Re: [OSM-talk] Question about contributor terms and derived contributions
On 2011-06-15 04:01, Nathan Edgars II wrote: As far as I know, I have probably contributed data in the following circumstances: *Mapper A who has not accepted the change to ODbL drew two intersecting roads. *I note in person that there is a recently-added island-separated right-turn lane, and I add it (way B) based on the ways added by A and a rough estimate of its size. Now I am the only contributor in the history of way B and all of its nodes. Yet their locations are based on cc-by-sa data, and cannot be distributed under ODbL. Why should way B be based on way A? You have been there, noticed the new way and added it. Why should you put it one kilometer away just because there is a copyrighted way beside? If way B is next to way A in reality than it will always be next to way A on any map regardless of the copyright. Otherwise no one would ever be able to draw a map, because then anybody who has already drew a map before can complain that you have copied the map. OTOH that would be the solution to the licence question: Whoever has added the first node in OSM (Steve C?) decides which licence we use, because all other nodes are based on that node :-). Bye, Andreas ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Question about contributor terms and derived contributions
Andreas Perstinger wrote: On 2011-06-15 04:01, Nathan Edgars II wrote: As far as I know, I have probably contributed data in the following circumstances: *Mapper A who has not accepted the change to ODbL drew two intersecting roads. *I note in person that there is a recently-added island-separated right-turn lane, and I add it (way B) based on the ways added by A and a rough estimate of its size. Now I am the only contributor in the history of way B and all of its nodes. Yet their locations are based on cc-by-sa data, and cannot be distributed under ODbL. Why should way B be based on way A? You have been there, noticed the new way and added it. Added it *based on existing data*. For simplicity, take the beginning of the way. This is a new node created by me, but lies along an existing way, and is thus related linearly to two existing nodes. We call this a derivative work. -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Question-about-contributor-terms-and-derived-contributions-tp6477076p6482728.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] Question about contributor terms and derived contributions
On 2011-06-16 13:55, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Andreas Perstinger wrote: On 2011-06-15 04:01, Nathan Edgars II wrote: As far as I know, I have probably contributed data in the following circumstances: *Mapper A who has not accepted the change to ODbL drew two intersecting roads. *I note in person that there is a recently-added island-separated right-turn lane, and I add it (way B) based on the ways added by A and a rough estimate of its size. Now I am the only contributor in the history of way B and all of its nodes. Yet their locations are based on cc-by-sa data, and cannot be distributed under ODbL. Why should way B be based on way A? You have been there, noticed the new way and added it. Added it *based on existing data*. For simplicity, take the beginning of the way. This is a new node created by me, but lies along an existing way, and is thus related linearly to two existing nodes. We call this a derivative work. How did you noticed that there is a right-way turn lane? Probably not by looking on the OSM map because then it would have been already there. So you have another source (local knowledge, bing, ...) from which you got the location of this way - you derived the information from that source. You could argue that without looking on the OSM map you wouldn't have noticed the missing way and therefore this information (the right-turn lane is missing) is derived from a ccbysa source. But then the whole licence change can't work because as I said before, every single edit after the first node is based on this node (a ccbysa one). I doubt that. Bye, Andreas ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Question about contributor terms and derived contributions
Andreas Perstinger wrote: How did you noticed that there is a right-way turn lane? Probably not by looking on the OSM map because then it would have been already there. So you have another source (local knowledge, bing, ...) from which you got the location of this way - you derived the information from that source. My point is that you can't derive exact location from local knowledge. So in the absence of aerials or GPS traces, any estimation will be derived from existing ways. -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Question-about-contributor-terms-and-derived-contributions-tp6477076p6483084.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] Question about contributor terms and derived contributions
