, having a library of icons matching common OSM features is a 
fantastic idea, and I'm sure would be welcomed. It does need someone to 
make it happen, though. If this is your particular itch, you should 
scratch it, and scratch it in the way that suits you best. If someone 
else were to do this project, they'd end up doing it differently to you, 
and you might not like the result as much.


Hell, if it's useful enough, it might even become icons.osm.org


J.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] "proprietary" keys and values, machine readable vs. humans

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 24/01/2012 11:22, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> I wonder if this kind of tagging should be tolerated. In the wiki I
> found no documentation regarding this tag, and therefore this data
> seems unusable for most mappers.

Perhaps not, but systematically removing it won't improve anything
(since most apps will just ignore the tags), and will actually increase
the amount of storage needed (since a new version of the objects in
question will be created).

We have (or at least, should have) a simple principle in OSM: Ignore
what you don't understand. That applies to mappers and to applications
using the data. The alternative is edit wars where one mapper things a
particular tag -- that otherwise does them no harm -- is "wrong" and
starts removing them and their creator puts them back.



-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Request for Romano-British features

[Jonathan Bennett]

You can use ooc.openstreetmap.org to see out-of-copyright Ordnance 
Survey maps for most of Britain. The coverage varies from area to area 
and series to series, but between them pretty much everywhere is covered.


Jonathan.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSmosa.net run now.., contribution model

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 05/12/2011 21:35, Frans Thamura wrote:

> i think must research how to copy the data in weekly basis, 

Use Osmosis' replication features:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Osmosis/Detailed_Usage_0.38#Replication_Tasks

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Blocked applications at tile server

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 21/11/2011 14:10, Václav Řehák wrote:

That's not true anymore. Downloading is disabled by Locus author in
the recent versions and online browsing is limited to a certain number
of tiles per day.


Possibly, but on the Locus web site 
(http://www.locusmap.eu/version-1-14-0) there's a big red notice saying 
"If you don’t want to have reduced downloading of Online maps, do not 
update!", so they aren't exactly encouraging people to stop overloading 
the servers.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Will OSM tiles be CC-0 soon?

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 26/10/2011 14:27, Robert Scott wrote:


If they're using our server capacity, the least we can ask is for attribution 
etc.



Whatever licence the tiles are released under, the Tile usage policy is 
unlikely to change:


http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tile_usage_policy

J.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Culture (was: Bing maps is misplaced)

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 08/12/2010 12:50, Steve Bennett wrote:

I should apologise here for picking on two innocent individuals. I was
trying to offer a criticism of the culture of the mailing lists and
the project as a whole, and a suggestion to look at moving to a more
scalable model, where policies get agreed, then written down.
On this particular point, I think some of the resistance to having 
"Policies" of this nature is that where you have Laws, you get Lawyers 
whose job it is to find ways of breaking the spirit of those policies 
without breaking the letter of the (or equally *apply* the letter of 
those policies while breaking the spirit). Wikipedia hasn't managed to 
avoid problems by having policies, and I don't think we'd have a much 
easier time if we started writing things in stone.


Discussion and consensus (and maybe even sanctions against those who 
refuse to act according to that consensus) are more important than 
hard-and-fast rules.


Jonathan



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Bing maps is misplaced

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 08/12/2010 14:35, Maarten Deen wrote:
I have never heard of this before and have never seen it documented 
anywhere or seen discussed before. The only mention of "do not trace 
from aerial maps" is when it is off Google's maps because we cannot 
legaly use them.
Never before have I seen a mention of "do not trace from aerial maps 
where you do not have local knowledge".


If you can point to previous discussions about this, that would be 
very helpful. Until that, I support Steve's view completely.


See:

http://www.gravitystorm.co.uk/shine/archives/2009/11/10/the-pottery-club/
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Yahoo!_Aerial_Imagery#Problems_with_tracing_Yahoo
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2006-December/009304.html
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2010-January/008698.html and 
subsequent messages

http://brainoff.com/weblog/2010/04/28/1556 (last para in particular)
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/2009-October/001753.html

...I'll have more later.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Steve Coast Joins Microsoft as Principle Architect ofBing Mobile

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 23/11/2010 17:41, Florian Heer wrote:
This is very exciting news. But I could not find any way to make use 
of that at the moment. So I guess this will be possible in the future 
as in opposed to now?

The announcement was made less than an hour ago -- be patient!

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Ongoing bulk uploads of GPS traces?

[Jonathan Bennett]

 On 13/10/2010 08:50, Sam Wilson wrote:
1. We use OSM maps for navigation, and so management are quite able to 
see the value that could arise from our giving this data to OSM, 
because it would make the maps better.  But there is a bit of a gap 
between lots-of-GPS-traces and lots-of-well-tagged-roads!  What can I 
do to bridge this gap? (I mean, trace over the GPS trace, I know, but 
that's going to leave a lot of 'highway=road' tags; is that okay?)



