Re: [OSM-talk] undeleting ways?
MP wrote:
> I tried searching on CPAN for AMF classes, but I have
> found only server-side libraries for perl - I found code
> to create an AMF serice, but no code to call it. Do you
> know of any Perl package to call the AMF code?
>From a brief glance you should be able to use Data::AMF, but the
documentation is verging on non-existent, so I spent 15 minutes staring at
it and decided it was far too much like hard work.
Instead, try this:
http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/utils/amf
It's in Ruby - though I'm more a Perl hacker than a Ruby one, I had the Ruby
AMF code written for Potlatch, so figured it would be easier to reuse this.
You'll need to install the httpclient and stringio libraries ('gem install
httpclient' etc.). Lots of the amf encoding/decoding logic is in the script
rather than the library, which is clearly a bad thing - I just felt like
quickly hacking up something that worked.
Edit amf_finddeleted.rb so the bbox is what you want, then: ruby
amf_finddeleted.rb
It'll spit out the results in Potlatch's array format, which is documented
in amf_finddeleted.rb (lines 65-70). You could either process it further in
Ruby, or copy-and-paste to do something in Perl, or use YAML to interchange
between the two - whatever.
> BTW is there any plan to expose this part of API as a traditional
> XML interface too in the future?
Well, it's in the main Rails codebase intentionally so someone could do
that, but I'm not comfortable enough with XML to do it myself. If it were to
happen, probably better to wait until after API 0.6 anyway, because I'm
slightly rewriting it as part of that.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/undeleting-ways--tp21808073p21902122.html
Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] undeleting ways?
[Nabble appears to be going wappy, sorry for the previous half-sent
message]
MP wrote:
> I tried searching on CPAN for AMF classes, but I have
> found only server-side libraries for perl - I found code
> to create an AMF serice, but no code to call it. Do you
> know of any Perl package to call the AMF code?
From a brief glance you should be able to use Data::AMF, but the
documentation is verging on non-existent: I spent 15 minutes staring
at it and decided it was far too much like hard work.
Instead, try this:
http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/utils/amf
It's in Ruby - though I'm more a Perl hacker than a Ruby one, I had
the Ruby AMF code written for Potlatch, so figured it would be easier
to reuse this. You'll need to install the httpclient and stringio
libraries ('gem install httpclient' etc.). Lots of the amf encoding/
decoding logic is in the script rather than the library, which is
clearly a bad thing - I just felt like quickly hacking up something
that worked.
Edit amf_finddeleted.rb so the bbox is what you want, then just:
ruby amf_finddeleted.rb
It'll fetch the deleted ways in Potlatch's array format, which is
documented in amf_finddeleted.rb (lines 65-70). You could either
process it further in Ruby, or copy-and-paste to do something in
Perl, or use YAML to interchange between the two - whatever.
> BTW is there any plan to expose this part of API as a traditional
> XML interface too in the future?
Well, it's in the main Rails codebase intentionally so someone could
do that, but I'm not comfortable enough with XML to do it myself. If
it were to happen, probably better to wait until after API 0.6
anyway, because I'm slightly rewriting it as part of that.
cheers
Richard
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] undeleting ways?
MP wrote: > I tried it multiple times, with same result. The ordinary API > seems to work, so I don't think it is just some server outage. > Any clue where the problem may be? Works fine for me, but just returns an empty list - i.e. there aren't any deleted ways in that area. (The "get deleted ways" call is on the slow side anyway.) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/undeleting-ways--tp21808073p21904037.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM on The Reg
Gert Gremmen wrote: > The current concept is good for geeks , like you and me, > and people that are really interested. The geeks are on-board > (> 1). Now it's time to create a user interface for the rest > of the world. Yes, I agree absolutely (wow, Gert and I agree on something :) ). http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/dev/2008-July/010994.html http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2008-November/031778.html >Kenneth: > > does *any* mapping app have an option like 'add road'? > Do you know any mapping application accessible for > everyone having internet ??? Yes on both counts: Google MapMaker. I personally don't want to write the editing interface that the rest of the world uses, and it's slightly insane that somehow I've ended up doing so (or, at least, what we have so far) - I mean, I'm not even a programmer, I'm a magazine editor with not a whole lot of free time. If future-Potlatch were to become _an_ editor available on the main site rather than _the_ editor, I'd be very happy. Of course, CloudMade might already be working on this - can anyone from CM confirm/otherwise? Would help the rest of us in knowing what to do next. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/OSM-on-The-Reg-tp21951170p21953743.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM on The Reg
Shaun McDonald wrote: > I have created: > http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/1584 for RichardF. :) Thanks. Of course, the other thing we could do is rescue the wiki from trainwreck territory. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/OSM-on-The-Reg-tp21951170p21953758.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM on The Reg
Kenneth Gonsalves wrote: > And there is a limit to the extent that we can dumb down the > interface without compromising usefulness. How would 'add a > road' work? I cannot even begin to dream of how to code such > a thing. Have a look at Google MapMaker. We don't have to dumb down; we can offer both and give people the choice. Bear in mind that Potlatch was never originally meant to be an editor specially for beginners; it was meant to be something for _quick_ editing. The reasons I first wrote it were that (a) JOSM wouldn't work on my machine (OS X 10.3, so no Java 1.5), and (b) when I did use ye anciente JOSM, I thought "what the hell is this create node/create segment/create way shit? I want something that works like Illustrator". So I don't want to dumb Potlatch down, either. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/OSM-on-The-Reg-tp21951170p21953996.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Oxford/Cotswolds mailing list
Oxford, Oxfordshire and the Cotswolds have as many mappers as anywhere in Britain, and such things as Mapnik, Potlatch and npemap.org.uk hail from our county - but we didn't have a mailing list. Now Mike Collinson has kindly set one up. The address is talk-gb-oxoncotswo...@openstreetmap.org and you can subscribe at http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-oxoncotswolds Topics of discussion will include, but are not limited to, "Shall we go to the pub?". cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Openstreetbugs source code
Tom Hughes wrote: > I'm all for having the geo-bugs in the main database, in fact > I would much prefer that Yep, me too, as I'd like to add support in Potlatch. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Openstreetbugs-source-code-tp22090086p22117319.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Re nder strangeness
Robert Vollmert wrote: > Probably, a minor edit in Potlatch (say changing a tag) will restore it. Indeed. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-January/033065.html explains what this is (and http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/dev/2009-January/013540.html describes a recent change that will mean it doesn't happen). cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Render-strangeness-tp22133293p22134185.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] GPX trace vandalism?
Tom Hughes wrote: > That said, my understanding is that Potlatch puts a break in the > track whenever there is a jump in the timestamp. Richard can > probably explain in more detail what it does. (Oooh, look at all that lovely untraced Yahoo imagery...) Yep. Potlatch connects points, breaking whenever there's a time difference of 3 minutes or more. It works very nicely if you have a "natural" GPS track, but can foul up when someone, say, uploads a track with faked timestamps all the same. Please, people, if you're going to fake your timestamps, do something like make them ascend at 1s intervals from 1st June 1970 or something. Anyway, if you want to see just your own points in Potlatch, simply shift-click the GPS icon. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-GPX-trace-vandalism--tp22157120p22157981.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] GPX trace vandalism?