On 2011-06-16 15:48, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Andreas Perstinger wrote: How did you noticed that there is a right-way turn lane? Probably not by looking on the OSM map because then it would have been already there. So you have another source (local knowledge, bing, ...) from which you got the location of this way - you derived the information from that source. My point is that you can't derive exact location from local knowledge. So in the absence of aerials or GPS traces, any estimation will be derived from existing ways. So in your case there are just objects near your way which are ccbysa and which will probably be removed and there is no other legal source from which you can recreate the area? Then why do you care about this single way at all? If there is just *one* single object near your way which isn't based on a ccbysa node/way, then you could always argue IMHO that you've measured the location of your way from this object (JOSM has a measurement tool with you can use for distances and angles). People have produced maps before aerials and GPS existed :-). Bye, Andreas ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Question about contributor terms and derived contributions
Andreas Perstinger wrote: On 2011-06-16 15:48, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Andreas Perstinger wrote: How did you noticed that there is a right-way turn lane? Probably not by looking on the OSM map because then it would have been already there. So you have another source (local knowledge, bing, ...) from which you got the location of this way - you derived the information from that source. My point is that you can't derive exact location from local knowledge. So in the absence of aerials or GPS traces, any estimation will be derived from existing ways. So in your case there are just objects near your way which are ccbysa and which will probably be removed and there is no other legal source from which you can recreate the area? Then why do you care about this single way at all? Who said anything about recreating? I'm supposed to agree to the statement that as far as I know, I have the right to authorize OSMF to use and distribute those Contents under our current licence terms. But, as far as I know, I don't, because some of those contents may be derived from cc-by-sa data without that being clear in the database. -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Question-about-contributor-terms-and-derived-contributions-tp6477076p6483748.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] Question about contributor terms and derived contributions
2011/6/16 Andreas Perstinger andreas.perstin...@gmx.net: If there is just *one* single object near your way which isn't based on a ccbysa node/way, then you could always argue IMHO that you've measured the location of your way from this object (JOSM has a measurement tool with you can use for distances and angles). AFAIR this is not reliable or precise. AFAIR it is not suited to enter precise data you measured on the ground. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Question about contributor terms and derived contributions
2011/6/16 Andreas Perstingerandreas.perstin...@gmx.net: If there is just *one* single object near your way which isn't based on a ccbysa node/way, then you could always argue IMHO that you've measured the location of your way from this object (JOSM has a measurement tool with you can use for distances and angles). That's the whole basis of how Walking Papers works (no measuring tool involved) - you locate new items by referring to the existing data. And it is also Ordnance Survey's oft-stated contention that this is indeed derivation - if you geolocate a photo by reference to map features, that is derived. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Question about contributor terms and derived contributions
On 2011-06-16 18:51, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2011/6/16 Andreas Perstingerandreas.perstin...@gmx.net: If there is just *one* single object near your way which isn't based on a ccbysa node/way, then you could always argue IMHO that you've measured the location of your way from this object (JOSM has a measurement tool with you can use for distances and angles). AFAIR this is not reliable or precise. AFAIR it is not suited to enter precise data you measured on the ground. I've done mapping for orienteering maps with this method and there are still people who map like that. The error is probably in the same order as with GPS (5-10m), especially for example in the woods or around high buildings. Ask a good orienteerer how they use compass and counting steps. If the distance isn't too far they will come very close to their aim. Bye, Andreas ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Question about contributor terms and derived contributions
On 2011-06-16 19:15, David Earl wrote: 2011/6/16 Andreas Perstingerandreas.perstin...@gmx.net: If there is just *one* single object near your way which isn't based on a ccbysa node/way, then you could always argue IMHO that you've measured the location of your way from this object (JOSM has a measurement tool with you can use for distances and angles). That's the whole basis of how Walking Papers works (no measuring tool involved) - you locate new items by referring to the existing data. And it is also Ordnance Survey's oft-stated contention that this is indeed derivation - if you geolocate a photo by reference to map features, that is derived. That's why you need one object which isn't based on restrictions as I've said (more accurate: you need two points of a baseline). The rest is simple trigonometry. Bye, Andreas ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
