Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Licensing a combined OSM adapted and CC-BY derived work

[Andrew Harvey]

On 23 November 2015 at 13:27, Paul Norman  wrote:
> CC BY 3.0 doesn't allow you to do this, as it requires you to impose
> conditions not present in the ODbL.

When I publish my new work, I add all the required attributions and
statements required by the CC-BY 3.0 license (in clause 4B). Are these
the conditions which you refer to? I thought from my CC compliance
side they don't need to be present in the ODbL since I assert them in
addition to the ODbL license as required from the OSM side?

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] imagerie mapbox

[Laurent Combe]

pour ma partie
L'outil uMap permet de créer facilement des cartes personnalisées. On place
des points/lignes/polygones sur sa carte avec en fond de carte un rendu
basé sur OSM

peu de monde (en tout cas chez les nouveaux utilisateurs) sait que l'on
peut rajouter un fond type "vue aérienne".
et beaucoup de personnes à qui je présente uMap me font la remarque
suivante : et comment faire pour avoir une "vue satellite" sur ma carte

je me demandais s'il était pertinent de documenter cela dans le wiki (dans
la page dédiée  à uMap) en décrivant comment rajouter la vue satellite en
provenance de mapBox (sachant que mapBox c'est pas des gentils, qu'IGN ne
propose rien de gratuit, que je ne connais pas d'autres solutions)
voilà c'est tout

Laurent

Le 22 novembre 2015 22:48,  a écrit :

>
>
> faut-il ou pas rajouter cette possibilité dans la page uMap du wiki ?
>
>
> Pour un simple affichage en fond, je ne pense pas qu'on soit encore dans
> les limites prévues ci-dessus.
>
> Il faut voir côté IGN... j'avoue ne pas tout comprendre à leurs conditions
> d'utilisation, mais pour certains usages, les couches de bases sont
> utilisables gratuitement.
>
> Heu, j'avoue ne pas comprendre : Laurent, tu veux dire proposer comme
> couche par défaut ou comme couche possible ?
> Je vois que tu l'as fait, donc c'est possible (j'allais d'ailleurs le dire
> ;-)).
> Tu veux dire proposer comme couche avec sa propre clé ?
>
> Christian, oui, les conditions IGN sont peu claires et peu pratiques. Il y
> a quelques années, tu pouvais prendre un jeton gratuit (dans certaines
> limites) mais jeton à renouveler chaque année !
>
> Pour paysage de France : pourquoi payer des tuiles OSM sur MapBox ?
> Pourquoi accepter des restrictions sur les surcouches alors que UMap (ou
> tout autre service basé sur Leaflet par exemple) ? Peut-être que vous
> n'atteignez pas les limites pour le moment.
>
> Il y a aussi des WMS/TMS d'orthophotos qui peuvent être intéressants
> suivant les zones (donc sans doute pas intéressant pour Paysages de France
> : zones trop vastes). Pour la Bretagne :
> http://geobretagne.fr/mapfishapp/.
>
>
> Jean-Yvon
>
> ___
> 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-in] Roads in India: How complete is OpenStreetMap ?

[Arun Ganesh]

The data team at Mapbox is also looking at how we can improve the highway
coverage. The public tracker is here:
https://github.com/mapbox/mapping/issues/138

The first step might be to collect existing maps or stats for each state
and compare them to OSM to identify where more work is needed.

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Aneesh T  wrote:

> Most of Haryana, Gujarat and Rajasthan were mapped by HeinzV and Oberaffe
> I think.. Karnataka, Tamil nadu, Kerala and Maharashtra are decently mapped
> too... The rest needs a lot of work...
> On 23 Nov 2015 7:04 a.m., "Yogesh योगि" 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Naveen,
>>
>> Blog from Mikel shows that in India only 21% of roads are mapped. [ref:
>>> CIA factbook ]
>>>
>>> https://www.mapbox.com/blog/how-complete-is-openstreetmap/
>>>
>>> https://gist.github.com/tcql/0d7ad9b32afbea76f615
>>>
>>> Is there any further analysis by states or type of road ?
>>>
>>
>> The India:Roads OSM wiki page[1] has some status on the percentage of SH
>> roads mapped and other details, although I couldn't see much recent updates
>> on individual State pages except in Karnataka[2] and Kerala[3] State pages.
>> From the wiki page, it looks like much of the Haryana[4], Karnataka,
>> Maharastra[5] and Rajasthan[6] State Highways are completed. But it may
>> also be the case that other States' SH might have been done but not updated
>> on the OSM wiki page.
>>
>>
>> [1]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads
>> [2]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Karnataka
>> [3]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/State_Highways_%28Kerala%29
>> [4]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Haryana
>> [5]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Maharashtra
>> [6]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Rajasthan
>>
>>
>> --
>> Yogesh K S
>> Sent from an Electronic Device
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-in mailing list
>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>


-- 
Arun Ganesh
(planemad) 

___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Roads in India: How complete is OpenStreetMap ?

[Naveen Francis]

Hi Arun,

Can you point out what percent of NH and SH [by state] has mapped in India ?

For NH length per state.
http://morth.nic.in/showfile.asp?lid=1624

For SH length per state.
http://www.mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/statistical_year_book_2011/SECTOR-4-SERVICE%20SECTOR/CH-21-ROADS/Table-21.2.xls


Thanks,
naveenpf

On 23 November 2015 at 10:58, Arun Ganesh  wrote:

> The data team at Mapbox is also looking at how we can improve the highway
> coverage. The public tracker is here:
> https://github.com/mapbox/mapping/issues/138
>
> The first step might be to collect existing maps or stats for each state
> and compare them to OSM to identify where more work is needed.
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Aneesh T  wrote:
>
>> Most of Haryana, Gujarat and Rajasthan were mapped by HeinzV and Oberaffe
>> I think.. Karnataka, Tamil nadu, Kerala and Maharashtra are decently mapped
>> too... The rest needs a lot of work...
>> On 23 Nov 2015 7:04 a.m., "Yogesh योगि" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Naveen,
>>>
>>> Blog from Mikel shows that in India only 21% of roads are mapped. [ref:
 CIA factbook ]

 https://www.mapbox.com/blog/how-complete-is-openstreetmap/

 https://gist.github.com/tcql/0d7ad9b32afbea76f615

 Is there any further analysis by states or type of road ?

>>>
>>> The India:Roads OSM wiki page[1] has some status on the percentage of SH
>>> roads mapped and other details, although I couldn't see much recent updates
>>> on individual State pages except in Karnataka[2] and Kerala[3] State pages.
>>> From the wiki page, it looks like much of the Haryana[4], Karnataka,
>>> Maharastra[5] and Rajasthan[6] State Highways are completed. But it may
>>> also be the case that other States' SH might have been done but not updated
>>> on the OSM wiki page.
>>>
>>>
>>> [1]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads
>>> [2]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Karnataka
>>> [3]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/State_Highways_%28Kerala%29
>>> [4]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Haryana
>>> [5]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Maharashtra
>>> [6]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Rajasthan
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Yogesh K S
>>> Sent from an Electronic Device
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-in mailing list
>>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-in mailing list
>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Arun Ganesh
> (planemad) 
> 
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

[OSM-legal-talk] Licensing a combined OSM adapted and CC-BY derived work

[Andrew Harvey]

I consume OSM data, adapt it for my needs by adjusting OSM geometries
to match CC-BY licensed aerial imagery, and then publish the result
publicly.

To comply with the OSM data's ODBL license, my published results
contain a notice that it is "based on data (c) OpenStreetMap
Contributors under the Open Database License
http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright;.

To comply with the CC-BY license, I also add that "In part derived
from [name of work], CC BY 3.0 licensed, [link to work]".

Is this okay?

However "CC BY 2.0, 2.5, and 3.0 are clearly  incompatible, thanks to
the attribution requirements that can't be met."[1] and "It is ... not
clear if the CC 4.0 licenses are compatible ... with the ODbL"[2].

With this in mind my modified data is of no use to OSM since my
improvements can't be reincorporated with OSM?

Is this correct or is there a problem with my logic?

Many thanks.

[1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2015-July/008161.html
[2] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2015-July/008157.html

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Licensing a combined OSM adapted and CC-BY derived work

[Andrew Harvey]

On 23 November 2015 at 13:06, Andrew Harvey  wrote:
> To comply with the OSM data's ODBL license, my published results
> contain a notice that it is "based on data (c) OpenStreetMap
> Contributors under the Open Database License
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright;.

...and I offer my adapted work under the ODbL.