Tanveer Singh wrote: > Okay, I enabled just my track, and at one point, its done the same > even with my track. If you post the URL of your track, we can tell you what's wrong with it. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-GPX-trace-vandalism--tp22157120p22160485.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Open Database Licence (ODbL)
Jordan S Hatcher wrote: > I know everyone really wants to see the latest draft and have > an opportunity to discuss it. If you can just give me a bit of > time, I'll have something for you next week. Any news? Not meant as a nag, we're just all in an eager state of anticipation. :) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Open-Database-Licence-%28ODbL%29-tp21999456p22180688.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Locating objects in Google Maps/Earth
LeedsTracker wrote: > I do. To be clear, I'm not advocating using Gmaps/G-earth for OSM, I > was just puzzled by the (apparently unproblematic) use of it in > Wikimedia and wondered if a parallel use was justifiable. Put yourself in the shoes of Google's lawyers - and, more significantly, those of their data suppliers. The law is unclear here, and Google/BigDataCo aren't actually losing out by this use. (You could argue they're gaining - every site which significantly draws on Google Maps reinforces their position at the head of the ecosystem.) So there would be no gain for them in a long, drawn-out, involved legal battle against Wikimedia, especially when you consider the adverse PR. But if we did it, Google/BigDataCo would be at risk of losing out - their future customers could use our data instead, or our data repackaged by an added-value company. Even if BigDataCo had to spend months on the case, it would be worth them stopping us deriving. So they would sue. (Besides, the Wikipedia crowd have deeper pockets than us.) > Also, I can't see what Google would gain by stopping Wikimedia users > from geolocating their pics, while OSM is eventually going to compete > with gmaps. Exactly. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Locating-objects-in-Google-Maps-Earth-tp22162444p22186685.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] amenity=doctor or amenity=doctors ? [tagging]
Gustav Foseid wrote: > They do, however, make pretty much sense in many other parts of > the world. I see no good reason why the (very UK specific) right of > way tags should not be something like uk_row:foot=, > uk_row:briddleway= and so on. A UK Right of Way legal status, unsurprisingly, is much more nuanced than simply "horse yes, bicycle yes, foot yes, car no". So, in itself, it's a valuable piece of information to store in the database. Rather than just approximating this with 5,000 OSM tags, let's be precise. Use a general tag such as "highway=track" so the path is routable/renderable and so on, but augment with "designation=uk:restricted_byway", so those applications which want to parse the detailed information can do so. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/amenity%3Ddoctor-or-amenity%3Ddoctorstagging--tp22117960p22189786.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] amenity=doctor or amenity=doctors ? [tagging]
Guenther Meyer wrote: > it may be trivial, but when you have to do this for every possible > tag with some variations, it's a waste of time, that should not > be necessary. parsing the osm xml files is already a ressource > consuming task; every unnecessary work should be omitted. Maybe, but you shouldn't be working "live" with OSM XML anyway. You should be preprocessing it into the format which makes sense for your app, making performance less of an issue. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/amenity%3Ddoctor-or-amenity%3Ddoctorstagging--tp22117960p22189744.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] oneway yes or true
David Earl wrote: > I can't help feeling the effort that I've noticed some contributors > are putting into manually changing oneway=yes to oneway=true > would be better spent doing something more useful. Eek - people are really doing this? 'yes' is English (and, as you say, in the editor presets). 'true' (in this context) is computerprogrammerish. Even if there was a need to standardise, which there isn't, it should be on the former. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/oneway-yes-or-true-tp22242216p22242397.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] oneway yes or true
Nop wrote: > On the other hand, the way I understood it OSM was a global > initative and is happy for every additional mapper. If this is the > goal, we need structures that you can understand and properly use > without a degree in computer science. A good general principle: we should always optimise for ease of mapping. If we produce a wonderful world map but developers have to jump through a few hoops to use it, a) we have a wonderful world map, therefore b) people will - and are doing - produce the tools that jump through the hoops. If we make it unnecessarily complicated to add data (and that includes using jargon words like "true" when "yes" is obvious) then we don't get the mappers, so we don't get the wonderful world map. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/oneway-yes-or-true-tp22242216p22247133.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
Ben Laenen wrote: > There's exactly one way to be sure this won't happen: get > approval of *all* the people who've been editing OSM. And with > a number of around 100.000 mappers I'm very skeptical that > you'll be able to manage that. Not true (IMO at least). We have 100,000 _registered_users_, not mappers. Only a fraction of them have contributed to the map. Of them, again, only a fraction have made substantial changes deserving of copyright* protection. If someone has put one church on the map, or removed an 'n' from 'Avennue', or even just done the uncreative monkey-work of tracing over Yahoo imagery, _most_ jurisdictions will not grant them any copyright over the work. Even in the UK, which follows the "sweat of the brow" principle (i.e. copyright can be gained through effort even without creativity), such effort needs to be significant. Claiming copyright over negligible works is what the RIAA, and those bunch of tards who are trying to stop the Kindle's text-to-speech feature, do. They are rightly vilified for it by people like us. We should be on the side of the angels, and not try and claim rights where such rights shouldn't and don't exist. This should be on legal-talk, but I don't know how to get Nabble to cross-post. Sorry. cheers Richard * read "copyright or similar rights" throughout :) -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22247370.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] oneway yes or true
marcus.wolschon wrote: > Actually it's the other way around. > We have tens of thousands of mappers > but are lacking developers on every corner. Nah. We don't have enough developers on the OSM core site, but that's immaterial in this context. The ecosystem, however, is thriving. There isn't a day when I don't see some new program released that uses OSM data. Yet we still don't have _enough_ mappers. I'm writing this from an only partly-mapped town. Vast swathes of Britain are still Here Be Dragons and we're the second most mapped country (by volunteers) in OSM. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/oneway-yes-or-true-tp22242216p22247514.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] oneway yes or true
Nic Roets wrote: >On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: >> A good general principle: we should always optimise for ease of mapping. > > Yes Richard, but some things are best done in the editors. It's > much easier for editors to highlight obvious mistakes, than it is > for every single tool out there to support every possible spelling. Oh, sure, I wouldn't argue with that. Writing better editors is part of "optimising for ease of mapping". But Potlatch autocompletes oneway only to yes/no, and from this thread it seems that JOSM is similar, so in this instance the editors are getting it right (hey, Potlatch got something right, break out the champagne). Slightly controversial suggestion: the quickest way to solve this would be to take "or [oneway]='true'" out of the Mapnik style file. ;) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/oneway-yes-or-true-tp22242216p22247591.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
Chris Hill wrote: > Emoticon aside, I think the licence is far too important to just > discuss among a cosy few. When I tried to join legal (out of > interest) I could not. It's not a closed list - it's open to anyone and you can, of course, read on the web or via Nabble. If you try to join again and it doesn't work, let me know (I'm nominally the maintainer of the list). > So, is there a succinct summary of the proposals,plans and options? There's a load of stuff on the wiki, but http://www.opengeodata.org/?p=262 from a year ago is probably the simplest introduction to _why_ a change is necessary (and the options are that we change or don't change). cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22247737.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
Donald Allwright wrote: >>Even in the UK, which follows the "sweat of the brow" principle (i.e. copyright >>can be gained through effort even without creativity), such effort needs to >>be significant. > > Sorry I meant to add at the end of my previous email - what I was saying > is that > tracing of satellite imagery can be significantly non-negligible, and > often needs > to be quite creative too. You try telling the difference between a lake > and the > shadow of a cloud on a very dark satellite image for example! Also, you > have to > make judgements as to where a lake or river ends and the land starts - > it's not > a simple case of where this is water, as that depends on the season, > amount > of rain and other factors. Sure. And the law is just as ill-defined! I think it's pretty unarguable that, in the UK, your tracing of the Peruvian lakes would merit copyright or similar protection (as "sweat-of-the-brow"). I think it's also unarguable that if I trace eight streets in a city, then in the US, that doesn't merit any copyright protection. I _suspect_ your Peruvian lakes wouldn't, either, but IANAL and so on. Between that is shades of grey. Extensive, skilled tracing, which can't simply be learned in an hour or two, assessed in sweat-of-the-brow jurisidictions: yes, there's probably some rights in there. Everything else is much less likely. Really do need to get away from thinking "copyright applies to everything we do". If that was the case then CC-BY-SA wouldn't be so unsuitable. I'm not knocking Yahoo tracing - it's not something I personally have any interest in, but then I've spent hours upon hours upon hours tracing from NPE which is roughly comparable. FWIW (as the owner of the NPE scans) I don't make any restriction on people tracing from my maps - not just because I believe in open data, but also because I don't think I'd have the legal right to even if I wanted. Broadly the same applies to why we're allowed to trace from Yahoo imagery. "Non-copyrightable" doesn't mean "worthless"! cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22251077.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
Ben Laenen wrote: > As long as there's no answer to it [...] > I wouldn't even accept [...] > I would refuse [...] > I want a very detailed answer [...] > that's really not my concern [...] Hey, this is a collaborative project. No-one is being paid for this. You could, you know, even _help_. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22251171.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
Ben Laenen wrote: > Great use of the ellipsis. You may have missed that I actually had > some things to say there. Yes, I'm sure you did. But what I was trying to say is that (IMO) the really important bit is this: > My hope basically when starting this thread was that these > fundamental issues would have been cleared up by now in > legal-talk or wherever since you now made the schedule available. Seriously - who is this "you"?!!! There is no "you" in OSM. There's a big "us". It's an open source, collaborative project. (I presume you can't mean the OSMF board in this context as I'm not on it and haven't been for going on a year, as I'm sure you checked on the OSMF website.) I expect the OSMF people think they _have_ sorted out the "fundamental issues". Similarly, Potlatch does everything that I would ever need and I never open another mapping program. But, amazingly, some people have a different view and use this strange thing called JOSM. Their definition of the "fundamentals" of mapping aren't the same. That's good. We have thousands of mappers, of course they'll think differently. And this is doubly true of licensing, which is always going to be the single most controversial area in this or any open-source project. So "I want a very detailed answer", in your previous message, is the wrong way to go about things. "In my view, this could be a problem. Could we do _this_ to solve it?" is exactly the right way. Come and join in, it's fun. :) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22260658.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-legal-talk] "A Creative Commons iCommons license"
CC-BY-SA says: You may distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly digitally perform a Derivative Work only under the terms of this License, a later version of this License with the same License Elements as this License, or a Creative Commons iCommons license that contains the same License Elements as this License (e.g. Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Japan). Could we ask CC to declare that the new fabulous ODbL, after due revision and comments by the community, can be considered a Creative Commons iCommons licence for the purposes of the above - in much the same way as FSF permitted migration from GFDL to CC-BY-SA? cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/%22A-Creative-Commons-iCommons-license%22-tp22260709p22260709.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
80n wrote: > What percentage of data would other people feel willing to see > sacrificed in order to move forward with the new license? I'd be interested to see this related to our userbase and editing stats. If (say) we lose 5%, how many months - at current rates of growth - does it take us to get back to the previous level? And an alternative way of looking at it is: might we lose people if we stick with CC-BY-SA? I suspect whatever decision is made, some people will leave; the question is how long it takes us to recover. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22262330.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] "A Creative Commons iCommons license"
80n wrote: > No. CC-BY-SA does not have a class of derivative works that are not > share alike. ODbL does. No it doesn't, that's the entire point of what I said. (Is this the five-minute argument or the full half-hour?) This is what 4.7 in ODbL is all about. The data is still "protected", if that's the kind of language you like, by share-alike at all times. > As I understand it Jordan is not our lawyer and cannot advise us on > whether or not we should use the FIL. So now I am utterly confused. Some people called Wilson Sonsini have advised us to use ODbL in a manner which is not, AIUI, the manner recommended by the licence co-author, who one would presume understands these things. And here I am debating with an OSMF board member who appears to be arguing _against_ the licence being recommended by OSMF. What on earth is going on? Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/%22A-Creative-Commons-iCommons-license%22-tp22260709p22262758.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Factual Information License and Produced Works?
