Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
If you want to do some mapping from home, then BING imagery is usually more than adequete and is and will continue to be OSM comliant. This way your efforts will not be in vain whether you stay with OSM, or branch off to another project. I map in places where the best imagery is usually Landsat. Don't get excited about Bing imagery. Outside of the bigger Australian cities it is targeted at commercial targets - mining sites and around where I live, the growing of illegal crops. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
- Original Message - From: John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com To: Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 4:59 AM Subject: Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors On 11 April 2011 13:45, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote: Create a new account, accept the CT's and then Has the CTs been updated to allow for this, or do they still refer to a natural person? The live CT's have not yet been updated to allow this, but the draft CT's will. Frankly I'm at a loss to see why the simple change to the CT's to make it clear they apply to a user account, and not a natural person, was not implemented months ago. David Also that doesn't help if someone only wishes to support projects using share a like licenses. ___ 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] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
Hi, This sums up me too. After years of mapping in Australia (when I started in Tasmania the map was literally blank) the threat of data deletion is the most de-motivating thing ever. I have used nearmap so I am of the understanding I CAN'T accept the terms. I also agree that many who accept probably have no idea of the legal issues and will be creating tainted data. I am waiting for an outcome and hoping for the best but the longer I wait the the more de-motivated I become and the community has certainly lost momentum. There is no incentive to keep mapping while there is a chance all of your work will be deleted in the future. Like Michael sometimes I can't help myself and do some more mapping, but it still feels futile. Cheers, Neal On 07/04/2011, at 10:57 PM, Michael Hampson wrote: I hear you Liz and All Blokes, it is sad. Really tried to ignore the politics as I just wanted to map things to help out the local community and since I heard about the changes I have almost given up. Now I only map when I can't help myself. Might be time to retire from my mapping and let someone else do the Empires work!! ___ 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] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
On 11 April 2011 13:45, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote: Create a new account, accept the CT's and then Has the CTs been updated to allow for this, or do they still refer to a natural person? Also that doesn't help if someone only wishes to support projects using share a like licenses. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 11:53:02 +1000 Leon Kernan lker...@gmail.com wrote: Supposedly it sends you to this flippant page if you decline the CT: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributor_Terms_Declined I think the lolcat picture on that page tells us exactly what they think of those of us that won't / can 't / don't want to accept their terms. Certainly helps give the impression of a professional organisation... (not) I don't see a lolcat on that page, was it on another page? Certainly the lolcat on the front page of the osm wiki makes me wonder about the IQ of the page writers ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 04:47:39 -0700 (PDT) All Blokes speed_13...@yahoo.com.au wrote: I was very keen and learning ...had done a few edits not many but I was planning on getting right into it. I don't agree with the new licensing and have just been sitting on the side reading. It's sad that this is happening A vibrant aussie community has gone down the drain within the last 12 months. I have spent 3 1/2 years (nearly) adding big tracts of eastern australia to the osm map, and now think I will do something else with my spare time. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On 7 April 2011 21:07, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: I don't see a lolcat on that page, was it on another page? Certainly the lolcat on the front page of the osm wiki makes me wonder about the IQ of the page writers Looks like Grant has removed it from the current version of the page, but the history is still there: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Contributor_Terms_Declinedoldid=549554 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On 7 April 2011 12:07, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: I don't see a lolcat on that page, was it on another page? Certainly the lolcat on the front page of the osm wiki makes me wonder about the IQ of the page writers I removed the lolcat from the decline page + translations... It was the wrong lolcat, we need a sad cat/kitten. The funnier looking the better. Regards Grant ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