That's fine -- it's much better than nothing
2. What form of permission do I need to get from management, and where 
does it get saved? Is there a pro forma letter somewhere? What licence 
do we release the data under?
You'd be releasing the data under CC-BY-SA and ODbL. If you are acting 
on behalf of the copyright owner, then you don't need to add any further 
documentation -- simply uploading the data is enough to show you agree 
to the licences.
3. Is a single daily trace suitable?  I mean, all vehicles' traces put 
together in one file and uploaded (under, I guess, a separate account 
-- but still owned by me)? Or is there some automatic way of doing this?
A separate account for the traces may well be a good idea. As for 
aggregating the traces, I don't see any benefit to OSM of doing that, 
especially if it involves you doing more work. If it's the effort of 
uploading multiple traces that worries you, there's an Alpha-quality 
Java utility that I'm happy to help you to use: 
http://www.chainring.co.uk/Tracey.jar


But really: is this worthwhile?  Will my company benefit?  Will OSM 
benefit?
Yes. More source data is always good, especially if it's based on real 
movements.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] Culvert and average contributor

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 27/08/2010 15:36, Pieren wrote:


But nobody is replying to my suggestion : is it okay to replace
culvert=yes but a tunnel=culvert (or tunnel=sewel)(or bridge=culvert on
the highway when it happens that the structure is directly used as a
bridge) in the wiki ?



I believe it's been shown that a culvert and a bridge/tunnel are not the 
same thing, so no to your suggestion.


There may well be *a few* things out there that get called culverts when 
they're constructed as bridges, but we should tag what things *are* not 
what they get called.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] Culvert and average contributor

[Jonathan Bennett]

 On 27/08/2010 14:17, ed...@billiau.net wrote:

In a town which does not have underground storm water management, the
gutters at the side of the roads have to cross one of the roads at an
intersection so you have a half-elliptical shaped culvert which traffic
crosses, making a little ford. The wikipedia definition of culvert is
simply "A culvert is a device used to channel water." and these fit into
that definition.


Nice selective quoting. The full description is:

"A *culvert* is a device used to channel water. It may be used to allow 
water to pass underneath a road , 
railway , or embankment 
 for 
example. Culverts can be made of many different materials; steel 
, polyvinyl chloride 
 (PVC) and concrete 
 are the most common. Formerly, 
construction of stone culverts was common."


from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culvert

If the vehicle travels through the water, it's a ford, not a culvert -- 
the water is passing *over* the road, not under it.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Image Of The Week proposal

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 28/07/2010 14:57, Floris Looijesteijn wrote:


But the girl is worth image of the week anyhow...


http://xkcd.com/322/


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

Re: [OSM-talk] cycle map not updating?

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 24/06/2010 16:57, Toby Murray wrote:

Two days ago he tweeted that the new server
was "nearly ready" so hopefully things will improve soon!
   
And don't forget, if you think OpenCycleMap.org is great, you could 
always call in at the shop on the way out:


http://shop.opencyclemap.org/



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Reporting bugs and documentation

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 22/03/2010 22:38, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> JOSM doesn't visualize relations at all. You need to notice that the
> thing you're working on is part of a relation in the attributes dialog
> (where the key/values are listed).

Almost true. It does if you work in the wireframe view, where relation 
membership is shown by an outline on the way or node. I admit in can be 
difficult to see the outline on a node, though.

Jonathan


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Contributing to PL2 (was: Re: Thoughts on OSM design, and looking forward and back)

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 28/02/2010 22:27, Randy wrote:

> Oops, I meant to check the groups list before sending this. There is an
> announce list, as of last October. However, it hasn't had much activity.

That's because, try as I might, I'm not psychic and can't announce 
things people don't tell me about.

Jonathan

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Community center

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 04/03/2010 10:57, Pieren wrote:

> Excepted that we should try to keep spelling consistent, no ? All other
> "approved" tags using 'center' are written 'centre'.

According to OSMdoc, there are already 252 uses of
amenity=community_centre and 90 uses of amenity=community_center

So the more popular usage should probably be documented. Any armchair
mappers fancy fixing all the other uses?

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OpenUsability

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 23/02/2010 23:07, SteveC wrote:
> Let me know if you want that retracted or anyone else would like to be 
> involved in anything we can accomplish with them.

You can give my name, if you like.


-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] In-vehicle tracking and editing software for tablet computers?

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 05/02/2010 03:12, Sam Wilson wrote:
> Hullo,
> 
> Does any one have any ideas about what programs I could use on tablet
> computers in vehicles for navigation and tracking, and possibly editing?

For the navigation and tracking you could use TrackMyJourney
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/TrackMyJourney), a combination of a
Java application and web site by OSMer Stephen Dartnall. There's a
charge for the full navigation and tracking service, and you need a data
connection for the live tracking to work. It uses OSM maps and data, and
can produce GPX or NMEA files. It can even take geotagged pictures or
audio if your hardware supports it. No OSM editing facilities built-in,
though.



-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Use of OSM data by the military and/or intelligence services

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 04/02/2010 14:49, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> AFAIK our current license offers our data for everyone who attributes
> correctly, but I'd like to raise the issue of malicious use of our
> data by governmental organisations. What do you thing about setting up
> a paragraph that prohibits the use of our data for military and
> intelligence services? Not that I'm hoping this would seriously
> prevent the use in case we have useful data to them, but still it
> would be a statement.

No. Free means free, and that includes people and organisations that you
don't agree with. Once we start imposing politically-based decisions on
who can or can't use the data, we stop being a resource and start being
a pressure group, and that's not what I believe OSM to be about.

