[talk-au] i presume university western sydney
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Christian%20Nold/diary/12968 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] i presume university western sydney
On 4/02/2011 9:07 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Christian%20Nold/diary/12968 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au Correct, Elizabeth. Penrith is one of several campuses scattered around Sydney. The Penrith campus is here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-33.77151lon=150.74293zoom=15 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-33.77151lon=150.74293zoom=15 I would have thought it was already well mapped. Richard ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] i presume university western sydney
Was down at Kingswood during the week and there is still work needed. The Tafe colleague next door hasn't been started. Regards, Michael Hampson 0416 685 785 On 4/02/2011 10:33 PM, Richard Colless wrote: On 4/02/2011 9:07 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Christian%20Nold/diary/12968 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au Correct, Elizabeth. Penrith is one of several campuses scattered around Sydney. The Penrith campus is here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-33.77151lon=150.74293zoom=15 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-33.77151lon=150.74293zoom=15 I would have thought it was already well mapped. Richard ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On 3 February 2011 08:38, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 February 2011 09:28, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: I also wonder how this works, using your example, if the user had entered street names and then another user came along and fixed a spelling mistake in one which they had surveyed themselves. When the changeset is relicenced, you have v1 of an object under a non-compatible licence, and v2 is compatible, so what happens to the object? It goes away. All objects get rolled back to the last valid state that have no unlicensed edits before them. So any object where v1 is unlicensed is gone, no matter how many changes have been done to it since. Surely that can't be correct? For example, I've surveyed an awful lot of the Perth northern suburbs, but I started off by tracing Nearmap imagery. My understanding is that Nearmap haven't agreed to the new licensing but nevertheless I've since personally surveyed the streets, corrected alignments, added names and changed source=nearmap to source=survey. I would understand if data and records of the original source=nearmap disappeared with the license change, but the subsequent source=survey edits would be able to be kept? Dropping data simply because at one time it was in an incompatible-license state but is now no longer sounds incredibly destructive to me. Is what's going to happen documented anywhere? I've had a poke around the wiki, but can't see anything relevant to how the data is being handled. -- Andrew ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 13:30:47 +0800 Andrew Gregory andrew.greg...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 February 2011 08:38, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 February 2011 09:28, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: I also wonder how this works, using your example, if the user had entered street names and then another user came along and fixed a spelling mistake in one which they had surveyed themselves. When the changeset is relicenced, you have v1 of an object under a non-compatible licence, and v2 is compatible, so what happens to the object? It goes away. All objects get rolled back to the last valid state that have no unlicensed edits before them. So any object where v1 is unlicensed is gone, no matter how many changes have been done to it since. Surely that can't be correct? For example, I've surveyed an awful lot of the Perth northern suburbs, but I started off by tracing Nearmap imagery. My understanding is that Nearmap haven't agreed to the new licensing but nevertheless I've since personally surveyed the streets, corrected alignments, added names and changed source=nearmap to source=survey. I would understand if data and records of the original source=nearmap disappeared with the license change, but the subsequent source=survey edits would be able to be kept? Dropping data simply because at one time it was in an incompatible-license state but is now no longer sounds incredibly destructive to me. Is what's going to happen documented anywhere? I've had a poke around the wiki, but can't see anything relevant to how the data is being handled. There is no easy answer for this. How does one sort out exactly what has been surveyed and what is traced? Then we still aren't sure if you can agree to the contributor terms yet, having used NearMap at all - the CTs are still being revised, and until there is some 'final' version, again there is no answer. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
