Re: [OSM-talk] QA bots commenting on changesets - your thoughts?
On the other hand, if editing software checked for some particular software, the bot would have nothing to do. So, maybe the bot is a good temporary solution until the map editors have it implemented? Also, it would be a good way to detect edits with new software that hes no checking implemented. On 4 April 2018 at 17:08, john whelan wrote: > > * do not message the same person twice about the same kind of problem > > and I would support this. The other problem is how recent was the > mapping. If its more than a week old they may have corrected the way they > work after it had been brought to their attention by another mapper. > > Cheerio John > > On 4 April 2018 at 10:53, Frederik Ramm wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On 04/04/18 10:44, Michał Brzozowski wrote: >> > What do you think about it? Are such bots useful or not? >> >> The bot programmer must take extreme care not to make their bot an >> annoyance. In my opinion this would include: >> >> * do not message the same person twice about the same kind of problem >> >> * at the very least allow mappers to "opt out" of bot messaging, or >> ideally use an opt-in where when someone submits a changeset, they don't >> only tick "I would like someone to review my changeset" but also "I am >> willing to receive automated messages about this changeset" >> >> Bye >> Frederik >> >> -- >> Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" >> >> ___ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > -- -- http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/ r.mi...@pl.vwfsag.deryszard.mi...@gmail.com دراجة أكبر ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
On 24 October 2017 at 17:19, Tomas Straupis wrote: > 2017-10-24 15:56 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote: > > Why, in this case is it better to have Wikipedia links in OSM point to > > disambiguation page instead of link Hillfort 1 in OSM to Hillfort 1 in > > Wikipedia, link Hillfort 2 accordingly and fix Wikipedia doubts in > > Wikipedia? > > So that the case is not forgotten and fixed properly (i.e. ALL tags > fixed) by people who know how to do it, not by those who are doing > guesswork and just silencing the "qa" script. > > You mean "stop any editing, cause we need two weeks or two years to make sure refs are correct and we don't have any other means to remember about the problem than to leave some obvious mistake everyone will trip over until we are sure about those refs"? Like, start a discussion at one of the hillfort articles in Wikipedia and live a note inOSM to check refs from time to time, with a link to the Wikipedia discussion? -- -- http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/ r.mi...@pl.vwfsag.deryszard.mi...@gmail.com دراجة أكبر ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
Please, PLEASE, stick to the case. The case is: 1) there are two hillforts, let's call them Hillfort 1 and Hillfort 2 for simplicity. 2) both have big information tables on the ground, with their names on them 3) so they are named Hillfort 1 and Hillfort 2 in OSM and nobody objects that. 4) both have their articles on Wikipedia. The articles may be a little mixed up, but they are articles on Hillfort 1 and Hillfort 2 Why, in this case is it better to have Wikipedia links in OSM point to disambiguation page instead of link Hillfort 1 in OSM to Hillfort 1 in Wikipedia, link Hillfort 2 accordingly and fix Wikipedia doubts in Wikipedia? On 23 October 2017 at 13:33, Andy Townsend wrote: > On 23/10/2017 11:40, Ryszard Mikke wrote: > >> That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia >> > > Part of the problem is that some of these problems simply aren't fixable > at wikipedia. For example https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > %D0%A1%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0 and https://sq.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > Serbia are allegedly the same article and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/ > Q403 lists them both. However, as can be seen by looking at the maps on > each page, they aren't the same geographic entity - one includes Kosovo, > one does not. Neither is "wrong" from the point of view of the authors of > each page yet they can't both be "correct" at the same time. > > Best Regards, > Andy > > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > -- -- http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/ r.mi...@pl.vwfsag.deryszard.mi...@gmail.com دراجة أكبر ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] New OSM Quick-Fix service
