Re: [OSM-talk-be] Géomatique Wallonne - strategic plan
Hi, @Ben : I had contact with Philippe D. who works on this topic. The idea was to synchronize the OSM and OKFN work on this topic, but give back two advices. We are thinking that repeating things twice may have a bigger impact... (We do not know if this is true...) @all : I have a question regarding the OSM opinion : do you think whe should keep the chapter about Free Software ? Open Source and Open Data are two differents subjects. Enemies of Open Data may counter-argues that for doing Open Data, you must use Open Source and this is a problem, which is not the reality (ESRI does Open Data). Having in the same document arguments in favors of Open data AND Open Source is difficult, because they are differents topics, which are related, but not completely. The risk is to loose the pro- open data which are not pro- open source. Julien Le 14/03/14 20:47, Ben Abelshausen a écrit : Hi Julien, I already read part of your comments but I will try and have a closer look soon... I also received word that OKFN is doing the same. Maybe we could merge this work with theirs? Best Regards, Ben ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Géomatique Wallonne - strategic plan
The chapter about open source in strategic plan is there : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Contacts_with_local_autorities/Wallonia/R%C3%A9flexion_des_contributeurs_OSM_sur_le_projet_de_plan_strat%C3%A9gique_pour_la_Wallonie#Les_manques And, please, give me feedback about this document :-) Julien Le 15/03/14 11:33, Julien Fastré a écrit : Hi, @Ben : I had contact with Philippe D. who works on this topic. The idea was to synchronize the OSM and OKFN work on this topic, but give back two advices. We are thinking that repeating things twice may have a bigger impact... (We do not know if this is true...) @all : I have a question regarding the OSM opinion : do you think whe should keep the chapter about Free Software ? Open Source and Open Data are two differents subjects. Enemies of Open Data may counter-argues that for doing Open Data, you must use Open Source and this is a problem, which is not the reality (ESRI does Open Data). Having in the same document arguments in favors of Open data AND Open Source is difficult, because they are differents topics, which are related, but not completely. The risk is to loose the pro- open data which are not pro- open source. Julien Le 14/03/14 20:47, Ben Abelshausen a écrit : Hi Julien, I already read part of your comments but I will try and have a closer look soon... I also received word that OKFN is doing the same. Maybe we could merge this work with theirs? Best Regards, Ben ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Géomatique Wallonne - strategic plan
First of all Julien: thanks for all your hard work and enthusiasm in taking on this task! :-) I think it is pretty obvious that we would want to promote usage of open-source as well but I think this is something that is not the task of our community. We can recommend using open-source tools but the argument against opening data cannot ever be 'open-data is not possible because then we would have to use open-source software'. I think we should be very very clear that these two are different. An excel document with nice juicy open-data is still a good thing. But we can still recommend using open-source tools, we just have to be careful about how this is done in this document. Also: We should be careful about positioning the OSM project in Belgium as a project that wants to collect/incorporate open-data sets. We are about collecting data in the form of mapping the world, not about collecting open-geo-data sets. That was an argument for me to join everything with OKFN into one document. Met vriendelijke groeten, Best regards, Ben Abelshausen ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Géomatique Wallonne - strategic plan
Hi Julien, My 5 ct: I would mention open source as open formats more as a recommendation. If we are talking about Open Data, the most important part is that the dataset has an open license. From the moment there is an open license which complies to the open definition, all the rest is policy and technology: If you want to maximize reuse in a sustainable way, using open formats is a very pragmatic choice. Same holds true for Open Source: it is a pragmatic choice to limit vendor lock-in, to have an open governance and so on... Furthermore, I'm really in favour of submitting as one group, but that's up to you, Ben and Philippe to decide :) Kind regards, Pieter On 2014-03-15 11:33, Julien Fastré wrote: Hi, @Ben : I had contact with Philippe D. who works on this topic. The idea was to synchronize the OSM and OKFN work on this topic, but give back two advices. We are thinking that repeating things twice may have a bigger impact... (We do not know if this is true...) @all : I have a question regarding the OSM opinion : do you think whe should keep the chapter about Free Software ? Open Source and Open Data are two differents subjects. Enemies of Open Data may counter-argues that for doing Open Data, you must use Open Source and this is a problem, which is not the reality (ESRI does Open Data). Having in the same document arguments in favors of Open data AND Open Source is difficult, because they are differents topics, which are related, but not completely. The risk is to loose the pro- open data which are not pro- open source. Julien Le 14/03/14 20:47, Ben Abelshausen a écrit : Hi Julien, I already read part of your comments but I will try and have a closer look soon... I also received word that OKFN is doing the same. Maybe we could merge this work with theirs? Best Regards, Ben ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be -- +32 486 74 71 22 Open Knowledge Foundation Belgium http://okfn.be Open Transport Working Group OKFN http://transport.okfn.org ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Géomatique Wallonne - strategic plan
Hi Julien, You mention we have permission to trace from Bing. In the mean time we have better imagery (higher resolution, more recent) in Flanders and Brussels provided by AGIV, which we are also allowed to trace. We also have permission to, if I understood correctly, to use their WMS (or is that CRAB) to trace/verify street names and house numbers. Maybe the Region Wallonne can do one better by allowing us to trace/reuse building outlines :-) like in Brussels Region. Open data and Open source are two orthogonal subjects, one can proces opendata with closed source software or closed data with open source software. We have a preference for software under free licenses, but everybody should be able/allowed to use whatever software they please and can afford as long as they comply with the licenses. Jo 2014-03-15 11:53 GMT+01:00 Ben Abelshausen ben.abelshau...@gmail.com: First of all Julien: thanks for all your hard work and enthusiasm in taking on this task! :-) I think it is pretty obvious that we would want to promote usage of open-source as well but I think this is something that is not the task of our community. We can recommend using open-source tools but the argument against opening data cannot ever be 'open-data is not possible because then we would have to use open-source software'. I think we should be very very clear that these two are different. An excel document with nice juicy open-data is still a good thing. But we can still recommend using open-source tools, we just have to be careful about how this is done in this document. Also: We should be careful about positioning the OSM project in Belgium as a project that wants to collect/incorporate open-data sets. We are about collecting data in the form of mapping the world, not about collecting open-geo-data sets. That was an argument for me to join everything with OKFN into one document. Met vriendelijke groeten, Best regards, Ben Abelshausen ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Géomatique Wallonne - strategic plan
Hi, Ben, Pieter, I do not have any opposition as joining OKFN and OSM opinion in one document. I thought it was more strategic to have two voices, but I am not sure this reasoning match with reality. I propose to write differently the chapter about open source in a way which is more pragmatic. I might do this at the beginning of the week. OK ? Or I delete this chapter completely ? @Jo: the permission to trace from WMS is included in our request to open data globally. I also have contacts which focus more on web services. But I will mention the persmissions of Brussels and Flanders (the advance of wallonie and brussels is a quite good arguments with our politics :-) ). Julien Le 15/03/14 12:04, Jo a écrit : Hi Julien, You mention we have permission to trace from Bing. In the mean time we have better imagery (higher resolution, more recent) in Flanders and Brussels provided by AGIV, which we are also allowed to trace. We also have permission to, if I understood correctly, to use their WMS (or is that CRAB) to trace/verify street names and house numbers. Maybe the Region Wallonne can do one better by allowing us to trace/reuse building outlines :-) like in Brussels Region. Open data and Open source are two orthogonal subjects, one can proces opendata with closed source software or closed data with open source software. We have a preference for software under free licenses, but everybody should be able/allowed to use whatever software they please and can afford as long as they comply with the licenses. Jo 2014-03-15 11:53 GMT+01:00 Ben Abelshausen ben.abelshau...@gmail.com mailto:ben.abelshau...@gmail.com: First of all Julien: thanks for all your hard work and enthusiasm in taking on this task! :-) I think it is pretty obvious that we would want to promote usage of open-source as well but I think this is something that is not the task of our community. We can recommend using open-source tools but the argument against opening data cannot ever be 'open-data is not possible because then we would have to use open-source software'. I think we should be very very clear that these two are different. An excel document with nice juicy open-data is still a good thing. But we can still recommend using open-source tools, we just have to be careful about how this is done in this document. Also: We should be careful about positioning the OSM project in Belgium as a project that wants to collect/incorporate open-data sets. We are about collecting data in the form of mapping the world, not about collecting open-geo-data sets. That was an argument for me to join everything with OKFN into one document. Met vriendelijke groeten, Best regards, Ben Abelshausen ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
Am 14.03.2014 12:43, schrieb o...@k3v.eu: IMHO, share alike is just like DRM on music What??? Come on, don't be foolish! DRM tries to prevent any reuse of date whereat Share Alike just requests to offer the data under the same conditions as you got them. This is a fundamental difference! Best regads, Michael. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
On 15 March 2014 08:22:26 GMT, Michael Kugelmann michaelk_...@gmx.de wrote: Am 14.03.2014 12:43, schrieb o...@k3v.eu: IMHO, share alike is just like DRM on music What??? Come on, don't be foolish! DRM tries to prevent any reuse of date whereat Share Alike just requests to offer the data under the same conditions as you got them. This is a fundamental difference! Best regads, Michael. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk Well my point is that using OSM should be a no-brainer and the complexity added to the license by share alike means that it isn't for a lot of potential users. I would prefer my contributions to be used as widely as possible. It really doesn't matter [to me] if a few people rip off the project if the result is OSM becomes ubiquitous. I don't suppose Linus Torvalds cares that a few Chinese companies rip off Linux when the open license means it is everywhere. Anyway, this is a rather pointless discussion as I can't imagine any changes to the license while the previous license change is still in peoples' memories ;] Kevin___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
2014-03-15 11:22 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: ... Do you know of any case where OSMF did more than write a letter? Just being curious: Do you - or anybody else - know of any specific case where G* wrote more than a letter? --S. 2014-03-15 11:22 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: Am 14/mar/2014 um 09:48 schrieb Norbert Wenzel norbert.wenzel.li...@gmail.com: And to the topic. It might not always be easy to enforce the share-alike clause, but I really like the fact that we have it and may enforce it if necessary. actually it seems we won't enforce it upon people who don't follow the share alike provisions, probably not even the attribution obligations will be enforced. Do you know of any case where OSMF did more than write a letter? Uses of osm without attribution are revealed every now and then but never has happened something (read: attempt to enforce the license) substantial whether they added attribution and declared share alike or not. e.g. MS could continue to distribute tainted aerials for months if not years, apple does so for at least 2 years, the wiki has a long but quite incomplete list of others: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/License_violation cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
Indeed, almost no license violation cases make it to court. In the 20 years since the GPL was created, it has gone to court only a handful of times, yet there have been hundreds (maybe thousands) of license violations which have been settled out of court. A court case benefits neither side. It's expensive to bring litigation and expensive to defend against it. This is why you hear of so few cases coming out the SFLC, because a vast majority of them are settled out of court, often with non-disclosure as a part of the settlement. This is by design. The goal here is no need to use the court system. Writing a letter should be enough. - Serge ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
