[talk-au] Melbourne bike paths update
Hi all, I have done a preliminary pass on all the bike paths in Melbourne, attempting to find each one and make a link to the relation. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Victoria,_Australia/Bike_paths However, I couldn't find some (or they might not be mapped), so I'd appreciate any help in completing the table. Also, if you know anyone who has an interest in cycling and OSM, please spread the word. Thanks, Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] ODBL yet again, but from a pragmatic approach...
On 10 July 2010 10:15, James Livingston wrote: > If you have imported data you got from someone else (other than public > domain), you can't legally agree to the CTs. Since I've imported some data > into OSM under my main account, I can't strictly click I Agree on that > account unless the changesets are moved to a different account. This is just semantics, it isn't that useful to give exceptions to the TCs. Otherwise those with exceptions, especially if they supply large amounts of data, would be able to hold OSM hostage at a future point in time. > The big one in Europe is AND. Presumably they are going to get an exemption > to the CTs, because they're definitely not going to agree to them for the > same reason our governments aren't. Which is nearly pointless trying to enforce the TCs on everyone, if large data suppliers will be exempt, all that needs to happen is include a small snippet about attribution and everyone is in the clear. > More important than losing data we wouldn't otherwise have, if losing data > that has replaced older stuff. Various people have gone around replacing the > old PGS coastline with ABS-derived coastline - someone is going to have to go > and re-import the PGS stuff if we lose CC-BY data. I know I've replaced a > bunch of Yahoo-imagery derived data with stuff based on CC-BY data. Not necessarily, we now have nearmap to draw upon as well, alternatively there is also SRTM that could be used. > If OSM does go ODbL, I'm tempted to propose PD re-licensing sometime after it > settled down a bit (but not too settled) just to stir things up. From memory, > someone has quoted 70% of people at SotM the other year as being happy to > have their work PD - we only need a vote of OSMF (presumably >50% majority) > and two thirds of "active mappers". 70% of ~230 people isn't exactly a good sample size, that isn't even 10% of active mappers, and some of those for PD would be just as happy with cc-by, as I see it, things are pretty much committed to some form of attribution license, I don't see PD happening if for no other reason than to prevent from just taking without giving back. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] ODBL yet again, but from a pragmatic approach...
On 10/07/2010, at 9:18 AM, John Smith wrote: > however due to > the absence of requiring such a free license to be cc-by compatible > (require some form of attribution) this then means any cc-by data > would now have to be expunged from the system. Only if the copyright holder hasn't agreed to the CTs. If you are importing any data into OSM, you either 1) have to be the copyright holder and agree to the CTs, gotten the copyright holder's permission to agree to the CTs on behalf of them, or 3) somehow gotten an exemption from having to agree to the CTs. I'm still trying to find out how you do (3). If you have imported data you got from someone else (other than public domain), you can't legally agree to the CTs. Since I've imported some data into OSM under my main account, I can't strictly click I Agree on that account unless the changesets are moved to a different account. > Currently we have a fair bit of cc-by data in the system, things like > ABS boundaries and in turn any data derived from such data, but so far > there is only assumptions on how much data is this exactly, especially > in Europe where the assumption is the majority of data has been > relicensed or is clean to begin with, The big one in Europe is AND. Presumably they are going to get an exemption to the CTs, because they're definitely not going to agree to them for the same reason our governments aren't. > while this wouldn't be completely devastating, we're not just talking ABS > data, there is a lot more to it like points of interest and national > parks and other such things. More important than losing data we wouldn't otherwise have, if losing data that has replaced older stuff. Various people have gone around replacing the old PGS coastline with ABS-derived coastline - someone is going to have to go and re-import the PGS stuff if we lose CC-BY data. I know I've replaced a bunch of Yahoo-imagery derived data with stuff based on CC-BY data. > Although I'm not sure what the point is of moving to another > attribution/share-a-like license, if the TCs undermine this, unless of > course the intent is to eventually force everyone to go to PD long > term, but doing it on the sly hoping no one notices where things are > headed. If OSM does go ODbL, I'm tempted to propose PD re-licensing sometime after it settled down a bit (but not too settled) just to stir things up. From memory, someone has quoted 70% of people at SotM the other year as being happy to have their work PD - we only need a vote of OSMF (presumably >50% majority) and two thirds of "active mappers". I'm sure that would go down *really* well, regardless of the outcome. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] ODBL yet again, but from a pragmatic approach...