Even without disabling - what a better tool fixes, JOSM's autofix won't find... On 17 October 2017 at 09:50, Yuri Astrakhan wrote: > Well, you kind of can fix one with the other - by introducing a better > tool and disabling some of the autofixes in JOSM (very easy to do). A more > complex approach would clearly require a separate topic(s) and a > substantial dev involvement. > > P.S. No, https://master.apis.dev.openstreetmap.org/ doesn't have any real > data (it shows maps from live servers, but editing shows just a few > objects). > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 3:36 AM, Tobias Zwick wrote: > >> I get your point, especially regarding the appliance of the JOSM >> fix-button as a "by-the-way" fixing. >> >> Though, you can't fix possible issues with of one tool by introducing >> another tool. People will not stop using (that feature of) JOSM. That is >> why I think, if you think you detected a problematic issue there in that >> editor, it should be discussed in a separate topic. >> >> On 17/10/2017 00:57, Yuri Astrakhan wrote: >> > Michael, I can only judge by my own experience adding validation autofix >> > rules - I added a number of Wikipedia tag auto cleanups to JOSM, and >> > they were reviewed by one or two JOSM developers and merged, probably >> > because they were deemed benign. I don't know about the other rules, >> > but I suspect many of them also went this route. Should have they been >> > discussed more widely? I don't know, but that question is complicated, >> > just like "what is a local community?" question. What a few devs may see >> > as benign, others may say needs a discussion, right? >> > >> > Mass editing is a different matter. We consider mass editing when one >> > person goes out to fix something everywhere in the world. But when we >> > provide a tool that automatically fixes something that you are looking >> > at, we don't view it as such. Or at least we don't view it when it >> > happens as part of JOSM, but we do when it happens in my new tool. Of >> > course there is an important difference - JOSM doesn't guide you towards >> > those cases. >> > >> > I think massive "by-the-way" fixing is far worse than the targeted fix >> > of a single issue. >> > >> > When you want to fix a single issue in many places, you become a subject >> > matter expert. You know all about that change, how it interacts with >> > other tags, what to watch out for, how to handle bad values, etc. For >> > example, when fixing wikipedia tags, you would see the types of mistakes >> > people make, wrong prefixes people use, incorrect url encodings, hash >> > tags in urls, incorrect multiple values, ... .When you simply click >> > "fix" because JOSM validator tells you it can fix it automatically, you >> > don't have that knowledge, so it effectively becomes a distributed >> > mechanical edit without the "reject" capability. My tool tries to >> > address this - to build domain experts in a narrow field, and let those >> > experts review changes one by one. I do not discount the value of local >> > knowledge, but it is not a panacea - you must be both to make >> > intelligent choices, and in some cases, the domain knowledge is more >> > important than the knowledge of a specific locale. >> > >> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Michael Reichert >> > mailto:osm...@michreichert.de>> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Yuri, >> > >> > Am 16.10.2017 um 16:02 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan: >> > > Rory, most of those queries were copied from the current JOSM >> validator >> > > autofixes. I don't think they were discussed, but they might >> have been >> > > mass applied without much thought by all sorts of editors. >> > >> > Could you please give examples for (a) the mass appliance of these >> rules >> > and (b) rules which have not been discussed but should have been >> > discussed? >> > > There are two ways to use the tool - you can write your own >> query, run it, >> > > and fix whatever it is you want to fix. That's the power user >> mode - >> > > anything goes, no different from JOSM or Level0. And there is >> another one - >> > > where you go to osm wiki, read the instructions, find the task >> you may want >> > > to work on, and go at it. The community reviews wiki content, >> tags >> > > different pages with different explanation or warning boxes, etc. >> The >> > > discussion could still be on the forum, or here, or in IRC, >> > >> > Just for future readers: IRC and Telegram channels are no >> replacement >> > for a mailing list or a forum with a public readable archive where >> you >> > can look up the discussions years later. >> > >> > Best regards >> > >> > Michael >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. >> (Mailinglisten >> > ausgenommen) >> > I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists) >> > >> > >> > ___
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