On 03/15/2014 11:22 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am 14/mar/2014 um 09:48 schrieb Norbert Wenzel norbert.wenzel.li...@gmail.com: And to the topic. It might not always be easy to enforce the share-alike clause, but I really like the fact that we have it and may enforce it if necessary. Do you know of any case where OSMF did more than write a letter? Uses of osm without attribution are revealed every now and then but never has happened something (read: attempt to enforce the license) substantial whether they added attribution and declared share alike or not. e.g. MS could continue to distribute tainted aerials for months if not years, apple does so for at least 2 years, the wiki has a long but quite incomplete list of others: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/License_violation I do not know what the OSMF does regarding attribution and other license violations, but I know cases where the local community enforced the attribution, which, as others pointed out, would not be possible for PD data. Usually you don't need to sue users to get a correct attribution. That's all I personally want to see when someone uses OSM data. Norbert signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
Am 15/mar/2014 um 11:31 schrieb Stefan Keller sfkel...@gmail.com: Just being curious: Do you - or anybody else - know of any specific case where G* wrote more than a letter? Maybe people act faster if it's G who writes the letter. I never got one from them but I'd expect it to be from a lawyer while ours are usually from mappers, a less intimidating profession ;-) Do you think they would have waited a year and more for MS until the tainted data was naturally washed out by successive updates of their imagery? cheers Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
Am 14/mar/2014 um 14:52 schrieb Peter Wendorff wendo...@uni-paderborn.de: ODBL does not require Share-Alike for produced works. The map, even when based on OSM data is a produced work. Therefore even if the map is based on osm data, it's not share-alike, and any data based on the map IMHO cannot be share-alike too. I am not a lawyer neither, but my view of this is that the map (rendering) being licensed whatever doesn't mean there cannot be other rights involved at the same time. Eg a photo of the coke logo could be licensed pd but that doesn't make the logo pd, a pd series of photos of a disassembled product don't give you the permission to re-engineer that product etc., so even if the rendering is released as pd the underlying data still remains ODbL and when you extract it it will be under ODbL license and not the license of the rendering itself. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
Martin Continuing to repeat a twisted version of what actually happened does not make it truer. Apple: the Foundation has engaged (documented) multiple times with the company on this matter, even though, as you VERY well know, the data they use is pre-licence change and the OSMF has no IP rights in the data. While not ideal, the current attribution is a lot better than what they originally had. Given the legal situation with CC by-SA and DB protection in the US that is about the limit of what we can reasonably do (and wasting time flogging dead horses is something that most people don't enjoy as much as you do). MS*: we immediately took the matter up with MS, and were promised that they would rectify the issue when they rolled out new imagery.They where a bit late with that, but otherwise they did exactly what they promised us. Again it is not quite sure what you expect, should we have closed bing down (which in some countries would have been possible)? Aka take a big gun and shoot ourselves in the foot. And BTW we didn't write letters in either case. Simon * background: MS had used polygons from OSM to blur some supposedly military relevant areas in Germany in their aerial imagery, the whole thing was very badly advised on behalf of MS and simply a screw up. Am 15.03.2014 11:22, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: Am 14/mar/2014 um 09:48 schrieb Norbert Wenzel norbert.wenzel.li...@gmail.com: And to the topic. It might not always be easy to enforce the share-alike clause, but I really like the fact that we have it and may enforce it if necessary. actually it seems we won't enforce it upon people who don't follow the share alike provisions, probably not even the attribution obligations will be enforced. Do you know of any case where OSMF did more than write a letter? Uses of osm without attribution are revealed every now and then but never has happened something (read: attempt to enforce the license) substantial whether they added attribution and declared share alike or not. e.g. MS could continue to distribute tainted aerials for months if not years, apple does so for at least 2 years, the wiki has a long but quite incomplete list of others: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/License_violation cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
On 15/03/2014, Kevin Peat o...@k3v.eu wrote: On 15 March 2014 08:22:26 GMT, Michael Kugelmann michaelk_...@gmx.de wrote: Am 14.03.2014 12:43, schrieb o...@k3v.eu: IMHO, share alike is just like DRM on music What??? Come on, don't be foolish! DRM tries to prevent any reuse of date whereat Share Alike just requests to offer the data under the same conditions as you got them. This is a fundamental difference! Well my point is that using OSM should be a no-brainer and the complexity added to the license by share alike means that it isn't for a lot of potential users. I would prefer my contributions to be used as widely as possible. Licenses are complex. It's the fault of international laws intermingling, not the fault of the licence writer nor of the share-alike clause. As has been pointed out, share-alike also *enables* some use-cases that wouldn't be possible with PD, CC0, or CC-BY. It's a balancing act. It really doesn't matter [to me] if a few people rip off the project if the result is OSM becomes ubiquitous. I don't suppose Linus Torvalds cares that a few Chinese companies rip off Linux when the open license means it is everywhere. Linux is GPLv2, which is absolutely share-alike and similar to OSM in that respect. And the Linux community has been much more active in fighting licence violations. The comparision with Linux really proves the opposite of what you seem to think. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Maximum recommended length of ways tagged with layer
Hi, I think it would be good to agree on something... https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:layer#Maximum_recommended_segment_length_of_ways_tagged_with_layer Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
* Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com [2014-03-13 10:26 -0400]: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/lxbarth/diary/21221 This is really similar to the discussions that periodically happen in the open source software community over whether share-alike licenses like the GPL or open-use licenses like the 3-clause BSD license are better. I usually end up on the side of share-alike for reasons best summed up by a friend of mine who once said, The GPL restricts your freedom to be evil. The BSD license doesn't. I think that if your goal is to have as many people as possible using your data, you're best off choosing open-use or public domain licensing. (Richard Weait and I chose to go with CC0 and PDDL for the data in the shield rendering so as to allow for as much variance of reuse as possible. Similarly, it makes sense for US federal government data, because their mandate is to be as useful to US citizens as possible.) If, however, you want to foster a community around a larger scale project, I think share-alike is a better path to take. If OSM switched to public domain licensing today, there would almost certainly be more people using and benefiting from today's OSM data. Google in particular would probably make OSM data part of its data; they already merge numerous public domain datasets into their proprietary dataset. That would make Google the better choice for a lot of people than plain OSM data, and you can even edit Google's data through their Map Maker program. From there, I suspect that Map Maker would attract more people that might otherwise have ended up contributing to OSM, which would hurt community growth and benefit Google at the expense of all the other OSM data consumers. In my opinion, the single biggest thing that makes OSM valuable is the community of people contributing to it, and the license on the data needs to reinforce that community, not allow proprietary data uses to splinter it. -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- lately my mania has been mega-lo-mein-ia, which is to say i believe the plate of noodles is larger than i am. -- elysse --- -- ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Maximum recommended length of ways tagged with layer
Hi, On 15.03.2014 14:44, Richard Z. wrote: I think it would be good to agree on something... https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:layer#Maximum_recommended_segment_length_of_ways_tagged_with_layer I think that choosing some fixed number would be un-OSM. Your idea that length limits should apply to certain layers but not others strikes me as odd. You have already written down a rule that people shouldn't use layer=-1 to hide validator warnings; no need to breathe down mapper's necks with ever more detailed rules. It's not a German project ;) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Maximum recommended length of ways tagged with layer
I think stereotyping by nationality is quite un-OSM too. (I'm Brazilian, btw.) I think validators have a significant role in the current problem: we need a warning about missing bridges/tunnels when two ways overlap, regardless of the value in the layer tag of either way. This will discourage the use of layer=-1 on rivers to avoid validation warnings, and will also reveal when this was done and encourage people to effectively map bridges and tunnels. I now agree that the layer tag should be used as locally as possible, so I think Richard had good intentions when proposing this. At the same time, I think you, Frederik, has a good point that arriving at a threshold for that number is quite hard. What exactly do we want to avoid? Really, really long ways with a layer tag. So why not set this threshold higher? Say 10 km? On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Hi, On 15.03.2014 14:44, Richard Z. wrote: I think it would be good to agree on something... https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:layer#Maximum_recommended_segment_length_of_ways_tagged_with_layer I think that choosing some fixed number would be un-OSM. Your idea that length limits should apply to certain layers but not others strikes me as odd. You have already written down a rule that people shouldn't use layer=-1 to hide validator warnings; no need to breathe down mapper's necks with ever more detailed rules. It's not a German project ;) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months. (Moore's law) The speed of software halves every 18 months. (Gates' law) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
On 14.03.2014 23:21, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: There's one fairly obvious to me : the share-alike requirement is necessary to enforce the attribution requirement (otherwise any user could just change the license to one that doesn't require attribution). It would not be legal for them to get rid of the attribution like that. Attribution requirements can exist without share-alike, see e.g. CC-BY. I believe that arrangement would also be the sweet spot for OSM. The user's best interest is the carrot, but the license is the stick. There's no harm using both, it's actually better. If having a stick didn't cost us anything, that would obviously be true. But this discussion came about because our stick also hits good users quite a lot. So if the carrot works pretty well by itself, perhaps we should get rid of the stick after all. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Maximum recommended length of ways tagged with layer
On 15/03/2014, Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com wrote: I now agree that the layer tag should be used as locally as possible, so I think Richard had good intentions when proposing this. At the same time, I think you, Frederik, has a good point that arriving at a threshold for that number is quite hard. What exactly do we want to avoid? Really, really long ways with a layer tag. So why not set this threshold higher? Say 10 km? Validator rules are a good thing, but I think that length of a way that has layer=* to detect misuse of the layer tag is beside the point. Whatever threshold you use, there'll false-positives and false-negatives. How about something along the lines of negative layer but no tunnel tag (or positive/bridge) and no/too many crossing ways ? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
On 15/03/2014, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote: On 14.03.2014 23:21, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: There's one fairly obvious to me : the share-alike requirement is necessary to enforce the attribution requirement (otherwise any user could just change the license to one that doesn't require attribution). It would not be legal for them to get rid of the attribution like that. Attribution requirements can exist without share-alike, see e.g. CC-BY. I know it sounds like a glaring loophole that ought to be illegal, but I have yet to see a paragraph of CC-BY that prevents me to : * Use the CC-BY material to create an adapted work * Release the adapted work as PD with attribution (using PD because I'm not allowed to place additional restrictions) * Use the PD material to create a private work. Of course you expect that in that process, only an insubstancial part of the original CC-BY material would be left. But insubstancial isn't legaly defined, so an unscrupulous user could get unrestricted access to a lot of data this way and still stand enough of a chance in court that nobody would bother attacking (especially considering the fact that CC-BY licensors probably do not care as much as CC-BY-SA licensors). ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Hate captchas!!!!