How do you determine what's military use, anyway? Is a private
contractor working for the armed forces military use? Is a member of the
armed forces working in their spare time military use? More pertinently,
is members of armed forces working in an area recently hit by a natural
disaster military use?

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing - Optimally Sorting Vias

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 19/01/2010 20:02, Shaun McDonald wrote:
> You may find that adding openstreetmap to your web searches helps to find 
> openstreetmap related stuff.

Or even using this custom search of the wiki, mailing lists and forum:

http://bit.ly/osmsearch

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] ?

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 14/01/2010 11:01, sara susini wrote:

This list generally uses English.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:FAQ

e

talk...@openstreemap.org - http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] problems with nominatim

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 13/01/2010 20:45, Stan Berka wrote:
>  Whom do I contact to correct this?

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nominatim#Bugs_.2F_Error_reporting

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Why doesn't OSM implement a simple measure to protectit's users and passwords?

[Jonathan Bennett]

On 22/12/2009 16:27, John F. Eldredge wrote:
> There also does not appear to be any provision on the OSM web site for 
> changing to a new password

See http://www.openstreetmap.org/user//account
where there are two password boxes. Fill them both in to change your
password.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Countering Google's propaganda

[Jonathan Bennett]

Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Oh, and someone in Ireland 
> has just released a motor that produces more energy than it consumes.

Apart from the massive D cell powering it, you mean?

http://blogs.zdnet.co.uk/news-blog/#10014630

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] API Down?

[Jonathan Bennett]

maning sambale wrote:
> Can't download and connect to the main site.
> 

WORKSFORME

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal RFC leisure=dog_park

[Jonathan Bennett]

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> Please see the proposal here:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dog_off-leash_area

This tag already seems to be well in use:

http://osmdoc.com/en/tag/leisure/dog_park

and there are no violent objections on the talk page, so it seems like
it's fine to me. Just start using it.


-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Path vs footway vs cycleway vs...

[Jonathan Bennett]

Steve Bennett wrote:

> [...] I tend to
> believe I can ride my bike wherever the hell I want unless there's a
> sign saying otherwise. 

That's fine for your personal decision making. However, for OSM we need
to provide people with as much information as possible so they can make
their own, possibly different, decisions.

Record legal access rights using access=* and bicycle=* tags, and record
physical characteristics using width=* and surface=* tags, and include
any barrier=* on the path. Routers can choose whether only to use legal
routes that way, or add to path cost where there's a bike-unfriendly
barrier in the way.

If you don't *know* the legal situation this gets tricky, but that's
something we can clear up within each country eventually.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Bridge on Hiking Trails

[Jonathan Bennett]

Shalabh wrote:
> JOSM does not give me that option of a bridge under hiking trail,
> atleast not while using the presets. If I use the highway tag with a
> bridge, consider this. I have a hiking trail marked as an 'demanding
> alpine hiking' 50 km from any humanity and then I have a bridge tagged
> as highway in the middle of it. Am I missing something here?

Yes. You don't have to use the presets to tag a feature. You can just
type the tags in by hand.

Which version of JOSM are you using? In JOSM build 2255, the latest
tested version, the footway preset does have a bridge attribute. You may
need to get a newer version.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Seeing only my traces in JOSM ?

[Jonathan Bennett]

Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:

> The only drawback is that it depends on always working on the same host. 
> I often move and I would have preferred a solution that does not depend 
> on local data but only on what is on the server.

USB key? That has the advantage of working now, rather than waiting for
code, which might take rather a long time.




-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Seeing only my traces in JOSM ?

[Jonathan Bennett]

Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> In Potlatch, 'Shift+g' shows only your traces and 'g' show all the 
> traces (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Potlatch/Keyboard_shortcuts). 
> But the same shortcuts don't work in JOSM and nothing similar is listed 
> in http://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Shortcuts. Is there a way to do 
> that or should I file a wishlist bug for JOSM ?

You can load your traces from local files. If you then don't download
the public traces (or hide the layer if you do) you'll only see them.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] positioning of barrier = stile

[Jonathan Bennett]

David Groom wrote:

> I have been doing the former, but it appears this might stop routing 
> applications allowing a car to travel from c - d as the barrier = stile 
> "blocks" the road to vehicle transport, and so the second tagging option 
> might be better.

Indeed it is. If it helps, think of a way for a road as representing the
centreline of the road, rather than its entire width. That way having
the stile node offset using a short length of footway doesn't seem so odd.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Direct upload GPX to osm from iPhone

[Jonathan Bennett]

bernhard wrote:
 > Does OSM provide something like openid for mobile devices.

OSM supports OAuth.

See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OAuth
-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Will Google ever use OSM data?

[Jonathan Bennett]

Bráulio Bezerra da Silva wrote:
> Will it ever happen?

Yes.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] differences in how OpenCycleMap renders bicycle parking

[Jonathan Bennett]

Dave F. wrote:
> Could it be possible to change the render a the highest detail level or 
> two, to display the C+number. In the example you give it they would 
> certainly fit.

Dave,

This isn't aimed at you specifically, but you've raised a common point
which needs clarifying.

OpenCycleMap is a project by two members of the OSM community
(gravitystorm and randomjunk). It's great that people like it and find
it useful, and it's a fantastic example of what you can do with OSM
besides producing a general purpose map with everything on it.