80n wrote: > As far as I know there has been no attention paid to the FIL. It > was grabbed at the last minute from here > http://www.opencontentlawyer.com/open-data/open-data-commons-factual-info-licence/ > I don't know whether or not it has been reviewed by Clark Asay but I've > not seen any evidence to suggest that it has. > > In my opinion the FIL is much more important than the ODbL and yet it > has had very little attention. As you know (and without wanting to reopen Saturday's argument) I don't believe that users are intended to sign up to the FIL. I believe that they're intended to sign up to the ODbL, and that each user is viewed as contributing a database of content to the wider OSM database, the individual "atoms" of which are licensed as FIL to recognise that they are, essentially, facts. (One could argue that, coincidentally, the changeset model being adopted with 0.6 makes the conceptual leap to "database" very easy indeed.) Clearly from Saturday's postings you disagree. Nonetheless the very fact that there is some uncertainty about this merits a clarification, ideally both from Jordan and these Wilson Sonsini chaps. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Factual-Information-License-and-Produced-Works--tp22286008p22286647.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Concerns about ODbL
jean-christophe.haessig wrote: > Moreover, after having read the proposed license text and some comments > on wiki pages, I am under the impression that most of the participants in > the discussion are public domain advocates and that they may use this > license change to promote their views. Just to dispel any conspiracy theories: that certainly isn't true. Looking at the postings to legal-talk in March so far, I see contributions from three people I believe to be PD advocates (Frederik, Russ, me) and six from people I believe to be share-alike advocates (Simon, Peter, Rob, Oliver, Etienne, Ivan). I don't keep track of everyone's preferences - I'm not that creepy ;) - but you get the general idea. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Concerns-about-ODbL-tp22287609p22287833.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
wer-ist-roger wrote:
> First of all we will lose data. We won't get everyone to agree on the
> new license. No matter why. Maybe they don't approve the new
> license or we just can't reach them anymore.
There's three categories to consider relating to existing data.
1. People who have made edits and can't be contacted. This is the hard one.
(As said previously, I think _minor_ contributors - whose work isn't
"substantial" - could be moved across automatically if they don't respond,
though still given the right to withdraw at a later time, but this isn't a
universally-held opinion.)
2. People who don't like ODbL and withdraw their data. _Assuming_ we can get
the bugs sorted in ODbL, and we can't take that for granted yet, this
percentage should be very small. I'm reminded of a participant at the SOTM
licence debate (I won't identify him, he can speak up if he wants) who spoke
fervently against PD - which of course isn't what's being proposed here -
but later said "I think if you moved to PD, I wouldn't withdraw my data, I
just wouldn't contribute any more". If that's the case for PD then surely he
wouldn't withdraw from a different share-alike/attribution licence.
3. Large organisations. I believe Canada has been done with the expectation
of a move anyway; the US is PD so no bother; it's immaterial to Yahoo. So
the issue is largely reassuring the original owners of the European imports.
IMO ODbL should always be better for them because of its "contribute back
the source of improvements" clause, which of course CC-BY-SA doesn't have:
so, AND (for example) are guaranteed access to all improvements based upon
their work. But this is probably an evangelism job for the foundation.
So all in all, if done right (and that's a big if), the amount of data we
lose _should_ be very small assuming that ODbL is deemed acceptable and the
bugs are ironed out.
There's then a second question: how does a licence move change future
contributions?
Much harder to measure, but my gut feeling is that because the licences are
both attribution/share-alike, the move will be largely neutral, maybe even
positive.
I know a bunch of people who haven't contributed significantly to OSM
because of CC-BY-SA, generally either because of unclarity ("I don't have
any confidence this will stand up, so I'm not contributing to something that
could easily be exploited") or the old derived work issue. For myself, I'm
spending every evening this week working on a detailed map of the
Chesterfield Canal and the surrounding area: data which I'd put into OSM
under ODbL, but which at present I do entirely standalone under Adobe
Illustrator, because of CC-BY-SA. This is a regular occurrence (our magazine
runs a detailed set of canal maps every month) and it frustrates me every
time.
But, on the other side, there will be a handful who genuinely prefer
CC-BY-SA, and we'll lose them.
Re: automatically moving from CC-BY-SA to ODbL via a licence upgrade: for
those who don't follow legal-talk, I raised the idea there in the
expectation that the nice chap from Creative Commons would respond, and sure
enough, he did. However, his reply was that CC's position is that data
should be licensed as public domain, so they wouldn't be interested in such
a move.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22304926.html
Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Front page design and SEO
Tom Hughes wrote: > Screen size is of course irrelevant to browser window size, > unless you're one of those weird web designers that seems to > think everybody runs their browser full screen all the time... IMX it's a platform thing. Windows people genuinely do run their web browser, and most things, full screen. Hence the aberration that is "MDI". Us Mac people, by contrast, usually have about 57 different non-full screen windows overlapping - that's why Apple came up with Expose to help us find them all. I dunno what Linux people do - whatever RMS has decreed is in the best interests of some weird notion of "freedom", I guess. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Front-page-design-and-SEO-tp22302099p22305671.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Front page design and SEO
SteveC wrote: > I asked the CM designers for some quick hacks on what different > front pages could look like which you can see on the wiki page > below. Very pretty in a sort of let's-polish-the-CSS way, which isn't a bad thing at all. In a "let's ask for the stars" way, though, how about: - a little draggable "I've found a problem" icon - yeah yeah, OSB integration :) - something that says "Hey! We're a fun community!"; maybe two forthcoming events in tiny type? - some visualisation like Mikel's old activity tracker, showing where people have been editing recently - so you get a real sense of how alive the project is; would only want this at, say z1-10 - as per Dave's e-mail: lots of visibility for "you get different views on the same data", maybe with a "More..." link to featured images, or a gallery, or something - downloadable Fake SteveC mascot for your desktop which installs some spyware and stuff like that cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Front-page-design-and-SEO-tp22302099p22305733.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Front page design and SEO
Tom Hughes wrote: > Richard Fairhurst wrote: >> IMX it's a platform thing. Windows people genuinely do run their web >> browser, and most things, full screen. Hence the aberration that is "MDI". >> Us Mac people, by contrast, usually have about 57 different non-full screen >> windows overlapping - that's why Apple came up with Expose to help us find >> them all. I dunno what Linux people do - whatever RMS has decreed is in the >> best interests of some weird notion of "freedom", I guess. > very fast> > > That's a bit pot calling the kettle black though - back when I was > using Macs, which admittedly was quite a long time ago Goodness me, it must have been - Macs have been like this since at least System 7 in 1991ish... Seriously, though, it does depend on the app. Right now I've got open TextEdit, Safari, TextMate, Cyberduck, Colloquy, Mail, Preview, and Terminal: the only ones I can imagine making any sense full-screen are possibly Mail and Terminal, and I don't think I've ever used either as such. OS X, and System 7/8/9 before it, makes much heavier use of drag-and-drop between apps than Windows has ever done, and users are expected to think that way. (The classic Finder didn't have copy and paste for files, for example; it was assumed you'd drag from one window to another. It's only in OS X as a "borrowing" of the Windows paradigm.) But Word and Excel borrow so much from Windows that they can make more sense full-screen, and the Adobe stuff is as ever a law unto itself - so many bloody floating palettes, one screen sometimes doesn't feel enough. (http://adobegripes.tumblr.com/ is brilliantly observed and puts all our parody blogs to shame.) And even Apple have been getting a bit too full-screen for my liking with some of the iLife apps. Where was I? cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
Ulf Lamping wrote: > Personally I am feeling excluded from what's going on behind > the scenes and I think this is not the way for a project that > has "open" in his name ... If it helps, there _isn't_ anything going on behind the scenes... well, at least not that I know of. Post in German, or French, or whatever, on here if you like - we all have Google Translate, someone will step up to translate manually, and it's a million times better than not posting. Put stuff on the wiki. Ask questions. Vent. Rant. Anything from a misplaced capital in ODbL to a serious doubt about the entire licensing philosophy. Just say it. Far, far better that you speak up and post "I'm worried about this because...", even in Schwabisch dialect if you like, than you sit there in silence thinking "there's this conspiracy to make OSM commercial and I feel left out". Because There Is No Cabal. Look around you - who's organised enough to come up with a conspiracy? If there was a conspiracy they'd be doing it better. But OSM is at heart a disorganised rabble - that's why the communication on the licence issue has been shit, yes, but that's also why we've mapped large portions of the world, because you couldn't organise it better than that. I've said it a million times before but: there is no "you" in this project, there is only "us". Of course, this might be why Steve thinks I'm a filthy communist. If I could cross-post this to talk-de, talk-fr, talk-it and the rest, I would do. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22306472.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Front page design and SEO
Andy Allan wrote: > Quite. Can someone please come up with names for the two "main" > styles that aren't just the technology that creates them? Mapnik -> Standard (or maybe 'Classic') Osmarender -> Community cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Front-page-design-and-SEO-tp22302099p22306623.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ODbL, Derivative Databases & Produced Works
Dave Stubbs wrote: > Am I missing something obvious, or am I just being sneaky in some > way? And is there a way it can be made more obvious in the license > if it's actually intended to be that way? I think this is a serious error in the ODbL draft 0.9. (I believe Frederik is of the same opinion.) It wasn't the case in the previous draft of ODbL. I can only assume it was a drafting error in the revision. We raised it directly on the ODC list at http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/odc-discuss/2009-March/date.html cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/ODbL%2C-Derivative-Databases---Produced-Works-tp22307257p22307343.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Front page design and SEO - layer names
Tom Chance wrote: > It's not clear that it's the distributed rendering of the data that makes > one more "community" than the other. That's not quite what I was thinking of - it was more the cartographic style than the mechanics behind it. The Osmarender layer tends to prioritise more POIs, more differentiation among little details of OSM tagging, than the Mapnik one which is a very focused "classic cartographical" approach - more so than most webmaps, indeed, which is one of the reasons I like it so much. But certainly the Osmarender layer is a fuller depiction of the breadth of our community. So maybe "Classic style" "Community style" would be clearer than a bald Classic/Community. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Front-page-design-and-SEO-tp22302099p22308134.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