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [Talk-br] duvida de tunnel=culvert

[Nelson A. de Oliveira]

2015-11-23 1:58 GMT-02:00 Helio Cesar Tomio :
> Mas depois disto aparece a mensagem "tunel em objeto suspeito" na
> verificação do JOSM.
>
> Em cruzamentos destes tipos, é errado mapear como ponto?

Sim. tunnel=* só pode ser utilizado em caminhos, não em pontos (nós).
Por isso você vê um aviso quando utilizado em nós.

E outra coisa que está errada nos seus exemplos, é que o nó está
conectando o rio com a rua. Isso não deve acontecer.
Não deve existir nó compartilhado entre os dois.

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [Talk-in] Roads in India: How complete is OpenStreetMap ?

[Aneesh T]

Most of Haryana, Gujarat and Rajasthan were mapped by HeinzV and Oberaffe I
think.. Karnataka, Tamil nadu, Kerala and Maharashtra are decently mapped
too... The rest needs a lot of work...
On 23 Nov 2015 7:04 a.m., "Yogesh योगि" 
wrote:

> Hi Naveen,
>
> Blog from Mikel shows that in India only 21% of roads are mapped. [ref:
>> CIA factbook ]
>>
>> https://www.mapbox.com/blog/how-complete-is-openstreetmap/
>>
>> https://gist.github.com/tcql/0d7ad9b32afbea76f615
>>
>> Is there any further analysis by states or type of road ?
>>
>
> The India:Roads OSM wiki page[1] has some status on the percentage of SH
> roads mapped and other details, although I couldn't see much recent updates
> on individual State pages except in Karnataka[2] and Kerala[3] State pages.
> From the wiki page, it looks like much of the Haryana[4], Karnataka,
> Maharastra[5] and Rajasthan[6] State Highways are completed. But it may
> also be the case that other States' SH might have been done but not updated
> on the OSM wiki page.
>
>
> [1]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads
> [2]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Karnataka
> [3]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/State_Highways_%28Kerala%29
> [4]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Haryana
> [5]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Maharashtra
> [6]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Rajasthan
>
>
> --
> Yogesh K S
> Sent from an Electronic Device
>
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Roads in India: How complete is OpenStreetMap ?

[Yogesh योगि]

Hi Naveen,

Blog from Mikel shows that in India only 21% of roads are mapped. 
[ref: CIA factbook ]


https://www.mapbox.com/blog/how-complete-is-openstreetmap/

https://gist.github.com/tcql/0d7ad9b32afbea76f615

Is there any further analysis by states or type of road ?


The India:Roads OSM wiki page[1] has some status on the percentage of SH 
roads mapped and other details, although I couldn't see much recent 
updates on individual State pages except in Karnataka[2] and Kerala[3] 
State pages. From the wiki page, it looks like much of the Haryana[4], 
Karnataka, Maharastra[5] and Rajasthan[6] State Highways are completed. 
But it may also be the case that other States' SH might have been done 
but not updated on the OSM wiki page.



[1]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads
[2]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Karnataka
[3]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/State_Highways_%28Kerala%29
[4]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Haryana
[5]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Maharashtra
[6]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Roads/Rajasthan


--
Yogesh K S
Sent from an Electronic Device


___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Licensing a combined OSM adapted and CC-BY derived work

[Paul Norman]

On 11/22/2015 6:19 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:

On 23 November 2015 at 13:06, Andrew Harvey  wrote:

>To comply with the OSM data's ODBL license, my published results
>contain a notice that it is "based on data (c) OpenStreetMap
>Contributors under the Open Database License
>http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright;.

...and I offer my adapted work under the ODbL.


CC BY 3.0 doesn't allow you to do this, as it requires you to impose 
conditions not present in the ODbL.



___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

[Talk-br] duvida de tunnel=culvert

[Helio Cesar Tomio]

Estava tentando corrigir erros tipo "Cruzamento hidrovia/estrada" que
apareceram na verificação do JOSM.

Coloquei no cruzamento da highway com o waterway, um nó com:
tunnel=culvert
layer=-1

Mas depois disto aparece a mensagem "tunel em objeto suspeito" na
verificação do JOSM.

Em cruzamentos destes tipos, é errado mapear como ponto?

Objetos no OSM:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3853480833
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3853480834
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3853480835
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3850695157
___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] [SOTMTG2015] SOTM en cours au Togo - dans le cadre de la mission de renforcement de capacités du Projet EOF

[Augustin Doury]

Merci pour vos retours Stéphane et Djakaridja !

Stephane, nous avons filmé toutes les présentations et les publieront dès
que possible.
Pour commencer nous publierons toutes les présentations pays du SOTM BF de
Juillet 2015 sur Viméo, elles sont en lignes, nous allons les relayer sous
peu.
D'ici là, un article à propos des 2 semaines de missions qui ont précédé le
SOTMTG :Action OSM 2015 Togo: #mapathon #Mivamapper et State Of The Map
2015 Togo durant GIS Day et Geoweek


Bonne fin de WE,

Augustin



Le 22 novembre 2015 09:35, Djakaridja Sangari 
a écrit :

> Merci à tous pour ce volontariat et bon fin de formation au Togo. la
> communauté OSM-Bouaké (Côte d'Ivoire) vous êtes reconnaissant d'avoir
> séjourné du 28 septembre au 09 octobre 2015. Bien de choses à toutes les
> communautés réunies. et coucou a
> tous!!!
>
> Cordialement SANGARI Djakaridja
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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-cz] Nové pojetí dálniční sítě

[Marián Kyral]

Dne 22.11.2015 v 07:51 Pavel Machek napsal(a):
> Ahoj!
>
>> navrh popisu cest - pokud je neco spatne napiste do konference
>>
>>  
>>
>> Spravny popis road od 1.1.2016
>>
>> a) Motorway  Dálnice 
>>
>> must_have:highway=motorway,ref=D1,oneway=true
>>
>> don't_have:motorroad=*
>>
>> conditional:int_ref=E 55
>>
>> defaults:  lines=4,maxspeed=130,source:maxspeed=CZ:motorway
> Spis "lanes", ne?
>
> A teda nevim, tagovat natvrdo maxspeed=130, je to zadouci? To by spis
> chtelo nechat prazdny dokud to nekdo neprojede s tim ze tam ta 130
> fakt je dovolena, ne? Takhle se objevi maxspeed=130 i na mistech kde
> je to omezeny treba na 80...
>   Pavel

Tak dálnice je dálnice ne? Předpokládá se 130. Pokud tam je někde
omezení, tak se otaguje dodatečně. Důležitější jsou přece značky a ne to
co mi píše navigace.
Rychlost v navigaci je jen orientační.

Marián

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-it] S.a.S. come scriverla?

[Matteo Quatrida]

Il 21/11/2015 19:07, girarsi_liste ha scritto:
> Nel tag Operator=* ho il nome di una società con aggiunta Sas, ovvero
> società in accomandita semplice.
>
> Sono in dubbio se inserire il nomesocietà con aggiunta Sas, oppure
> estendere l'acronimo come dovrebbe essere per i santi dei nomi delle
> chiese, cioè invece di S.Qualcuno in San Qualcuno?
>
> Ovviamente questo influisce anche per gli altri acronimi commerciali
> come Spa, e SrL.
>
> Grazie a chi interverrà.
>
>
Ciao a tutti,

che io sappia, ma sarei felice di essere corretto, in italiano gli
acronimi e le sigle dovrebbero essere puntati e con lettere maiuscole:
S.R.L., S.A.S., S.N.C., S.P.A., ecc.
Tuttavia credo sia invalso l'uso parzialmente maiuscolo o minuscolo per
una pura questione estetica (questa è la giustificazione a cui sono
arrivato): S.r.l., s.n.c., s.a.s., S.p.A., ecc.
Quanto all'inserimento, lo terrei in forma puntata, perché non si vede
mai in giro in forma estesa.

Buon fine settimana.

-- 
Dott. Ing. Matteo Quatrida
+39 340 909 6828
matteo.quatr...@pec.it 

/“If a cluttered desk is a sign of a cluttered mind, of what, then, is
an empty desk a sign?”/ — Albert Einstein


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[lester]

Sent from my android device so quoting is crap!

-Original Message-
From: Colin Smale 
To: Daniel Kastl 
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 12:57
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

On 2015-11-22 13:49, Daniel Kastl wrote:


The difference in their proprietary system (if you want to call
address systems in in countries closed and proprietary) is, that when
their API (and "algorithm") goes away, you won't find any address
anymore. It's totally unreliable to depend on a proprietary API to
locate an address, and a waste of time to add such data to OSM in my
opinion.

