Re: [OSM-talk] horrible job in gjilan,kosovo

[pec...@gmail.com]

Hi Mike!

I'm not the person who can fix this, but can you be more precise why
do you think this is error from rectration bot? Do you claim that
license of data were ok? Please specify.

Respectfully,
Peteris.

2012/8/22 Mike  Dupont :
> i am not going to deal with this ignorance,
> thanks
> mike
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Guillaume Rischard
>  wrote:
>> On 22 Aug 2012, at 09:43, Mike Dupont  wrote:
>>
>>> we are going to have an event there
>>
>> On the bright side, you have just the right people for a mapping party.
>>
>> Guillaume
>
>
>
> --
> James Michael DuPont
> Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org
> Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com
> Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org
> Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



-- 
mortigi tempo
Pēteris Krišjānis

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

[OSM-talk] Strange and mystifying aka another license violation

[pec...@gmail.com]

Hi!

I write a work for which I did a small comparison of walking/transit
routing/data between digital maps for my diploma work. One thing caught my
eye is that while MapQuest have this nice open.mapquest.com site with all
up-to-date and nicely legit attribution to us, their default site for
capital of my country has started to show details which are clearly from
OSM (stuff I did myself), but from year a half ago or so. Attribution to
default site is MapQuest, portions NAVTEQ, couldnt find attribution to OSM
there.

So maybe anyone know:
1) why it has reasonably old OSM data on main MapQuest site
2) and why it isn't properly attributed

Respectfully,
Peteris Krisjanis.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] source=Google

[pec...@gmail.com]

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Haiti/Imagery_and_data_sources#Google_Imagery

This is one explanation. Also source=Google really says nothing that source
is Google Maps.

P.


2013/5/18 malenki 

> There are abot 33.000 objects in OSM which have "google" in the one
> way or another in their source tag:
> http://malenki.ch/d/2013-05-18_142122_scr_source_google.png
> Just type "google" in the value-field:
> http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/source#values
>
> Any thoughts about that?
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>



-- 
mortigi tempo
Pēteris Krišjānis
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] iD Editor live on OpenStreetMap

[pec...@gmail.com]

As one of people who raised issue of iD being slow on Firefox more than
week ago, I must say that I tested it right now on Firefox 20 (on same
system, just Firefox upgrade) and it is much much faster. Thanks for
improvements to iD dev team and keep up good work! :)

Respectfully,
Peteris Krisjanis.


2013/5/24 RB 

> ID is a wonderful editor, simple and intuitive.  Although I am mostly a
> JOSN user, I know at least 2 beginners who feel confident enough to edit
> the map since there is ID.
>
> Thanks very much for it. It is helping OSM a lot.
>
> Ruben
> Le 24 mai 2013 15:05, "Simon Poole"  a écrit :
>
>
>> Am 08.05.2013 17:10, schrieb razor74:
>> > The worst editor ewer.
>> There is still (deleted) data in the database from an editor that got
>> lat/lon confused  what was the name again 
>>
>> JOSM
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>


-- 
mortigi tempo
Pēteris Krišjānis
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] List: Densely Mapped Areas

[pec...@gmail.com]

2013/5/24 Martin Koppenhoefer 

>
>
> interesting, but it's a pity that really a lot of them seem to be "mapped"
> by import rather than OSM mappers.
>
>
It is bad because?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Maps being "praised" for removing I-5 colasped bridge quickly

[pec...@gmail.com]

For those who are still naive to think that journalists find out these
things themselves: Google has huge amount of money to waste on PR. If last
two years is evidence everyone is happy to advertise "new stuff" of their
maps, because it's very easy for people to relate to.

I don't see how OSM would want to play this game. We don't see logic in
this. However, this make PR work.

Peteris.