On 23 October 2017 at 07:17, Tomas Straupis wrote: > 2017-10-22 23:20 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote: > > So, to sum up: > > 1) There was a link to disambiguation page that no one has corrected > until > > it was detected by Yuri's tool. > > There was a link to disambiguation page which was detected using > other tool which is not using wikidata. Could you point me to that tool? > That other tool gives more > than 2500(!) items to fix in osm/wikipedia (Lithuania only). So there > is enough work to be done until this particular problem is fixed. It > could take two weeks, it could also take two years. > That's exactly my point. I mean, that's why I think it's a good idea to automate the process as much as possible. Even in cases requiring human attention it is possible to make it easier if a QA tool gives links needed to decide what is correct. > > 2) User kartonage has wrongly linked "Žagarės I piliakalnis" to "Žagarės > II > > piliakalnis" in Wikipedia. > > 3) You have reverted it back to disambiguation link and no wikidata=* tag > > even though there is an established ground truth in the form of big > > information tables in front of each of those hillforts with names > "Žagarės > > piliakalnis I" and "Žagarės piliakalnis II" in big letters. > > It's not only names, but codes and some other details. Wikipedia > page content is probably mixed or swaped (haven't done analysis yet). > That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia and one may assume in good faith that when it's solved, everything about hillfort I will be in article about hillfort I and analogically for hillfort II. And hillfort I will be the one marked as such on the ground, as it is easier to fix Wikipedia, than go and change information on tables in front of the object. So, I would go and linked hillfort I in OSM with hillfort I in Wikipedia and waited until Wikipedia guys fix in Wikipedia, what needs to be fixed. In fact, I have done so, but then I thought again and reverted it. It's your decision. > And people were asked NOT to do automatic changes without local > knowledge. > How were the people asked? I can only see very short note in Lithuanian. I can' understand it, but it doesn't seem like "do not touch" request... My advice would be to put some note in English. If you really think it's needed - see above. You can also opt out from my script now by just adding "nowikidata=yes". > Yet you think that wikidata=* tag is the problem here? > > It would not have been a problem if Yuri would not have created a > tool which attracts people and fools them into believing such things > could be fixed automatically. > I still think that correct linking to wikipedia is a good idea in this case. For the reasons above. I can give another real world example where wikidata usage WOULD be a > problem: > > Say we have a church named "St. Brewers church". It has an object in > OSM with corresponding name tag, a link to wikipedia page "St. Brewers > church" and wikidata ref 12345. > > Now this church is upgraded to basilica: it's name (in the real > world) changes to "St. Brewers basilica". > > OSMers do not notice this change (name tag is not changed), > wikipedians do (wikipedia page title is renamed, leaving old 'church' > page as a redirect only). > > If we use QA tool based on wikipedia link, it finds that "St. > Brewers church" does not exist anymore (redirect pages do not get into > geotagged dumps). As soon as I try going to that page I'm redirected > to "...basilica" page. Now I know that a name has changed and I change > it in name and name:xx tags in OSM. > > If we use QA tool based on wikidata, it will find NOTHING wrong > here. wikidata 12345 will be pointing to "St. Brewers basilica" page. > Nothing wrong. No noticing of a change of name. Which leaves OSM with > outdated name and no way to notice (names in wikipedia and OSM do not > always match, comparing wikidata and OSM name is not always possible, > we need to find the fact of CHANGE of wikipedia article name). > On the contrary, AFAIK redirection pages don't have wikidata item, so the wikidata-based tool would detect them. It is even possible to automatically detect such cases (i.e. Wikidata article's title has changed, and there is a redirect under old title) and correct wikipedia link in OSM to the new title in Wikipedia. It would leave the name, but hey, it's easier to detect name change manually if there is an obvious difference between name=* and wikipedia=* tags, than to compare wikipedia=* tag with the current Wikipe
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
On 15 October 2017 at 16:05, Tomas Straupis wrote: > Lets take an example. History of this hillfort: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1717783246/history > > What happened here: > 1. I've added a hillfort object "Žagarės piliakalnis" (Žagarės hillfort). > 2. Med fixed wikipedia tag (removed underscores - good change, my > mistake fixed). > 3. I've updated local Lithuanian heritage id's (fine, we use that for > synchronisation). > 4. rmikke added a wikidata entry... chrm... could be fine as we do not > use wikidata at all, somebody else might, but... then > 5. kartonage "corrected" wikidata tag (whatever, don't care about > that) but also wikipedia tag! And let's look what was the change: > "Žagarės piliakalnis" changed to "Žagarės antrasis piliakalnis". In > English „Žagarės hillfort“ to „Žagarės SECOND hillfort". Reason stated > for change is "pointing to disambiquity page" (so fixing wiki* tags > according to Youris