On 14.03.2014 19:12, Tobias Knerr wrote: On 14.03.2014 17:15, Tom Hughes wrote: I think most of those are already whitelisted aren't they? Unless I'm mistaken, these are the currently whitelisted URLs: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Captcha-addurl-whitelist How about adding *.wikipedia.org and josm.openstreetmaü.de to the list ? I am still in favour of interwiki links as they keep the connection protocol. cu colliar signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Hate captchas!!!!
On 2014-03-15 19:04, colliar wrote: On 14.03.2014 19:12, Tobias Knerr wrote: On 14.03.2014 17:15, Tom Hughes wrote: I think most of those are already whitelisted aren't they? Unless I'm mistaken, these are the currently whitelisted URLs: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Captcha-addurl-whitelist How about adding *.wikipedia.org and josm.openstreetmaü.de to the list ? The whitelist already includes openstreetmap\.de and \.wikipedia\.org Not sure if that would include josm.openstreetmap.de, I don't know how the whitelist matches links? I am still in favour of interwiki links as they keep the connection protocol. Interwiki links to Wikipedia work fine. Just use something like [[wikipedia:OpenStreetMap]] or [[w:OpenStreetMap]] Or specify the language, eg [[wikipedia:de:OpenStreetMap]] Craig ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 2:44 PM, moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com wrote: On 15/03/2014, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote: On 14.03.2014 23:21, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: There's one fairly obvious to me : the share-alike requirement is necessary to enforce the attribution requirement (otherwise any user could just change the license to one that doesn't require attribution). It would not be legal for them to get rid of the attribution like that. Attribution requirements can exist without share-alike, see e.g. CC-BY. Section 4 of CC-BY. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/legalcode Since this discussion isn't about CC-BY, there's no point in discussing it further, though. - Serge ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
2014-03-15 12:16 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole si...@osmfoundation.org: Apple: the Foundation has engaged (documented) multiple times with the company on this matter, even though, as you VERY well know, the data they use is pre-licence change and the OSMF has no IP rights in the data. While not ideal, the current attribution is a lot better than what they originally had. Given the legal situation with CC by-SA and DB protection in the US that is about the limit of what we can reasonably do (and wasting time flogging dead horses is something that most people don't enjoy as much as you do). Also if cc-by sa can't protect facts in the US, there is Europe where they would have to adhere to the license (and they also provide their service here). Yes, the copyright is with the single contributors, yes, the foundation has decided not to spend their scarse resources on this case, and it is their right to do so, but in this case it doesn't look as if anyone would try to enforce share alike to the extent it seems possible (for old data, cc-by-sa). (e.g. look actively for osm contributors who have mapped in the areas from which apple uses data, which are these again?) I believe mentioning the areas from which they took osm data would be fair, as it can also protect us from wrong allegations for data problems in areas where the data is from different providers. MS*: we immediately took the matter up with MS, and were promised that they would rectify the issue when they rolled out new imagery.They where a bit late with that, but otherwise they did exactly what they promised us. Again it is not quite sure what you expect, should we have closed bing down (which in some countries would have been possible)? Aka take a big gun and shoot ourselves in the foot. yes, I also believe them that it was an incident and they didn't use the data on purpose against the license (or in other words they were not understanding that using the data under the license that it was available and publishing it would make their imagery share alike), still, they didn't do anything timely to correct the mistake, once it was pointed out to them, in fact all they promised was not to do it again, do nothing and wait for the next imagery update to wear the data out. In practise, also here nobody insisted in strict interpretation of the share alike provisions. Has there been any case where someone who used OpenStreetMap and continuously and deliberately ignored the license obligations had any kind of trouble? Maybe we're only waiting for G* to do it on a global scale ;-) ? Maybe we don't want to be like them, in the end we are happy with everyone using our data, and we don't want to scare people away by creating the impression you might risk a court case for small formal mistakes in adhering to the osm license. OK. Sounds like a reason why until today noone ever tried to enforce any of the license obligations on any user of the data besides from kindly asking them to do so (and do nothing when they don't). Still in practise its a weak share alike ;-) cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] Postbussen
osm-talk...@lucb1e.com schreef op za 15-03-2014 om 01:37 [+0100]: Hallo! TL;DR: Is het een goed idee om te proberen de lijst van brievenbussen van PostNL los te peuteren en te importeren in OSM? Ik zie dat ik brievenbussen op de kaart toe kan voegen, maar ik ben er nog geen enkele tegengekomen, laat staan compleet met lichtingsmomenten zoals ze wel op de PostNL site staan. --- Ik ben nieuw hier dus even voorstellen: Ik ben Luc (OSM username lucb1e), doe een hbo ict opleiding in het zuiden van het land, en ben een open-source fan. OSM vind ik een interessant project en ik wil best wat meehelpen door gebieden die ik ken te verbeteren. Misschien dat ik ook links en rechts wat aan bekendheid ga doen. Een ding wat me opviel was dat er weinig brievenbussen op de kaart staan, terwijl PostNL daar gewoon een database voor heeft (er is een zoekfunctie op hun site). Ik heb ernaar gezocht in alle uithoeken van de site, maar er lijkt geen (indexeerbare) lijst te zijn. Vandaag heb ik daarom PostNL gebeld, kort uitgelegd wat OSM is, en gevraagd of ze een lijst van brievenbussen hebben. Meneer had deze niet, en ik werd geadviseerd om PostNL een verzoek per post te sturen (de ironie). Voordat ik mijn tijd en postzegels ga verdoen aan verdere acties ben ik meer gaan lezen over imports, en al snel las ik dat imports soms zelfs negatief zijn in bepaalde gebieden en ik beter eerst de lokale community kan vragen. Dus bij deze: denken jullie dat het nuttig is om brievenbussen op de kaart te zetten? Ik vind het opzich wel leuk om te proberen om deze dataset los te krijgen, dus tenzij het liever niet is ga ik er waarschijnlijk mee verder. Tips zijn ook welkom trouwens. Overigens, mailinglists zijn wel niet helemaal mijn ding en het is pas de tweede keer dat ik naar een lijst post, dus verbeter a.u.b. (netiquette) fouten als ik die maak! Thanks, Luc Luc, Hou er rekening mee dat de huidige brievenbussen op maximaal een radius van 500 meter van de verstuurder moeten staan en vorig jaar is aangekondigd dat dit 750 meter mag gaan worden. Wanneer dit in effect komt weet ik niet, maar misschien wel handig om even te kijken hoe ze nu de BAG-import doen ivm updates in de toekomst. Ik hoop wel dat de lijst ook bevat oa de lichtingstijd (18h, 19h of 21h) en of de brievenbus geschikt is voor rolstoelgebruikers. Hans signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] Postbussen
Hoi Luc welkom bij OpenStreetMap! Ik heb de import van de BAG langs de daarvoor gebruikelijke kanalen geloodst en ken dus inmiddels de nodige valkuilen. De belangrijkste pagina voor imports is deze: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines. Cruciaal daarin is met name de licentie: de eigenaar van de gegevens moet expliciet (= schriftelijk) toestemming geven voor het gebruik van de data in OpenStreetMap. Dat kan onder andere via een PD licentie. Imports van brievenbussen is nuttig. Zij het dat OSM momenteel meer zit te springen om adressen. In het verlengde daarvan: zie jij het zitten om bij je opleiding een workshop BAG te organiseren? Ik kan dan vragen of enkele BAG importers en de programmeur van de plugin mee willen doen aan zo'n workshop. Laat me maar ff weten. Cheers, Johan ps er vindt ook veel communicatie via het forum plaats, http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=12 Op 15 maart 2014 10:24 schreef Hans Spaans h...@dailystuff.nl: osm-talk...@lucb1e.com schreef op za 15-03-2014 om 01:37 [+0100]: Hallo! TL;DR: Is het een goed idee om te proberen de lijst van brievenbussen van PostNL los te peuteren en te importeren in OSM? Ik zie dat ik brievenbussen op de kaart toe kan voegen, maar ik ben er nog geen enkele tegengekomen, laat staan compleet met lichtingsmomenten zoals ze wel op de PostNL site staan. --- Ik ben nieuw hier dus even voorstellen: Ik ben Luc (OSM username lucb1e), doe een hbo ict opleiding in het zuiden van het land, en ben een open-source fan. OSM vind ik een interessant project en ik wil best wat meehelpen door gebieden die ik ken te verbeteren. Misschien dat ik ook links en rechts wat aan bekendheid ga doen. Een ding wat me opviel was dat er weinig brievenbussen op de kaart staan, terwijl PostNL daar gewoon een database voor heeft (er is een zoekfunctie op hun site). Ik heb ernaar gezocht in alle uithoeken van de site, maar er lijkt geen (indexeerbare) lijst te zijn. Vandaag heb ik daarom PostNL gebeld, kort uitgelegd wat OSM is, en gevraagd of ze een lijst van brievenbussen hebben. Meneer had deze niet, en ik werd geadviseerd om PostNL een verzoek per post te sturen (de ironie). Voordat ik mijn tijd en postzegels ga verdoen aan verdere acties ben ik meer gaan lezen over imports, en al snel las ik dat imports soms zelfs negatief zijn in bepaalde gebieden en ik beter eerst de lokale community kan vragen. Dus bij deze: denken jullie dat het nuttig is om brievenbussen op de kaart te zetten? Ik vind het opzich wel leuk om te proberen om deze dataset los te krijgen, dus tenzij het liever niet is ga ik er waarschijnlijk mee verder. Tips zijn ook welkom trouwens. Overigens, mailinglists zijn wel niet helemaal mijn ding en het is pas de tweede keer dat ik naar een lijst post, dus verbeter a.u.b. (netiquette) fouten als ik die maak! Thanks, Luc Luc, Hou er rekening mee dat de huidige brievenbussen op maximaal een radius van 500 meter van de verstuurder moeten staan en vorig jaar is aangekondigd dat dit 750 meter mag gaan worden. Wanneer dit in effect komt weet ik niet, maar misschien wel handig om even te kijken hoe ze nu de BAG-import doen ivm updates in de toekomst. Ik hoop wel dat de lijst ook bevat oa de lichtingstijd (18h, 19h of 21h) en of de brievenbus geschikt is voor rolstoelgebruikers. Hans ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] Postbussen