2013/5/25 Maarten Deen 

> On 2013-05-25 07:09, James Mast wrote:
>
>> http://www.nbcnews.com/**technology/collapsed-i-5-**
>> bridge-gone-google-maps-**almost-quickly-it-6C10067906
>> [1]
>>
>>
>> If I remember correctly, we had it marked as "access=no" and the
>> segment removed about an hour faster than on Google. Somebody needs to
>> get ahold of Rosa from NBC (who did the "article") and let them know
>> about OSM pawning Google here.
>>
>
> Google is known by the public.
> Recently there was an important addition to the motorways around Amsterdam
> here [1] (opening of the A5, 2e Coentunnel). Google didn't have correct
> maps until 1,5 week afterwards. Of course OSM had correct maps almost
> instantly (it was only unfortunate that there was a small error and that
> osrm only updates once a week).
>
> Maybe we need to be more vocal and send out messages to various news sites
> when a new road is opened and it is on OSM and not on Google.
>
> [1]  14&layers=M
> >
>
> Regards,
> Maarten
>
>
>
> __**_
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk
>



-- 
mortigi tempo
Pēteris Krišjānis
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] It's fun while it lasts

[pec...@gmail.com]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12427680

I think we can call it a day. I really doubt Microsoft will be that
interested in OSM anymore when they got Nokia on their hook.

Cheers,
Peter.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] It's fun while it lasts

[pec...@gmail.com]

2011/2/11 Andrew Ayre :
> What is the point of spreading unfounded FUD? OSM doesn't need Microsoft to
> exist anyway.

Well, I'm not talking about OSM existence, of course. I'm talking
about interesting collaboration between Microsoft and OSM community
which just started to give fruits. It was just opinion, not fact
statement, that Microsoft will be now less interested in OSM.

Cheers,
Peter.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM is dying (was Re: We Need to Stop Google's Exploitation of Open Communities)

[pec...@gmail.com]

2011/4/11 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer :
> 2011/4/11 Dermot McNally :
>> OSM is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If
>> OSM is to survive at all it will be among bearded hippies too behind
>> the times to have discovered Waze. OSM continues to decay. Nothing
>> short of a cockeyed miracle could save OSM from its fate at this point
>> in time. For all practical purposes, OSM is dead.
>
>
> While I guess this was meant to be satirical there is indeed a problem
> with active contributors not growing any more since 17/08/2009
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osmdbstats4.png

There are several issues which needs to be addressed before we can
move forward (not necessary with growth, but forward nevertheless):
1) QA principles of map data. There are very few consistent know how
docs about mapping. No, I'm not talking about educating newbies, I
talking about agreements between active mappers how to do things. No
doubt, there are lot good QA tools, but they still lack serious
oversight and sometimes overburden contributor with details (not all
highways needs a name tag, you know). This is main problem I think
because lot of contributors just get confused with all stuff and there
is serious lack of documentation to explain all in detail;
2) Get air clear for licensing stuff - decide and move forward, give
concrete deadlines for moving to ODbL. I know there is resistance but
bird have already sung in this case - then better split up efforts to
not to hurt each another. I suggest critics shut up and show the code
with alternative service with old CC-BY-SA license;
3) Get some serious marketing team together. We have SOTM, we have
pictures of the day, we have lot of exciting new things in OSM - but
no one knows that. Heck, even majority of geeks still are clueless
what OpenStreetMap actually is and what you can do about it.
OpenLayers? No one knows. OpenStreetMap data can be used freely? Can't
I just use GM? No?

We as community, as organization need to deal with lot of stuff before
we can call us dead :)

Cheers,
Peter.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] PD tick box

[pec...@gmail.com]

2011/4/18 Elizabeth Dodd :
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 08:40:45 +0200
> Fabio Alessandro Locati  wrote:
>
>> In all the countries I know of ticking a checkbox is comparable to
>> sign a printed contract, so I thin is pointless to have a written
>> contract or a Copy&Past thing ;)
>
> add Australia to your list of places where ticking a checkbox is NOT
> comparable to signing a printed contract.
>
>
> Quotation from an Australian Copyright Council Information sheet G102v01
>
>      Elements of a contract
> The following elements must be present before you have a contract (a
> legally binding agreement):
> •   an offer;
> •   acceptance;
> •   benefit to all parties (“consideration”).
> Sometimes, a party does not want to accept the terms initially offered
> and makes a “counter-offer”, which may then be further negotiated. A
> contract is not binding until an offer is accepted without further
> conditions. Terms and conditions are generally set at the time of
> acceptance and cannot later be changed or revoked without all parties
> agreeing to the new terms.
>

I know, English is not my native one, but how it is related with
checkbox as agreeing with printed contract?
When you check that box, you agree that contract is final and valid.
If you don't want to acept the terms, you simply don't check it.