idea/tool). What is wrong here? Name tag is still > "Žagarės I piliakalnis“ - Žagarės FIRST hillfort. And that is correct, > because there is a second hillfort nearby called "Žagarės SECOND" > hillfort: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/56.35690/23.23084 > But wikipedia link on this FIRST hillfort now points to the SECOND > hillfort. > > What happens then. I fixed wikipedia tag and removed wikidata entry > so that somebody else would not come and "fix" it again (at least > until we fix the actual problem). But rmikke runs his script again and > adds the same wikidata value again. So this item will once again show > up in Youri's tool and somebody else can try to "fix" it. > > The actual "on the ground" problem here is an error in official > heritage data. Heritage codes or names are mixed/swaped in several > official sources. It is impossible to fix this stuff by simply looking > at the OSM data (and even by simply looking at heritage data because > it contradicts with data of archaeologists). We (local community) will > have to contact heritage guys, archaeologists to find out who is > wrong. So it cannot be fixed by somebody without local knowledge and > without local contacts. And the problem is that Youri's tool gives a > false impression that it CAN be fixed. > > And this hillfort does show up in our local wikipedia error list > (which is produced without any use of wikidata whatsoever) and is just > waiting in queue to be fixed. > > The points I'm showing here: > 1. Error identification can be done without wikidata tags (and we > already identify more errors like: no object in OSM or no coordinates > in wikipedia, multiple objects in OSM for the same wikipedia page). > 2. Error can not be fixed without local knowledge. > 3. If it was only wikidata tag I would not have noticed the bad > change, because there is no way I would somehow know what those 324657 > 897984 65465465 id's stand for. It is only because of wikipedia tag > that I spotted the problem. > > There was a very logical and practical advice somewhere in this > thread. If you got approval in OSM-RU, why can't you do your > experimenting/fixing there first? To the very end. When all (or almost > all) wiki errors would be fixed in Russia, you could create a report > about your work. It could then by compared to other processes of > fixing wiki data and it would be possible for a specific community to > choose the most appropriate method. And there would be less > "toxicity", because you would not be forcing your way on people who > are successfully doing it in a different way. > > So, to sum up: 1) There was a link to disambiguation page that no one has corrected until it was detected by Yuri's tool. 2) User kartonage has wrongly linked "Žagarės I piliakalnis" to "Žagarės II piliakalnis" in Wikipedia. 3) You have reverted it back to disambiguation link and no wikidata=* tag even though there is an established ground truth in the form of big information tables in front of each of those hillforts with names "Žagarės piliakalnis I" and "Žagarės piliakalnis II" in big letters. Yet you think that wikidata=* tag is the problem here? -- -- http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/ r.mi...@pl.vwfsag.deryszard.mi...@gmail.com دراجة أكبر ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
On 3 October 2017 at 18:56, Christoph Hormann wrote: > * systematic wikidata ID addition/editing efforts (there seems to be > nothing listed currently on > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Automated_edits_log) That may be because there is a bug in wiki, that I have reported a few months ago. Adding a category in the page does not cause this page appear in the category. I have just created a page, documenting my edits of wikidata tags and I can see the problem persists. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Rmikke/Adding_wikidata_entries and try to find it in the "Automated edits log" category. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
On 12 October 2017 at 23:23, Christoph Hormann wrote: > As i have pointed out elsewhere doing QA in OSM based on Wikidata does > not in any way depend on the automatic addition of Wikidata IDs to > OSM - or in other words: Any ID you'd add based on some matching > algorithm just for QA purposes you would not need to add at all. > How exactly would you approach detecting OSM objects with wikipedia=* pointing to disambiguation page in wikipedia, instead of the correct one, without using wikidata? This is a real problem - e.g. wikipedia link "pl:Józefów" is useless as it points to a list of about a hundred places of this name. With wikidata one can locate all similar cases and correct them - I have done this for Poland as well as for other countries, using Yuri's QA tool. Without it, disambig wikipedia links would stay there until someone accidentally finds one and will be willing to correct it. One by one. There were hundreds of such cases in Poland alone. > With practical applications i was referring to actual external