Hoi Hans, Welkom, een reactie van Johan mbt de BAG import heb je al gehad. De enige fout die je als ICT'r kunt maken bij een project als OSM is niet participeren. Ik heb tot nu toe slechts brievenbussen, zonder gegevens toegevoegd, maar rolstoel vriendelijk nog geeneen en nooit gezien. Mvg Hendrikklaas ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [OSM-talk-ie] mapping roads
It would be useful if we got a firm no, before we start re-inventing the wheel. Personally I would not need an app. There are loads of OSM apps that allow editing on the go. It would be useful to track the number of zones entered to see if we are missing any. On 14/03/2014, Donie Kelly donie.ke...@gmail.com wrote: Would it be useful if I released an app that allowed you to mark the beginning and end of the zones? I could also gather the speed limit if you drive it at close to the limits? Could we get the community to help out? I'm thinking of releasing it for free. A paid option gets you live camera reports. I love to get your help so I can do this without risk of breaching copyrights. Donie On 14 Mar 2014, at 19:50, Daniel Cussen d...@post.com wrote: I've just got a response from An Garda that my request has been passed up the chain. Fingers crossed. Donie Donie Did you ever get an official response from the Gardai regarding your request to use the data from Gardai.ie speedzones? I am very interested in putting in this data too. If we get the official NO then we can begin mapping them ourselves and proactively seeking them out and marking them. I travel on national routes countrywide quite often so I could start getting the GPS positions of the signs on each side of the road, if we cannot use the Gardai info. So the first thing should be to get an official respose, and if it is yes then it should be easy to map the zones http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dspeed_camera http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:enforcement On 14/03/2014, Donie Kelly donie.ke...@gmail.com wrote: Can we add the restricted speed zones? The ones the go safe cameras are on? Just the speed limits on those stretches? I'm working on an app for the speed zones and I'd like to be able to pop up the speed limits as they are not always signed. I can statically scan for updates to release to the app when updates on the roads are implemented. Any objections on using the data for this? Donie On 14 Mar 2014, at 18:27, da fo43 daf...@outlook.com wrote: Hello All, First time posting on the mailing list but I've spoken individually to a number of you already. There can't be too many roads still to map in Ireland now so I guess the next step would be to improve the quality by filling in road numbers, names, etc. So I'm going to propose a few standards and see what people think. 1. Map L roads 1000 to 4999 (Local Primary) as 'Tertiary' and all other public roads as 'Unclassified' or 'Residential'. I know people have a lot of differing views on this and will admit that some local primary roads seem to have less importance than Local Secondary and Local Tertiary roads but really I think it's better to go with what is designated rather than making judgement calls. On some parts of the map all roads are being set to 'Tertiary' so really I don't think the current system works. All other roads are mapped as per designation so I personally don't see why this should be any different. 2. Labeling roads L1000- with spaces. I see on some parts of the map that roads are being labelled with a space 'L 1234' instead of 'L1234'. I would be in favour of sticking to one standard, and going with the majority in not using a space. 3. Labeling roads over L. I propose the labeling roads listed as L12341 as L1234-1 as this makes it easier to read and work out which branch of primary/secondary road it belongs to. I guess this might not suit everyone. 4. Non public roads to be displayed as 'Service' or 'Track' only. It's not always obvious if some roads are private (especially some housing estates) but where it is known for certain they are private then I would be in favour of using a 'service' road rather than 'residential' or 'unclassified'. Hopefully we can agree on some things and apologies if I have overwritten anyone's work recently, it's certainly not my intention to do so and I will go with whatever the consensus is. Lastly I was planning on making some small updates to the Wiki page, just a general cleanup on removing dead links and adding a sat nav section, if anyone has any objections please let me know. David ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
Re: [OSM-talk-ie] mapping roads
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 09:06:30PM +, Donie Kelly wrote: I got nothing back. Didn't follow it up. The Garda website says it complies with the Regulations on the Re-Use of Public Sector Information: http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=1442Lang=1 You might have better luck contacting the people at http://psi.gov.ie/, they might be able to clarify about reusing information in OSM. Cheers, Andrew ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
Re: [OSM-talk-ie] mapping roads
I’ve followed up with both now. Thanks for the links. I had let it slide but I’d really like to get this app moving again… I need it myself. Anybody interested in helping me get these mapped ourselves? If we gather the data ourselves we are under no obligation to anybody? I’ve set up a few routes with the enforcement on them and I need you guys to check them. You can use the following query at http://overpass-turbo.eu/index.html and it will highlight the roads with speed limits and enforcement on them. There are two on the ennis road leaving limerick and one outside Banagher in Offaly. Can you guys check they are done ok? http://overpass-turbo.eu/?q=PCEtLQpUaGlzIMSHIGFuIGV4YW1wbGUgT3ZlcnBhc8SIcXXEmXkuxIRyecSJdCBvdcSoYsSmcHJlxJ1pbmcgdGjElVJ1xI1ixKt0b8SNYWJvxJghClnEqiBjxIwgZsSzZCBtb8SwxI7EkMSSxJTEiHdpxLfEtsS4IExvYcWQxL9vbMSjxII-CjzEu2nFgMWpCTzEn8ShxLZ5cGU9IndheSLFqSAJxbBoxJwta3Yga8W4ZW5mxZNjZW3GinQiIHbFuG1heHPFtmVkIi_Fr8WwYsWDeC3FssSlIHt7xqJveH19xp8KxbAvxqZ5xak8L8Wsxa4KxarEr8SzxKjFkmTFtyLFg2TFvMawPMSwY3Vyc8SVdMW1x4Jkb3duxp7Gtsa9bsa_b8eBxbhza2XElMS_x5XGnwc=BGGE0A8XKNR I can build this query into the back end of the app and turn it into a form the app can use. It will be delivered to the app as regular updates automatically so updates to the OSM will make it into the app every day or week or whatever the update interval is. I’d rather use the OSM as a data source that is dynamic so that if new zones appear in future we can get them into the app with no delay or intervention by me. I’m using parse.com as the backend if anybody wants to give me a hand… :) Donie On 15 Mar 2014, at 22:31, Andrew McCarthy m...@andrewmccarthy.ie wrote: On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 09:06:30PM +, Donie Kelly wrote: I got nothing back. Didn't follow it up. The Garda website says it complies with the Regulations on the Re-Use of Public Sector Information: http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=1442Lang=1 You might have better luck contacting the people at http://psi.gov.ie/, they might be able to clarify about reusing information in OSM. Cheers, Andrew ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
Re: [OSM-talk-ie] mapping roads
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 6:27 PM, da fo43 daf...@outlook.com wrote: Hello All, First time posting on the mailing list but I've spoken individually to a number of you already. There can't be too many roads still to map in Ireland now so I guess the next step would be to improve the quality by filling in road numbers, names, etc. So I'm going to propose a few standards and see what people think. 1. Map L roads 1000 to 4999 (Local Primary) as 'Tertiary' and all other public roads as 'Unclassified' or 'Residential'. Changing the tagging of roads based on an arbitrary reason such as an assigned L ref value where we presume there is a consistent scheme applied to it is mindless. Not all [county] councils assigned values based on the quality of the road, I know of at least one where the assigned value is based on the electoral division that the road is in. Changing the tagging of anything based on the self-perceived notion that you know better where in actual fact you might not, is little more than mindless vandalism. Good intentions or not. This is why I hope you are looking for advice first, here and now, before you change anything based on your gut feel. I know people have a lot of differing views on this and will admit that some local primary roads seem to have less importance than Local Secondary and Local Tertiary roads but really I think it's better to go with what is designated rather than making judgement calls. On some parts of the map all roads are being set to 'Tertiary' so really I don't think the current system works. All other roads are mapped as per designation so I personally don't see why this should be any different. Tag a road as how it is - if a road is primarily residential then tag it as residential. If a road, no matter what the classification is according to how you interpret an L-ref number, is only good enough for being unclassified rather than, say tertiary, then tag it as that. If some remnant of the old N7 is now little more than a cul-de-sac with a few houses on it, tag it as such, not highway=primary :-) Take a look at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway to see what I mean, and remember: If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and smell's like a duck then it's a duck. 2. Labeling roads L1000- with spaces. I see on some parts of the map that roads are being labelled with a space 'L 1234' instead of 'L1234'. I would be in favour of sticking to one standard, and going with the majority in not using a space. Not having spaces is good, but please don't readjust the formatting otherwise! Read on... 3. Labeling roads over L. I propose the labeling roads listed as L12341 as L1234-1 as this makes it easier to read and work out which branch of primary/secondary road it belongs to. I guess this might not suit everyone. Ground Truth requires that you map it as you see it, not as how you wish you saw it. Please don't remove hyphens from where you think they don't belong and add them to where you want them. There are enough standards without making up more - or I suppose you could say people get confused easily enough without adding reformatting into the mix. 4. Non public roads to be displayed as 'Service' or 'Track' only. It's not always obvious if some roads are private (especially some housing estates) but where it is known for certain they are private then I would be in favour of using a 'service' road rather than 'residential' or 'unclassified'. If the main use of a road is residential (e.g. down a cul-de-sac or in a housing estate), then tag it as residential. Tracks are roads for agricultural or forestry use. Private residential roads should be tagged highway=residential;access=private not as highway=service which means something completely different (and used to tag things such as alleys, parking aisles and the likes). Remember my duck sentence? :-) Ken -- http://about.me/kenguest/ ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