OJ W wrote: > This could potentially alienate anyone who wonders why they are > doing surveying for free so that cartographers can sell all-rights- > reserved map images based on their data. Yeah, just like I lie in bed at night fretting that people can sell all-rights-reserved, closed-source routing services based on my data. Come on. cheers Richard (On a point of order, I don't believe ODbL _does_ allow all-rights-reserved anyway; that's what the reverse-engineering clause is about.) -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22308562.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
OJ W wrote: > Could you expand that answer? Removing cartography from the scope > of OSM's license would seem to deserve a better explanation than a > dismissal like that. Sure. A printed map; an online routing service (like, say, YOURS, OpenRoutingService, or CloudMade routing); and a dedicated satnav device all perform the same function: they communicate a subset of map data to the user in an understandable, friendly way. Under CC-BY-SA, as I'm sure you know, a printed map can only be licensed as copyleft. The cartographer therefore no longer has exclusive rights to their "added value" (colours, selection of data to include, and so on), which are clearly apparent from the map. These can be trivially copied. Under CC-BY-SA, a routing service does not have to be licensed as copyleft.[1] The author of the routing service does not have to disclose their "added value" (weightings for different types of road, any transformations applied to the data, etc.). These cannot be trivially copied: to do so would require reverse-engineering a near-infinite set of requests and you'd probably be banned for DoSing before that. ;) It's an artefact of the fact we're currently using a "creative works" licence - the copyleft therefore applies to creative works. ODbL is a database licence, therefore the copyleft applies to data. ODbL is not interested either in art or in computer source code. The really good thing is that OSM therefore gets [2] the "added value", the data, in computer-readable form from both - something CC-BY-SA doesn't offer. You could, of course, argue the opposite of ODbL - that the routing service author should have to publish their added value in full, just as the cartographer does - and indeed Lutz.horn on the wiki has said exactly that. I think that would be a very honest position to take, and if you're the kind of guy who believes everything should be Free in the RMS sense, I respect your opinion though it's obviously not one I share. But I don't see how arguing for full disclosure by cartographers, but not by routing system authors, is tenable. I think Rob Myers summed it up well on legal-talk: "It's a pragmatic step to ensure that what users of free maps actually need (free maps generated using quality geodata) isn't denied by ensuring that the subject of copyleft in the wild is something else (low-resolution maps rendered from that data)." cheers Richard [1] and indeed several aren't, e.g. CloudMade routing, OpenRouteService [2] subject to the "bug" Frederik and I raised on odc-discuss yesterday, and Dave raised on legal-talk today -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22310036.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
Pieren wrote: > It's very confusing now about who, how and what is deleted with > the license change. I would appreciate if someone could answer > the following questions: It's not been decided. What do you think should happen? Everything is up for debate. ODbL itself is up for debate. As Jordan (co-author) said on odc-discuss earlier re: a point we raised: "It (like the rest of the ODbL) isn't set in stone and so totally open for discussion." Really, there's no evil force presenting a fait accompli here. There is no "you" or "them", only "us". cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22310154.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
Ed Avis wrote: > What you wrote above is a very good argument for it. > > Rendering the data into a printed map is not a great deal of effort. > Anyone can do it and many already do so. There are not many > people who would be put off from rendering maps by being unable to > make the result proprietary. The copyleft requirement is pretty trivial > and doesn't create disincentives to rendering a map, because > rendering a map is so easy. I think you're approaching that from a very programmatic perspective, and this confirms it: > (In any case, even though you can freely copy a PNG file of a map > or photocopy a page, and even though you can see for yourself what > colour scheme was used, you don't have the program code that was > used to render the ways and the text, which is the hard part. No, no, no, no, no, no. It might be easy to do an automated rendering. That's not what I'm talking about. What concerns me is hand-drawn cartography. The "program code" for that, in my case, is something like Inkscape or Adobe Illustrator, which anyone can have - but that's incidental. I spend days on getting the cartography right for the maps we produce in the magazine every month. It isn't "rendering". It's entirely done by hand. Getting the label placement right, choosing the colour set, working on the pull-outs, generalising features so that they don't collide but the user doesn't notice the distortion: that _is_ a great deal of effort. I try to aspire to OS Landranger quality of cartography, not MapQuest! http://www.systemeD.net/osm/caldon_2.jpg http://www.systemeD.net/osm/caldon_3.jpg http://www.systemeD.net/osm/caldon_4.jpg (There's no OSM data in there - and conversely, OSM doesn't have all that data either; and even if the maps were CC-BY-SA, which they weren't, the generalisation is such that CC-BY-SA doesn't give much useful return to the project.) Believe me, I first wrote a passable routing program with reasonably decent weighting at the age of 19 or so (heh, I found a review - http://www.thecompclub.org.uk/newsletters/12.pdf), and it was a whole host more trivial than the n years of experience that have, I hope, given me the skills to design attractive maps. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22311108.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
OJ W wrote: > If the cartographers then devise a new license that says "my > contributions are more important than yours, I should get exclusive > rights over my additions to the map with a paintbrush while you > shouldn't get exclusive rights over your additions to the map with a > GPS" then it reduces the incentive for people to survey, since the > work they do can be published in a way that they can't use or copy. So to return to the point you have completely ignored, can you tell me why you're happy that the (current) licence doesn't require routing program source code to be released, please? Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
OJ W wrote: > [routing source code] > I saw that as a bit of a loophole in the license which is unfortunate > but rather difficult to close Ok, that's consistent. Extreme, perhaps, but consistent. But: > [...] > we can just declare that it should meet sharelike standards to > ensure that OSM players are not trying to take advantage of > each other. is inordinately offensive. As far as I know there are only two "OSM players" who are commercial cartographers in some way (though for neither of us is it our main job): me and Steve Chilton. To allege that we are aiming to take advantage of other contributors is, yes, offensive, but also insane beyond belief. You might not like Potlatch, you might not trace from NPE or ever use any traced data, you might never use the Mapnik layer. But there is no denying that all three of them are very major contributions to OSM without any - _any_ - payback. Meanwhile, the guys releasing the routing software are, er, the ones who've got €2.4m of venture capital. I don't begrudge them that - quite the contrary. I don't think anyone does. But you might want to open your eyes. Sheesh. Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22320263.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan
MP wrote: > We have now tool to convert OSM data to garmin format (Mkgmap). > The tool is opensource. Garmin can do routing (at least I assume it can, > I don't posses any garmin devices or software myself) and is closed > source. Would the new license make mkgmap unusable/illegal with > odbl'd data? No. Not at all. I don't know where this idea is coming from. ODbL does _not_ insist that the data can only be accessed by open-source programs or in open formats. A couple of people appear to have suggested that _their_ ideal licence would require this; but given that a) they haven't actually proposed such a licence, b) nor have they argued for the easy and obvious step of browser-sniffing to prevent IE/Safari/Opera users from using osm.org (well, exactly), I suggest said suggestions are politely ignored until they do. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22327489.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan - what data would need deleting
Dave Stubbs wrote: > But don't kid yourselves it's a simple A or B choice. Absolutely. Steve actually answers this in his (very good IMO) "Licence to kill" post. You can theoretically work out a complicated Boolean system of "is this derived from an ODbL refusenik's work?". You can read every bit of discussion about what "substantial" might mean in different jurisdictions, and write some clever fuzzy-matching software to reflect that. I think that's what people are talking about here. But as Steve points out, that's a programmer's answer, all very black-and-white. It doesn't actually work like that. What really makes the difference, in my very limited understanding (but hey, I'm a journalist not a programmer, limited understanding is a speciality :) ), is intent. Intent, and acting in good faith at all times. If we can demonstrate that we've taken reasonable precautions; that we have removed people's data on request (which, of course, we can do at any time); And for those who say "well, let's stick with the clean dataset we have now": We don't actually have a clean dataset. Nowhere near. We have material from Google Maps in there. We have material from the Ordnance Survey. We may even have entire countries which have been taken from a source not compatible with our current licence - see the discussion about some of the ex-USSR states. The reason we haven't been sued is exactly the same. Intent and good faith. Things like community pressure, the stuff in the FAQ, and the warning you get when you start Potlatch. The efforts we go to to gather our own data. That is real, hard proof. And that won't change - we should make real efforts, and we will, but clinical boolean precision is a distraction. (Ed asked how we'd "convince a court of law" - that's how. At the very least, if Paul The Disaffected Mapper doesn't want to go to ODbL, some of his stuff somehow remains in, and he says "ha, I'm going to sue", that _very_ instant a crowd of OSMers would go and survey the place in question to replace his data. You know what we're like. We like a challenge. :) ) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22329361.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan - minimum-legalese option
Ed Avis wrote: > I could start tracing in things from Ordnance Survey maps > right away. Note that these maps are 'Crown Copyright', not > 'Crown Database Right' http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22crown+copyright+and+database+right%22 :) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22333511.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] License plan - minimum-legalese option
Peter Miller wrote: > The clear advice (verbal so far) from our lawyer is that in the > UK/EU map data is covered by copyright (as well as DB rights). I will quote the following from an Ordnance Survey agreement as much for people's amusement as for edification. "Intellectual Property Rights means copyright, patent, trade mark, design right, topography right, database right, trade secrets, know-how, rights of confidence, broadcast rights and all other similar rights anywhere in the world whether or not registered and including applications for registration of any of them" I have not made any of that up. Though I think Fake Ed Parsons put it more succinctly: "Not only do we own all your data, we also own your trademarks, your logo and your fucking pet cat. Thanks." As ever with these things, either you join in on the arms race (which is why ODbL has three prongs: copyright, database right, contract), or you put down your arms and hope enough people will respect it (PD). cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/License-plan-tp22245532p22334676.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM license change: A license to kill? -> How to make a nightmare come true!