However, it doesn't use any OSMF resources -- In essence it's their map.
While I'm sure they're happy to receive suggestions (I've even given
them one myself), they have no obligation to make the map fit anyone's
needs but their own.

Remember that it's done by people in their spare time, using resources
they've begged, borrowed and stolen for themselves. If you think you
have a need for a similar, but different map you're free to make one.
That's what OSM's for, and if you need pointers on how do make your own
map, the community will help, providing you're prepared to help
yourself. But please, please don't expect someone else to change their
own efforts just to suit you.

Jonathan

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

[OSM-talk] New mailing list - annou...@openstreetmap.org

[Jonathan Bennett]

Another new mailing list has been created: annou...@openstreetmap.org

You can subscribe here:

http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/announce

Announce is a moderated list limited to announcements about OSM
services, new software versions and any other really, really important
news that affects the whole community.

This will be a low-volume, no-chatter list that should be safe to
subscribe to, even for the smallest of mailbox allowances.

Sysadmins, maintainers: Please mail announce when you release new
versions or plan downtime.

Thanks,

Jonathan

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

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

[Jonathan Bennett]

Gervase Markham wrote:
> So why did you make the noname map in the first place, if it's not 
> important? Have you changed your mind about its usefulness?

It's useful *as a guide*, or a tool. What some people seem to be unable
to grasp is that *it's OK for a road to appear in red on NoNames*. You
don't have to eliminate them completely. It's just a guide, not a gospel.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

[Jonathan Bennett]

Markus Lindholm wrote:
> Isn't it time that the governing board establishes a tagging council
> of some sort 

See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_bureaucracy
for what Another Plaice thinks of that idea.
-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Flickr Now Supports OSM Tags

[Jonathan Bennett]

Russ Nelson wrote:
> On the other side you have mappers who want to create useful data, not
> a pile of random rubbish.

No-one wants to create random rubbish. What people do want is to be able
to describe what they've just mapped without needing prior approval from
the OpenStreetMap Tagging Standardisation Committee.

> So there is no purpose to the JOSM validator?  No purpose to
> keepright?  No purpose to having presets?  I think you're exxagerating
> too make a point, Fredrick.

They're just tools. They can only give you information, not make
decisions for you. They can also be wrong sometimes.



-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Flickr Now Supports OSM Tags

[Jonathan Bennett]

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
 > As Kyle Gordon brought up in this thread the issue is that the OSM
> data has both building=yes/no and building=true/false and flickr only
> supports the former.
> 
> Dave F. suggested that the OSM database be normalized to just use the
> former because that's simpler.

He seemed to be suggesting that the values be *constrained* to only
those two values, which creates as many problems as it solves, since it
precludes using a precise value for building=*, such as building=house.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Terms of use for OSM tiles and API?

[Jonathan Bennett]

Nick Whitelegg wrote:
> It seems rather contra to the spirit of free software and open source it 
> has to be said. 

Not at all. You're free to do whatever you want with the data, and most
of the software used to create, store, process and display it.

What you can't do is expect someone else to provide you with free
hosting for your project, which is what ends up happening if we don't
set a realistic usage policy.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Flickr Now Supports OSM Tags

[Jonathan Bennett]

Frankie Roberto wrote:
 > Ha, well there's a contentious statement! If that were the case, then
> why do we even bother with the Mapnik/Osmarender tiles? Surely they're
> the ultimate form of doing "clever" stuff with the data.

Primarily so mappers can see what they've been doing, as a form of
validation (and gratification). They're also a reasonable demonstration
of what's possible using OSM data and various tools. The Cycle map is
included to show that you can do more than "normal" street maps, but
that's hosted elsewhere.


> My personal view is that it's the XML view which is tag-agnostic, and
> that the map and browse views are where we should be displaying the data
> in the most useful, usable form possible. I think our browse pages could
> be as good, if not better, than Google's "place pages" [1].

If you mean including extra, non-geographic info, I'd disagree. The
point of the project is to collect geodata and allow people to use it in
interesting ways, and that could include Google. I'd rather Google kept
its place pages and based them on OSM data than we tried to compete.

> Whilst I can understand the view that OSM should only be about gathering
> and maintaining the data, and that we should leave building
> user-friendly 'services' on top of it to other companies and
> organisations, I think that we need some form of usable services (like
> the map, and the browse pages) in order to show off the data and to
> attract people to the community.  To use Wikipedia as an example, they
> seem to focus equally on providing a well-designed, stable, fast
> encyclopaedia website as on providing a good editing experience and
> community (despite the huge financial burden of running all the extra
> servers).

Instead of thinking of OSM like Wikipedia, think of it like the Linux
kernel: We have lots of contributors to a very large whole, with a
central site where all contributions are collated. That site may be
where the product is created, but it shouldn't be where it's used.

In the same way you wouldn't expect to have to log into kernel.org to
use Linux, you shouldn't expect openstreetmap.org to provide every
possible application of the data. Instead, we provide enough to make
collection and maintenance of the data easy (and fun), and enough
documentation to show  people how to render their own maps/install a
routing app on their handheld/extract POIs from the data for (reverse)
geocoding.