Re: [Talk-br] Dúvidas em Natal
Lembrando que aqui no Rio muita coisa mudou assim, deixando a imagem de satélite bastante desatualizada. []s Paulo Em 14 de março de 2014 17:14, Bráulio brauliobeze...@gmail.com escreveu: OK. Vou dar uma revisada na situação (nesse fim de semana ocorreram mais mudanças em ruas próximas) e colocar notes nesses casos mais estranhos. 2014-03-14 17:08 GMT-03:00 Erick de Oliveira Leal erickdeoliveiral...@gmail.com: Braulio. Eu não vou corrigir, vou deixar pra você que tem mais conhecimento do caso. Em 14/03/2014 17:03, Nelson A. de Oliveira nao...@gmail.com escreveu: 2014-03-14 16:57 GMT-03:00 Bráulio brauliobeze...@gmail.com: Sim. Tanto a avenida Amintas Barros como a Miguel Castro (ao sul desta) estão com alguns trechos em mão única, mesmo onde há canteiro central. Faltou um note explicando isso então ;-) ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
Re: [Talk-br] Kit para compilação Garmin em Windows e mapas Garmin para download
Muito obrigado, Nélson. Em 14 de março de 2014 16:18, Nelson A. de Oliveira nao...@gmail.comescreveu: 2014-03-14 12:08 GMT-03:00 Paulo Carvalho paulo.r.m.carva...@gmail.com: Nélson, não tenha pressa. Pensei que talvez você os já tivesse prontos. Mas se dispondo a gerá-los, só temos a agradecer. Eu tenho os que eu uso para gerar os mapas para osmand Coloquei aqui: http://naoliv.iq.unesp.br/osm/poly/ Depois (acho que vai ficar para segunda mesmo) eu termino o resto. O do Brasil é o contorno igual ao limite no OSM (então vai diferir em tamanho/nós dos outros poly já discutidos antes) ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
[Talk-de] Notes-RSS-Feed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Moin, wo muss ich mich melden, um im Notes-RSS-Feed[0] der API eine Änderung zu erwirken? Mich nervt etwas, dass die Links zu den Notes in die API geht und nicht zur Website. Oder gibt es einen RSS-Feed für Notes in einem Gebiet, der dieses Feature bietet? MfG Andreas [0] z.B. http://api.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/notes.rss?bbox=10.824,50.636,10.968,50.75 - -- Andreas Neumann http://map4Jena.de http://Stadtplan-Ilmenau.de -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQGcBAEBAgAGBQJTJIvIAAoJENEKAxYRlUN9X98L/0bUYAH1t3hg2T4wHNz/9OYf TpLkLZy791f4vAmOLIipNlidI1PLSxCieI7MuQi1SFwn47+rl2BgBQZpI562sWFq HvCU+Jd5aoyV94F/dYPEwDL1qCynjwjUYauYJc97RrxP2YzrjnIYzR12Oyb1GiRK /xXwkp/SYqGSP1QDypTf5TcIbxfLpvQ0TK7+ji/j5FZ74DQJ6515egc8c+O9gHmK oj/Hvle1rHdFeiiscNnW4mMuwe3zoBaJg7iiFILGMnw7UektM5lP/EgpopuOj2Vi X3sUqNh25NP93AmU6jI/qOmvDeGfrV7hRL6kvH37zJtct4i7Xw+Ch7Ui/LR72XOl 8btLJh5mFnOXunFGSh7RImNWRgItnCsgKxLrCPSDeAvGCgE+R5tObe4ID10nwA7K f8SzZkTon0aPpQ7YUeGKxHZGdcppLVIzvl0xdQwk8GshnVihuqNV/ZoGIthMzGKo ceMskIXZt0oN6HJi08hIAuxZcSLl0vF4+YX2BnYUSg== =YT50 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Notes-RSS-Feed
Am 15.03.2014, 18:20 Uhr, schrieb Andreas Neumann andr-neum...@gmx.net: Oder gibt es einen RSS-Feed für Notes in einem Gebiet, der dieses Feature bietet? Wenn ich dich richtig verstehe suchst du das hier: http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/notes/feed?bbox=10.824,50.636,10.968,50.75 ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Notes-RSS-Feed
Hallo Andreas, Die verlinkte API-Seite enthält sowieso sofort eine permanente Weiterleitung zur Webseite per 304. Insofern geht der Link letztlich nicht mehr in die API, obwohl du natürlich recht hast, dass das auch in den Feeds behoben werden sollte, um zusätzliche Seitenaufrufe zu ersparen. Was das Erwirken einer Änderung angeht: Den Code der Webseite inklusive API findest Du unter [1], da gibt's dann auch einen Issue-Tracker [2]. Idealerweise findest und behebst du den Fehler* natürlich direkt ;) alternativ kannst du auch per Ticket darauf aufmerksam machen. Gruß Peter * ein Fehler ist es ja eben nicht, denn es entspricht mit der Weiterleitung vollständig dem HTTP-Protokoll. [1] https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/ [1] https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues Am 15.03.2014 18:20, schrieb Andreas Neumann: Moin, wo muss ich mich melden, um im Notes-RSS-Feed[0] der API eine Änderung zu erwirken? Mich nervt etwas, dass die Links zu den Notes in die API geht und nicht zur Website. Oder gibt es einen RSS-Feed für Notes in einem Gebiet, der dieses Feature bietet? MfG Andreas [0] z.B. http://api.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/notes.rss?bbox=10.824,50.636,10.968,50.75 ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Notes-RSS-Feed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am 15.03.2014 18:51, schrieb Peter Wendorff: Hallo Andreas, Die verlinkte API-Seite enthält sowieso sofort eine permanente Weiterleitung zur Webseite per 304. Insofern geht der Link letztlich nicht mehr in die API, obwohl du natürlich recht hast, dass das auch in den Feeds behoben werden sollte, um zusätzliche Seitenaufrufe zu ersparen. Was das Erwirken einer Änderung angeht: Den Code der Webseite inklusive API findest Du unter [1], da gibt's dann auch einen Issue-Tracker [2]. Idealerweise findest und behebst du den Fehler* natürlich direkt ;) alternativ kannst du auch per Ticket darauf aufmerksam machen. Gruß Peter * ein Fehler ist es ja eben nicht, denn es entspricht mit der Weiterleitung vollständig dem HTTP-Protokoll. [1] https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/ [1] https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues @ Martin: Danke für den Link! @ Peter: Das Problem scheint vielschichtiger zu sein. Der Link hinter jedem Item wird tatsächlich weitergeleitet. Da ich als RSS-Reader Feedly nutze war ich bisher immer davon ausgegangen, dass auch der Link genommen wird, jedoch wird hier der Link aus der guid verwendet, was mir immer nur eine XML-Ansicht beschert hat. MfG Andreas - -- Andreas Neumann http://map4Jena.de http://Stadtplan-Ilmenau.de -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQGcBAEBAgAGBQJTJJfAAAoJENEKAxYRlUN99GcL/2AjKn+h+Tli0YeF+Y6QGozv IFJKUq3j48os5giZOZ9NcoR9obmAfZo4eegKa2MjufXQ6z49WhUDc7DUr8K3j0VL V527DVVoJ119i/GVf5/vdhW4hceFFJyrDy5GdWVj1q01eA3cMhKcVLOYvjHzt8ed dXyXW07ZDIQBPuZvnGt9yTWXdDJevrHTKWgGl1a59fqxYbeMYjCNrFLPaIhEDVpf v5vgGtlGrtw7DvZCmupx1Kvhbewq5tsO9Y4g7WeHw+PqYqfzGlUeTlpumTODn/lZ cIblXMdOV3/QWS+HBpjlsVHkKdWuXCYcKtdFJPJnWcuI+GFzBsuDUHz/CDPnqWQR Sh8O2oDOXctzg/7sEKyo+2CBYfdkdGE3J/hb1IzS7XuAPfqRODK8D+o+LUoi3qQi PY1BgtVxdx2xijfThu2ZDHriEyfv6yj575ktSKMK/4mmGw5Laus3tA/zhMdrLUyU TWm29nCzUgF53rlMk6jZ1rphlCZyFARrVCOaBYdSBg== =1AEe -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Ehemaliges Streckenwaerterhaus
Ich moechte gern ein ehemaliges Streckenwaerterhaus eintragen. Finde nicht mal ein tag fuer ein noch funktionierendes. :-( ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Ehemaliges Streckenwaerterhaus
building=lineman_residence abandoned=yes z.B., wobei sich das abandoned auf das Gebäude bezieht, und nicht auf die Eigenschaft der Streckenwärterunterkunft, d.h. ggf. auch weglassen, sofern das Gebäude noch irgendwie genutzt wird. Was die Streckenwärterfunktion angeht: gibt es das überhaupt noch irgendwo? Gruß Martin Am 15. März 2014 23:57 schrieb Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com: Ich moechte gern ein ehemaliges Streckenwaerterhaus eintragen. Finde nicht mal ein tag fuer ein noch funktionierendes. :-( ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de -- Martin Koppenhoefer (Dipl-Ing. Arch.) Via del Santuario Regina degli Apostoli, 18 00145 Roma |I|I|I|I|I|I|I|I| Italia N41.851, E12.4824 tel1: +39 06.916508070 tel2: +49 30 868708638 mobil: +39 392 3114712 mobil: +49 1577 7793740 m...@koppenhoefer.com http://www.koppenhoefer.com Hinweis: Diese Nachricht wurde manuell erstellt. Wir bemühen uns um fehlerfreie Korrespondenz, dennoch kann es in Ausnahmefällen vorkommen, dass bei der manuellen Übertragung von Informationen in elektronische Medien die übertragenen Informationen Fehler aufweisen. Wir bitten Sie, dies zu entschuldigen. Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of koppenhoefer.com unless specifically stated. This email and any files attached are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify postmas...@koppenhoefer.com Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of our clients and business, we may monitor and read messages sent to and from our systems. Thank You. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Ehemaliges Streckenwaerterhaus
Danke, Martin Ich habe ehemalige Bahnhoefe, die als Wohnhaeuser benutzt werden so eingetragen (die Bahnlinie ist schon ueber 50 Jahre still gelegt und die Trasse lebt nur noch als Strassen fort): building=yes historic:railway=station historic:name= NAME Daher wuerde ich das Bahnwaerterhaus, das ebenfalls als Wohngebaeude weiterlebt so eintragen building=yes historic:railway=lineman_residence Zu deiner Frage: Streckenwaerter solls noch in der Schweiz routinemaessig geben (d.h. Leute, die regelmaessig di Strecke abgehen). (Steht irgendwo in Wikipedia) Worin die heute wohnen, weiss ich nicht. 2014-03-16 0:01 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: building=lineman_residence abandoned=yes z.B., wobei sich das abandoned auf das Gebäude bezieht, und nicht auf die Eigenschaft der Streckenwärterunterkunft, d.h. ggf. auch weglassen, sofern das Gebäude noch irgendwie genutzt wird. Was die Streckenwärterfunktion angeht: gibt es das überhaupt noch irgendwo? Gruß Martin Am 15. März 2014 23:57 schrieb Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com: Ich moechte gern ein ehemaliges Streckenwaerterhaus eintragen. Finde nicht mal ein tag fuer ein noch funktionierendes. :-( ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de -- Martin Koppenhoefer (Dipl-Ing. Arch.) Via del Santuario Regina degli Apostoli, 18 00145 Roma |I|I|I|I|I|I|I|I| Italia N41.851, E12.4824 tel1: +39 06.916508070 tel2: +49 30 868708638 mobil: +39 392 3114712 mobil: +49 1577 7793740 m...@koppenhoefer.com http://www.koppenhoefer.com Hinweis: Diese Nachricht wurde manuell erstellt. Wir bemühen uns um fehlerfreie Korrespondenz, dennoch kann es in Ausnahmefällen vorkommen, dass bei der manuellen Übertragung von Informationen in elektronische Medien die übertragenen Informationen Fehler aufweisen. Wir bitten Sie, dies zu entschuldigen. Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of koppenhoefer.com unless specifically stated. This email and any files attached are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify postmas...@koppenhoefer.com Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of our clients and business, we may monitor and read messages sent to and from our systems. Thank You. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-in] Devanagari font feedback