Pierre-André Jacquod wrote: > Was a surprised by the announcement. Read the license and mails. > Would probably have said yes. > > But I do not like the way this went on. The fact that those who want > to change it just say "you do not want to help". That's my free time, > that's your's. Seriously, don't react to the style, react to the substance. I know it's not always easy but we're none of us great at communication, we're none of us actually paid to think that carefully about what we write, so it's all too easy to get wound up in a http://xkcd.com/386/ kind of way. At which point Steve does something between amused and sarcastic, Frederik does deadpan, I do flying off the handle, Etienne does inscrutable, someone on talk-de will do BAN POTLATCH!!1!1?lol, etc. etc. < lots of hints for Fake blogs there But none of that matters, really. If we're to get things done then occasionally biting your lip is helpful. The number of mails I write to this list and then close before sending... cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/OSM-license-change%3A-A-license-to-kill---%3E-How-to-make-a-nightmare-come-true%21-tp22325041p22355771.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] immutable=yes Fwd: DEC Lands
Russ Nelson wrote: > How do people feel about me importing this data (with all of > their metadata), adding an immutable=yes tag, with the intent > of tracking their dataset, and deleting --outright-- any changes > made by OSM editors. If it can't be edited, there's no point sending it to the editor. It would only mean more bandwidth => slower editing. Therefore I would alter amf_controller so that anything with immutable=yes wasn't sent to Potlatch. (At which point most of Germany would tag their towns immutable=yes... but I digress. :) ) So what's the point of having it there? I presume so that people can get it via the OSM API and via planet dumps (you've said as much in another post: "consistent metadata and a consistent single-source API"). To me, this is another argument for good libraries in popular scripting languages, not for putting it in OSM. If I could do a call from Perl or ActionScript or Ruby whatever to say "get all geodata within this bbox from openstreetmap.org, and also freesurveyorsstuff.org, and return it in one object", that would fulfil the need - without bending OSM to do something it was never intended to do. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/immutable%3Dyes-Fwd%3A-DEC-Lands-tp22419231p22419570.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: "We are the Wikipedia of maps"
Stephen Hope wrote: > And you can't always blame the journalists, either. Once they > send their copy in, the editors can have a go at it as well. If I may speak up for editors, a lot of journalists could avoid this unfortunate necessity by Actually Learning To Write. cheers Richard (Incidentally, Tim is absolutely right: good, clear 'Notes to Editors' at the end of releases are the way to go.) -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Cloudmade%3A-%22We-are-the-Wikipedia-of-maps%22-tp22445658p22452008.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: "We are the Wikipedia of maps"
Lars Aronsson wrote: > You have to explain how your rants help the project. > The impression I get is that you cause division rather than unity. On a point of order, getting all "meta" on a flamewar like this is the most surefire way to prolong it. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Cloudmade%3A-%22We-are-the-Wikipedia-of-maps%22-tp22445658p22453905.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] California bill to limit detail on online mapping tools
Pieren Pieren wrote: > May I suggest a new tag: > landuse=blur Superb. I've been wanting a tag like that for a while. I have now used it for the first time, in a location not that far from where I live: http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=51.90063&lon=-1.62397&zoom=15&way=32060656 (warning - very _cheesy_ joke that only some UK mappers will get) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/California-bill-to-limit-detail-on-online-mapping-tools-tp22492051p22496808.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] immutable=yes Fwd: DEC Lands
Russ Nelson wrote: > There's a reason why people create generalized interfaces and > standard metadata and a common currency and a shared language We do have all that, of course. It's called, for OSM-historical reasons, the Rails port. You can get yourself a server (I can probably think of people who will lend you one); install the Rails port on it; and upload this funky DEC stuff to it. People can then access it using exactly the same language/currency/interface that they're used to with OSM. Hell, if you think having to call two URLs is too much like hard work, you can augment your data with minutely-updated OSM dumps, and make everything available from that one place. Given that (AIUI) you don't think people should edit the DEC data, there won't be any syncing problems between your server and OSM. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/immutable%3Dyes-Fwd%3A-DEC-Lands-tp22419231p22549420.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Spam] Re: Alternatives to wikipedia?
Peter - are you really sure about geograph? AIUI only the photos are CC-BY-SA, the geolocation is OS-derived. Please check. Sorry for crap formatting, moving house so on mobile. Richard Peter Miller-7 wrote: > > > On 18 Mar 2009, at 17:11, Lester Caine wrote: > >> Tim 'avatar' Bartel wrote: If we're going to cooperate with Wikipedia, then they need to cooperate with us by not allowing any dangling links. >>> >>> There are several reasons why this isn't possible, but the biggest >>> one >>> is the following: Wikipedia isn't controlled by the Wikimedia >>> Foundation but by the community. With whom do you like to make an >>> arrangement? It's pretty hard to make an arrangement with a community >>> consisting out of constantly changing people. >> >> That is probably the main reason who I would prefer to find an >> alternative 'location' to direct links to. And some useful suggestions >> have already been made. >> >> While I CAN appreciate the idea of our own wiki. That would require a >> lot more hardware. Viovio has several terabytes of images already, >> and I >> suspect wikitravel.org can probably top that. So sharing the load >> would >> sound a lot more sensible? > > As I see it there are a number of different sorts of 'associated' data > for OSM that needs a reliable and welcoming home somewhere: > > 1) Photos - these need to have locations and a direction or > alternatively two positions, one for the camera and one for the > subject of the photo. In addition to that it is useful to know when it > was taken and any special attributes, was it taken when it was > snowing, was it raining, is it a picture of something pretty or of a > defect or of a signpost or what. All of this information would allow > applications to decide which ones to use. A journey planner would show > pictures of the pretty things on the route but another application > might want to show defects to the local council or show illegal > parking to the police. So... there is a whole load of stuff to do with > photos , some pretty pictures of scenery can go in WikiTravel and > Viovio etc, but some of the other stuff wouldn't be appreciated there > and we might need to provide a home. > > 2) Articles - background information for a street, when it was > constructed, why, where its name came from and possibly plans for its > future. Hard to see who else would give this house-room. > > 3) Subjective information about ways - muddy in winter, poor lighting, > too narrow for a double buggy, very crowded on market days etc. > > I would like us to think about all this stuff. We need to decide which > bit below in Wikipedia (certainly the right place for articles about > towns), for Viovio (pretty pictures?), and which nerdy details about > traffic, pot poles, traffic signs and bus stop poles and origins of > street names belong in OSM and no-where else. > > Finally, lets not be frightened about the cost of another box and the > hosting because terrabytes and gigabytes are really cheap these days. > We have just bought a box with 7 Terrabytes of disk storage and it > cost <£100 per terrabyte. We are also about to import all 1,000,000 of > photos of geographic features in the UK from Geograph (all CCBYSA) to > see how it copes. > > Can I suggest that if we are serious about this that we get a wiki > page together with the brief for the project and see what it looks > like as we work on it. Does this project have a name and are in vague > agreement about the scope and the need? > > > Regards, > > > Peter > > >> >> >> -- >> Lester Caine - G8HFL >> - >> Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact >> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk >> EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ >> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// >> Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php >> >> ___ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Alternatives-to-wikipedia--tp22574913p22588822.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
talk@openstreetmap.org
Andrew Chadwick wrote: > In this case, Richard's right in that it's an old bridleway still > used by horses for field access. But it's also been half-surfaced > nicely for bicycle use, and has blue low-flying-bicycles signs > along it. And a sign saying "bridleway" and hoofprints. Oh, and > nearby riding schools and horse mounting steps. And lots of > foot traffic, plus private motor access. It's pretty much the > definition of shared use in path form. Oooh, and it's the proposed NCN 57 too. (Though I expect NCN 57 might actually end up going a different way, at least at first.) Clearly the fact that it's officially a bridleway is worth recording, because it implies all sorts of useful legal permissions and stuff. Yet clearly most users will actually use it as a cycleway, because there are more bikes in Oxford than horses. So three roughly equivalent suggestions: 1. highway=bridleway, surface=paved 2. highway=cycleway, designation=bridleway 3. create two parallel ways: tag one of them as above, and the other as highway=bridleway, surface=something_that_implies_mud. Potlatch can do this for you with its parallel way feature (Other Editors Are Available). cheers another cycling Richard from Oxfordshire -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-highway%3Dcycle-footway-tp22661251p22663109.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
talk@openstreetmap.org
David Earl wrote: > The problem marking it as cycleway now is that in the UK road > > bridleway > cycleway > footway loosely speaking. Unless there is > evidence to the contrary, cycles can use bridleways, but horses can't > use cycleways. Sort of. There are actually two fairly important exceptions to the bridleway > cycleway rule (this is getting a bit UK rights-of-way geeky, sorry everyone). A bridleway is available to cyclists but there is no obligation on the land-owner to maintain it for cyclists. Cyclists are also required to give way to other users. http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4678 http://www.sustrans.org.uk/webfiles/Info%20sheets/ff27.pdf A "cycle track", however (as declared by a Cycle Tracks Order) confers an obligation on the local highway authority to maintain it for cyclists. As best as I can see, there is no formally expressed priority of use. So in this case cycleway actually > bridleway. This is kind of what I like about the designation= tag. The Oxford example is maintained by the local highway authority as a cycleway. So it quacks like a cycleway, looks like a cycleway, but is legally a... bridleway. highway=cycleway, designation=bridleway sums this up concisely. cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