Or I don't get secret lawyers language? :)

Cheers,
Peter.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] New Logo in the Wiki

[pec...@gmail.com]

If you wanna critize SWG/OSMF *again*, please, create new thread but
don't spam this one. I know there is lot of desire to express pain how
communication doesn't work between some very loud minority and OSMF,
but please, do it properly.

About logo - new version looks excellent in high resolution, thanks; I
suggest that next step would be creating icons with lesser details for
each level (32x32, 16x16, etc.) so everyone can replace their art
(favicons, applications, etc.) accordingly. Also I hope that someone
will move futher and create whole "coorporate identity" for letters,
local chapters, etc. so anyone who wish to communicate as OSM mapper
can do so without reinventing a wheel. We need a little bit more
consistency in OSM image (and I don't mean new version of logo here).

About merchandise - I highly doubt that it will change anything. I
mean - logo haven't changed that much, safety wests still says fully
what it is so they are still useful. However, I agree, that blog post
with explaining about new logo and other plans of "touching up" OSM
identity would have been nice before actual change. I mean, decisions
were already made, so why not just inform people more about it? Yes,
there would be regular complaining, as usual, but at least it would be
done. I really hope that SWG/OSMF people do understand that most of us
don't see them as enemies and want to communicate about their
decisions. Not everyone wants to flame, but I'm quite sure that most
of us just want to be kept in the loop.

Cheers and have a good mapping,
Peter
Latvia OSM community

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Breaking up is hard to do (was New Logo in the Wiki)

[pec...@gmail.com]

2011/5/5 Russ Nelson :
> Dermot McNally writes:
>  > The change in licence and CTs has been endorsed massively by The
>  > Community.
>
> I'm wondering on what data you come to that conclusion? Because people
> have clicked "ok" on the license change and CTs? And yet there is no
> agreement and no contract. The OSMF has made it clear: you agree, or
> we delete your data and throw it into the dustbin of history. An
> agreement made under duress is no agreement at all.

If I'not mistaken, license change was endorsed by:
1) OSMF voting, in which lot of people didn't care to turn in their
votes. Rest of us voted for license change;
2) Low level of actual arguing against license outside this list.
There is no fork, no serious campaign to turn vote result around;
3) People still can read and as far as I know most of mappers are
quite informed about license change so "dumb clickers" charge won't
work here. They still don't complain because they trust OSMF/don't
care/don't have problems with changing license for their data;

At first I was seriously against license change not because of license
(I had hard time to argue against that their authors don't know what
they're doing), but because of way it was done. However, in recent
year, I have seen some serious effort from OSMF towards community
minor complains (major ones are just fundamental differences) mostly
about CT. In current form is is near possible compromise.

I know that lot of complains are coming about "huge elephant in the
room about which no one wants to talk about" or "massive imports with
CC-BY-SA".  Problem is also with thirty party data in general
(infamous CT). But CT has changed a quite since my last complains and
lot of questions are answered. About massive imports - well, ODbL
isn't that different, one must try to work with vendor to have data
relicensed.

In nutshell, if you are still unhappy about that, then it is time to
fork because what's done done. And in my opinion no, splitting OSMF or
OSM in "country organizations" isn't that fork.

Cheers,
Peter.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Comprehensiveness or level of detail rating

[pec...@gmail.com]

2011/5/6 Josh Doe :
> Has anyone discussed the creation of a comprehensiveness or level of
> detail rating? What I mean by this is different from a quality rating
> or metric, as that is a very difficult task which entails comparison
> against "authoritative" sources or some other process, and different
> from the general definition of completeness which measures what
> percentage of real world objects of type X exist in the OSM database.

I'm think about this all the time for almost a year, especially when
going out for mapping. I fully agree that we need something like this,
because because it is hard to grasp all data at once when mapping, and
better have first level's high quality data than average to low data
for all levels.