I'm looking for some feedback on font selection for the default OpenStreetMap.org layer. One of my projects is to improve the font support of local scripts, and I'm currently looking at South Asia. Unfortunately, I can't read the languages I'm working with. I've put together a list of available openly-licensed Devanagari fonts at https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/414#issuecomment-37 682621 and I'd like feedback on what fonts work well. My goals are to find a font that is * Readable, particularly at small sizes * Consistent in style with DejaVu Sans * Consistent with cartographic conventions in that language * is available in normal, bold and oblique (italic) versions I am leaning towards Chandas as it is similar in style, particularly in the loops. Feedback either here or on Github works. I will later be working on other scripts in the region. ___ Talk-in mailing list Talk-in@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
Re: [Talk-it] map1.eu
oggi mi sono imbattuto in questa mappa http://map1.eu/ Fa uso dei dati di openstreetmap Cliccando sulla rosa dei venti si vede l'about. Le tile sono rilasciate in CC-BY-NC-SA. Guardando nell'about si arriva anche ai sorgenti https://github.com/bigr/map1 Aumentando gli zoom compaiono foto delle strade e ulteriori tag provenienti dalla sorgente osm ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] map1.eu
la mappa non ha dati aggiornatissimi...sono di prima del febbraio di questo anno (verderio superiore ed inferiore da allora si sono accorpate) ma non vecchissimi. il render non è bellissimo ma è molto carina l'idea di indicare gli elementi sul suolo in base a dove è posizionato il mouse. agli zoom massimi io non vedo nulla...la tile viene sostituita con una richiesta di donazione :/ - Ciao, Aury -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/map1-eu-tp5799784p5799796.html Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] map1.eu
Non piace nemmeno a me, ma mi sembrava il caso di segnalarla :) 2014-03-15 8:18 GMT+01:00 Aury88 spacedrive...@gmail.com: la mappa non ha dati aggiornatissimi...sono di prima del febbraio di questo anno (verderio superiore ed inferiore da allora si sono accorpate) ma non vecchissimi. il render non è bellissimo ma è molto carina l'idea di indicare gli elementi sul suolo in base a dove è posizionato il mouse. agli zoom massimi io non vedo nulla...la tile viene sostituita con una richiesta di donazione :/ - Ciao, Aury -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/map1-eu-tp5799784p5799796.html Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it -- Maurizio Napo Napolitano http://de.straba.us ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Università con più sedi e campus.
Aury, il mio suggerimento è: Il 14/03/2014 12:21, Aury88 ha scritto: ciao a tutti. oggi il mio dubbio riguarda le grandi università che spesso non sono localizzate in un unico punto, ma il discorso può essere esteso a svariati ambiti (ospedali, circoli scolastici etc etc) nello specifico oggi ho provato a sistemare il Politecnico di Milano secondo la suddivisione fornita dal politecnico stesso: università-sedi-campus per cui uno o più campus formano una sede e più sedi compongono l'universita università (in questo caso sono 7 delle quali solo due a milano in quartieri diversi..le altre sono ognuna in una città diversa della lombardia). come faccio a classificarle e a mapparle? .. un altro metodo potrebbe essere l'utilizzo delle relazioni site ma non ho assolutamente idea di come gestirlo (anche qui poi come? usando il metodo delle singole relazioni applicate ai singoli elementi o una gerarchizzazione tramite parentele?). +1 Secondo me dovresti mappare ogni sede o campus con una relazione multipoligono o ciò che al meglio rappresenta lo specifico caso, poi creare una relazione site con nome 'Politecnico di Milano' e inserirvi come membri le relazioni multipoligono delle varie sedi del Politecnico. Ad esempio io per la pagina Wikipedia riguardante i palazzi rinascimentali di Orvieto ho creato la relazione: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3422249, il tuo caso credo sia assimilabile. - Ciao, Aury -- Ciao, Marcello ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] convertire linea confine in poligono (2000 nodi)
2014-03-14 23:59 GMT+01:00 Andrea Bressi andrea.bre...@gmail.com: come è possibile creare un poligono da una linea quando è molto grande? Anche caricando la linea a tratti inferiori di 2000 nodi, poi come è possibile riunirli e poi chiudere la linea e creare il poligono? non ho capito. stai parlando di inserire dati e creare un poligono? oppure vuoi estrarre dati? -- -S ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] commento su licenza odbl
2014-03-14 14:07 GMT+01:00 Daniele Forsi dfo...@gmail.com: Il 14 marzo 2014 13:12, Simone Cortesi ha scritto: sabas, sbiribizio e io lo abbiamo tradotto in italiano e pubblicato bravi, è materiale utile per il tutorial che non mi sembra abbia fatto progressi: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cgqjsf41MJGUVEg4C1LdHlubPJm-ngDliiWo00jz6uA/edit aggiunto il link al documento, per non perderlo. PS: se trovate errori, segnalatemelo per favore. manca il verbo prima di considerato: qualsiasi database derivato che sia stato utilizzato nella produzione del lavoro finale considerato Utilizzato Pubblicamente. fixed tutti, grazie. -- -S ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] convertire linea confine in poligono (2000 nodi)
se ho capito bene quello che stai cercando di fare, devi usare una relazione multipoligono con tutte le way perimetrali. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Multipolygon - Ciao, Aury -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/convertire-linea-confine-in-poligono-2000-nodi-tp5799785p5799806.html Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] map1.eu
Maurizio Napolitano-3 wrote Non piace nemmeno a me, ma mi sembrava il caso di segnalarla :) hai fatto benissimo! è sempre un piacere vedere come viene utilizzata la nostra mappa e comunque si impara sempre qualcosa di nuovo :) sbaglio o teoricamente dovrebbe essere messo direttamente sulla mappa un riferimento ad osm? invece per quanto riguarda la licenza di utilizzo Cc-sa-nc-by? a cosa viene applicato? allo stile, la tile o ad un eventuale integrazione di questa mappa (o forse le sue funzionalità) dentro altri siti o applicativi? è lecita come licenza vista la provenienza dei dati da osm? - Ciao, Aury -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/map1-eu-tp5799784p5799807.html Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Università con più sedi e campus.
Am 15/mar/2014 um 08:56 schrieb Marcello arca...@gmail.com: Ad esempio io per la pagina Wikipedia riguardante i palazzi rinascimentali di Orvieto ho creato la relazione: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3422249, il tuo caso credo sia assimilabile. il caso dell'università non è simile. La relazione Palazzi rinascimentali di Orvieto è da cancellare in osm (relations are not categories)*. Non è un site, sono palazzi distinti che hanno soltanto una proprietà in comune: sono stato costruiti nella stessa epoca. http://wiki.osm.org/w/index.php?title=Relations/Relations_are_not_Categories ciao, Martin___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Università con più sedi e campus.
ma quindi cosa dovrei fare ? - Ciao, Aury -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Universita-con-piu-sedi-e-campus-tp5799685p5799811.html Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Università con più sedi e campus.
Il 15 marzo 2014 10:44, Martin Koppenhoefer ha scritto: il caso dell'università non è simile. La relazione Palazzi rinascimentali di Orvieto è da cancellare in osm (relations are not categories)*. +1 suggerisco all'autore della relazione di preparare una query per Overpass Turbo e documentarla nel wiki, magari nella pagina regionale o della città -- Daniele Forsi ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Università con più sedi e campus.
Martin, grazie per l'informazione, provvedo a cancellare la relazione. In quel caso quindi sarebbe corretto mettere ad ogni palazzo il tag building:architecture=Italian Renaissance, giusto? Ciao, Marcello Il 15/03/2014 10:44, Martin Koppenhoefer ha scritto: Am 15/mar/2014 um 08:56 schrieb Marcello arca...@gmail.com mailto:arca...@gmail.com: Ad esempio io per la pagina Wikipedia riguardante i palazzi rinascimentali di Orvieto ho creato la relazione: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3422249, il tuo caso credo sia assimilabile. il caso dell'università non è simile. La relazione Palazzi rinascimentali di Orvieto è da cancellare in osm (relations are not categories)*. Non è un site, sono palazzi distinti che hanno soltanto una proprietà in comune: sono stato costruiti nella stessa epoca. http://wiki.osm.org/w/index.php?title=Relations/Relations_are_not_Categories ciao, Martin ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] map1.eu
Nessuno segue OSM Italia sui social :( https://plus.google.com/105538331374374393602/posts/cf18CbcBgJc Il giorno 15 marzo 2014 10:34, Aury88 spacedrive...@gmail.com ha scritto: Maurizio Napolitano-3 wrote Non piace nemmeno a me, ma mi sembrava il caso di segnalarla :) hai fatto benissimo! è sempre un piacere vedere come viene utilizzata la nostra mappa e comunque si impara sempre qualcosa di nuovo :) sbaglio o teoricamente dovrebbe essere messo direttamente sulla mappa un riferimento ad osm? invece per quanto riguarda la licenza di utilizzo Cc-sa-nc-by? a cosa viene applicato? allo stile, la tile o ad un eventuale integrazione di questa mappa (o forse le sue funzionalità) dentro altri siti o applicativi? è lecita come licenza vista la provenienza dei dati da osm? - Ciao, Aury -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/map1-eu-tp5799784p5799807.html Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] map1.eu
Il 15 marzo 2014 12:05, sabas88 saba...@gmail.com ha scritto: Nessuno segue OSM Italia sui social :( https://plus.google.com/105538331374374393602/posts/cf18CbcBgJc Rimediato! Grazie sabas! C ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Università con più sedi e campus.