On 7/04/2011 9:10 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 04:47:39 -0700 (PDT) All Blokesspeed_13...@yahoo.com.au wrote: I was very keen and learning ...had done a few edits not many but I was planning on getting right into it. I don't agree with the new licensing and have just been sitting on the side reading. It's sad that this is happening A vibrant aussie community has gone down the drain within the last 12 months. I have spent 3 1/2 years (nearly) adding big tracts of eastern australia to the osm map, and now think I will do something else with my spare time. I hear you Liz and All Blokes, it is sad. Really tried to ignore the politics as I just wanted to map things to help out the local community and since I heard about the changes I have almost given up. Now I only map when I can't help myself. Might be time to retire from my mapping and let someone else do the Empires work!! ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
On 08/04/11 05:47, John Henderson wrote: On 07/04/11 21:10, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: It's sad that this is happening A vibrant aussie community has gone down the drain within the last 12 months. I have spent 3 1/2 years (nearly) adding big tracts of eastern australia to the osm map, and now think I will do something else with my spare time. Agreed. Quite aside from other considerations, the fuel cost and the wastage of having to do all this work again is staggering to the individuals concerned. It's not as if it can be dome in a lifetime by waiting for OSM contributors to take all these roads again without going out of their way. It wouldn't be nearly so bad if we could simply agree to the new terms for objects outside Nearmap coverage (and for future contributions), but have our contaminated work removed. Whilst I agree / commiserate with your basic point (been there; done that; spent the fuel), don't you still have the raw traces from your device? I certainly do, and consider at no point have I ever given up my rights to them. Maybe I am wrong; but what is to stop me from reformatting, retracing or extracting information from these (in my case GPX) traces, and subsequently giving this new work away to absolutely anybody I choose? Certainly it will be a lot of work and a monumental annoyance to do so; but I don't remember signing away this aspect of my rights as primary producer of survey data. Any thoughts? P.S. I make no claim to being a significant contributor; but if my efforts are expunged I shall ever harbour deep malevolence toward the organisation that does so regarding the hole in the map which is left; even if nobody else notices! ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
On 08/04/11 06:25, {withheld} wrote:
Whilst I agree / commiserate with your basic point (been there; done
that; spent the fuel), don't you still have the raw traces from your
device? I certainly do, and consider at no point have I ever given up my
rights to them.
I couldn't see any point in keeping those traces at the time, so a
couple of years OSM work of mine will be lost to OSM.
John H
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
On 08/04/11 06:37, John Henderson wrote:
On 08/04/11 06:25, {withheld} wrote:
Whilst I agree / commiserate with your basic point (been there; done
that; spent the fuel), don't you still have the raw traces from your
device? I certainly do, and consider at no point have I ever given up my
rights to them.
I couldn't see any point in keeping those traces at the time, so a
couple of years OSM work of mine will be lost to OSM.
That is annoying. I feel for you; as I nearly did the same thing; and in
fact have lost some information as well,but obviously not quite so severely.
Very naughty thought. I wonder what the reaction would be to a simple,
formal request to OSMF to re-grant you your rights to OSM data along the
same alignments on the basis OSM is backing up an effective copy of your
lost data?
VNT-2: You didn't upload the traces to OSM, and thus have the capability
to legitimately download them again; do you? Worth checking:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/your-OSM-id/traces.
VNT-3: Until the full licence change goes through you still have rights
under the SA clause to export your area of the map. There are any
amount of utilities available to strip your real data out of the
resulting .osm file(s). XAPI may be your friend here. Try something
like: http://xapi.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/*[@user=OSMid|OSMid2|OSMid3]
This is quite crude of course: it scrapes off details of the latest
edits made in OSM by user OSMid (optional aliases OSMid2 etc.) A full
approach - which I have not experimented with - would be to extract the
list of changesets you had made and to perform a similar extraction for
each one.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 07:30:29 +1000
{withheld} pheasant.cou...@gmail.com wrote:
Whilst I agree / commiserate with your basic point (been there;
done that; spent the fuel), don't you still have the raw traces
from your device? I certainly do, and consider at no point have I
ever given up my rights to them.
