Re: [talk-au] Mass revert now??
On 07/01/2012, at 5:18 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote: On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 5:00 PM, David Findlay wrote: Yeah, that's me. Apparently I have another account? I can't seem to log in via that account though. Is there a way I can mark my old account as accepting terms and as public domain? Thanks, If that is you then in this case you've got nothing to worry about. JohnSmith kept your contributions in tact and simply amended them with a new version while making improvements to your work. Your attribution is present in the history and OSM very easily roll back to an earlier version. Andrew: that's also providing David can somehow access his old account which created the edits so that he can accept the new terms. Can we refer David to somewhere (help.openstreetmap.org ?) for further advice on accessing his old account? David: the critial thing is to accept the new terms. The other "Public Domain" option is of no consequence. Richard from legal explained to me that they just threw that in there as a "survey type of thing" to gauge opinion on whether there is interest in going down this path, but they won't be releasing any of our work as public domain without discussing with the community, and legally it seems there is no way to declare something as "Public Domain" in a few important countries anyway. In my opinion it was a silly place to put a survey question but I guess they had their reasons. BJ ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mass revert now??
On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 5:00 PM, David Findlay wrote: > Yeah, that's me. Apparently I have another account? I can't seem to log in via > that account though. Is there a way I can mark my old account as accepting > terms and as public domain? Thanks, If that is you then in this case you've got nothing to worry about. JohnSmith kept your contributions in tact and simply amended them with a new version while making improvements to your work. Your attribution is present in the history and OSM very easily roll back to an earlier version. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mass revert now??
On Sat, 7 Jan 2012 03:33:39 PM you wrote: > On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 12:13 AM, David Findlay > > wrote: > > On Sat, 7 Jan 2012 02:59:30 PM Andrew Harvey wrote: > >> On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 3:57 PM, David Findlay > >> > >> wrote: > >> >Looks like most of my area will > >> > > >> > disappear with the license change. I'm quite pissed off about it > >> > actually, because I remember creating much of it originally, but I've > >> > disappeared from the Author history. > >> > >> Can you please provide one example of where this happened? > > > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-27.21027&lon=153.03733&zoom=17&layers= > > M > > > > I can't be 100% certain, and I can't prove it, but I recall mapping these > > areas with my laptop and GPS bug in my backpack on my mountain bike, back > > before common mobile phones had GPS built in. They are marked as Author > > "JohnSmith" > > [Language please] > > I've selected one of the streets in that area. YMMV, Have a look at > the history. > http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=4477032 > I see another account earlier in the history, Davsoft, could that be you? Yeah, that's me. Apparently I have another account? I can't seem to log in via that account though. Is there a way I can mark my old account as accepting terms and as public domain? Thanks, David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mass revert now??
On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 12:13 AM, David Findlay wrote: > On Sat, 7 Jan 2012 02:59:30 PM Andrew Harvey wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 3:57 PM, David Findlay >> >> wrote: >> >Looks like most of my area will >> > >> > disappear with the license change. I'm quite pissed off about it >> > actually, because I remember creating much of it originally, but I've >> > disappeared from the Author history. >> >> Can you please provide one example of where this happened? > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-27.21027&lon=153.03733&zoom=17&layers=M > > I can't be 100% certain, and I can't prove it, but I recall mapping these > areas with my laptop and GPS bug in my backpack on my mountain bike, back > before common mobile phones had GPS built in. They are marked as Author > "JohnSmith" [Language please] I've selected one of the streets in that area. YMMV, Have a look at the history. http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=4477032 I see another account earlier in the history, Davsoft, could that be you? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mass revert now??
> Somewhere I'll still have all my GPS traces from the time. So I'm just > wondering if I should delete and redraw. Only problem being is I'd have to > delete the entire network he's created. Thanks, Turns out I do still have my GPS logs from then. Have gpx files from all these spots around the local area. There is lots of other stuff he did actually create initially, as when I was last editing OSM there were big gaps in the Redcliffe area. Seems though he's tainted the lot. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mass revert now??
On Sat, 7 Jan 2012 02:59:30 PM Andrew Harvey wrote: > On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 3:57 PM, David Findlay > > wrote: > >Looks like most of my area will > > > > disappear with the license change. I'm quite pissed off about it > > actually, because I remember creating much of it originally, but I've > > disappeared from the Author history. > > Can you please provide one example of where this happened? http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-27.21027&lon=153.03733&zoom=17&layers=M I can't be 100% certain, and I can't prove it, but I recall mapping these areas with my laptop and GPS bug in my backpack on my mountain bike, back before common mobile phones had GPS built in. They are marked as Author "JohnSmith" who seems to be an anal retentive prick. It looks to me like a bunch of this stuff may have been deleted and remapped using Nearmap at some point. I remember particularly because the streets I didn't bother naming at the time are still unnamed. Somewhere I'll still have all my GPS traces from the time. So I'm just wondering if I should delete and redraw. Only problem being is I'd have to delete the entire network he's created. Thanks, David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mass revert now??
On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 3:57 PM, David Findlay wrote: >Looks like most of my area will > disappear with the license change. I'm quite pissed off about it actually, > because I remember creating much of it originally, but I've disappeared from > the Author history. Can you please provide one example of where this happened? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mass revert now??