OpenStreetMap is Free in the sense of Stallman. You can do what the hell
you like with it. You're limited only by your own ability, not by a
licence agreement. If you don't have the skill to do it yourself, you
can pay someone else to do it, but you still get the OSM goodness.

What OSM (or more precisely the OSMF) isn't in the business of is
providing free beer to all and sundry, which is what would happen if we
tried to provide a reliable tile service to anyone who wanted it.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Flickr Now Supports OSM Tags

[Jonathan Bennett]

Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
> I wish OSM has a "redirect" feature for deleted nodes, ways, and
> relations sort of like what Wikipedia has for its articles and pages.
> Maybe a redirect=* tag? :-)

You mean something like this?:

http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/2194

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Maps v.s. OSM routing in Berlin

[Jonathan Bennett]

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> Why doesn't OSM ever tell me to take a 270 degree turn into oncoming
> traffic on a 6-lane highway and get onto the motorway_link on the
> other side?
>

OSM also never tells you to turn 180 degrees across a motorway central
reservation, then drive off the side of a bridge and fall to the road 15
metres below:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=Glasgow+Airport,+Abbotsinch,+Paisley,+Renfrewshire,+UK&daddr=Glasgow+Central+station&geocode=&hl=en&mra=ls&sll=55.85277,-4.26733&sspn=0.015273,0.029011&ie=UTF8&ll=55.855793,-4.268575&spn=0.007636,0.014505&t=h&z=16

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] How to map quarters?

[Jonathan Bennett]

Valent Turkovic wrote:
> Currently on wiki I only found place=suburb tag and I see that it is used 
> also for mapping city's quarters.
> 
> Only issue is that when you map quarter of some town or village currently 
> the quarter has bigger font than name of village or town.

You should use the suburb tag -- that's what it means. The text size
problem is an issue with that particular render, and you shouldn't tag
for the renderer, which using a different tag just to get different text
size would be.

If you'd like to see the text size issue fixed, you can file a bug at
http://trac.openstreetmap.org/

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

[Jonathan Bennett]

David Muir Sharnoff wrote:
> Perhaps the OSM database should be moved out of the EU to a location
> that doesn't suffer from a Database Rights law.Extracting from
> no-EU data source by people not in the EU would then be okay for sure.

Great! Let us know when you've secured the funding for this move, and
we'll start work on it.

>   Extending the Database Rights law to extracting turn restrictions
> from Streetview is a stretch anyway: they turn restrictions aren't
> part of the original data.

If the photos are geocoded -- which SV's are -- then you are deriving
data from the whole product, both picture and location. This constitutes
a database. While the law on this may be a grey area, it's not worth our
while becoming the test case and jeopardising (geopardising?) the whole
project for relatively little gain.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

[Jonathan Bennett]

Anthony wrote:
> Eh, I'd take on Google pro se (or with the help of free EFF lawyers or
> the like) over the issue of the ToS, and based on US law I'm pretty sure
> I'd win.  However, I'm aware that other users of OSM don't have the
> benefit US-jurisdictional copyright law with respect to factual data, so
> I won't do it, for their sake.

As it stands, the OSM database is in the UK.

> Still, I can't get my head around what the rules exactly are.  If I read
> a newspaper article which says that Main Street has been renamed to
> Independence Blvd, can I use that, or do I have to go out there myself
> and check?  It makes no sense.

There's a difference between using one fact from a newspaper article,
and systematically extracting data from a database to reuse in another
database. It's the same principle that allows Wikipedia to get away with
getting co-ordinates for individual articles by taking them from a map,
and us doing the same for every point of interest on the map.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

[Jonathan Bennett]

David Muir Sharnoff wrote:
> Google's forbids many things, but looking at an image and noting the
> turn restrictions (or other content) that you can see within it is not
> mentioned.   Such a use is not covered by "2 (b) copy, translate,
> modify, or make derivative works of the Content or any part thereof;"
> since the turn restrictions are something that you can see in the
> image -- not the image itself.
> 
> -Dave

Google's (or rather Tele Atlas's) lawyers would argue you were indeed 
making a derivative work, and they can afford better lawyers than us -- 
unless you have a huge pot of cash you want to use to test this case?

As I said, there's probably a deal to be done with Google where we have 
permission to use the images, but it will take work and diplomacy.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

[Jonathan Bennett]

Anthony wrote:
> Is it okay to use Google Street View to confirm turning restrictions, 
> street names, etc?  This seems like an obvious "yes" to me, but then, 
> I would have said the same thing about tracing from a satellite photo, 
> so I'm not going to try to guess international copyright law.
The simple answer is that Street View is still protected by copyright, 
and that by using it you agree to Google's terms and conditions, so 
unless you have specific permission to derive data from it, it's safest 
to assume you can't. We're generally paranoid about copyright 
infringement because we don't want to jeopardise the entire project for 
the sake of a relatively small gain (Street View tends to cover urban 
areas, which are easier to survey in person anyway).

You also need to consider that Street View still uses Google Maps as 
part of its interface (and possibly for the overlaid navigation data), 
so it's affected by the licence on that data.