use of > the data. If the only practical use of the wikidata IDs is internal QA > that would be a pretty bad ROI in terms of Mapper's work (the time > adding IDs would be much better invested into doing actual validation > work). > But how could a mapper validate anything if he (or she) has no way to know there is a problem? > > > * To what extent has there been information transferred > > > systematically from Wikidata and Wikipedia to OSM based on wikidata > > > ID references (like adding names in different languages). As > > > others have explained this would be legally problematic and it > > > would be important to know how common this is. > > > > To my knowledge nothing automatic of this kind exists so far, so > > there should be only a few manual edits of this kind. > > Yesterday i showed examples of systematic node and name tag additions to > OSM clearly sourced from Wikidata. It is clear that this is happening. > The question is only how extensive such data transfer is. Yup, you are right, I can see now it's happening. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
On 3 October 2017 at 23:21, Yuri Astrakhan wrote: > While I have nothing against pausing bulk wikidata additions for a month, > we should be very clear here: > * several communities use bots to maintain and inject these tags, e.g. > Israel. Should they pause their bots? > * If a specific community is ok with it, does it override world wide ban > for that location? > * Has anyone actually been doing world-wide bulk wikidata additions ever > since this discussion has restarted after what I thought was a settled > matter about two weeks ago? > Yup, I have been updating wikidata entries for northern and central Europe more or less every weekend, with Overpass and JOSM's Wikipedia plugin. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
On 3 October 2017 at 18:56, Christoph Hormann wrote: > On Tuesday 03 October 2017, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Hi, > > > >seeing that the matter is discussed quite intensively and opinions > > vary widely, could we perhaps agree to pause any (large scale) > > wikidata edits for a while until more members of our community have > > had a chance to form an opinion? > > I think that is a good idea. > I'm not happy with it, as the way I do it is sensitive to amount of data to work with, so if I don't run it regularly, I have to restart from fragments. But well, I might limit the query to Poland where the adding of wikidata entries is widely accepted. I will repeat Yuri's question here: If a specific community is ok with it, does it override world wide ban for that location? Also, I'm going to remove wikidata entries where the wikipedia tag points to a section in a wikipedia article as Spiegel0 pointed in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52744495 (next weekend, I hope) as they are obviously erroneous. I won't do it globally, though, only in the region i have been adding wikidata entries (Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Baltic countries, Kaliningrad region, Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Austria and Hungary). * How many of the wikidata=* tags currently in the database have been > added through normal mapping (while adding or significantly modifying > the object otherwise) and how many have been added through systematic > efforts outside normal mapping? > Given that semi-automated edits might be done by unknown number of users, i'm afraid this information might be hard to obtain. > * What practical applications exist for the wikidata IDs? And i am not > talking about theoretical ideas here but specific uses for practical > purposes in actual use, in particular with open source implementation. > There are QA tools by Yuri Astrakhan and Mateusz Konieczny, both based on wikidata. > * To what extent has there been information transferred systematically > from Wikidata and Wikipedia to OSM based on wikidata ID references > (like adding names in different languages). As others have explained > this would be legally problematic and it would be important to know how > common this is. > To my knowledge nothing automatic of this kind exists so far, so there should be only a few manual edits of this kind. > Also i think it would be of great importance for OSM and a functioning > communication in the community to have better documentation of: > > * systematic wikidata ID addition/editing efforts (there seems to be > nothing listed currently on > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Automated_edits_log) > Ummm, I think I should document my edits... Now, to be frank, I can't see anything wrong in adding wikidata entries to existing wikipedia links in OSM objects and using them e.g. to display Wikipedia articles in users' preferred langages instead of "native" language of article pointed by wikipedia=* tag as long as we don't copy the data into OSM. mi...@pl.vwfsag.de ryszard.mi...@gmail.com دراجة أكبر ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] timestamps on tracks - why?