From their website:

If we, what3words ltd, are ever unable to maintain the what3words technology or 
make arrangements for it to be maintained by a third-party (with that 
third-party being willing to make this same commitment), then we will release 
our source code into the public domain. We will do this in such a way and with 
suitable licences and documentation to ensure that any and all users of 
what3words, whether they are individuals, businesses, charitable organisations, 
aid agencies, governments or anyone else can continue to rely on the what3words 
system.

Translation- if we can't make money from this then you are on your own   
There is nothing stopping anybody creating an open source alternative now 
perhaps directly extending the already open source data?
what3words is not a good base to start from o why would we provide them free 
support?

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Colin Smale]

 

Andy, you are right, if you accept that the 3 or 4 people who have
participated in this discussion are representative of OSM at large. But
the most active inhabitants of this list and others are limited to maybe
10 people, who frequently use authoritative-sounding language like "we
are not doing it" and "it has no place in OSM" without the merest hint
of "IMHO". I am not naming any names, and I don't want to get into any
personal arguments, but it is a general frustration I have with the
discussions on these lists. 

There may be many arguments against w3w in OSM, but I was kind of hoping
that some of the attacks would also apply objectively to other entities
which are or are not mapped in OSM. On-the-ground visibility was
mentioned, and that is spurious in the sense that there are many other
things in OSM which are not visible and are yet tolerated. Being
proprietary was mentioned, but it is not really much more proprietary
than the coordinates of UK postcodes used to be, and we were happily
reverse-engineering them and adding them to point addresses and deriving
district boundaries from that data. Through all that effort the
proprietary nature (and the commercial value) of the PAF was to some
extent diluted, and now a lot of this information is publicly available.
Only time will tell if w3w takes off commercially. Right now they have
had $5m of funding and have an impressive list of partners. 

--colin 

On 2015-11-22 14:01, ajt1...@gmail.com wrote: 

> On 22/11/2015 12:51, Colin Smale wrote: 
> 
>> ...and once again, as seems to be the norm in OSM, any minority interest 
>> which is not supported by the oligarchy gets mercilessly shot down.
> 
> ... except it's not _just_ the "oligarchy", is it?  No-one on this list seems 
> to have a good word for the original idea.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Andy (SomeoneElse)
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
 ___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Talk-GB] traffic calming

[Chris Hill]

There has been a discussion on the tagging mailing list triggered by 
Gerd Petermann having made a mechanical edit to some traffic calming 
features. I asked him to revert the undiscussed mechanical edit which he 
has done. He is not subscribed to talk-gb, he asked me to forward a link 
to his email to talk-gb, so here it is: 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2015-November/027597.html


Whatever the outcome of the discussion on tagging@, even in the highly 
unlikely event that tagging@ comes to some consensus, I do not agree 
that Gerd's mechanical edit is much use.  I specifically wanted to point 
out that discussing stuff on tagging@ doesn't constitute agreement to 
run a mechanical edit IMO.


--
Cheers, Chris (chillly)


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [talk-ph] Mapping all lanes of a toll plaza

[Ervin Malicdem]

Unless there is an "island" that separates them outside the toll booth
building, I believe creating a separate way for that purpose makes it too
cluttered. I second ":lanes" tagging scheme. In addition, we can place
separate nodes for each toll booth instead as what was done in Cavitex and
MCX.

Regards,

Ervin M.
*Schadow1 Expeditions* - A Filipino must not be a stranger to his own
motherland.
http://www.s1expeditions.com

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Rally de Leon  wrote:

>
> ...in which case, go for the ":lanes" tagging scheme (but it looks
> complicated -- too many forking segments). Can we experiment on a wide toll
> plaza? let's see how it renders
>
> +1 if it renders the segments nicely, :-) else lets the delay (for later)
> and use the original 1 center line approach
>
> besides, putting too many forking lanes (tagged as motorway) on wide toll
> plazas may unnecessarily increase the total number of kilometers
> (distorting the actual length) of that particular road; although this can
> be solved by relations.
>
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar 
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Rally de Leon 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I prefer one (1) center line for each group or class (less clutter) eg.
>>> 1 for those prepaid auto-debit lanes, 1 for car/cash, 1 for trucks/PUB;
>>> maybe this can help the lane-assist feature in car navigation.
>>>
>>
>> That would mean 9 lines for Cavitex
>> 1. Cash (Class 1)
>> 2. Exact Toll
>> 3. Cash (any class)
>> 4. EasyDrive
>> 5. E-TAP and EasyDrive
>> 6. E-TAP loading and cash
>> 7. E-TAP and cash
>> 8. Emergency and cash
>> 9. Wide vehicles
>>
>> Theoretically, we can still put information about various toll lanes even
>> with just a single center line using the ":lanes" tagging scheme:
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lanes
>>
>
>
> ___
> talk-ph mailing list
> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>
>
___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Colin Smale]

 

Hi Daniel, 

I didn't actually say there was any point in putting it in OSM, I just
said "w3w exists, what could/should we do?" 

You argument about being able to derive the w3w from the geometry is
valid, but requires the use of the proprietary API. But as you mention
their resolution is 3m, and I have seen discussions where people point
out that their house falls into multiple squares so there is not a
single translation from a building to w3w. People choose which w3w to
publish as "their location." An adjacent square has a completely
different w3w, so a human can't just visually assess whether it is close
or just plain wrong. An address may have multiple phone numbers, and the
inhabitants choose which one to publish; typically that one gets into
contact:phone=* in OSM. 

IF anyone wants to put their w3w into OSM, I don't think that would be
sufficiently wrong to require the data to be removed, even if the
concept is causing some raised eyebrows at the moment. 

By the way, just to be absolutely clear, I am not thinking of w3w as a
coordinate system in OSM, but as an addressing attribute similar to
postcodes. 

--colin 

On 2015-11-22 14:52, Daniel Kastl wrote: 

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
> 
> Hi Colin,
> 
> Beside the different opinions about proprietary and closed technology,
> what is the point to add these 3 words as a tag? I don't really
> understand the benefit, because the relation between location
> (coordinates) and their address system is fixed. It's just a 3x3m grid.
> 
> In OSM every object has a geometry and you can query the w3w address
> just using their API. So I don't see the point where it makes sense to
> add such an address tag. It's like you add "latlon" as a tag.
> 
> Regards,
> Daniel
> 
> On 22/11/15 22:37, Colin Smale wrote: 
> 
> Andy, you are right, if you accept that the 3 or 4 people who have 
> participated in this discussion are representative of OSM at large.
> But the most active inhabitants of this list and others are limited
> to maybe 10 people, who frequently use authoritative-sounding
> language like "we are not doing it" and "it has no place in OSM"
> without the merest hint of "IMHO". I am not naming any names, and I
> don't want to get into any personal arguments, but it is a general
> frustration I have with the discussions on these lists.
> 
> There may be many arguments against w3w in OSM, but I was kind of
> hoping that some of the attacks would also apply objectively to
> other entities which are or are not mapped in OSM. On-the-ground
> visibility was mentioned, and that is spurious in the sense that
> there are many other things in OSM which are not visible and are
> yet tolerated. Being proprietary was mentioned, but it is not
> really much more proprietary than the coordinates of UK postcodes
> used to be, and we were happily reverse-engineering them and adding
> them to point addresses and deriving district boundaries from that
> data. Through all that effort the proprietary nature (and the
> commercial value) of the PAF was to some extent diluted, and now a
> lot of this information is publicly available. Only time will tell
> if w3w takes off commercially. Right now they have had $5m of
> funding and have an impressive list of partners.
> 
> --colin
> 
> On 2015-11-22 14:01, ajt1...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> On 22/11/2015 12:51, Colin Smale wrote: 
> 
> ...and once again, as seems to be the norm in OSM, any
> minority interest which is not supported by the oligarchy gets
> mercilessly shot down.
> 
> ... except it's not _just_ the "oligarchy", is it?  No-one on
> this list seems to have a good word for the original idea.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Andy (SomeoneElse)
> 
> ___ talk mailing
> list talk@openstreetmap.org  
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