I couldn't see any point in keeping those traces at the time, so a
couple of years OSM work of mine will be lost to OSM.
That is annoying. I feel for you; as I nearly did the same thing; and
in fact have lost some information as well,but obviously not quite so
severely.
I have the vast majority of mine. I removed them from OSM already, and
have them roughly sorted by year.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
On 08/04/11 07:30, {withheld} wrote:
VNT-2: You didn't upload the traces to OSM, and thus have the capability
to legitimately download them again; do you? Worth checking:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/your-OSM-id/traces.
Unfortunately no. The few traces I've uploaded have been the pure
ones, where I've kept in the traffic lane. When I'm mapping, I tend to
wander around and mark waypoints that I make notes about. It all makes
sense to me if I process it when I get home. But I don't want other
mappers being mislead by my meanderings, as I'm often mapping roads
which have no traces already.
John H
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
On 8 April 2011 05:47, John Henderson snow...@gmx.com wrote: It wouldn't be nearly so bad if we could simply agree to the new terms for objects outside Nearmap coverage (and for future contributions), but have our contaminated work removed. Well our first priority should be to try and get an agreement with Nearmap. Hopefully to allow use of their imaging ongoing, but if that turns out not to be possible to hope that they may just allow existing work to be kept. In the unfortunate eventuality that Nearmap derived data has to be removed from the main OSM trunk, then we will need a few tools to do this effectively. I'm sure a tool along the lines of what you have suggested is technically feasible. But as I previously said, we are going to have to claw some positivity back if we are going to maintain OSM as a useful data set if the licence/contributor terms change is forced. Given the effort put into the mapping of these areas, I think it is worth a bit more a bit more to keep as much data as possible intact. I don't want to sit by and watch it dissolve. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
To be clear; we're not refusing anything - our licence has remained the same since we launched, and we haven't changed it. The new OSM CTs are incompatible with it. Regards Ben On 7 April 2011 08:14, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 April 2011 10:06, Alex (Maxious) Sadleir maxi...@gmail.com wrote: What happened to NearMap? Nearmap have refused to allow data derived from their imagery to be used without guarantee of attribution and share-a-like in a future license, or having a guarantee that such data would be removed if relicensing occurs. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au -- *Ben Last* *Development Manager* [image: nearmap.com] http://www.nearmap.com [image: leave us a message on facebook] http://www.facebook.com/nearmap [image: follow us on twitter] http://www.twitter.com/nearmap [image: nearmap youtube channel] http://www.youtube.com/nearmap [image: linkedin]http://www.linkedin.com/company/nearmap-pty-ltd [image: Get your Free nearmap.com newsletter now!]http://www.nearmap.com/nearmap/subscription ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
On 8 April 2011 07:30, {withheld} pheasant.cou...@gmail.com wrote:
Very naughty thought. I wonder what the reaction would be to a simple,
formal request to OSMF to re-grant you your rights to OSM data along the
same alignments on the basis OSM is backing up an effective copy of your
lost data?
That isn't needed since at no point under the new or old CT do you
sign your copyright away, previously/currently for some you agreed to
allow OSM-F to publish your work under cc-by-sa, and possibly in
future you agree to allow OSM-F to be able to license a copy of your
data as they see fit. In both cases you still own the copyright, but
of course in future you have to deal with more than just copyright and
so that would become a lot less clear if you could do what you want
with your own submissions if you attempt to extract them from the
database.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
On 08/04/11 10:46, John Smith wrote:
On 8 April 2011 07:30, {withheld} pheasant.cou...@gmail.com wrote:
Very naughty thought. I wonder what the reaction would be to a simple,
formal request to OSMF to re-grant you your rights to OSM data along the
same alignments on the basis OSM is backing up an effective copy of your
lost data?