Maybe it's a newbie question, but I don't understand one thing (*) Why there is a need to have timestamps on tracks uploaded to OSM? It's really a pain in the ass when your GPS device exports tracks without timestamp and I really don't see the reason to require them. rmikke (*) For sure I don't understand more things, but this one is most annoying at the moment ;-) -- -- ==> Gardzi miodem - szalony! <== -- -- ==> -- Kubus Puchatek <== -- [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] PD vs SA: The eternal battle
Hey, didn't you think about the server's capacity and so on? detailed GIS data from every GSM company, huh? And from every network provider and so on? Where will you store it and for whom? It seems for me that storing rather huge amount of data for a very limited group of people is not exactly what we want. At least not at first place. Anyway, GSM companies just don't want to publish the detailed data and they won't. Whatever licence you put OSM under. All they need is low resolution map and they will get it. If they use OSM - all the better. Let everyone use OSM for their selfish or evil purposes. When everyone uses OSM - OSM will be most up-to date and most detailed map ever. And I like it. rmikke -- -- ==> Gardzi miodem - szalony! <== -- -- ==> -- Kubus Puchatek <== -- [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ legal-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] PD vs SA: The eternal battle
Errr... Let's get back to our bus company? Of course they CAN use PD data from OSM, add their layer and publish it, not sharing their data... but that will cost them. Any change in the PD data requires repeating their work for them to be up to date. Whereas just putting their bus stops into OSM means that all they have to do is *nothing* to update their online map and *just make a printout* for paper version. Which one is cheaper? And there is more. They become interested for at least part of the map being up to date and they have no one to demand it from. So it pays to give a few minutes and correct the PD map... or they have to pay someone for the map and THEN demand. As for freedom (or Freedom ;-) ) - I like the idea that we give away our knowledge for everyone for free and they are free to do whatever they want to. If someone can make money on it - it's just the better. That means, that there are people willing to pay for access then e.g. search for it themselves. Who will bring our gift to them? Bob Myers? (no offence intended) It seems that Bob Myers has something more interesting to do. So let's let some greedy guy do that or it won't be done at all. And this hypothetical greedy guy is in situation even worse than the bus company - he get's paid for the data, so he is demanded to keep it up to date. That means that people who otherwise wouldn't see the OSM, now unwillingly create a pressure on some greedy guy to keep it up to date. Let's let them. I contribute to OSM and I don't expect anyone that uses my contribution to contribute as well. Some of them will anyway for that reason or other. So much the better. +1 for PD ;-) rmikke -- -- ==> Gardzi miodem - szalony! <== -- -- ==> -- Kubus Puchatek <== -- [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ legal-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-talk] OpenCycleMap questions
Should I ask them here or is there some other list/forum? Ryszard Mikke -- -- ==> Gardzi miodem - szalony! <== -- -- ==> -- Kubus Puchatek <== -- [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] POI by coordinates
2008/10/16 Richard Fairhurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Gustav Foseid wrote: > >> One should certainly not add information to OSM that is copyrighted, >> protected by database rights or otherwise protected. There is a difference >> between being careful and paranoid, however. > > Yes. We're paranoid. Always have been, it's one of the things that > defines OSM. Read the archives. Hmm... It is my understanding, that if I find something I didn't know (like, say, cycletrack or POI) in Google and add it ro OSM, it would be copying. On the other hand, if I add the same data to: WikiMapia Some my project using GoogleMaps OSM then it is hard to call that copying. Even if adding to OSM requires copying coordinates from WikiMapia - it is still MY knowledge I have added to all three maps. Anyway, is these license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ free enough to use the data in OSM? Ryszard Mikke -- -- ==> Gardzi miodem - szalony! <== -- -- ==> -- Kubus Puchatek <== -- [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] POI by coordinates
