Re: [talk-au] OSM Attribution Q
On 2022-08-14 3:23 a.m., Bob Cameron wrote: I likely have this wrong, but worth a question. Looking at petrolspy.com.au website for Theodore Qld and note that the sport and rec ground shows a remarkable similarity to the changes/updates I did 10 months ago, right down to the service road loop around the RV dump. In addition the petrolspy map has copied the campsite rather than the reserve name. There is no attribution I can see, but the site does have Google ads. The contact domain (email) is MX'd to Google. They are using a map from maptiler, which uses OpenStreetMap data. I would contact them at the email on their site, explaining that they're using a Map based on OpenStreetMap data, and they are required to attribute, which is generally done in one of the bottom corners of the map. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Multiple web sites linked to car yard
On 2022-07-28 4:22 p.m., Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: I saw something similar a little while back when clearing Notes. Same physical premises had 2 businesses operating out of it, one as general scrap metal & the other a car wrecker, but two different names, phone numbers & websites. OK or not? I could see it for something like that where they're doing somewhat different things. I'd say that one is marginal, while in the case linked earlier, they were all offering the same service of picking up old vehicles. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Multiple web sites linked to car yard
On 2022-07-28 12:29 a.m., nwastra wrote: This mapper has added about a dozen similar businesses to the same car wrecker yard. https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/freecarpickup/history#map=19/-33.93048/150.99878 I assume this is ok as they are linked to the same physical location. It's not okay - judging by the imagery and online results, there's only one company physically there that does business under multiple names. OSM is a map of the world, not a general business directory. There's clearly a scrap_yard there, so I've cleaned up the duplicates and left the one that was originally mapped. I'll leave a changeset comment on one of the mapper's changesets. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] "Removing closed or illegal trails." (in Nerang National Park)
On 2021-10-28 8:05 p.m., osm.talk...@thorsten.engler.id.au wrote: If it exists on the ground, it gets mapped. If there is no legal access, that's access=no or access=private. If it's a path that has been created by traffic where it's not officially meant to go, it's informal=yes. Yep, this is how it is supposed to be handled. Removing paths that exist on the ground is vandalism, and counter-productive because the paths will be remapped ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Ways to map boundaries that won't go into OSM
On 2019-06-16 10:26 p.m., Ben Kelley wrote: Hi. A project I have been thinking about for a while is creating a map of Anglican (church) parish boundaries in Australia. In some sense these are like admin boundaries, but the source of the boundary is not easily verifiable. While the resulting map would be based on OSM, the data itself probably does not belong in OSM. Any thoughts on a tool set for how to do this? I've used uMap (http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/) where I want to create a map on top of OSM data. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