___ talk mailing list 
talk@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

- -- 
Georepublic UG & Georepublic Japan
eMail: daniel.ka...@georepublic.de
Web: https://georepublic.info
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWUci6AAoJEHjh5kk/zBG0MkQH/3R0ROeV1V8ugjeddSNrNaBE
KL7gQreKBzhrg+YnysiZGjqBJ6i0dmpe6OimPAXrOLrhzu90LvZJZRfhhSmWi3ms
HuNLUJofcPqQybEoJTZ+khQpebMBFg0DatH5uQJYvg+0fTBMpQncKtUjTPlMXhZf
UWMZSQNEpPOq8BAZ1/aO1Kxvxd2VNTxBgznsyTSzqs1LY8oS5ZiRzMFBpODYwlI7
kiqI69M8LC/IUjX5iSetBH+fTucNJxguvVhjadJnusGW6n+7gLYyPcZnTdRy5Q1+
HtUhDHOXqZiFYEoVcbveHZnEKAiMq9qXpZvv6xwQS4RJmEQpKTS6aGLBZ9jKSuc=
=lpOg
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
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-fr] imagerie mapbox

[Christian Quest]

On 22/11/2015 06:45, Laurent Combe wrote:
> effectivement vos cartes sont réussies
> dans mon cas le but est de pouvoir ajouter à uMap une vue aérienne en
> complément du rendu "carte" (avec les données OSM et le rendu osm-fr).
> Mon but n'est pas d'utiliser d'autres fonds de carte de Mapbox, mais
> d'utiliser la vue aérienne en complément.
>
> C'est vraiment pour contrer une remarque récurrente lorsque je montre
> ce service.
>
> juste pour illustrer voici une carte qui montre l'objectif recherché :
> http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/boucle-de-randonnee-a-bouloc_19720#14/43.8050/1.4286
>
> je comprend bien qu'en faisant cela je suis à la merci d'une évolution
> de la politique commerciale de la société MapBox mais ça répond à mon
> besoin
> mais c'est ce que fait le site openSolarMap qui a été ma source
> d'inspiration au départ
>

Pour OpenSolarMap, j'ai vérifié directement avec Mapbox que vu que la
finalité était de compléter des données OSM l'accès aux tuiles
d'imagerie de DigitalGlobe était ok. J'utilise d'ailleurs le token "OSM"
utilisé par JOSM.

> faut-il ou pas rajouter cette possibilité dans la page uMap du wiki ?

Pour un simple affichage en fond, je ne pense pas qu'on soit encore dans
les limites prévues ci-dessus.

Il faut voir côté IGN... j'avoue ne pas tout comprendre à leurs
conditions d'utilisation, mais pour certains usages, les couches de
bases sont utilisables gratuitement.

-- 
Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-cz] Nové pojetí dálniční sítě

[Jakub Sykora]

To sice ano, ale mě se léty osvědčuje pravidlo, že žádná informace je 
lepší než špatná informace. Ono se totiž špatně rozlišuje, co je 
informace z importu a co už někdo ručně prošel.


K

Dne 22.11.2015 v 09:11 Marián Kyral napsal(a):

Tak dálnice je dálnice ne? Předpokládá se 130. Pokud tam je někde
omezení, tak se otaguje dodatečně. Důležitější jsou přece značky a ne to
co mi píše navigace.
Rychlost v navigaci je jen orientační.


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-cz] možnost doplnění ref k rozcestníku

[Michal Grézl]

jo pujde to JizVelmiBrzy:), behem pristiho tydne zkusim
naimplementovat nejake zakladni editacni rozhrani.

2015-11-19 14:41 GMT+01:00 Zdeněk Pražák :
> Mám dotaz,
>
> zda bude možné doplnit číslo rozcestníku k nahraným fotografiím rozcestníků
>
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>



-- 
Michal Grézl
http://openstreetmap.cz

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Daniel Kastl]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

Hi Colin,

Beside the different opinions about proprietary and closed technology,
what is the point to add these 3 words as a tag? I don't really
understand the benefit, because the relation between location
(coordinates) and their address system is fixed. It's just a 3x3m grid.

In OSM every object has a geometry and you can query the w3w address
just using their API. So I don't see the point where it makes sense to
add such an address tag. It's like you add "latlon" as a tag.

Regards,
Daniel


On 22/11/15 22:37, Colin Smale wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andy, you are right, if you accept that the 3 or 4 people who have 
> participated in this discussion are representative of OSM at large.
> But the most active inhabitants of this list and others are limited
> to maybe 10 people, who frequently use authoritative-sounding
> language like "we are not doing it" and "it has no place in OSM"
> without the merest hint of "IMHO". I am not naming any names, and I
> don't want to get into any personal arguments, but it is a general
> frustration I have with the discussions on these lists.
> 
> There may be many arguments against w3w in OSM, but I was kind of
> hoping that some of the attacks would also apply objectively to
> other entities which are or are not mapped in OSM. On-the-ground
> visibility was mentioned, and that is spurious in the sense that
> there are many other things in OSM which are not visible and are
> yet tolerated. Being proprietary was mentioned, but it is not
> really much more proprietary than the coordinates of UK postcodes
> used to be, and we were happily reverse-engineering them and adding
> them to point addresses and deriving district boundaries from that
> data. Through all that effort the proprietary nature (and the
> commercial value) of the PAF was to some extent diluted, and now a
> lot of this information is publicly available. Only time will tell
> if w3w takes off commercially. Right now they have had $5m of
> funding and have an impressive list of partners.
> 
> --colin
> 
> On 2015-11-22 14:01, ajt1...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 22/11/2015 12:51, Colin Smale wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ...and once again, as seems to be the norm in OSM, any
>>> minority interest which is not supported by the oligarchy gets
>>> mercilessly shot down.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> ... except it's not _just_ the "oligarchy", is it?  No-one on
>> this list seems to have a good word for the original idea.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> Andy (SomeoneElse)
>> 
>> ___ talk mailing
>> list talk@openstreetmap.org  
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 
> 
> ___ talk mailing list 
> talk@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 

- -- 
Georepublic UG & Georepublic Japan
eMail: daniel.ka...@georepublic.de
Web: https://georepublic.info
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWUci6AAoJEHjh5kk/zBG0MkQH/3R0ROeV1V8ugjeddSNrNaBE
KL7gQreKBzhrg+YnysiZGjqBJ6i0dmpe6OimPAXrOLrhzu90LvZJZRfhhSmWi3ms
HuNLUJofcPqQybEoJTZ+khQpebMBFg0DatH5uQJYvg+0fTBMpQncKtUjTPlMXhZf
UWMZSQNEpPOq8BAZ1/aO1Kxvxd2VNTxBgznsyTSzqs1LY8oS5ZiRzMFBpODYwlI7
kiqI69M8LC/IUjX5iSetBH+fTucNJxguvVhjadJnusGW6n+7gLYyPcZnTdRy5Q1+
HtUhDHOXqZiFYEoVcbveHZnEKAiMq9qXpZvv6xwQS4RJmEQpKTS6aGLBZ9jKSuc=
=lpOg
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Colin Smale]

 

On 2015-11-22 15:47, Dave F. wrote: 

> On 22/11/2015 14:32, Colin Smale wrote: 
> 
>> I just said "w3w exists, what could/should we do?"
> 
> The consensus appears to be "Nothing"

Agreed.

--colin ___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Maarten Deen]

On 2015-11-22 13:34, Colin Smale wrote:

On 2015-11-22 13:18, Maarten Deen wrote:



I also don't understand this:"It's a non-hierarchical system. The
problem with latitude and longitude coordinates is that if you make
a mistake when writing them down you will be completely lost. But
with our system similar sounding words are located very far apart so
people don't get lost if you hear it wrong."
First, making a mistake in a lat/lon coordinate does not by
definition mean you are completely lost. It is when you make a
mistake in significant digits (add one degree to the latitude and
you're way off) but it isn't when you make a mistake in the
non-significant digits (the difference between 51.3456247 and
51.3456248 is mere centimeters).
Secondly, if you write a similar sounding word wrong, you are
completely off. I mean, they specificaly say "similar sounding words
are located very far apart".
So if someone tells you nice.place.here and you use nice.place.hear,
you are by definition not near your intended location.


As I understand it, they have avoided homophones like your example.
The idea of placing similar-sounding words far apart geographically is
that you would be instantly alerted to an error. If you expect a
location in North London and it translates to Peru, a bell would ring
an you would double-check it. But if you the location you hear
translates to one 1km from what was intended, you might be going round
in circles for hours trying to find it.


So the three-level address system is at least a four-level address 
system. When saying the location is nice.place.here, you should say the 
location is nice.place.here in London (England, not Canada, 5 
level-address system).