On Sat, 7 Jan 2012 12:25:31 PM David Findlay wrote: > I'm doing quite a bit of work on my local area, adding street names and the > like. How can I tell if the stuff I'm working on will be removed? Much of > it was originally added by me, but someone later has edited it based on > nearmap. Thanks, Never mind I've found the plugin in Josm. Looks like most of my area will disappear with the license change. I'm quite pissed off about it actually, because I remember creating much of it originally, but I've disappeared from the Author history. A "JohnSmith" who's declined the license change seems to have at some point come through editing with Nearmap. Should I start resurveying all these routes(should probably have GPS traces for most of them) and then deleting and replacing them? Thanks, David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mass revert now??
I'm doing quite a bit of work on my local area, adding street names and the like. How can I tell if the stuff I'm working on will be removed? Much of it was originally added by me, but someone later has edited it based on nearmap. Thanks, David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Confused by on-road bikelanes
If the bike lane is on the road the cars drive on and isn't separated by a barrier, tag the road as you normally would, then add cycleway=lane if the lane runs down both sides of the road. All these tags go on the same way both road and cyclelane together. If they aren't part of a cycle network don't add a lcn tag, and don't add it to a cycle route relation. Refer to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 1:03 PM, David Findlay wrote: > I've read the tagging guidelines but am still a little confused. How should we > tag marked on road bike lanes? Usually they don't have any particular name or > network. Thanks, > > David > > ___ > 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
[talk-au] Confused by on-road bikelanes
I've read the tagging guidelines but am still a little confused. How should we tag marked on road bike lanes? Usually they don't have any particular name or network. Thanks, David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Back in editing - Tracks and 4wd areas
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 9:53 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote: > Well imaging driving 29.980 km and then finding you need a 4WD to go the > last 20m. You may only want to go the first 29km in which case it would be possible without a 4wd. Also a proper routing engine would tell you not to bother starting as you can't get past the last 20m. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mass revert now??
On 2012-01-06 5:26PM, Nilbog_aus_OSM wrote: I agree. I find it hard to tell the necessity of further immediate rollbacks until the "maxspeed rollback" is done. Is this rollback technically possible? Perhaps going forward it would be possible to rollback the changes of those who have made it clear that they will not accept the new terms? Then later look at those who have currently declined the terms or have yet to choose. A good idea, I think. I've more or less given up editing anything at the moment, and just add new data, because trawling through the history of each and every (which it seems to be for most areas) item is less fun than making good new (odbl-compliant) data. ;-) However, if there's any chance of people still accepting the new licence, then nothing should be done to endanger their data. I'd rather just not do much mapping until April (not that I'm doing all that much at the moment). - Sam. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Back in editing - Tracks and 4wd areas
On 06/01/12 17:05, Andrew Harvey wrote: On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote: Ok so if your mapping every 10m and the first 10m is 2wd and then the next is 4wd the remainder of the track becomes 4wd_only. What about coming from the other end? Well imaging driving 29.980 km and then finding you need a 4WD to go the last 20m. Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mass revert now??
I agree. I find it hard to tell the necessity of further immediate rollbacks until the "maxspeed rollback" is done. Is this rollback technically possible? Perhaps going forward it would be possible to rollback the changes of those who have made it clear that they will not accept the new terms? Then later look at those who have currently declined the terms or have yet to choose. Mark B. -Original Message- From: Mark Pulley [mailto:mrpul...@lizzy.com.au] Sent: Friday, 6 January 2012 10:35 AM To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] Mass revert now?? Quoting Ian Sergeant : > On 6 January 2012 04:42, Michael Collinson wrote: > >> I looked at doing a revert for the street where I lived but found >> that just one "Fixed Stuff" changeset was affecting 12,576 different >> ways! I guess a lot of other folk are in the same position. > Yes, they are... The biggest culprit is probably the residential maxspeed=50 maxspeed:source=default(etc) edit - should we start by removing this one (removing just this change while leaving other subsequent edits intact)?. This will probably need to be done in a few steps: 1. If the maxspeed and maxspeed:source tags have not been touched since, then just remove these tags from the culprit changeset. 2. If the maxspeed has been changed since, then remove the tags from the culprit changeset, making sure the new versions remain (e.g. some maxspeeds I have corrected to 60, correcting the source tag at the same time). 3. For some ways, the maxspeed is correct; for the ones I have come across I have changed the source tag (usually to source:maxspeed=sign, although some have been maxspeed:source=sign (or =voice)) - can we remove the tags from the culprit changeset, adding the maxspeed to the later changeset where the source tag was corrected (as it should be obvious that I reviewed the maxspeed when adding the source tag)? Mark P. ___ 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] Back in editing - Tracks and 4wd areas
On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote: > Ok so if your mapping every 10m and the first 10m is 2wd and then the next > is 4wd the remainder of the track becomes 4wd_only. What about coming from the other end? On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 12:27 AM, David Findlay wrote: > So for instance I've just added a track in Freshwater National Park. It's > designated as a walking trail, but is really a 4wd track with a gate at the > end. So I've added it as a Track, but tagged no motorcycle or motorcar, but > said foot and bicycle yes. Sounds correct? In another area the tracks are > often again wide enough for 4wd's, but fences prevent vehicular access so I've > made them paths? Thanks, For the first one, yes how I would do it; for the second I would still tag it as a track, and as Michael pointed out use barrier=gate with the restrictions on the gate. On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote: > Read the wiki: > > "Description: > > A road signed as only suitable for 4WD Only vehicles" > > > If it's not signposted as 4wd only and "I don't think a 2WD can drive here" > then it's 4wd=recommended. Yes, I should really have read the wiki. It makes sense now, use 4wd_only=yes only where it is signposted or otherwise legally restricted to 4wd only, irrespective of the actual surface, and 4wd_only=recommended for the latter case. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