talk@openstreetmap.org
Richard Mann wrote: > Map Features says that highway=cycleway should be used for ways that > are mainly/exclusively for bicycles. Map Features is wrong. :) IIRC some divvy inserted this sentence a good while after people had got accustomed to using highway=cycleway for shared-use paths. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-highway%3Dcycle-footway-tp22661251p22740967.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
talk@openstreetmap.org
Alex Mauer wrote: >>Richard Fairhurst wrote: >>> Map Features says that highway=cycleway should be used for ways that >>> are mainly/exclusively for bicycles. >> Map Features is wrong. :) > So you're saying that highway=cycleway is not intended for ways > which are for bicycles? Thanks for putting words into my mouth. Clearly I'm not. "mainly/exclusively" is the difference. Access permissions cascade down[1]. We grew out of tagging highway=secondary;motorcar=yes;foot=yes;horse=yes;motorcycle=yes;bicycle=yes;penguin_on_a_skateboard=yes about three years ago - people were starting to take the piss (http://mappinghacks.com/2006/09/18/have-a-nice-metadata/). So why on earth you think that highway=cycleway;foot=yes is still required, I have no idea. Unless, of course, you do actually go around tagging highway=secondary;motorcar=yes;foot=yes etc. etc., in which case full marks for consistency albeit no marks for clue. But, you know, well done on finally uploading some GPS tracks in the last few weeks (http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Hawke/traces). Maybe actually doing some mapping will give your opinions some weight, rather than just being another tedious wikignome. We live in hope. Richard [1] with the well-known exception of highway=motorway -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-highway%3Dcycle-footway-tp22661251p22744086.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
talk@openstreetmap.org
Andrew Chadwick wrote: > So let it be a cycleway, tagged designation=public_bridleway. Surface > I guess we can use the "best" (vehicular) value for it: paved, > probably. Acceptable? *applauds* cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-highway%3Dcycle-footway-tp22661251p22745024.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] OSM April Fools
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Igor%20Shubovych/diary/5772 http://www.opengeodata.org/?p=459 http://fakestevec.blogspot.com/2009/04/new-ceo-appointed.html http://blog.shaunmcdonald.me.uk/2009/04/the-crap-o-surface-detector/ cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] OSM in Living Spain magazine
Living Spain, a quarterly magazine published by our company, has just published its new spring issue and I'm pleased to report that it includes OSM mapping for the first time. The magazine contains pull-out "Instant Guides" to Barcelona and Torrevieja, and each one has a city map. For these, we've used OSM maps, using the default Mapnik rendering - properly attributed, of course! Big thanks to the Spanish community for the mapping and, of course, to Steve Chilton for the cartography. The magazine will be on sale in the UK in a week or so; I'd be happy to post a couple of copies out to the Spanish community if anyone wants to give me a postal address. cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap in "The Times - atlas of the world" book
Rory McCann wrote: > So is that book under a creative commons licence? Collective Work. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/OpenStreetMap-in-%22The-Times---atlas-of-the-world%22-book-tp22734589p22925199.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Using the data...
80n wrote: > This is correct. Neither OSM nor OSMF holds any copyright. Database right, on the other hand... ;) For a magazine, I use "OpenStreetMap.org and contributors: CC-BY-SA" next to the map. Then in the flannel panel at the start of the magazine (where copyright/contributor information usually resides, we add something like "Where an image includes a credit similar to CC-BY-SA, it is made available under that Creative Commons licence: full details at www.creativecommons.org." cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Using-the-data...-tp22935531p22945454.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik rendering export has only coastline
Ben Ward wrote: > This looks like a bug/problem with the Openstreetmap Mapnik > Export rendering. Can anyone confirm, or fix? Mapnik export doesn't work on Wednesdays while the database is reloaded. I believe there's an intention to fix this in the medium term (help welcome no doubt). Meanwhile I'll add it to the FAQ on the wiki. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Mapnik-rendering-export-has-only-coastline-tp22955618p22955846.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] People's Map
Mike Harris wrote: > Does anyone know anything about People's Map? It's a tragic waste of good aerial imagery. http://fakestevec.blogspot.com/2007/12/peoples-map-is-deeply-fucked.html cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/People%27s-Map-tp22966717p22967071.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] We're back
...with API 0.6, Postgres and the new server. But everyone's uploading at once, so don't expect to do much serious editing for the time being. :) The new changeset stuff is really superb. Have a browse: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changesets Mad props (as the kids say) to Tom, Grant, Matt et al for getting it done. Buy them a beer: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Protocol_Version_0.6/Beer cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] We're back
Pieren wrote: > Another short question : empty changesets are possible ? > (e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/876923) > (I tried to download the xml but no response - I guess it is the > server current load). Indeed, there's no prohibition on empty changesets. Specifically, Potlatch at present creates a new changeset when you open it, so if you don't actually make any edits then an empty changeset will result. I'd like to fix this so it only creates a changeset on your first edit, but it's not critical. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/We%27re-back-tp23152499p23154119.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] We're back
Martijn van Exel wrote: > Great. Congratulations to all involved. You pulled a massive, great > job. Potlatch seems to be stuck for me at 'Loading Presets'. It does > say 0.11. Firefox and Chrome on windows. Is this load-related or > something else altogether? Load-related. I know of two issues with Potlatch 0.11 at the moment. One is relation handling (actually I see Ed's just posted about that) - not clear yet whether this is Potlatch-specific. The other is that there seems to be some issue with junction nodes which is causing a server error dialogue to come up, haven't narrowed this one down yet. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/We%27re-back-tp23152499p23155833.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] We're back
Ed Loach wrote: > When editing, Potlatch no longer shows what relations an > existing way is part of. I'm assuming this isn't deliberate. Still trying to track this one down. It works 100% as intended on my local test setup, with the latest svn code and the latest Potlatch (though still running MySQL rather than Postgres). The bug only appears on the live site. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/We%27re-back-tp23152499p23171307.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-talk-be] IMPORTANT - OSM API upgrade - Upgrade finished
Ben Laenen wrote: > Little warning though: relations are completely broken with Potlatch. We think we've found the issue. More in half an hour, hopefully. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A--OSM-talk-be--IMPORTANT---OSM-API-upgrade---Upgrade-finished-tp23174315p23175635.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-talk-be] IMPORTANT - OSM API upgrade - Upgrade finished
I wrote: > We think we've found the issue. More in half an hour, hopefully. Fixed (hopefully) and committed. Will be live later when Tom has a chance to deploy it. For those interested, the database was changed in 0.6 to store relation members as 'Way', 'Node' or 'Relation'. Previously they were stored as 'way', 'node' and 'relation' (I've now updated the wiki documentation to say this), and Potlatch was still expecting that. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A--OSM-talk-be--IMPORTANT---OSM-API-upgrade---Upgrade-finished-tp23174315p23175791.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Editor statistics from created_by in changesets
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > Have new editor statistics been compiled from the created_by tag > in changesets now that 0.6 is live? If anyone actually managed to use Potlatch on Tuesday/Wednesday, given the server speed, I think they deserve some sort of medal. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Editor-statistics-from-created_by-in-changesets-tp23219716p23220578.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wikipedia POI import?
Adam Schreiber wrote: > We don't know where the wikipedia users sourced their cooridinates from. Oh yes we do: Google Maps. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Obtaining_geographic_coordinates#Google_tools There is absolutely no way that Wikipedia-derived co-ordinates are suitable for mass import into OSM. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wikipedia-POI-import--tp23392791p23394016.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wikipedia POI import?
Frederik Ramm wrote:
>Thomas Wood wrote:
>> Where's ShakespeareFan00 when you need him? :)
> That poor guy has been told by some self-important OSMers that
> Wikimapia was an unacceptable source, and they somehow forgot
> to say that this is just the OSM interpretation. SFan00 dutifully
> started removing Wikimapia references from Wikipedia ("they're
> unacceptable, you know"), and ended up on the receiving end of
> a lot of justified Wikipedians' anger.
You are very charitable, Frederik (well, maybe not to those of us who you've
just called self-important :) ) - probably too charitable. Yes, he did ask
whether he should import them to OSM, and we replied no. To that question,
nothing else. He also asked "so I should remove them from Wikipedia?" (or
something along those lines) and was told that #osm has no power over, or
indeed interest in, Wikipedia.
Why he, or you, or anyone should take comments in #osm to mean "oh, you
should do this in Wikipedia" without even questioning it or - heavens above
- asking some Wikipedia people, I don't know.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Wikipedia-POI-import--tp23392791p23394088.html
Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wikipedia POI import?