That is exactly the same as with coordinates. Give a coordinate and say 
where it is on the ground. That way you eliminate a lot of errors. So 
the "mistake" factor does not apply.
It is only easier to use, but only if you want to address places that do 
not have proper addresses. Because Amsterdam.Kalverstraat.50 for me is 
just as easy to memorize as nice.place.here.


It seems the only useful application for this scheme is in undeveloped 
countries or very rural areas.


Maarten

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Barry Hunter]

On 22 November 2015 at 11:07, Colin Smale  wrote:

>  I guess there would be no objections to someone adding
> addr:w3w:en=nice.place.here ? Or addr:w3w=en:nice.place.here ?
>

Ok, so turning it around, what would be the benefit of this? Why bother?
What purpose does it serve?




The only purpose I see, it then serves as an independent database of w3w's.
Persuming the database is comprehensive enough could perform a lookup via
the OSM database to find the location of a given set of words.

But as then it effectively makes the proprietary 'app' redundant,
 what3words themselves might then take exception to it anyway. And/or might
infringe database right.



As I see it what3words is not really 'andress' system. Its a coordinate
system. Its a way of encoding a location in a series of words. OSM
generally uses decimal Lat/Long as its encoding.

OSM doesnt store every known coordinate in the system. Like
addr:mgrs=4QFJ.1234.6789
or British National Grid. Or Indian Grid. Or UTM Coordinates. etc

There are lots of ways of encoding coordinates. Each with (generally) a
well known conversion from WGS84 lat/long (complicated by the fact there
may be a datum transformation needed)

If end user wants to use a given system, then can use that conversion. They
dont need to exist in the database.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Tim Waters]

As an infrequent poster to osm-talk I think I'm excluded from Colin's "3 or
4 people" and "most active participants" and am not in the Fetted Inner
Core (at least I wasn't the last time I checked!) - however my views are
similar to the ones previously, in this case, very sorry Colin! :-)

In short, What Three Words does initially appear to be a "wow that's cool"
techy project, but given closer inspection it's not that suitable for an
open data project. It is not open or ground verifiable *at the moment*. Yes
it has got recently millions in funding. I frankly would expect more public
pressure to get it used in OSM than there has been. Perhaps they are
avoiding direct pressure until their board demands it, or perhaps they are
approaching the Foundation obliquely. I do know that they have been doing a
lot of work promoting the service to development and humanitarian
organisations, and they really are good at promoting their product. Very
many good quality proprietary data and software for profit companies make
healthy profits from working in the development and humanitarian
industries. One could think that such good causes should be the preserve of
Libre Software and non profit organizations, but that's a fallacy. Anyhow
I'm digressing, sorry!

So, if my local shops start to use it in the future, if "people on the
ground" use it, then I would say it could be added then - but there's no
benefit to mappers, or people on the ground for adding it before that stage.
At that stage, before people actually use it, it's just another way of
encoding location, and therefore redundant. Futhermore in both cases, the
only way for another mapper to tell if the reference is correct is to use
the third party API.

Given their approach and closedness however, I very much doubt that most
people will start using it. Perhaps they will buy into getting a developing
country to use it nationally, but we will have to see what happens. So, in
the future, if normal folks use it on the ground, it may be useful to add
it, in my humble opinion. Perhaps they will open source their algorithm but
keep their APIs and services closed, again we will have to see. Perhaps *if
and when it is used by people on the ground* we can pressure the company to
open up enough of their solution to make it OSM friendly and for them to
still please their board of investors?

But the main reason I don't see it being used in OSM is that it goes
against the spirit of the project.
This spirit of openness, collaborativeness and Libre software. It's closed,
it doesn't look like it will ever be open and it ties the usage of the
system through a closed API.  It's a closed data project, and OSM is *the*
open data project.

Cheers,

Tim
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Dave F.]

On 22/11/2015 14:32, Colin Smale wrote:


I just said "w3w exists, what could/should we do?"




The consensus appears to be "Nothing"

Dave F.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] [SOTMTG2015] SOTM en cours au Togo - dans le cadre de la mission de renforcement de capacités du Projet EOF

[Djakaridja Sangari]

Merci à tous pour ce volontariat et bon fin de formation au Togo. la communauté 
OSM-Bouaké (Côte d'Ivoire) vous êtes reconnaissant d'avoir séjourné du 28 
septembre au 09 octobre 2015. Bien de choses à toutes les communautés réunies. 
et coucou a tous!!!
 Cordialement SANGARI Djakaridja
   



  ___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Colin Smale]

 

I guess there would be no objections to someone adding
addr:w3w:en=nice.place.here ? Or addr:w3w=en:nice.place.here ? 

Surely the established addressing systems are also closed and
proprietary, in the sense that some organisation with a sanctioned
monopoly tells YOU what your address is - you cannot just make it up
yourself. Street naming, postal codes etc are definitely in this
category. We have been crowdsourcing postcodes for years without
problems. 

Integration with nominatim for example, which will need to use the w3w
API, is a different subject as this would need licensing. 

On 2015-11-22 11:46, Paul Norman wrote: 

> On 11/22/2015 2:39 AM, Colin Smale wrote: 
> 
>> I have heard a few times recently about what3words, a new novel 
>> coordinate/addressing system for the whole world.
>> 
>> Could/should we be doing anything to support/facilitate/implement this 
>> system in OSM?
> 
> No. Other people might talk about the numerous problems how what3words 
> doesn't do what it claims to accomplish or flaws in the technical 
> implementation, but there's a much simpler reason why it doesn't belong on 
> osm.org: It's a closed proprietary system that others can't reuse.
> 
> ___
> 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] What3words

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 11/22/2015 11:39 AM, Colin Smale wrote:
> I have heard a few times recently about what3words, a new novel
> coordinate/addressing system for the whole world.

It's a blatant attempt at commercializing location. Under the (rather
tasteless) guise of finally being able to bring Christmas presents to
the slums of this world, they try to get everyone to use their API. In
truth they're just planning to make money through selling vanity
locations. If businesses pay millions for top level domains, goes the
thinking, then they will also pay millions to be found under
"great.shoes". By adding their API to your web site, you're pimping out
your search form for them to harvest money from it.

Ask yourself whether the venture capitalists would really fork out tons
of money for someone who wants to bring addressing to the poor.

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] What3words

[Colin Smale]

 

On 2015-11-22 13:49, Daniel Kastl wrote: 

> The difference in their proprietary system (if you want to call
> address systems in in countries closed and proprietary) is, that when
> their API (and "algorithm") goes away, you won't find any address
> anymore. It's totally unreliable to depend on a proprietary API to
> locate an address, and a waste of time to add such data to OSM in my
> opinion.

>From their website: 

_If we, what3words ltd, are ever unable to maintain the what3words
technology or make arrangements for it to be maintained by a third-party
(with that third-party being willing to make this same commitment), then
we will release our source code into the public domain. We will do this
in such a way and with suitable licences and documentation to ensure
that any and all users of what3words, whether they are individuals,
businesses, charitable organisations, aid agencies, governments or
anyone else can continue to rely on the what3words system._ 

  ___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[ajt1...@gmail.com]

On 22/11/2015 12:51, Colin Smale wrote:



...and once again, as seems to be the norm in OSM, any minority 
interest which is not supported by the oligarchy gets mercilessly shot 
down.




... except it's not _just_ the "oligarchy", is it?  No-one on this list 
seems to have a good word for the original idea.


Cheers,

Andy (SomeoneElse)
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Michael Reichert]

Hi Colin,

Am 2015-11-22 um 11:39 schrieb Colin Smale:
> I have heard a few times recently about what3words, a new novel
> coordinate/addressing system for the whole world. 
> 
> Could/should we be doing anything to support/facilitate/implement this
> system in OSM? 

No. It is a propietary system and there is no place for such stuff at OSM.

Best regards

Michael

-- 
Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
ausgenommen)
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Steve Doerr]

I've read articles about it a few times, and for fun I sometimes post my 
w3w location on Facebook. But I don't know if it's achieved much traction.


One maps site that I use from time to time, www.streetmap.co.uk, 
includes w3w addresses for searching and on its 'convert co-ordinates' 
screen, e.g. http://www.streetmap.co.uk/idgc.srf?x=530051=179922 (10 
Downing Street).


Maybe our search box could do the same, either directly or through 
integrating into Nominatim. I wouldn't suggest storing w3w addresses in 
the main OSM database though.


Steve


On 22/11/2015 10:39, Colin Smale wrote:


I have heard a few times recently about what3words, a new novel 
coordinate/addressing system for the whole world.