P.S. Credo che la relazione assimilabile sia questa: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3188770, dove ci sono due scuole secondarie superiori distinte che a causa della riforma scolastica sono state 'fuse' in un unico istituto scolastico. Ciao, Marcello Il 15/03/2014 10:44, Martin Koppenhoefer ha scritto: Am 15/mar/2014 um 08:56 schrieb Marcello arca...@gmail.com mailto:arca...@gmail.com: Ad esempio io per la pagina Wikipedia riguardante i palazzi rinascimentali di Orvieto ho creato la relazione: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3422249, il tuo caso credo sia assimilabile. il caso dell'università non è simile. La relazione Palazzi rinascimentali di Orvieto è da cancellare in osm (relations are not categories)*. Non è un site, sono palazzi distinti che hanno soltanto una proprietà in comune: sono stato costruiti nella stessa epoca. http://wiki.osm.org/w/index.php?title=Relations/Relations_are_not_Categories ciao, Martin ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] AAA cercasi mappers senesi
Ciao io non sono senese ma ho vissuto a Siena per diversi anni. Vale uguale? Francesca Il 15/mar/2014 09:10 Maurizio Napolitano napoo...@gmail.com ha scritto: ciao a tutt*, mi chiedono di mapper attivi su Siena per un progetto -- Maurizio Napo Napolitano http://de.straba.us ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] map1.eu
mea culpa! mi ero scordato di averlo già visto un annetto fa xD chiedo venia :) - Ciao, Aury -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/map1-eu-tp5799784p5799854.html Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Università con più sedi e campus.
2014-03-15 12:02 GMT+01:00 Marcello arca...@gmail.com: In quel caso quindi sarebbe corretto mettere ad ogni palazzo il tag building:architecture=Italian Renaissance, giusto? si, qualcosa del genere, qualche tag che descrive bene la charatteristica che hanno in comune. Forse non sarebbe male avere anche un start_date, che questo serve per filtrare in maniera abbastanza generica. Poi anche un tag che dice palazzo (il tag building non è male per questo). ciao, Martin ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] convertire linea confine in poligono (2000 nodi)
Ciao! Quello che ho io è il confine lineare di un'area molto grande e vorrei caricarlo su osm, solo che per il limite dei 2000 nodi non mi permette di farlo. Allora ho provato a caricarlo a pezzi ma poi quando ho provato ad unirli al momento di salvare mi dà comunque errore per lo stesso motivo. E anche ammettendo che riesca ad unirli e salvarlo, come faccio poi a dire che quell'entità lineare in realtà è il confine di un'area? Spero di essere stato più chiaro.. Grazie, A. Il giorno 15/mar/2014 11:39, Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com ha scritto: Il 14 marzo 2014 23:59, Andrea Bressi andrea.bre...@gmail.com ha scritto: come è possibile creare un poligono da una linea quando è molto grande? Anche caricando la linea a tratti inferiori di 2000 nodi, poi come è possibile riunirli e poi chiudere la linea e creare il poligono? Se capisco giusto, tu hai una linea di confine su OSM e vuoi scaricarne il poligono. In questo caso, questo strumento può essere d'aiuto: http://osm102.openstreetmap.fr/~jocelyn/polygons/index.py Ha anche delle funzionalità per semplificare il poligono risultante. C ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
[Talk-lt] Kaukas: papildomos taisyklės
Sveiki Prie Kauko pridėtos papildomos taisyklės. 1. amenity=parking nuimam visus rastus area=yes 2. highway=residential|secondary|tertiary|primary|trunk nuimame motor_vehicle=yes Abiem atvejais tai beprasmiškos žymos. JOSM'o validatorius jau skundžiasi dėl tokių žymų. -- Tomas ___ Talk-lt mailing list Talk-lt@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-lt
Re: [Talk-se] OSM i Umeå
De kartor jag rektifierat är de två sista på den här sidan: http://www.umea.se/umeakommun/kommunochpolitik/kartorochgeografiskinformation/produkterochtjanster/trycktakartor/historiskakartor.4.76244a6d126e919ed6f80003181.html 2014-03-11 11:04 GMT+01:00 André Costa andre.co...@wikimedia.se: Många tack. Jo stan är av god kvalité. Det jag funderade på var mest utkanterna samt kringliggande byar då det är här man ofta ser större förändringar över tiden. Speciellt är det av nytta att exempelvis ha kyrkan (eller andra äldre byggnader) karterade som man kan använda för referenspunkter. Sedan är det självfallet alltid en vinst om vi hittar fler som börjar med OSM eller annan typ av fri_kunskaps arbete och då passar Umepediasamarbetet som en bra plattform. @Henrik: Vilka kartor är det du har rektifierat sedan tidigare? @Jonas: Det skulle definitivt kunna vara intressant. Vi har inga datum ännu men får vi till något så blir det troligen innan sommarledigheten kommer igång. Jag ska titta närmare på vilka möjligheter som finns och återkommer efteråt. /André André Costa | GLAM-tekniker, Wikimedia Sverige | andre.co...@wikimedia.se| +46 (0)733-964574 Stöd fri kunskap, bli medlem i Wikimedia Sverige. Läs mer på blimedlem.wikimedia.se 2014-03-06 16:01 GMT+01:00 Henrik Johansson henr...@gmail.com: Jag undrar därför om någon här dels vet hur stort OSM-communityt är i Umeå. Det kanske rent av finns någon på denna listan? Jag är den som gjort mest OSM-kartering i Umeå. Det finns ingen riktig community, vi är 2-3 personer som bidrar mer eller mindre aktivt till kartan här omkring. Då rektifieringen av kartorna använder sig av OSM för referenspunkter behöver denna data vara så bra och utförlig som möjligt. Vi funderar därför på om man kunde hitta på något event kring karteringen av (dagens) Umeå. I själva stan är kvalitén helt tillräcklig för att rektifiera äldre kartor, jag har själv gjort det med goda resultat. När man kommer längre bort till omkringliggande byar sjunker exaktheten. Henrik ___ Talk-se mailing list Talk-se@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se ___ Talk-se mailing list Talk-se@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se ___ Talk-se mailing list Talk-se@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se
Re: [Talk-cz] Adresy
Ahoj, Dne So 15. března 2014 03:42:22, Dalibor Jelínek napsal(a): Ahoj, nepropadej panice. :-) Mozna jen nemaji tak obsahly zdroj adres jako my. Mozna vsechy dalsi cast adresy umi dat do polygonu, coz mi nemuzeme. Jiste nemaji slozitosti c.p. / c.e. / c.o. tohle radši vůbec nepiš, nebo se přijde na to, že housenumber je redundantní. Mozna ma cely dum vzdy prave jedno cislo Mozna nikdo ani zatim nic navic pridavat nechtel. Ale hlavne si myslim, ze nabobtnavani dat o uzitecne znacky proste nemuze z principu vadit. Vzdyt to delame porad kreslenim a zpresnovanim mapy. Podle Moorova zakona to za rok bude vse z hlediska zpracovani snazsi, ale my nebudeme mit rychlejsi ruce. Proste cena casu a energie, kterou do projektu venuji lide, je mnhohonasobne vyssi, nez naklady na hardware, ktery to zpracovava. Meli by byt radi, ze pridavame data, ktera maji smysl a jsou relativne presna. Ono zas tak moc protestu nebylo. To je otázka, my ten HW, kromě vlastního, neplatíme a navíc nás to baví, teda myslím ;-) Nebudeme tam davat zadne CZ. OK. Co muzeme vypustit dale? borough/suburb? Umime to polygonem? Ne. Tak to tam dame. Umíme to polygonem. Museli bychom tam polygony nahrát, je jich 143, největší má 1980 bodů. Admin_level 9 je snad volný.? Ale Petrovi se do toho, myslím, moc nechtělo. Mohli bychom vypustit addr:place, kdyz je tam ulice. Ale to se mi tak moc nechce... Jinak ma zbytek opodstatneni podle meho nazoru. Tak co tam vlastně dáváme: - ulice - to snad nikdo nezpochybňuje -place - to snad může být, i když je ulice. Třeba se to Nominatim či jiný geocoder časem naučí. BTW: šel by použít Tiger? Má s ním někdo zkušenosti? Nebo se hodí jen pro USA? - city - máme polygony - suburb - polygony dají se dohrát - country - máme hranice - postcode - to nikdo moc nezpochybňuje, i když jistě na to dojde ;-). Co vím, tak seznam PSČ jde minimálně na úroveň ulice, spíš domu - viz třeba ta Sokolovská. Jestli někde má pošta polygony, no to bych neřešil a PSČ bych nechal. Zatímco tady už 4 měsíce tlacháme, tak v OSM chybí 800.000 adres. -- Petr ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Adresy
tohle radši vůbec nepiš, nebo se přijde na to, že housenumber je redundantní. To sice je, ale Nominatim hleda asi jen podle nej, ne? To je otázka, my ten HW, kromě vlastního, neplatíme a navíc nás to baví, teda myslím ;-) Ja bych prave rekl, ze ho platime nasim casem. Kdyby se jim to nevyplacelo, tak to nedelaji. city - máme polygony A bude vse fungovat, kdyz vypustime city? Ja bych to tam radsi nechal. Je skutecne obec definovana jen svou hranici? Neni to spise ten vycet, ze ktereho se pak da zkontruovat hranice? Nevim. Umíme to polygonem. Museli bychom tam polygony nahrát, je jich 143, největší má 1980 bodů. Admin_level 9 je snad volný.? Ale Petrovi se do toho, myslím, moc nechtělo. A jaky to jsou? Jen mestke casti Nebo i mestske obvody a spravni obvody Prahy? - postcode - to nikdo moc nezpochybňuje, i když jistě na to dojde ;-). Co vím, tak seznam PSČ jde minimálně na úroveň ulice, spíš domu - viz třeba ta Sokolovská. Jestli někde má pošta polygony, no to bych neřešil a PSČ bych nechal. Neee, na to nesahat a davat to tam! Zatímco tady už 4 měsíce tlacháme, tak v OSM chybí 800.000 adres. -- Petr Jo, chtel bych to ted rozstipnout. Dalibor ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Adresy
Ahoj, Dne So 15. března 2014 12:59:22, Dalibor Jelínek napsal(a): tohle radši vůbec nepiš, nebo se přijde na to, že housenumber je redundantní. To sice je, ale Nominatim hleda asi jen podle nej, ne? Nevím, podle něj určitě najde, jestli by stačilo conscriptionnumber či provisionalnumber (ale provisional je, myslím, zase specifikum). To neřešmě, to nikdo zatím nezpochybňuje. city - máme polygony A bude vse fungovat, kdyz vypustime city? Ja bych to tam radsi nechal. Je skutecne obec definovana jen svou hranici? Neni to spise ten vycet, ze ktereho se pak da zkontruovat hranice? Nevim. Třeba new york hoover avenue 150 funguje Umíme to polygonem. Museli bychom tam polygony nahrát, je jich 143, největší má 1980 bodů. Admin_level 9 je snad volný.? Ale Petrovi se do toho, myslím, moc nechtělo. A jaky to jsou? Jen mestke casti Nebo i mestske obvody a spravni obvody Prahy? Všechno v RUIAN je, jak ty Praha1-10, tak Praha1-22, tak ty části. Jo, chtel bych to ted rozstipnout. Máš sekeru? ;-) -- -p- ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