Your detail ratings make sense, but I would also add POI there.
Combined with roads it would be good starting block for measuring
quality and asserting need of additional mapping.

Cheers,
Peter.

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

[OSM-talk] Name rendering on osm.org (was Naming dispute over Jerusalem - OSM failure)

[pec...@gmail.com]

2011/10/5 Ed Loach :
> Lambert wrote:
>
>> Personally I would say:  '.. OFFICIALLY used locally.'
>
> Which is where it becomes political... Do you mean officially
> according to Israel? Or official according to international
> resolutions such as
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolut
> ion_194
> (see also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem#Political_status )
>
> (Note: I'm not taking sides in all this, but didn't realise there
> was such a political aspect to Jerusalem until doing a bit of
> research and thought the above made interesting reading for those
> not aware of the history involved. Disclaimer: I'm not saying
> Wikipedia is a reliable source).
>

Actually I have a question - why osm.org doesn't default to English
language of rendering entity names and if it's not available, to
closest one (in country official language, etc.) as it is now? This
would solve lot of such headaches. Jerusalem is Jerusalem in English
for both of nations.

Peteris.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Applications for Android

[pec...@gmail.com]

2011/10/10 Parveen Arora :
> Hi All,
> I was searching for the applications for android using OSM data and
> have got few.
> So Please suggest me some good applications like offline and online
> maps, navigation etc. etc. of android which uses OSM data.

Next time just Google For It [tm] :)

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Android

Peteris.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Applications for Android

[pec...@gmail.com]

2011/10/10 Parveen Arora :
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 1:53 AM, pec...@gmail.com  wrote:
>> Next time just Google For It [tm] :)
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Android
>
> Thank You very much :)
> and can you please suggest If any application is best according to you
> having most of the feature?

Well, I have HTC Wildfire, so I can't dream about feature creep :)
OSMAnd is currently most usable for me, but as far as I heard they
have gone commercial way, with Lite version for free - I use it for
browsing, but has also routing too (too slow on my phone). Also from
commercial ones NavDroyd have some serious recommendations from guys
which travels a lot.

Peteris.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Transition to CC-4 instead of destroying data

[pec...@gmail.com]

2011. gada 15. decembris 17:42 Ed Avis  rakstīja:
> If the new CC licence will be ready next year, why not keep the existing CC
> licence available as an option until then, in parallel with the ODbL?  Then 
> when
> CC4 is finalized the OSMF can make the decision whether to drop CC altogether.
> But people can still take advantage of the extra permissions given by ODbL, 
> too.

Could you please just stop talk about that? Decision is *already* made
and that's it. It is not only impractical, it is too late to turn back
now. Most of data will be preserved. Some of data will be recollected
and/or redrawn.

ODbL has issues for sure, but it is more clear about factual data used
in OSM, and it has several advantages over CC, especially in
republishing area. So it is done deal. If you don't like it, fine, no
one holds you here.

Cheers,
Peter.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Attention, mappers in Halland, Sweden

[pec...@gmail.com]

2012. gada 29. janvāris 17:05 Morten Kjeldgaard  rakstīja:
> Hi,
>
> It appears the danish meteorological institute has pointed to an area near
> Halmstad/Markaryd as an example where OpenstreetMap is poorer that Google
> maps [1].

Have some web source with such claims? Just interested.

There's no big problem to get some locations where OSM lacks comparing
to GM (at least visually as it seems so). I actually care about
overall quality.

Cheers,
Peteris.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Komuna e Malishevs, Serbia ?

[pec...@gmail.com]

2012. gada 1. aprīlis 13:01 Павел Фомин  rakstīja:
> 01.04.2012, 12:16, "Mike Dupont" :
>
> I think we agreed here on the "on the ground rule", kosovo is on the ground
> the republic of kosovo and not serbia.
> [...]
> belgrad is not in fact control of kosovo, kosovo is its own country.
>
>
> Arrrgh. We should have rules on mapping disputed areas and partially
> recognised countries. Is OSM showing the internationally accepted situation
> or is it taking into account every single front line?

Really? What about South Osettia? I have hard time to think that
anybody in Russia would "dispute" that, but it's recognized only by
few countries. And I bet there's lot of Georgians who would like to
see it mapped as part of Georgia. But while I fully understand them I
recognize that South Osettia currently is de facto independent from
Georgia.