Could/should we be doing anything to support/facilitate/implement this 
system in OSM?


http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/feature/2434706/move-aside-google-maps-the-future-of-navigation-is-just-three-words

--colin



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Tom Hughes]

On 22/11/15 11:13, Steve Doerr wrote:


Maybe our search box could do the same, either directly or through
integrating into Nominatim. I wouldn't suggest storing w3w addresses in
the main OSM database though.


As I said we have been asked to do this at least twice and we have 
refused on both occasions.


That's partly a question of not wanting to add something that may never 
gain any traction and partly a question of whether we should be 
supporting what is essentially a proprietary project that uses a 
patented algorithm and relies on a proprietary database.


Frankly, the main thing they're good at (apart from spamming me) is 
whoring themselves in the media, which is why they always seem to be far 
more significant than I think they really are.


Tom

--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Stefano]

Hi,
just for reference in May I saw a discussion on okfn-labs on "opening up"
w3w by doing an open location code system (different from the Google one).
https://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-labs/2015-May/001623.html

See also https://github.com/pudo/open3words/issues/1

Regards,
Stefano

2015-11-22 12:37 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole :

> It is not as if there are not numerous alternative addressing schemes
> see for example this list (which was produced for an open system from,
> gosh, the goog).
>
>
> https://github.com/google/open-location-code/blob/master/docs/comparison.adoc
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] What3words

[Mateusz Konieczny]

On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 12:07:43 +0100
Colin Smale  wrote:
 
> I guess there would be no objections to someone adding
> addr:w3w:en=nice.place.here ? Or addr:w3w=en:nice.place.here ? 

Only in cases where such "adress" is displayed on the ground.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Stefano]

2015-11-22 13:16 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole :

>
> While developing a similar system to w3w might be an attractive proposal,
> have you checked what the w3w patent covers given that the thoughts in the
> referenced issue would seem to result in at least a very similar system?
>


Actually no, I like how they patented things like "ONEWORD".

Brb gotta retire my demo

Thanks,
Stefano


>
> Am 22.11.2015 um 13:00 schrieb Stefano:
>
> Hi,
> just for reference in May I saw a discussion on okfn-labs on "opening up"
> w3w by doing an open location code system (different from the Google one).
> https://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-labs/2015-May/001623.html
>
> See also https://github.com/pudo/open3words/issues/1
>
> Regards,
> Stefano
>
> 2015-11-22 12:37 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole :
>
>> It is not as if there are not numerous alternative addressing schemes
>> see for example this list (which was produced for an open system from,
>> gosh, the goog).
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/google/open-location-code/blob/master/docs/comparison.adoc
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] What3words

[Mateusz Konieczny]

On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 13:16:24 +0100
Colin Smale  wrote:

>  
> 
> On 2015-11-22 13:04, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: 
> 
> > On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 12:07:43 +0100
> > Colin Smale  wrote:
> > 
> >> I guess there would be no objections to someone adding
> >> addr:w3w:en=nice.place.here ? Or addr:w3w=en:nice.place.here ?
> > 
> > Only in cases where such "adress" is displayed on the ground.
> 
> So the same as we do for postcodes then? I honestly don't see the
> difference. The criteria is not visibility, but verifiability. 
>   

Main problem with What3words is that it is a small project with nearly
no usage. Adding it in places where it has no real usage would be
useless, pointless and spammy.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Daniel Kastl]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256


> 
> I guess there would be no objections to someone adding 
> addr:w3w:en=nice.place.here ? Or addr:w3w=en:nice.place.here ?
> 
> Surely the established addressing systems are also closed and 
> proprietary, in the sense that some organisation with a sanctioned 
> monopoly tells YOU what your address is - you cannot just make it
> up yourself. Street naming, postal codes etc are definitely in
> this category. We have been crowdsourcing postcodes for years
> without problems.
> 

The difference in their proprietary system (if you want to call
address systems in in countries closed and proprietary) is, that when
their API (and "algorithm") goes away, you won't find any address
anymore. It's totally unreliable to depend on a proprietary API to
locate an address, and a waste of time to add such data to OSM in my
opinion.

Regards,
Daniel




- -- 
Georepublic UG & Georepublic Japan
eMail: daniel.ka...@georepublic.de
Web: https://georepublic.info
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWUbnBAAoJEHjh5kk/zBG0fTsIAM2TSeFlIbBW6laJP6O8E9NF
X3eTOExYtaQFHlsYXII/MWo8apMjGtCIw4fkmWFzkktkgIZlIqSWZdg2hzEBctCy
ilmSwsx2mL3yGf0uX+PhdPOvKKuBLq1NBMUDVV5Nl6Nnj9SPQA039B67B5Xve2HK
G/Lc6ZO5+5uGGMv4i2n0/Y99XNJWuax9E0AauKLGsJiFTA5d0bebbBC1AK9NmVf5
1MHNMED4bf82CbrV1TbR/nyjhWhXrA2OqJmEUKKK/TM/NnyakrLcFr2Ivx84PzdU
h+ozbJUrlpZDxv7yhCgWVuRsFcHF+QtNS52wK7VK964FptVLR5U21EVerAg1c3A=
=YvLQ
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] imagerie mapbox

[Léo Serre]

Salut,

Dans mon cas, j'utilise l'IGN pour ça. J'ai une clé API pour
umap.openstreetmap.fr et j'ajoute sur chaque carte un calque correspondant.
C'est pas libre mais cet usage est autorisé et le quota est loin d'être
atteint.

Léo

Le 22/11/2015 06:45, Laurent Combe a écrit :
> effectivement vos cartes sont réussies
> dans mon cas le but est de pouvoir ajouter à uMap une vue aérienne en
> complément du rendu "carte" (avec les données OSM et le rendu osm-fr).
> Mon but n'est pas d'utiliser d'autres fonds de carte de Mapbox, mais
> d'utiliser la vue aérienne en complément.
>
> C'est vraiment pour contrer une remarque récurrente lorsque je montre
> ce service.
>
> juste pour illustrer voici une carte qui montre l'objectif recherché :
> http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/boucle-de-randonnee-a-bouloc_19720#14/43.8050/1.4286
>
> je comprend bien qu'en faisant cela je suis à la merci d'une évolution
> de la politique commerciale de la société MapBox mais ça répond à mon
> besoin
> mais c'est ce que fait le site openSolarMap qui a été ma source
> d'inspiration au départ
>
> faut-il ou pas rajouter cette possibilité dans la page uMap du wiki ?
>
> Laurent
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

-- 
LSTRONIC logo

Léo SERRE

mail  l...@lstronic.com 
website  lstronic.com 

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[OSM-talk] What3words

[Colin Smale]

 

I have heard a few times recently about what3words, a new novel
coordinate/addressing system for the whole world. 

Could/should we be doing anything to support/facilitate/implement this
system in OSM? 

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/feature/2434706/move-aside-google-maps-the-future-of-navigation-is-just-three-words


--colin 

  ___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Tom Hughes]

On 22/11/15 11:07, Colin Smale wrote:


I guess there would be no objections to someone adding
addr:w3w:en=nice.place.here ? Or addr:w3w=en:nice.place.here ?


I don't see the point, and it's certainly not ground truthable.


Integration with nominatim for example, which will need to use the w3w
API, is a different subject as this would need licensing.


They would be more than happy though - we have refused them several 
times already.


Tom

--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Colin Smale]

 

On 2015-11-22 13:04, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: 

> On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 12:07:43 +0100
> Colin Smale  wrote:
> 
>> I guess there would be no objections to someone adding
>> addr:w3w:en=nice.place.here ? Or addr:w3w=en:nice.place.here ?
> 
> Only in cases where such "adress" is displayed on the ground.