That isn't needed since at no point under the new or old CT do you
sign your copyright away, previously/currently for some you agreed to
allow OSM-F to publish your work under cc-by-sa, and possibly in
future you agree to allow OSM-F to be able to license a copy of your
data as they see fit. In both cases you still own the copyright, but
of course in future you have to deal with more than just copyright and
so that would become a lot less clear if you could do what you want
with your own submissions if you attempt to extract them from the
database.
Agreed - and thanks for stating the point I had intended so clearly.
The naughty aspect springs from my awkward attempt to imply the FUD
(fear/uncertainty/doubt) campaign could possibly be played two ways.
That is not to say I seriously think such an approach would be
acknowledged; let alone honoured.
Reminder: this particular sub-thread was attempting to address the
problems of a user who wishes to recover as best they can their own
original survey traces lost as a result of overly-trusting OSM-F to do
the right and honourable thing by their volunteer community.
Nearly choked on that. Wonder why?
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 19:31:53 +1000 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com didn't write: (Michael Collinson did) For clarity: - This will only affect (77,000) contributors who registered before May 2010 and who have not accepted the new terms as part of the voluntary re-licensing program. those who see a big hole in the numbers total contributors at May 2010 ~250,000 Those who have signed up ~9,000 Those who have not signed up ~77,000 the gap I guess refers to accounts which have been completely idle and will be prevented from editing (source, LWG minutes 5th April 2011) I still have trouble understanding how 9,000 of 86,000 is a large majority. Those who signed up after May 2010 got no option, so they can't be construed as supporting either side. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On 6 April 2011 10:51, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 19:31:53 +1000 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com didn't write: (Michael Collinson did) For clarity: - This will only affect (77,000) contributors who registered before May 2010 and who have not accepted the new terms as part of the voluntary re-licensing program. those who see a big hole in the numbers total contributors at May 2010 ~250,000 Those who have signed up ~9,000 Those who have not signed up ~77,000 the gap I guess refers to accounts which have been completely idle and will be prevented from editing (source, LWG minutes 5th April 2011) Yes, those that have been completely idle. They signed up prior to May 2010 and have not made any edits. They are not prevented from editing, but they will be presented with the new CTs when they login to edit. I still have trouble understanding how 9,000 of 86,000 is a large majority. Those who signed up after May 2010 got no option, so they can't be construed as supporting either side. There are around 12,000 accounts which have prior to May 2010 contributed 95%+ of all the data. Regards Grant ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On 06/04/11 19:31, John Smith wrote: -- Forwarded message -- From: Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz Date: 6 April 2011 19:08 Subject: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ... To: d...@openstreetmap.org ... the License Working Group intends implementing Phase 3 of the license change implementation plan [1]. This involves blocking edits with HTTP Forbidden messages until the individual contributor has Accepted/Declined the new terms by logging in manually via browser at http://www.openstreetmap.org. The text of the message will explain the reason. This will happen Real Soon Now, I hope within the next few days. We will give at least 48 hours notice on the main Talk and other mailing lists of the exact date/time. Please would you check that your editor software has some mechanism for your users. For clarity: - This will only affect (77,000) contributors who registered before May 2010 and who have not accepted the new terms as part of the voluntary re-licensing program. - Once a contributor has Accepted/Declined the new terms, they may continue editting normally. Even if they decline, they may continue editting normally until and if Phase 4 kicks in. Mike Michael Collinson License Working Group [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Implementation_Plan#PHASE_3_-_Existing_Contributor_Mandatory_Re-licensing_.28Phase_2_.2B_5_or_10_weeks.29 Thank you John for forwarding this. Would you please pass back to Michael my respectful disdain for this notification which provides no reassurance nor guidance whatsoever. (I am straining to be polite; in case this is not obvious!) So some change may be made - maybe even soon - to force a decision the result of which may be ignored - by people who may not be using the system any more. Which may not have any effect? I will say no more than express my bewilderment why this announcement(Meta-b Control-k)waste of time and effort was even considered for posting as I doubt I will be able to refrain from insult. I emphasise this last statement is not directed at John. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