As people should now be aware there is currently there is an issue, not so much with ODBL, but the new Terms and Conditions people have to agree to stating that OSM can change to other "free" licenses in future without requiring consent, while in theory this is a great idea since if there is a compelling reason to change/upgrade the license they can do so without all the problems occurring now, however due to the absence of requiring such a free license to be cc-by compatible (require some form of attribution) this then means any cc-by data would now have to be expunged from the system. Currently we have a fair bit of cc-by data in the system, things like ABS boundaries and in turn any data derived from such data, but so far there is only assumptions on how much data is this exactly, especially in Europe where the assumption is the majority of data has been relicensed or is clean to begin with, so they don't care about anyone else who may be effected by this change, but of course the big unknown is how many contributors will actually agree to this change, especially some of the more prolific editors. The $20mill dollar question however is this, and this is the pragmatic part, what would the state of the map be tomorrow if the license change over happened if all the cc-by data and derived data disappeared. For the purposes of this exercise I'll just make the blind assumption that anything with attribution=* would be considered cc-by, obviously this isn't a perfect test since some people have stripped the attribution information and other data may not have been attributed properly, then again even ODBL data could be tainted, and subtly enough to corrupt large chunks of the database, however this should give us a pretty good idea of what we're dealing with rather than keep making blind assumptions. I found that there is 97,573 ways/nodes/relations within an Australia bounding box with an attribution tag, although there needs to be a lot more interrogation of the data to make this a much more tangible and suitable for making objective decisions based on it. Although I did create a noattribution navit[1] file and a gosmore file[2] to try and help with visualising. The above 98k objects make up about 8M of compressed data[3], while this wouldn't be completely devastating, we're not just talking ABS data, there is a lot more to it like points of interest and national parks and other such things. As Kai wrote in another thread, the loss of data could have a big demoralising effect on anyone that spent time cleaning up or otherwise manipulating that data. Those that are so gung-ho to push through their own agendas might want to push for a small change to the TCs ensure attribution and most of this discussion would disappear, rather than alienating[4] people that contribute data from regional areas that we have enough trouble sourcing by any other means, that is unless they want to come and recruit others that would also do the work for free instead. Although I'm not sure what the point is of moving to another attribution/share-a-like license, if the TCs undermine this, unless of course the intent is to eventually force everyone to go to PD long term, but doing it on the sly hoping no one notices where things are headed. [1] http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/australia-noattribution.navit.bin [2] http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/australia-noattribution.pak [3] 149,017,722 v 157,576,420 respectively [4] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2010-July/003441.html ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 'Restrictive cartography'
On Fri, 9 Jul 2010, Ben Last wrote: > As a slightly different tack, criminals are now using cheap GPS jammers > when ripping off trucks with valuable loads to defeat the GPS-based > tracking-and-reporting. The side effects of a jammer can be considerable, > including bringing down cellular phone systems. And, of course, screwing > up the GPS tracks of any innocent OSM mappers nearby... I've seen them on sale from US when searching ebay and similar for gps loggers ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM, eat your heart out... :)
On 9 July 2010 17:44, Simon Biber wrote: > eDuShi (meaning eCity) has made cool "real" isometric 3D maps of many cities > in > China. The style is somewhere in between cartoon and reality, but obviously > much Looks like simcity... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM, eat your heart out... :)
Ben Last wrote: > It'd be better like this: >http://hello.eboy.com/eboy/wp-content/uploads/2006/04/FTN_CommunicationCity_06t.png > > eDuShi (meaning eCity) has made cool "real" isometric 3D maps of many cities in China. The style is somewhere in between cartoon and reality, but obviously much cleaner than the cities are in real life. The buildings look similar to their counterparts in real life. Most of the maps are in Chinese, but there is an example of Hong Kong in English here: http://hongkong.edushi.com/?l=en I wonder how much of it is clever software, and how much is cheap labour. Regards, Simon. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