Russ Nelson wrote: > In fact, we don't know this. And since Google didn't create those > lat/lon pairs, the Wikipedia editor did, Google had no participation > in the act of creation, and thus no copyright claim. > > You guys have some really weird ideas about copyright. Yeah, but by "you guys" you actually mean Europe, and in particular, the UK. I mean, your paragraph above makes absolute sense for someone who knows a bit about the US legal framework and US legal history. I could read Feist vs Rural and Mason vs Montgomery Data and say exactly the same thing. The trouble is that I'm sitting in a stone cottage in a quiet Cotswold country town opposite a pub serving five real ciders and a comfortable hourly InterCity to Lond - scratch that - The trouble is that I'm sitting in England and it doesn't, frankly, apply to me or my compatriots. We don't have Feist vs Rural, we have Ordnance Survey vs the Automobile Association and all your "act of creation" stuff means, really, bugger all here. We have the sweat-of-the-brow doctrine instead. It sucks harder than a Hoover, but it's there. So there are three important OSM principles here. One is that we are whiter than white - that's what we're here for. We don't push the legal envelope. If someone else wants to, that's fine. But we don't want to be the test case. I strongly suspect, though I stand to be contradicted, that CloudMade doesn't want us to be the test case either. The second is that we have the manpower of crowdsourcing (and the power of Greyskull). Yeah, we could import a few dozen POIs from Wikipedia. Oh joy. Alternatively we could get our 100,000 mappers to map them themselves. I suppose, worst case scenario, it might take up to a month. The third, of course, is that anything decided without community consensus (cf Cyprus edit war) risks unleashing a bot arms race. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wikipedia-POI-import--tp23392791p23395478.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wikipedia POI import?
Russ Nelson wrote: > Fine enough, and who sweated hardest to click in a particular point > on a Google Map? Google? Or the Wikipedia editor[...]? Sweat-of-the-brow doesn't mean that. It doesn't mean that "A did some work, but B did more, so B owns the copyright". _Both_ A and B own some copyright. > Bullshit. Sorry, but it's bullshit. Okay, so I have a railroad > map of New York State which I could drop in toto into OSM. I > *claim* to have derived it from completely public-domain > sources (USGS topo and DOQ). But you don't know that. You > can't know that. All you can do is close your eyes, let me > import it, and hope that I'm not infringing some railroad > mapping company's data. No. If you tell me (or, by extension, the OSM community) publicly, or I notice, I _will_ look. I will not close my eyes. If it looks suspicious I'll raise it on the lists. You don't need Easter eggs to spot infringement. For example, there is someone on this list who figured out, correctly, the copyrighted source from which People's Map got their road numbers. I'll let her speak for herself if she wants to. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wikipedia-POI-import--tp23392791p23396540.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wikipedia POI import?
Russ Nelson wrote: > What work or creativity did Google do towards the existence of > that particular point? Google's imagery suppliers collected and rectified the imagery. "For over a hundred years, English courts have held that a significant expenditure of labour is sufficient" - that's, er, Wikipedia saying that. If they'd rectified them differently, your 14 digits would be different. Now I'm not saying that this is necessarily a view I wholly subscribe to (if you could actually be bothered to look through the wiki and the 8zn prior mailing list discussions, you'd see I've put stuff on there with a more liberal view of this). Clearly some people don't - Yahoo, for example. But Ivan has it right. Google's imagery suppliers could well take that view if they wanted to, and OSM's attitude has always been "we are whiter than white". Don't forget we have _expressly_ asked Google, in the form of Ed Parsons at SOTM, and he has _expressly_ said, sorry, no, we don't have those rights to give away. Yet... we're forgetting something: > To think that Google has ANY copyright ownership of points chosen > off their aerial photographs simply boggles the mind. Er, how come we're suddenly just talking about aerial imagery? The Wikipedia page I quoted says "Google Maps". It actually recommends you use their API and their geocoder, too: that looks to be against their ToS to me, though I'm sure you'll find some way to disagree. It even provides a handy tool for you to do it. http://pagesperso-orange.fr/universimmedia/geo/loc.htm . That _directly_ extracts from their geocoder. Nothing about clicking on imagery there; I type in my address and it gives me a lat and long. Wikipedia also recommends you do a web search for the city name together with "latitude" and "longitude" so, hey, why stop at Google? You can infringe on lots of other people's content, too! With all that in mind, I reckon any court would conclude that it is very likely there has been large-scale extraction of features. But evidently I'm being an armchair lawyer: > But nobody wants to talk about the hard stuff. Everybody just > wants to be an armchair lawyer rather than exercize their brain. Oh, don't be so patronising. And you're not? Please. Actually, I think an OSMer said it best on Twitter. "Openstreetmap is about gathering map data and sharing it. Some people seem desperate to import data from anywhere. GATHER IT YOURSELF." And with that, I shall stop posting the same old stuff that's been said so many times before, and go and gather some data. I recommend it. :) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wikipedia-POI-import--tp23392791p23400514.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wikipedia POI import?
Jochen Topf wrote: > I don't think we have to worry about that. Google hasn't sued > Wikipedia yet. And Wikipedia has been distributing all those > points in bulk for years. It isn't about Google, it's about their data providers. Wikipedia is not a competitor to TeleAtlas. OpenStreetMap is. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wikipedia-POI-import--tp23392791p23401272.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wikipedia POI import?
Russ Nelson wrote: > WHERE do you guys get these weird ideas about copyright from? Tell you what. You work for CloudMade, right? I suggest you ask your bosses. Show them what you're proposing to import. Show them the Wikipedia page that explains how it's been gathered. Ask them if they'd be happy with that in their dataset and are prepared to run the legal risk. I'd be interested to know their response. (This would, of course, be better on legal-talk.) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wikipedia-POI-import--tp23392791p23408966.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Satellite for OSM
Frederik Ramm wrote: > Not if you plan to let it make photos that are of better resolution > than Landsat though! Oh, I don't know: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TopSat http://www.qinetiq.com/home/defence/defence_solutions/space/topsat.html Apparently you can rent it for £25k a week... easily within the ambition of donate.openstreetmap.org. (And they give the images free to humanitarian agencies, see http://www.qinetiq.com/home/newsroom/news_releases_homepage/2007/4th_quarter/topsat_satellite_imagery.html - Mikel, do you reckon we could get in on that?) MP's point about what you do with the vast quantities of data that you get is well-observed, of course. But we like a challenge. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Satellite-for-OSM-tp23587856p23588185.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Satellite for OSM
Matt Amos wrote: > out of interest, is there a link to the £25k figure? i couldn't > find any pricing information on the net anywhere... http://www.qinetiq.com/home/newsroom/news_releases_homepage/2006/4th_quarter/TopSat_toasts_its_first_birthday_with_Best_of_What_s_New_Grand_Award.html "A feature of the programme is that for a cost of £25,000, customers can lease the satellite for a period of a week and control its schedule of imaging operations." Also: "In addition to actively pursuing further experiments for the MOD and BNSC, the consortium is also seeking new applications to which the technology can be applied." i.e. it's as much a research project as a commercial operation... so maybe your idea of "let's just ask them" could work. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Satellite-for-OSM-tp23587856p23592213.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Satellite for OSM
Matt Amos wrote: > out of interest, is there a link to the £25k figure? i couldn't > find any pricing information on the net anywhere... http://www.qinetiq.com/home/newsroom/news_releases_homepage/2006/4th_quarter/TopSat_toasts_its_first_birthday_with_Best_of_What_s_New_Grand_Award.html "A feature of the programme is that for a cost of £25,000, customers can lease the satellite for a period of a week and control its schedule of imaging operations." Also: "In addition to actively pursuing further experiments for the MOD and BNSC, the consortium is also seeking new applications to which the technology can be applied." i.e. it's as much a research project as a commercial operation... so maybe your idea of "let's just ask them" could work. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Satellite-for-OSM-tp23587856p23592214.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Re verting Changes....
David Earl wrote: > It looks to me like yet again someone hasn't realised changes made > in Potlatch are live. There was also someone complaining about this > on the diary pages recently. Have patience. ;) (I presume as the author of Namefinder you're quite good at being patient anyway. *runs away very fast*) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Reverting-Changes-tp23596869p23599012.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Satellite for OSM
Peter Miller wrote: > We would need to take advice on it, but I see no reason why > mappers can't sign-up to use the photography on-line Er, we do that already. You can't edit OSM without registering. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Satellite-for-OSM-tp23587856p23598839.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Re verting Changes....
Russ Nelson wrote: > Richard, I know that you don't have infinite resources to devote to > Potlatch. But if you can't For those without the imagination to see what "have patience" followed by a winking smiley might mean, I would kindly request that you hold fire for a very small amount of time. There is, obviously, no "can't" about it. cheers Richard trying to remain slightly polite for once -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Reverting-Changes-tp23596869p23603935.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Satellite for OSM
Douglas Furlong wrote: > If that is the case, can we not just tie the OSM authentication in to the > WMS layer, so that you are only able to view the data IF you have an OSM > account. Exactly. One way to do it in Potlatch, for example, would be to require auth on the directory with the spherical Mercator tiles, perhaps against the user token generated by the Rails site. cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.0
Hi all, It's been an important 24 hours for the webmapping world. At last - and after many months of expectation - UK cycle charity Sustrans released their new online slippy map. Oh yeah, and some irritating US outfit did some data API or something. But never mind any of that, because it's also Potlatch's second birthday! And that means: it's time for Potlatch 1.0. What's new? Online help. Offline editing. Conflict management. A new way of showing junction nodes. Better changeset handling. And some other stuff. Bugs and comments? Trac, of course, but there's also a new potlatch- dev mailing list - both for current Potlatch and exciting future stuff. Subscribe: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/potlatch- dev/ . Enjoy! cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.0
Martijn van Exel wrote: > Great work. It all seems somewhat snappier. Love the offline editing > feature already. Glad you like it (and others, thanks for the kind comments). :) > Still no 'building' preset? What would you like to see the preset as? I'm no tagging guru. cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch 1.0 broken non-ASCII input on Mac OS X?