I was very keen and learning ...had done a few edits not many but I was planning on getting right into it. I don't agree with the new licensing and have just been sitting on the side reading. I have some firm views against the new licensing and also about the methods that have been used in the implementation, but I don't feel I have been a member of the community for long enough to be vocal in expressing my opinion. I doubt very much that I will edit or map in OSM again. Perhaps in one of the derivatives. I feel like I am the customer who walked into the shop and didn't get any service. Not because the staff were busy, but because they were standing round talking amongst themselves about how quiet it has been... and so because I did not get any service I didn't complain, I just walked out of the shop. Regards, Paul. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
So is Phase 4 the end for those that don't agree? What happens to the data if we don't agree? and the data built on top of that data? I have read what I could about the new Contributor Terms and I get the drift about the CC-BY-SA and ODbL. Just not sure about the OSMF bit. Regards, Michael Hampson 0416 685 785 On 6/04/2011 7:31 PM, John Smith wrote: -- Forwarded message -- From: Michael Collinsonm...@ayeltd.biz Date: 6 April 2011 19:08 Subject: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ... To: d...@openstreetmap.org ... the License Working Group intends implementing Phase 3 of the license change implementation plan [1]. This involves blocking edits with HTTP Forbidden messages until the individual contributor has Accepted/Declined the new terms by logging in manually via browser at http://www.openstreetmap.org. The text of the message will explain the reason. This will happen Real Soon Now, I hope within the next few days. We will give at least 48 hours notice on the main Talk and other mailing lists of the exact date/time. Please would you check that your editor software has some mechanism for your users. For clarity: - This will only affect (77,000) contributors who registered before May 2010 and who have not accepted the new terms as part of the voluntary re-licensing program. - Once a contributor has Accepted/Declined the new terms, they may continue editting normally. Even if they decline, they may continue editting normally until and if Phase 4 kicks in. Mike Michael Collinson License Working Group [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Implementation_Plan#PHASE_3_-_Existing_Contributor_Mandatory_Re-licensing_.28Phase_2_.2B_5_or_10_weeks.29 ___ dev mailing list d...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev ___ 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] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On 06/04/2011, at 7:31 PM, John Smith wrote: ... the License Working Group intends implementing Phase 3 of the license change implementation plan [1]. This involves blocking edits with HTTP Forbidden messages until the individual contributor has Accepted/Declined the new terms by logging in manually via browser at http://www.openstreetmap.org. The text of the message will explain the reason. This will happen Real Soon Now, I hope within the next few days. We will give at least 48 hours notice on the main Talk and other mailing lists of the exact date/time. Time to go read the CTs again... You agree to only add Contents for which You are the copyright holder (to the extent the Contents include any copyrightable elements). ... If You are not the copyright holder of the Contents, You represent and warrant that You have explicit permission from the rights holder to submit the Contents and grant the licence below. Right, so I still can't agree because I have uploaded data from third parties (e.g. CC-BY govt data), which I'm not the copyright holder for. Does anyone know if someone ever sort out a way of moving some changesets into new account(s), for different sources? -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 8:50 AM, James Livingston li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote: Time to go read the CTs again... Hi James, That's one of the sections of v1 that has been clarified in v1.2.4. Have a look. http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
There are around 12,000 accounts which have prior to May 2010 contributed 95%+ of all the data. So how many of these 12,000 accounts have agreed to the new CT's? Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
There are around 12,000 accounts which have prior to May 2010 contributed 95%+ of all the data. Regards Grant Also how many of these are actual people not import accounts eg ABS2006? Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:52 AM, 4x4falcon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote: There are around 12,000 accounts which have prior to May 2010 contributed 95%+ of all the data. Regards Grant Also how many of these are actual people not import accounts eg ABS2006? I don't know, I haven't tried to distinguish between bot and non-bot accounts. Some are import-accounts. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