No hard feelings, but what you are pushing is politics. You don't like
what you see in the map, fine. But that doesn't change anything. Fact
is a fact. Kosovo is de facto country and while it's not fully
recognized internationally, chances of that happening is much closer
than any other current "disputed regions". When by some actions it
happens to be reunited by Serbia - let's map it then accordingly. But
while it isn't, is just pushing your own agenda and destroying any joy
for mapping.

I really don't like posting this, I want to avoid any political
posturing these days, but please keep such disputes out of this. Map
accordingly to the facts, not historical or "what feels right" basis.
Please.

Respectfully,
Peteris.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Truth about media hype in Microsoft lending big support and big dollars to OSM ?

[pec...@gmail.com]

Actually I fail to see any war going on, because Google can easily
take our data, attribute accordingly and use them (with ODbL it will
be even easier). For some unknown for me reason they still insist to
use their own "soup" of data :)

So Microsoft gave us Bing permission, and for that I say thank you.
That's rare one from their list of their open source/open data efforts
(I won't count forced by court releasing api docs for SMB/MAPI in good
deeds, but still it was nice step from them to not to prolong that
stupid case).

2012. gada 4. aprīlis 05:24 Russ Nelson  rakstīja:
> Pieren writes:
>  > Where is the truth here ? Is the "big support and big money" the
>  > access of Bing aerial imagery ? Is that all ?
>
> Hey, that's enough for me. I LOVES the Bing aerial imagery. Microsoft
> is welcome to take all the credit for helping us that they want to
> take.
>
> --
> --my blog is at    http://blog.russnelson.com
> Crynwr supports open source software
> 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815
> Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  |     Sheepdog
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



-- 
mortigi tempo
Pēteris Krišjānis

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Detecting unwanted edits and vandalism

[pec...@gmail.com]

I think most humanly possible way is to set up monitoring for concrete
region and follow changesets. Usually those with vandalism don't have
very insightful changeset comments, also user names can sometimes
indicate intent.

I think there is no way computer can detect this except using our
defined tag list.

Respectfully,
Peter.

2012. gada 6. aprīlis 22:26 Adam Velkei  rakstīja:
> Dear mappers,
>
> I'm looking into ways to detect harmful map edits in an automated way.
> I'm fairly new to OSM and I'd like to hear about what typical mistakes have
> you seen while editing and what kind of changes would you consider to be
> vandalism.
>
> Any insight would be much appreciated.
>
> Best regards,
> Adam
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>



-- 
mortigi tempo
Pēteris Krišjānis

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

[pec...@gmail.com]

2010/12/6 Serge Wroclawski :
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:42 AM, andrzej zaborowski  wrote:
>> On 6 December 2010 14:55, Serge Wroclawski  wrote:
>>> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Steve Bennett  wrote:
 Hi,
  So, this is awkward. According to my profile, I've "agreed to the
 new Contributor Terms". I have no recollection of having done so, and
 obviously I don't want to agree to them while they're incompatible
 with Nearmap.
>>>
>>> If Nearmap is CC-BY-SA, they're compatible now.
>>
>
>> But the Contributor Terms aren't compatible.  It's not some
>> theoretical issue, they are actually incompatible in that you can't
>> give OSMF the rights listed in CT to something licensed CC-By-SA (yes,
>> this belongs on the legal list but I wanted to correc this)
>
> Right; this is an issue with a few people in OSM who've integrated
> other datasets under a specific license, rather than either getting
> the other organization to make them available under a very permissive
> license, or else making the donation to OSM itself.
>

Serge, which part of "It isn't about license, it is about CT" you
don't understand?

License is fine. It is CT which in fact still allows OSMF to change
data license to any other "free license" (which could be strip "share
alike" and "attribution" requirements) what blocks usage. In fact,
there is NO license which allows such CT to coexist. Only PD, and
that's even not working in all countries.

I know that ODbL team talked about changing description of "free
license", but I don't see any official statements about that. I'm
afraid that PDists got their way all over again.

Cheers,
Peter.

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