Woll Newall wrote: > Potlatch 1.0 seems to have broken the input of non-ASCII characters > in tags. > > I'm running Potlatch inside the Safari browser on Mac OS X. > > Before Potlatch 1.0 I could type in Japanese characters into the > tags, but now the Japanese hiragana and katakana entries in the > Kotoeri input menu are disabled when I'm in Potlatch (so only > ASCII text can be entered, even in Japanese input mode). Entering non-ASCII text (e.g. é î å ë) works fine for me here, using Safari 4 on OS X 10.4. I think we'd have heard by now if there was a universal problem! Though I wouldn't know Kotoeri from Coco the clown, I've just played around for five minutes, enabled it in System Preferences -> International, and have managed to successfully select the Hiragana and Katakana entries from the input menu while using Potlatch. The Kana palette then allows me to enter characters - not the ones I'd expect, but this is probably because I've started the browser with en-GB as the language and Flash Player tends to be sensitive to that. There's a new mailing list called potlatch-dev where such issues are best discussed. :) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Potlatch-1.0-broken-non-ASCII-input-on-Mac-OS-X--tp23700117p23704358.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Re vert a changeset
Teemu Koskinen wrote:
> Could somebody revert the node changes in changeset 1315063,
> someone accidentally moved big part of Hämeentie (a major street
> in Helsinki). There are over a hundred moved nodes, and they are in
> middle of hundreds of unmoved nodes, so it would be hard to try to
> move them back by hand.
You can revert a way to an earlier version yourself, using Potlatch's
history ('H') function. This will take care of all the constituent nodes.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Revert-a-changeset-tp23715523p23720066.html
Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] script to cut a big OSM map into letter or A4 size papers
Matt Amos wrote: > i've found that printers often prefer high resolution images > over PDFs, but these are also pretty easy to generate. for the > mappa mercia A0 print [1] it looks like 9934 x 14046 (300dpi) > was a good resolution. We send the magazine to the printers as PDFs, _but_ we always embed the maps into each page as high-resolution TIFFs (i.e. non-lossy) - usually 300dpi CMYK. The big advantage of doing it this way is that you avoid any font (or other) embedding problems. The alternative is to convert the text to outlines before saving it in your vector format of choice (PDF/EPS/Illustrator), which also works well. In theory you can embed the fonts in the PDF if the font permissions are ok, but generally you only find out that this hasn't worked once 25,000 copies have come back from the printers. If you pick up a copy of the Waterways World Annual 2009 (for which someone else did the maps, not me) you'll see we have a map of the Broads without any rivers on it. :| cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/script-to-cut-a-big-OSM-map-into-letter-or-A4-size-papers-tp23716831p23744965.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch and sketching from aerial imagery
Joe Richards wrote: > If that is the case, why does Potlatch not offer highway=road > as one of its presents, under the little car icon? Because I don't really keep up with the ever-changing tagging discussions - life's too short. Anyone with svn access can augment the Potlatch preset/autocomplete files, they're all in easy-to-understand text: http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/sites/rails_port/config/potlatch/ I do however reserve the right, should you add smoothness=very_horrible, to remove it again, and additionally to come round to your house and kill you. FWIW I personally think highway=road is not generally of much use in 90% of cases. Whether you're tracing from Yahoo or NPE or whatever, you can very often work out what highway value the road should have. Certainly, if it were to be added to the preset menu, it'd need to be with a very clear description of what it's intended for - "road, unsure of type" or something like that. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Potlatch-and-sketching-from-aerial-imagery-tp23823385p23823663.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] tagging "unofficial" cycle routes
maning sambale wrote: > In the Philippines there are very few (close to nothing I > know of) officially designated cycleways and routes. However, > local cycling/mtb clubs have created/established routes for > their own purpose. Any advice on how to tag these routes? If they're not "on the ground" (i.e. signposted), then adding them to OSM is getting perilously close to tagging-my-favourite-road territory - so I'd hesitate before actually tagging them. By the same token, we don't tag CTC routes (a national cyclists' organisation) in the UK, which aren't signposted, but we do tag Sustrans ones, which are. Two things spring to mind. One is that (presumably) these routes have been chosen because of objective factors - decent surface, low traffic, that sort of thing. This can all be tagged. Then anyone is free to benefit from this knowledge by using a cycling route-planner on the data. Secondly, this is really prime mash-up territory, but the great flaw of the traditional (Google Maps-like) mashup approach is that it doesn't interact with the data in any way. It's just a bunch of pushpins and squiggly lines sketched on top. There is an opportunity for someone to write, even just as a proof of concept, a mashup that actually links to the data. You can't easily do "follow way 827364 then way 76354 then way 9876325", because way ids change as people edit the data. But you _could_ do "follow unclassified road west from Chadlington to Sarsden, then follow unclassified road south to the B4450" - something that can be recreated on OSM data. The CloudMade routing API might be suitable for this: effectively you'd be storing the route as a set of instructions to the routing API, with sufficient 'via' points to make sure the right route was returned. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/tagging-%22unofficial%22-cycle-routes-tp23828424p23830852.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] When is a road a secondary road and when is it not?
Peter Miller wrote: > Personally I want a structure for the town which tells a story > about today's road use, rather than a dusty document in a > council. I should inform routing engines to keep cars on > major roads and cyclists off them. I don't dispute that this information would be valuable - to draw a cartographic analogy, that's absolutely what Michelin maps do, though the fact they're the only ones in the UK to do so might tell you something! But nonetheless the existing use of the highway= tag in the UK is understood by 95% of UK mappers and it's not helpful to have a little island of "we do things differently here" in Ipswich. So you should (I would almost go as far as to say "must") use another tag for this. Personally, I would love to see the use of tags like traffic=low - it would be hugely useful for determining cyclable roads. More generally, over the next year, we're going to be seeing a lot more custom rendering (a la CM Style Editor), on-the-fly rendering (see Cartagen and Potlatch 2), and configurable routing engines (everywhere). So the barrier against having a new tag is much, much less. "Tagging for the renderers" basically isn't needed any more: you use the tag you want and the client that responds to it. Followups on the UK-specific point to talk-gb, I suspect. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/When-is-a-road-a-secondary-road-and-when-is-it-not--tp23836218p23848584.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Castles and Palaces
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > thanks a lot. In old-English you could also say "burh". I live in Charl_bury_ and spend a lot of time in _Bur_ton. Shaun, however, comes from Edin_borough_, which the French, funnily enough, know as Edin_bourg_. They're all the same root. I'm not sure that the existence of one of them in some dictionary or other, much though I like Chambers, really proves the point. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Castles-and-Palaces-tp23874066p23888389.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Castles and Palaces
I wrote: > Edin_borough_ which should of course be Edin_burgh_. Which is a bit further up the ECML from Peter_borough_. And so on. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Castles-and-Palaces-tp23874066p23890407.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Licence status in Potlatch2, and data deletion?
Steve Bennett wrote: > The "show licence status" in Potlatch2 is no longer working for me. Works fine for me. You might just have hit a temporary WTFE outage. > Also, could we have an update on what is happening with data deletion? Henk has just posted http://blog.osmfoundation.org/2012/04/26/license-change-still-ongoing/ . cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Licence-status-in-Potlatch2-and-data-deletion-tp5667829p5667847.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Licence status in Potlatch2, and data deletion?
Steve Bennett wrote: > It's been like this for at least a week for me, I think. Can you > definitely see licence info in, say, Melbourne? I see no red > outlines, and no "no"/"partial" etc above the advanced editor. Presume that's Melbourne, Australia rather than the nice little Derbyshire town ten miles down the road from where I am now. :) But yes, I can go to Melbourne and see that way 4308541 (for example) is 'partial'. It could be that your Flash Player has cached a faulty crossdomain.xml and is therefore refusing to load, or something. I'd try manually opening (and reloading) wtfe's crossdomain in a browser window to refresh the cache, or experimenting with a different browser to see if that works. > "The bad news: the electric chair is *still* out of action, but we're > trying as hard as we can to fix it. The good news: one of the > prisoners on death row turned out to be innocent while we were fixing > it." > :) "Caedite eos - novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius..." cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Bing coverage relations, in particular 1298962
Someoneelse wrote: > Regardless of the "perhaps the map shouldn't render unknown things > just because of name=blah" issue, I'd argue that metadata such as > this really doesn't belong in OSM. Agreed. OSM is not the world's sole repository of co-ordinate data, and nor should it be. This would be much better stored in an externally hosted .osm file or shapefile, which can be loaded into the editor/tool of your choice, than in the main database. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Bing-coverage-relations-in-particular-1298962-tp5669039p5669972.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM cycle map - ?excessive focus on long-distance routes
Richard Mann wrote: > My point is that tagging should allow both types of routes to be > recorded We tag what's on the ground, whether it's route signage, cycle-specific infrastructure, or a giant woolly mammoth (http://url.ie/f9ts). Are you suggesting a deviation from that? cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/OSM-cycle-map-excessive-focus-on-long-distance-routes-tp5697183p5697391.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