However, Google does own the Street View pictures themselves in their 
entirety. If they, with the location and bearing of each one was made 
available to OSM under terms compatible with CC-BY-SA (or ODBL), then we 
could use them. We would need a way of accessing the images that made no 
reference to any other geodata (so the standard web interface would be 
out). It's something we'd need to negotiate, but we can't do it at 
present, unfortunately.

J.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Software Freedom Day

[Jonathan Bennett]

Tobias Knerr wrote:
> How about "offer reliable service with good uptimes"? After the recent
> maintenance weekend it was stated that our services are not really
> intended for the public (at least if they need them and don't just
> experiment with them) and we are only about data. If that's still the
> case, recommending the use of these services to the public doesn't seem
> like a good idea.
>   
You're right that the mapping on openstreetmap.org isn't intended to be 
a reliable, full-scale service for the general public: It's a showcase 
and a mapper's tool. The idea is to get other sites to use the data to 
create the maps they want, rather than just using one set of tiles from us.

To put it another way: We will have succeeded not when the public uses 
openstreetmap.org instead of Google Maps, but when Google Maps uses 
OpenStreetMap data instead of Navteq, Teleatlas, or other proprietary 
data sources.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] wikipedia - english

[Jonathan Bennett]

Liz wrote:
> I'm looking to implant some OSM maps into Wikipedia, but I need some examples 
> of their wiki editing style so I don't get my edits rubbed out by the style 
> police.
>
> Could people please advise me of wikipedia pages with OSM maps so I can view 
> the style of the pages?
>
>   
Liz,

See:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Collaboration_with_Wikipedia
and
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/OpenStreetMap

Jonathan.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] radioactivity

[Jonathan Bennett]

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> no, we shouldn't. But what's so strange about the desire to tag
> nuclear installations? Why not tag all chemical plants? There is a lot
> of benefit in mapping not just "industrial" but also the type of
> industry, be it chemical, automotive, steel, clothing or whatever.

There's a difference between mapping what you can verify -- the
presences of buildings, fences, structures, etc. and mapping pollution
or radioactivity levels, especially when you're not allowed anywhere
near the plant itself.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Comment on the Opengeodata website

[Jonathan Bennett]

Mike Ryan wrote:
> Hi
> 
> Not really sure if this is the right place to ask, but I wanted to leave
> a comment on the Opengeodata.org website and you need to login first.
> However, there's nowhere listed to register. Does anyone know how to do
> this on there?

I appears to be disabled at the moment. Dunno why.


-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - 4wd_only

[Jonathan Bennett]

Morten Kjeldgaard wrote:
> Remember that data is no good if it's not rendered,

Remember that rendering a map isn't the only use for geodata.


-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Bing Imagery

[Jonathan Bennett]

John Smith wrote:
> Is it forbidden, explicitly or otherwise?

Yes. Unless it's explicitly permitted, it's forbidden.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] residential and unclassified in Australia WAS definition of the main highway-tag

[Jonathan Bennett]

John Smith wrote:
> I feel there is a very real need to describe "something" that is between 
> residential and track and up until this point in time unclassified has been 
> used.

If there are types of roads in Australia that you feel the existing tags
don't adequately describe, feel free to start using a new one -- you can
use Any Tags You Like. Bear in mind that the highway tags aren't meant
to be a sliding scale of importance, or follow a strict hierarchy. You
just have to describe a particular type of road as best you can, without
necessarily needing a reference to any other type of road.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] residential and unclassified in Australia WAS definition of the main highway-tag

[Jonathan Bennett]

James Livingston wrote:
> In addition the "Australian Tagging Guidelines" (which Liz mentioned  
> were written a year before the residential page) explicitly disagree  
> with the residential page.

I've done some investigation on this specific point, and found the
following:

The edit which added the current definition of residential roads to that
page was made on 2nd January 2008
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php?title=Australian_Tagging_Guidelines&diff=67689&oldid=66241)
by Lakeyboy in an edit with no summary. I can find no discussion of this
change on the wiki talk page or Talk-AU beforehand.

I can only assume, based on the available evidence, that this wasn't a
change that the Australian OSM community arrived at through consensus.
Rather it was one mapper's idea that he didn't discuss with anyone
before putting into the wiki. The change was also made after the
convention for the residential tag had been established elsewhere.

It's up to the AU community what to do about this, but be aware that in
the European Axis there's a very strong feeling that for a road to be
tagged residential, there needs to be houses (or other dwellings) on it,
and for it not to be designed for through traffic.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - 4wd_only

[Jonathan Bennett]

Roy Wallace wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Lester Caine wrote:
>> High ground clearance required?
>> ...So 4WD_Only is not really the correct terminology
>> and does not clearly identify the problem? IS it ground clearance, deep 
>> fords,
>> mud or poor traction conditions ...
> 
> The sign says "4WD ONLY" - I therefore suggest that 4wd_only is indeed
> the correct terminology, at least in regions (e.g. Australia) where
> the sign appears as such and the phrase is in common use.

WHS -- it meets the guidelines of being verifiable, by being what's on
the ground. If it were based on one mapper's judgement, that would be
different, but this is unambiguous.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] AAAA openstreetmap still doesn't use ipv6

[Jonathan Bennett]

John Smith wrote:
> I'm still scratching my head as to why this isn't possible to be honest.

It's possible, but it appears the people who think it's so important
just want to sit on their arses and have someone else do the work.