2008/10/16 Lennard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Tom Hughes wrote: > the situation is: I've got a POI in the area where I'm only in summer. I've marked in somewhere in Google Maps and now I want to mark it in OSM. > [snip] >> ...but bear in mind that importing data which has been derived from >> Google Maps is not allowed anyway! > > Even when someone has been there, verified the POI, and used Google Maps > only as a fancy kind of notepad, in lieu of jotting down the coordinates > on a piece of paper ? > > Of course, I understand, if he has placed the POI in Google Maps by > checking their map and positioning the node from memory, this would not > be usable for OSM. Ummm... Why is that so? Does that mean that I can't use WikiMapia for it as well? Cause that is what I've actually done... Of course I can wait till summer or get coordinates from paper map... rmikke -- -- ==> Gardzi miodem - szalony! <== -- -- ==> -- Kubus Puchatek <== -- [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] POI by coordinates
Hello, the situation is: I've got a POI in the area where I'm only in summer. I've marked in somewhere in Google Maps and now I want to mark it in OSM. The problem is, the whole area is poorly marked in OSM, there is even a national road not marked. So I can't just go and draw the point. I need to put it at the same coordinates as in Google Maps. Tried to put it in GPX and import, but only tracks are imported, not waypoints. Pity, cause I've made an effort to remove everything else from GPX... So, how can I put the point at known coordinates? Maybe using some other editor than Potlatch? rmikke -- -- ==> Gardzi miodem - szalony! <== -- -- ==> -- Kubus Puchatek <== -- [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] temporary=yes tag
2008/10/3 Matias D'Ambrosio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > While discussing leisure=bullring in the talk-es (spanish speaking list), the > issue came up of bullrings that are only set up on certain occasions > (holidays and other special events). This is also common for fairs, circuses, > etc. So we thought something like a tag temporary=yes/no would be nice for > them, I searched in the wiki and found nothing of the sort, is something of > the sort available? opening_hours is not fit for this, obviously. I'm not > sure "temporary" is the right word (specially since it might give the idea > that the OSM tag is temporary, which is not intended). Wouldn't it be better to have "expires=date" instead? So trhat it would disappear automatically after the date. Ryszard Mikke -- -- ==> Gardzi miodem - szalony! <== -- -- ==> -- Kubus Puchatek <== -- [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Tags created by presets - railway station
Sure, I was using Potlatch. So far I couldn't make to get some sensible background i JOSM or Merkaator... I thought it is defined in OSM itself, not editor dependent. Ryszard Mikke 2008/9/27 Christoph Eckert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi, > >> I don't know where to propose a CHANGE to existing preset. >> >> When a railway station preset is chosen, it creates only one tag for >> for a point: railway:station. >> >> I think it should also create a name: tag, as every railway station >> has a name... > > any chance to get more info, e.g. whicdh editor you are refering to? I just > checked JOSM which asks for the name. > > Best regards, > > ce > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > -- -- ==> Gardzi miodem - szalony! <== -- -- ==> -- Kubus Puchatek <== -- [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Tags created by presets - railway station
Hello, I don't know where to propose a CHANGE to existing preset. When a railway station preset is chosen, it creates only one tag for for a point: railway:station. I think it should also create a name: tag, as every railway station has a name... rmikke -- -- ==> Gardzi miodem - szalony! <== -- -- ==> -- Kubus Puchatek <== -- [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