So the same as we do for postcodes then? I honestly don't see the
difference. The criteria is not visibility, but verifiability. 
  ___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] imagerie mapbox

[Laurent Combe]

peux-tu décrire la façon d'obtenir cette clé

en cherchant j'ai trouvé ça
http://www.geoportail.gouv.fr/depot/api/tutoriel/WMS_ARCGIS.pdf

en en allant sur le site je ne vois pas comment obtenir une clé d'accès
autre que temporaire et limité à des usages de développement

Laurent

Le 22 novembre 2015 10:22, Léo Serre  a écrit :

> Salut,
>
> Dans mon cas, j'utilise l'IGN pour ça. J'ai une clé API pour
> umap.openstreetmap.fr et j'ajoute sur chaque carte un calque
> correspondant.
> C'est pas libre mais cet usage est autorisé et le quota est loin d'être
> atteint.
>
> Léo
>
>
> Le 22/11/2015 06:45, Laurent Combe a écrit :
>
> effectivement vos cartes sont réussies
> dans mon cas le but est de pouvoir ajouter à uMap une vue aérienne en
> complément du rendu "carte" (avec les données OSM et le rendu osm-fr). Mon
> but n'est pas d'utiliser d'autres fonds de carte de Mapbox, mais d'utiliser
> la vue aérienne en complément.
>
> C'est vraiment pour contrer une remarque récurrente lorsque je montre ce
> service.
>
> juste pour illustrer voici une carte qui montre l'objectif recherché :
>
> http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/boucle-de-randonnee-a-bouloc_19720#14/43.8050/1.4286
>
> je comprend bien qu'en faisant cela je suis à la merci d'une évolution de
> la politique commerciale de la société MapBox mais ça répond à mon besoin
> mais c'est ce que fait le site openSolarMap qui a été ma source
> d'inspiration au départ
>
> faut-il ou pas rajouter cette possibilité dans la page uMap du wiki ?
>
> Laurent
>
>
>
>>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing 
> listTalk-fr@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
>
> --
> [image: LSTRONIC logo]
>
> Léo SERRE
>
> [image: mail]   l...@lstronic.com
> [image: website]  lstronic.com
>
> ___
> 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: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Paul Norman]

On 11/22/2015 2:39 AM, Colin Smale wrote:


I have heard a few times recently about what3words, a new novel 
coordinate/addressing system for the whole world.


Could/should we be doing anything to support/facilitate/implement this 
system in OSM?




No. Other people might talk about the numerous problems how what3words 
doesn't do what it claims to accomplish or flaws in the technical 
implementation, but there's a much simpler reason why it doesn't belong 
on osm.org: It's a closed proprietary system that others can't reuse.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Maarten Deen]

On 2015-11-22 12:07, Colin Smale wrote:

I guess there would be no objections to someone adding
addr:w3w:en=nice.place.here ? Or addr:w3w=en:nice.place.here ?


Reading about what it is, it is just a lookup between some random three 
words and a location. We don't map addr:latlon=51.34,3.45 in OSM, why 
would we map addr:w3w? Especially since it is just a lookup. The way I 
see it, this is something you would add to nominatim.


I also don't understand this:
"It's a non-hierarchical system. The problem with latitude and 
longitude coordinates is that if you make a mistake when writing them 
down you will be completely lost. But with our system similar sounding 
words are located very far apart so people don't get lost if you hear 
it wrong."


First, making a mistake in a lat/lon coordinate does not by definition 
mean you are completely lost. It is when you make a mistake in 
significant digits (add one degree to the latitude and you're way off) 
but it isn't when you make a mistake in the non-significant digits (the 
difference between 51.3456247 and 51.3456248 is mere centimeters).
Secondly, if you write a similar sounding word wrong, you are completely 
off. I mean, they specificaly say "similar sounding words are located 
very far apart".
So if someone tells you nice.place.here and you use nice.place.hear, you 
are by definition not near your intended location.


So it seems to me it is already flawed in concept.

Regards,
Maarten


Surely the established addressing systems are also closed and
proprietary, in the sense that some organisation with a sanctioned
monopoly tells YOU what your address is - you cannot just make it up
yourself. Street naming, postal codes etc are definitely in this
category. We have been crowdsourcing postcodes for years without
problems.

Integration with nominatim for example, which will need to use the w3w
API, is a different subject as this would need licensing.

On 2015-11-22 11:46, Paul Norman wrote:


On 11/22/2015 2:39 AM, Colin Smale wrote:


I have heard a few times recently about what3words, a new novel
coordinate/addressing system for the whole world.

Could/should we be doing anything to support/facilitate/implement
this system in OSM?


No. Other people might talk about the numerous problems how
what3words doesn't do what it claims to accomplish or flaws in the
technical implementation, but there's a much simpler reason why it
doesn't belong on osm.org: It's a closed proprietary system that
others can't reuse.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


___
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] What3words

[Simon Poole]

While developing a similar system to w3w might be an attractive
proposal, have you checked what the w3w patent covers given that the
thoughts in the referenced issue would seem to result in at least a very
similar system?

Am 22.11.2015 um 13:00 schrieb Stefano:
> Hi,
> just for reference in May I saw a discussion on okfn-labs on "opening
> up" w3w by doing an open location code system (different from the
> Google one).
> https://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-labs/2015-May/001623.html
>
> See also https://github.com/pudo/open3words/issues/1
>
> Regards,
> Stefano
>
> 2015-11-22 12:37 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole  >:
>
> It is not as if there are not numerous alternative addressing schemes
> see for example this list (which was produced for an open system from,
> gosh, the goog).
>
>  
> https://github.com/google/open-location-code/blob/master/docs/comparison.adoc
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Colin Smale]

 

On 2015-11-22 13:18, Maarten Deen wrote: 

> On 2015-11-22 12:07, Colin Smale wrote: 
> 
>> I guess there would be no objections to someone adding
>> addr:w3w:en=nice.place.here ? Or addr:w3w=en:nice.place.here ?
> 
> Reading about what it is, it is just a lookup between some random three words 
> and a location. We don't map addr:latlon=51.34,3.45 in OSM, why would we map 
> addr:w3w? Especially since it is just a lookup. The way I see it, this is 
> something you would add to nominatim.

I see it as a kind of alternative postcode. You advertise your own
location as a w3w, and anyone who needs to get there does a lookup
through 
their apps or API to find out where it is and get the lat/lon. Which is
more or less what the postman does, or any of the millions of
applications which allow you to input 
a postcode to select a location. 

But the core of their ambition seems not to be a direct competitor to
existing addressing/postcode systems in the developed world, but as a 
simple-to-use system for the 75% of the world that doesn't have a decent
system yet. That, and to make money of course. 

> I also don't understand this:"It's a non-hierarchical system. The problem 
> with latitude and longitude coordinates is that if you make a mistake when 
> writing them down you will be completely lost. But with our system similar 
> sounding words are located very far apart so people don't get lost if you 
> hear it wrong."
> First, making a mistake in a lat/lon coordinate does not by definition mean 
> you are completely lost. It is when you make a mistake in significant digits 
> (add one degree to the latitude and you're way off) but it isn't when you 
> make a mistake in the non-significant digits (the difference between 
> 51.3456247 and 51.3456248 is mere centimeters).
> Secondly, if you write a similar sounding word wrong, you are completely off. 
> I mean, they specificaly say "similar sounding words are located very far 
> apart".
> So if someone tells you nice.place.here and you use nice.place.hear, you are 
> by definition not near your intended location.

As I understand it, they have avoided homophones like your example. The
idea of placing similar-sounding words far apart geographically is that
you would be instantly alerted to an error. If you expect a location in
North London and it translates to Peru, a bell would ring an you would
double-check it. But if you the location you hear translates to one 1km
from what was intended, you might be going round in circles for hours
trying to find it. 
  ___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Colin Smale]

 

On 2015-11-22 13:42, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: 

> On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 13:16:24 +0100
> Colin Smale  wrote:
> 
> On 2015-11-22 13:04, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: 
> 
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 12:07:43 +0100
> Colin Smale  wrote:
> 
> I guess there would be no objections to someone adding
> addr:w3w:en=nice.place.here ? Or addr:w3w=en:nice.place.here ? 
> Only in cases where such "adress" is displayed on the ground.

So the same as we do for postcodes then? I honestly don't see the
difference. The criteria is not visibility, but verifiability. 
Main problem with What3words is that it is a small project with nearly
no usage. Adding it in places where it has no real usage would be
useless, pointless and spammy. 

...and once again, as seems to be the norm in OSM, any minority interest
which is not supported by the oligarchy gets mercilessly shot down. 

  ___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Jóhannes Birgir Jensson]

I see many merits in What3Words solution.

I don't think it should be incorporated into OSM en-masse but a place 
adding its address:what3words=pull.donkey.cart should be fine in my 
view, just like them adding phone= and even the disappearing fax=




Þann 22.11.2015 18:08, skrifaði Peter Gervai:

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 2:01 PM, ajt1...@gmail.com  wrote:

On 22/11/2015 12:51, Colin Smale wrote:
...and once again, as seems to be the norm in OSM, any minority interest
which is not supported by the oligarchy gets mercilessly shot down.
... except it's not _just_ the "oligarchy", is it?  No-one on this list
seems to have a good word for the original idea.

And even many of the the lurkers don't. Central repository is bad for
longevity.