Paul, I know how you feel. I came home from a trip to remote Australia with lots of material to upload and was met with the “traffic” generated by this issue. I don’t understand what’s it’s all about. The Wicki, like it is in most things, is confused and inconclusive. No one has contacted me directly and I just don’t think it is worth the effort. I get the impression that this show is run by Europeans so I am not surprised. Kevin From: All Blokes [mailto:speed_13...@yahoo.com.au] Sent: Wednesday, 6 April 2011 9:48 PM To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors I was very keen and learning ...had done a few edits not many but I was planning on getting right into it. I don't agree with the new licensing and have just been sitting on the side reading. I have some firm views against the new licensing and also about the methods that have been used in the implementation, but I don't feel I have been a member of the community for long enough to be vocal in expressing my opinion. I doubt very much that I will edit or map in OSM again. Perhaps in one of the derivatives. I feel like I am the customer who walked into the shop and didn't get any service. Not because the staff were busy, but because they were standing round talking amongst themselves about how quiet it has been... and so because I did not get any service I didn't complain, I just walked out of the shop. Regards, Paul. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 22:09 +1000, Michael Hampson wrote: So is Phase 4 the end for those that don't agree? What happens to the data if we don't agree? and the data built on top of that data? Well, it depends what you read. According to the wiki, stage 4 is when OSM asks the community what will should happen for those who havent accepted the licence. One has to wonder if any of the comments from the past year or two will be taken into account when those in power decide to ask us mere mushrooms what we think. For clarity: - This will only affect (77,000) contributors who registered before May 2010 and who have not accepted the new terms as part of the voluntary re-licensing program. For clarity: (according to odbl.de) In Australia: - This will remove 57% of users - This will remove 67% of nodes, 66% of ways and 86% of relations In UK: - This will remove 65% of users - This will remove 40% of nodes, 40% of ways and 10% of relations In Europe: - This will remove 61% of users - This will remove 20% of nodes, 20% of ways and 15% of relations It is fairly clear that the Australian issue has very little value to those in Europe in control of the project at the moment. The fact that the number of users lost is in the same ballpark while the amount of data lost is significantly higher in our part of the world, seems to show the regions and the users whos interests they are looking out for. - Once a contributor has Accepted/Declined the new terms, they may continue editting normally. Even if they decline, they may continue editting normally until and if Phase 4 kicks in. Maybe I missed the announcement, but is there now an option to record that you decline the licence? David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 9:37 AM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 22:09 +1000, Michael Hampson wrote: So is Phase 4 the end for those that don't agree? What happens to the data if we don't agree? and the data built on top of that data? Well, it depends what you read. According to the wiki, stage 4 is when OSM asks the community what will should happen for those who havent accepted the licence. One has to wonder if any of the comments from the past year or two will be taken into account when those in power decide to ask us mere mushrooms what we think. For clarity: - This will only affect (77,000) contributors who registered before May 2010 and who have not accepted the new terms as part of the voluntary re-licensing program. For clarity: (according to odbl.de) In Australia: - This will remove 57% of users - This will remove 67% of nodes, 66% of ways and 86% of relations In UK: - This will remove 65% of users - This will remove 40% of nodes, 40% of ways and 10% of relations In Europe: - This will remove 61% of users - This will remove 20% of nodes, 20% of ways and 15% of relations It is fairly clear that the Australian issue has very little value to those in Europe in control of the project at the moment. The fact that the number of users lost is in the same ballpark while the amount of data lost is significantly higher in our part of the world, seems to show the regions and the users whos interests they are looking out for. - Once a contributor has Accepted/Declined the new terms, they may continue editting normally. Even if they decline, they may continue editting normally until and if Phase 4 kicks in. Maybe I missed the announcement, but is there now an option to record that you decline the licence? http://openstreetmap.org/user/terms Supposedly it sends you to this flippant page if you decline the CT: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributor_Terms_Declined If you have reached this page because you declined the OpenStreetMap contributor terms, that's too bad. We're sorry that you have decided to not accept the OpenStreetMap Contributor Terms. That means that you can not contribute data to OpenStreetMap. It would have been good for the dust to settle on CT acceptance by data owners before moving to Phase 3: Are they compliant with the spirit and letter of CC-BY 2.5/3.0 Attribution AU? (then the Australian Government data issue is solved?) If not why not; are data owners giving up something that they previously had and intended when they licensed their data? Is it just about the level of attribution? That would be a lot easier to get clarified than trying to get a whole new suite of licences approved. What happened to NearMap? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On 7 April 2011 09:37, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: In UK: - This will remove 65% of users - This will remove 40% of nodes, 40% of ways and 10% of relations In Europe: - This will remove 61% of users - This will remove 20% of nodes, 20% of ways and 15% of relations I wonder the difference between the UK and the rest of Europe has something to do with the Ordinance Survey data requiring attribution etc... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On 7 April 2011 10:06, Alex (Maxious) Sadleir maxi...@gmail.com wrote: What happened to NearMap? Nearmap have refused to allow data derived from their imagery to be used without guarantee of attribution and share-a-like in a future license, or having a guarantee that such data would be removed if relicensing occurs. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 10:14 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 April 2011 10:06, Alex (Maxious) Sadleir maxi...@gmail.com wrote: What happened to NearMap? Nearmap have refused to allow data derived from their imagery to be used without guarantee of attribution and share-a-like in a future license, or having a guarantee that such data would be removed if relicensing occurs. Surely that's a simple procedural matter then (CT 1.2.4 already has the we reserve the right to delete your content for whatever reason), especially when changes through the NearMap editor can be tagged appropriately automatically. That would be the same situation we're in now; every major licence change has to be a fork of the old project and data owners can stop contributing in the future... that doesn't affect the past so end users can be assured the data is appropriately licensed. If LWG can negotiate special conditions (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/d/d8/Bing_license.pdf) with Bing, surely they can work something out with NearMap. I wouldn't want to get into a situation where you have to negotiate with every service/data provider (that's the point of open data licencing!) but a company that covers more area than some european countries to the community for free deserves a fair go. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On 7 April 2011 10:31, Alex (Maxious) Sadleir maxi...@gmail.com wrote: Surely that's a simple procedural matter then (CT 1.2.4 already has It always has been, but as others have pointed out, control of the process has gone on largely without proper consultation and feedback to better shape what mappers want. the we reserve the right to delete your content for whatever reason), especially when changes through the NearMap editor can be Unfortunately the language used as part of that clause isn't strong enough, they may decide it's too difficult and they can't be bothered to remove it. If LWG can negotiate special conditions (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/d/d8/Bing_license.pdf) with Bing, surely they can work something out with NearMap. It seems to me that they don't want to do anything that would limit them from moving to PD in future. I wouldn't want to get into a situation where you have to negotiate with every service/data provider (that's the point of open data licencing!) but a company that covers more area than some european countries to the community for free deserves a fair go. That isn't the problem since most projects have always used fixed license conditions, eg linux kernel will always be GPL based, in fact it's only commercial companies that require you to hand over all rights like the CTs demand. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors
On 6 April 2011 21:47, All Blokes speed_13...@yahoo.com.au wrote: I was very keen and learning ...had done a few edits not many but I was planning on getting right into it. I don't agree with the new licensing and have just been sitting on the side reading. Just out of interest, I'd like to hear your opinion from the perspective of a new user, unjaded by the ugliness that has sometimes characterised this conversation on both sides. I feel like I am the customer who walked into the shop and didn't get any service. The licence discussion has been a huge distraction to the project, which is unfortunate. Hopefully we'll be out the other side soon, with each OSMer choosing their path onwards, or perhaps choosing to move on. However, I'm sure if you want to talk about mapping, or need any help there are many OSMers who would be more than happy to lend an hand. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