By comparison, when Relations were proposed, they happened because
proponents (Frederik, I think?) were prepared to put the hours in to
make them work.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] AAAA openstreetmap still doesn't use ipv6

[Jonathan Bennett]

Thomas Schäfer wrote:
> Lets solving the Chicken-and-egg problem in ipv6 by simply doing it.
OK -- when are you available to set it up?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] AAAA openstreetmap still doesn't use ipv6

[Jonathan Bennett]

Stefan de Konink wrote:

> Set up a SixXS tunnel and have fun :)

Great idea! How long do you think it will take you?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] AAAA openstreetmap still doesn't use ipv6

[Jonathan Bennett]

Thomas Schäfer wrote:
> No, the answer was not satisfying. 

What part of "it's not under our control" didn't you understand?

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] AAAA openstreetmap still doesn't use ipv6

[Jonathan Bennett]

Thomas Schäfer wrote:
 > Therefore my appeal: Ask your next admin/provider for ipv6 , make a
plan and
> make the network working, add the  to dns an be happy. Solve the "little" 
> problems .

Asked and answered.

http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2007-October/018603.html

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] (no subject)

[Jonathan Bennett]

Ed Loach wrote:
>> "Important to who?"
> 
> A good question. Perhaps "prominence" rather than important?

Using synonyms for "Importance" doesn't answer the basic question. 
Anything not based on observable fact is inherently subjective. There 
are many ways to arrive at your own score for "importance" based on land 
area, population, governmental/administrative status or any other easily 
verifiable properties. It shouldn't be down to one particular person's 
idea of what's important. That way lies edit wars.

Also, prominence has a particular meaning to physical geographers, at 
least: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topographical_prominence

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

Re: [OSM-talk] How do we specify relative importance of features across all types of features?

[Jonathan Bennett]

Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:

> Any comments?
> 

"Important to who?"


-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - architect=*

[Jonathan Bennett]

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

> if you didn't destroy them... ;-)

Ah, they were clients of AT Harris Urban Remodelling Services?

Unfortunate as that is, it just reinforces my second point: Don't try to
solve a problem that you haven't actually encountered yet.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - architect=*

[Jonathan Bennett]

...and how many buildings designed by either have you tagged so far?

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - architect=*

[Jonathan Bennett]

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> Albert Speer.
> Father and son, quite notorious case by the way...
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Speer
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Speer,_Jr.
> 
> the grand father http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Friedrich_Speer
> also was an architect, but there is no wikipedia-article about him ;-)

Thank you for proving my point -- that strings are sufficient to
disambiguate the two. The generational qualifier works just as well as a
birth year for your example.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] tagging "unofficial" cycle routes

[Jonathan Bennett]

Jacek Konieczny wrote:
> If the clubs have documented and are maintaining the routes, then they
> are official enough. Just use the "operator" tag to mark which club is
> responsible for which route. "network" tag could be also used for that,
> but it is currently used rather for describing network scope
> (internationl/national/regional/local).

That doesn't necessarily work -- if the routes aren't waymarked on the
ground, the only source of the route is the organisations' own
publications, to which they have automatic copyright. Unless we have
their permission in writing to reproduce the route under the terms of
CC-BY-SA the routes can't be added to OSM.

Sticking purely to waymarked routes avoids this problem. I agree it
would be nice for groups like these to be able to share their
information in OSM format, but the OSM DB may not be the place to do it.
We need to preserve the ability to freely redistribute it.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - architect=*

[Jonathan Bennett]

Tobias Knerr wrote:

> "Relations are not Categories" uses the argument that you can query for
> all objects that carry a tag. This isn't enough, however, if the
> combined information from tags and coordinates doesn't qualify as an
> unique identifier. The situation for architects, imo, resembles the
> route relations (also in that there can be more than one architect),
> thus there is a case for relations.

I disagree. The reason we use relations for routes is that each section
of the route are part of the same "thing" -- a signed route that uses
many different sections of highway. While each individual section may
have some other identity, the route exists as a separate abstract
entity. A route is also a geographic entity.

Buildings designed by the same architect don't form part of some greater
whole -- it's just metadata about the buildings themselves, and the
relationship between them certainly isn't geographical. That's why using
a relation to group them would simply be classification.

There are lots of different ways you could format an architect tag to
ensure unambiguous values:

 ","  

Would be a start, and should you find two architects with exactly the
same name (can you name any?) you could add their year of birth:

 ","   "("  ")"


The important thing -- something I believe to be part of the OSM way of
doing things -- is to deal with actual cases, rather than theoretical
ones. The reason we have "Any Tags You Like" is because OSM is different
to other GIS systems. We don't have official, authoritative, preordained
ontologies and taxonomies. We make them up as we go along, based on what
we encounter in the real world. We then refine the tags as we get a
better idea of what works and what doesn't.

Trying to fix a problem you haven't encountered yet, particularly by
overusing a technical feature like relations, is overkill and probably
counter-productive. Keep it simple, and we'll get a better map far quicker.




-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Reverting Changes....

[Jonathan Bennett]

Shaun McDonald wrote:
 > I've taken another look at the wording. I think that the wording could
> be changed from "Start mapping with OpenStreetMap" to "Start LIVE  
> editing the OpenStreetMap data". 