[OSM-talk-fr] Nouveau serveurs pour OSM-FR
Je suis dans mon train de retour de Mont-de-Marsan où je suis venu installer un Blade Center. Il s'agit d'un rack avec 14 lames, c'est à dire 14 serveurs. Ce rack est hébergé par Aquinétic dans les locaux de la communauté d'agglo Marsan agglomération dans un petit local fibré. Tout est branché, il ne manque plus que le réseau ce qui devrait arriver dans la semaine qui vient. Nous allons partager quelques lames avec Aquinétic qui pourra en mettre à disposition à quelques startups hébergées sur place à La Fabrik car nous n'allons pas exploiter l'ensemble. Pour démarrer: - 2 lames HS21 avec 2 Xéon Quad Core à 3GHz, 16Go de RAM et 2 disques d'1To (en mirroir) - 4 lames LS21 avec 2 Optéron Dual Core à 2.8GHz, 8Go de RAM et 1 disque de 146Go Le rack complet fait partie d'une baie donnée par Ateliers sans Frontières, association qui récupère du matériel informatique dans de grandes entreprises. Cette baie était initialement utilisée par la BNP. Quelques upgrades ont été faits comme les disques, mais aussi en achetant d'occasion à très bas prix certains éléments (switch réseau à 10$, lames HS21 à 50 EURO). En gros, 400 EURO au total. Merci donc à: la BNP, Ateliers sans Frontières, Aquinétic et Marsan Agglomération. Photo de la bestiole: http://t.co/BIFFderjji et http://t.co/gqUPu2LDyz -- Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France Conférence State Of The Map France du 4 au 6 avril à Parishttp://openstreetmap.fr/sotmfr ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Nouveau serveurs pour OSM-FR
Ça a l'air cool, bravo ! Sais tu quels services actuels ou futurs osmfr devraient en profiter ? Le 15 mars 2014 12:53, Christian Quest cqu...@openstreetmap.fr a écrit : Je suis dans mon train de retour de Mont-de-Marsan où je suis venu installer un Blade Center. Il s'agit d'un rack avec 14 lames, c'est à dire 14 serveurs. Ce rack est hébergé par Aquinétic dans les locaux de la communauté d'agglo Marsan agglomération dans un petit local fibré. Tout est branché, il ne manque plus que le réseau ce qui devrait arriver dans la semaine qui vient. Nous allons partager quelques lames avec Aquinétic qui pourra en mettre à disposition à quelques startups hébergées sur place à La Fabrik car nous n'allons pas exploiter l'ensemble. Pour démarrer: - 2 lames HS21 avec 2 Xéon Quad Core à 3GHz, 16Go de RAM et 2 disques d'1To (en mirroir) - 4 lames LS21 avec 2 Optéron Dual Core à 2.8GHz, 8Go de RAM et 1 disque de 146Go Le rack complet fait partie d'une baie donnée par Ateliers sans Frontières, association qui récupère du matériel informatique dans de grandes entreprises. Cette baie était initialement utilisée par la BNP. Quelques upgrades ont été faits comme les disques, mais aussi en achetant d'occasion à très bas prix certains éléments (switch réseau à 10$, lames HS21 à 50€). En gros, 400€ au total. Merci donc à: la BNP, Ateliers sans Frontières, Aquinétic et Marsan Agglomération. Photo de la bestiole: http://t.co/BIFFderjji et http://t.co/gqUPu2LDyz -- Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France Conférence State Of The Map France du 4 au 6 avril à Parishttp://openstreetmap.fr/sotmfr ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [Talk-us] State ref tags on ways: Use of unique ISO/ANSI/USPS 2-letter state codes in RELATIONS as well as WAYS?
* Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com [2014-03-12 00:33 -0500]: I went and verified some things about bannered routes. It looks like the current shield rendering looks for network=X:Y:Modifier. So for example the US 50 truck route in Cincinnati is network=US:US:Truck and ref=50. [snip] Looking around it looks like the other convention that has some decent use in the database (but is not currently supported by any renderings) is to add a modifier=Truck/Business/Spur/etc tag. I believe the wiki recommends that bannered routes get a modifier tag in addition to having the modifier in the network tag, so US 50 Truck is network=US:US:Truck, ref=50, modifier=Truck. The idea is that data consumers can get the parent route network by subtracting modifier from network. (But data consumers that don't care about parent route networks, like the shield rendering, don't have to know about the modifier tag.) I don't know of any data consumers that make use of the modifier tag currently, but there weren't many consumers making use of route relations in general before the shield rendering. -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- The truth is not free. It's that simple. If you change the truth, it is no longer true - so the truth is not free! -- Jules Bean about freeness of documentation --- -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
* Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com [2014-03-13 10:26 -0400]: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/lxbarth/diary/21221 This is really similar to the discussions that periodically happen in the open source software community over whether share-alike licenses like the GPL or open-use licenses like the 3-clause BSD license are better. I usually end up on the side of share-alike for reasons best summed up by a friend of mine who once said, The GPL restricts your freedom to be evil. The BSD license doesn't. I think that if your goal is to have as many people as possible using your data, you're best off choosing open-use or public domain licensing. (Richard Weait and I chose to go with CC0 and PDDL for the data in the shield rendering so as to allow for as much variance of reuse as possible. Similarly, it makes sense for US federal government data, because their mandate is to be as useful to US citizens as possible.) If, however, you want to foster a community around a larger scale project, I think share-alike is a better path to take. If OSM switched to public domain licensing today, there would almost certainly be more people using and benefiting from today's OSM data. Google in particular would probably make OSM data part of its data; they already merge numerous public domain datasets into their proprietary dataset. That would make Google the better choice for a lot of people than plain OSM data, and you can even edit Google's data through their Map Maker program. From there, I suspect that Map Maker would attract more people that might otherwise have ended up contributing to OSM, which would hurt community growth and benefit Google at the expense of all the other OSM data consumers. In my opinion, the single biggest thing that makes OSM valuable is the community of people contributing to it, and the license on the data needs to reinforce that community, not allow proprietary data uses to splinter it. -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- lately my mania has been mega-lo-mein-ia, which is to say i believe the plate of noodles is larger than i am. -- elysse --- -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
I am still thinking about this and look forward to Alex's talk next month in DC. However, as a business user who directed a lot of money toward OSM at one point in my career, I thought it would be useful to run through why the SA aspects of the license were important to me at the time. I was at MapQuest back then, and Steve Coast was at Microsoft. Both companies spent substantial amounts on proprietary data to run their maps (still do :). It seemed to me that the better option would have been to get a consortium of like-minded companies together and provide support to the vibrant OSM community instead, commoditize the data layer by helping the community however we could, and then compete at a layer above the data. Other companies that were not fundamentally behind open data would go their own way, including my other former employer Google. But back then I would have loved for MapQuest and Microsoft to get together and support data behind by a SA license. And if other companies wanted to join in too, that would have been great. And if others wanted to go their own way, they could do so outside the common wealth protected by SA. Didn't quite happen that way in the end, but that was my thinking. I don't know whether SA would help or hurt in this regard at this point in time. Would love to discuss as I am still forming an opinion, and again I am looking forward to Alex's talk. The other thing that might be interesting on this topic: the legal team back in the day had no problem with the older CC BY-SA license (obviously, because we launched), but I recall a preference for the then-impending ODbL. Not sure how many of you have worked at a large public corporation, but trust me the legal teams there can be *quite* conservative. This was not a startup with small data and timid VCs, and it was just fine. So companies shouldn't worry about using OSM, becoming Mapbox customers, etc. The companies that should worry are the ones banking on proprietary data to provide long-term value! The hallmark of the business user is pragmatism. What will yield the better data, the better community, etc. I am not quite sure yet but am keeping an open mind. -Randy On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com wrote: Hello everyone - I've been sitting on writing about the detrimental effects of OpenStreetMap's share-alike license (ODbL) for a while and finally decided to, um, share. I've been listening long to many OpenStreetMappers I respect a ton telling me it's not so bad and it's just what we're stuck with right now. But given how bad share alike is for OpenStreetMap I don't think we should give up for pushing for a more open license. Here's why I think share-alike hurts OpenStreetMap and how this keeps OpenStreetMap from having the full impact it could have: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/lxbarth/diary/21221 Looking forward to your comments, Alex ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