Supposedly it sends you to this flippant page if you decline the CT: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributor_Terms_Declined I think the lolcat picture on that page tells us exactly what they think of those of us that won't / can 't / don't want to accept their terms. Certainly helps give the impression of a professional organisation... (not) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On 7 April 2011 00:37, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 22:09 +1000, Michael Hampson wrote: So is Phase 4 the end for those that don't agree? What happens to the data if we don't agree? and the data built on top of that data? Well, it depends what you read. According to the wiki, stage 4 is when OSM asks the community what will should happen for those who havent accepted the licence. One has to wonder if any of the comments from the past year or two will be taken into account when those in power decide to ask us mere mushrooms what we think. For clarity: - This will only affect (77,000) contributors who registered before May 2010 and who have not accepted the new terms as part of the voluntary re-licensing program. For clarity: (according to odbl.de) In Australia: - This will remove 57% of users - This will remove 67% of nodes, 66% of ways and 86% of relations In UK: - This will remove 65% of users - This will remove 40% of nodes, 40% of ways and 10% of relations In Europe: - This will remove 61% of users - This will remove 20% of nodes, 20% of ways and 15% of relations For pete's sake! Stop making up blatantly untrue stuff. Those are likely the precentages if we moved *today* without even formally contacting/emailing anyone. It is fairly clear that the Australian issue has very little value to those in Europe in control of the project at the moment. The fact that the number of users lost is in the same ballpark while the amount of data lost is significantly higher in our part of the world, seems to show the regions and the users whos interests they are looking out for. Please stop making grossly untrue statements. - Once a contributor has Accepted/Declined the new terms, they may continue editting normally. Even if they decline, they may continue editting normally until and if Phase 4 kicks in. Maybe I missed the announcement, but is there now an option to record that you decline the licence? Read the original mail that Mike posted to the DEV mailinglist... it is about planning the changes to the editor software before main announcements. Regards Grant ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 03:19 +0100, Grant Slater wrote: For clarity: (according to odbl.de) In Australia: For pete's sake! Stop making up blatantly untrue stuff. Those are likely the precentages if we moved *today* without even formally contacting/emailing anyone. I never made anything up. The closest I came to 'making up' was being creative with the summary of 3 relevant regions and rounding the numbers up. The figures I quoted came from the URL I gave, and anyone is welcome to research this themselves. The webpage suggests that these are the accurate percentages (with upto 1 week delay). It is fairly clear that the Australian issue has very little value to those in Europe in control of the project at the moment. The fact that the number of users lost is in the same ballpark while the amount of data lost is significantly higher in our part of the world, seems to show the regions and the users whos interests they are looking out for. Please stop making grossly untrue statements. What is untrue? Again, I only summarised what the statistics show. The fact that these statistics go against the ODbL propoganda, doesnt make them grossly untrue, it just makes them at odds with what some may believe. If you have figures for Australia which disprove the numbers on odbl.de then feel free to use them and cite your source, if you cant disprove the numbers and simply feel that theyre grossly untrue, then maybe you need to comprehend the statistics better. If the Australian issue is so important, as others have suggested why isnt OSMF seeking to make a rapid agreement with NearMap as was done with Bing? David - Once a contributor has Accepted/Declined the new terms, they may continue editting normally. Even if they decline, they may continue editting normally until and if Phase 4 kicks in. Maybe I missed the announcement, but is there now an option to record that you decline the licence? Read the original mail that Mike posted to the DEV mailinglist... it is about planning the changes to the editor software before main announcements. As far as I could tell, this email to the dev list is for what happens if people have chosen to decline the licence. The last Id heard, it was not possible to decline the licence, only to accept it. The issue of accepting/declining the licence is what Im talking about here, not the issue of what to do in the future if someone has declined (if such a mechanism is put in place). David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