I don't think that will be enough -- as David pointed out, the idea that
an application has a "Save" button of some kind is now ingrained into
many people's understanding of UIs.
-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Live Data - all new Data in OSM

[Jonathan Bennett]

andrzej zaborowski wrote:
 > Cool visualisation tools don't have to comply with a) or b), they just
> need to be cool :)

So cool you're prepared to pay for the infrastructure to support it?


-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Live Data - all new Data in OSM

[Jonathan Bennett]

Ian Dees wrote:
> Woah! Since when can OSM tell me what sort of applications I can and
> can't write with the open source data that OSM is providing**?

You're not being told what to do with the data, but it's being suggested
to you that you can't have it in a particular, resource-intensive format
unless you can justify why you need it over and above an existing, less
resource hungry format, for an application that does something other
than go "Ooooh, shiny!"

> OSM isn't about the geodata, it's about the data. That includes the fact
> that it is in the geographic domain, but it also means that we can
> manipulate it or store it however we want.

You can. On your own infrastructure.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Live Data - all new Data in OSM

[Jonathan Bennett]

andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> You might be missing out on a cool visualisation tool though (maybe
> what Bernhard is trying doing is similar), but that's the only use
> case I can think of right now.

How does that help anyone a) use the data, or b) improve the data? See
ITO's OSM Mapper if you want a *useful* visualisation tool. No live
stream needed there.

> What is a little worrying is that, as far as I see, there's no simple
> way to get a copy of the osm data (as in, everything that's in the
> database), even a week old -- because the planet file is only a
> "projection" of the data on a plane.  

I have no idea what a "projection of the data on a plane" is, unless
you're talking about an in-flight OSM movie. The planet file is
everything that's in the database, barring history info. Nothing more,
nothing less.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Live Data - all new Data in OSM

[Jonathan Bennett]

Frederik Ramm wrote:
> But saying: "We don't intend to support this because we cannot think of 
> an application that absolutely requires it", is quite un-OSM, is it not?

Qualify "application" as "application which actually uses the geodata",
and it's not so far off the mark. We don't need a million tools that
just tell us where people are mapping.
-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Live Data - all new Data in OSM

[Jonathan Bennett]

Ian Dees wrote:
>> I don't think anybody has ever given a use case which requires such
>>a stream and can't work with the diffs.
> 
> 
> I agree, but the point is that minutely-diffs are a minute old. At some
> point in the future someone will want to see the data in real time as a
> stream. The only reason I can currently think of is because they don't
> want to have to deal with downloading the minutely diffs and would
> rather read a stream of XML messages, applying each one to their
> database somehow as they came in.

The updates to the database aren't records of real-time, real-world
events; They're just mappers updating parts of the map. Anything which
analyses that, rather than the data itself as a whole is just
navel-gazing. It tells you something about the project, but not the
world it's mapping.

You're not missing out on anything by having minute-old data. We're not
recording how the world is changing, we're just making our map more
accurate.

As for wanting updates in a different format: Patches Welcome.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Languages

[Jonathan Bennett]

Peter Childs wrote:
> In that case what we may need is a phonetic name tag. (Oh dear)
>   
Like the one on:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/18167379

then?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Wikipedia POI import?

[Jonathan Bennett]

Jacek Konieczny wrote:
> You don't need multiple values. Other languages are linked in Wikipedia,
> no need to duplicate this in OSM.
> 
> If a place is described in 20 national Wikipedias do we really want 20
> wikipedia=XX: tags in OSM when only single wikipedia=XX:
> links to all the pages?

If you want to be able to render maps for a specific language or
territory, yes. Having the WP shortcut version means that if I wanted to
link to the English version of a WP page when we have only the Polish
version, I have to retrieve the Polish page from WP and parse it to find
the link to the English version. This means I can't do this rendering
offline, and would slow the job down somewhat.

> And more. You need no special handling for wikipedia=XX: links. 

Except you do -- special handling from an OSM point of view. The
convention of : =  is already well-established.

-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Wikipedia POI import?

[Jonathan Bennett]

andrzej zaborowski wrote:

> I think wikipedia=XX:NAME was choosen because the other way you can

Chosen? Where? As far as I can see the only discussion is at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/External_links#Wikipedia
and that says wikipedia:XX=

Besides, as present you can't have multiple values for a single tag in
OSM, so wikipedia=XX: wouldn't work.
-- 
Jonathan (Jonobennett)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Wikipedia POI import?

[Jonathan Bennett]

Russ Nelson wrote:
> Any reason not to go through Wikipedia and import everything with a  
> coordinate as a POI, with a url=http://wikipedia.org/NAME link, and  
> name=NAME where NAME is the name of the Wikipedia entry?  If I do this  
> under a special username, then there is no problem backing out the  
> import if somebody has a better idea later.
>   
Plenty of reason. To give just one example I came up with after no 
thought at all:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watts_Gallery is already in OSM as 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/30361827 so you'd be 
duplicating a POI -- OSM's location for this point is also more accurate 
than WP's (although I may now edit the WP coords).

I could probably come up with a few dozen more examples just in my local 
mapping area, where the same problems would occur. Scale this up to a 
worldwide level and you'd just be creating thousands and thousands of 
duplicate points.

Jono

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