Actually I'm impressed by Google's attempt called open-location-code,
it's actually pretty
useful, completely open and doesn't require a central authority. Kind
of no-brainer including
their already provided javascript on a page, and the hierarchical
approach is really neat.

grin

___
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: [Talk-GB] traffic calming

[Chris Hill]

On 22/11/15 19:06, Rob Nickerson wrote:

>There has been a discussion on the tagging mailing list triggered by
>Gerd Petermann having made a mechanical edit to some traffic calming
>features.

Thanks Chris,

To summarise for those who don't want to get stuck in the tagging
mailing list, Gerd spotted that traffic calming (speed bumps, etc) was
tagged in different ways:

1. highway=traffic_calming
2. highway=traffic_calming + traffic_calming=*
3. traffic_calming=*

It looks like highway=traffic_calming (which was only used ~1000 times
vs traffic_calming=*'s ~200,000 times) has never been a suggested tag
on the wiki. As such Gerd made the following changes to the three
cases above:

1. Replaced with traffic_calming=yes
2. Keep just traffic_calming=*
3. No change

The edit included a review of all nodes and extra detail was added on
a case by case basis if required (e.g. crossing details is it is also
a pedestrian crossing).

Quite frankly I don't really care. The tag was hardly used so if Gerd
wants to get rid of it completely and has time to do this then fine by
me. On the flip side the tag is not incorrect (just not documented or
supported by many people) so why waste time to remove it. Given that
Gerd took the time to manually review each one before changing it and
made improvements in some cases, I would have been quite happy to let
this slide - we have bigger issues to be discussing.

Question: Is the discussion of this more wasteful (time) and harmful
(negative impression of the community) than the original edit?


Gerd did the work you describe but went ahead with an almost nation-wide
mechanical edit without any prior discussion or description. That's why
I asked him to revert it. Mechanical edits need to be discussed. He then
indicated that he would discuss the tags on tagging@ - indeed he
suggested leaving his edit and discussing it on tagging@. I wanted also
to make it clear that tagging@ is not the best place to discuss
mechanical edits - a lot of people avoid tagging@ to maintain the will
to live.

--
Cheers, Chris (chillly)




___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] traffic calming

[Steve Doerr]

On 22/11/2015 19:37, Chris Hill wrote:


Mechanical edits need to be discussed. He then
indicated that he would discuss the tags on tagging@ - indeed he
suggested leaving his edit and discussing it on tagging@. I wanted also
to make it clear that tagging@ is not the best place to discuss
mechanical edits


So where is?

--
Steve

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[OSM-talk] [State Of The Map Togo] It was yesterday !

[Augustin Doury]

-Sorry for cross-posting-

Hi all,

After SOTMBF edition in Burkina Faso (July 2015), the 2nd african SOTM
occured yesterday in Togo.
You can find more about countries and projects presentations through these
hashtags (and get pictures) :
#map4tg : https://twitter.com/search?q=%23map4tg
#mivamapper : https://twitter.com/search?q=%23mivamapper
#sotmtg15 : https://twitter.com/search?q=%23sotmtg15
#projeteof : https://twitter.com/search?q=%23projeteof
Give it visibility on social networks !

It was really impressive to get an overview of all the work achieved for 2
or 3 years in these West African countries, OSM is spreading :)

We plan to release soon countries presentations videos from the SOTM BF on
Vimeo.

-
Context
-

This SOTMTG is organized after 2 weeks of OpenStreetMap capacity building
of the third 2015's Projet Espace OpenStreetMap Francophone mission (Blog
Projet EOF , @Projet_EOF), financed by the Direction
de la Francophonie Numérique (DFN) of the Organisation Internationale de la
Francophonie (OIF).
Next week we will focuse on management capacity building.
This mission is coordinated by Amadou Ndong, Augustin Doury, Fofana
Bagnoumana Bazo, Nicolas Chavent and Séverin Ménard from Projet EOF with
OSM Togo association members (AKE (Amegayibo Kokou Elolo), David Ragatoa,
Herman Kass, Richard Komlan Folly).

Mission participants (23) :
=OSM Bénin : Joel Henri Dossou, Phidias Azo, Saliou Abdou, Sam Agbadonon
=OSM Burkina Faso : Fofana Bazo, Innocent Dibloni,
=OSM Côte d'Ivoire : Alane Konan, Aurelien Kouame, Philippe Anebo, Racky Ly
=OSM Mali : Araba Coulibaly, Nathalie Sidibe, Soulo Boureima
=OSM Niger : Alio Mainassara Samaila, Fatiman Alher, Kadidja Mounkaila
Issa, Rahina Adamou
=OSM Senegal : Amadou Ndong, Jean-Marie Mancabou
=OSM Togo : AKE (Amegayibo Kokou Elolo), David Ragatoa, Herman Kass,
Richard Komlan Folly

Cordially,

Augustin Doury
Projet Espace OpenStreetMap Francophone
@d_ogus
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] traffic calming

[Rob Nickerson]

>There has been a discussion on the tagging mailing list triggered by
>Gerd Petermann having made a mechanical edit to some traffic calming
>features.

Thanks Chris,

To summarise for those who don't want to get stuck in the tagging mailing
list, Gerd spotted that traffic calming (speed bumps, etc) was tagged in
different ways:

1. highway=traffic_calming
2. highway=traffic_calming + traffic_calming=*
3. traffic_calming=*

It looks like highway=traffic_calming (which was only used ~1000 times vs
traffic_calming=*'s ~200,000 times) has never been a suggested tag on the
wiki. As such Gerd made the following changes to the three cases above:

1. Replaced with traffic_calming=yes
2. Keep just traffic_calming=*
3. No change

The edit included a review of all nodes and extra detail was added on a
case by case basis if required (e.g. crossing details is it is also a
pedestrian crossing).

Quite frankly I don't really care. The tag was hardly used so if Gerd wants
to get rid of it completely and has time to do this then fine by me. On the
flip side the tag is not incorrect (just not documented or supported by
many people) so why waste time to remove it. Given that Gerd took the time
to manually review each one before changing it and made improvements in
some cases, I would have been quite happy to let this slide - we have
bigger issues to be discussing.

Question: Is the discussion of this more wasteful (time) and harmful
(negative impression of the community) than the original edit?

*Rob*
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[OSM-talk-fr] Récupération cartes OSM pour utilisation dans un GPS

[pepilepi...@ovh.fr]

Bonjour,

Comment peut-on récupérer les données OSM d'une zone pour les convertir
en un fichier utilisable par un GPS ? Dans mon cas un format Rtmap pour
un sportiva.

J'avais bien trouvé Mobile Atlas Creator, mais il s'appuie sur mapquest,
et mapquest avoue
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MapQuest#How_often_is_the_data_updated.3F)
que la mise à jour des couches très détaillés ne se fait vraiment pas
souvent. Et c'est justement ça qui m'intéresse...

Merci,

Jean-Pierre

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Voies récentes dans Fantoir, absentes d'OSM

[Vincent de Château-Thierry]

Bonjour,

Le 21/10/2015 14:59, Vincent de Château-Thierry a écrit :



De: "DH" 

quelle bonne idée pour occuper ses longues soirées d"hiver !


:)


La version d'octobre 2015 du Fantoir a été intégrée par Christian côté 
BANO. Conséquence directe, la page des voies récentes 
http://cadastre.openstreetmap.fr/fantoir/voies_recentes_manquantes.html 
propose des voies dont les plus récentes sont datées du 27/10/2015.

C'est du frais !

vincent


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[Talk-TW] 社群組織理事會選舉開放登記

[Louis Liu]

Hi 各位 Mapper，

第一屆台灣開放街圖社群大會理監事選舉即日起開放登記參選，表單如連結： https://goo.gl/hxEOBn
。根據選舉辦法，登記分為推舉和自行登記兩種，請填寫被推舉人的 OpenStreetMap id 和對 OpenStreetMap
的貢獻，這些資訊之後會在選舉公報上呈現。登記的過程中，我們也會釋出已經登記的名單。

先前打算先開放加入會員的管道再開放登記參選。將採用 KKTIX 作為會員加入的管道，目前已經向 KKTIX
送出免年費服務方案申請，等待結果中。所以我們決定在在生效前，先開放參選登記。請各位踴躍跳坑、推坑。

Happy Mapping

Louis
___
Talk-TW mailing list
Talk-TW@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw

Re: [Talk-cz] Nové pojetí dálniční sítě

[Pavel Machek]

Ahoj!

> >> a) Motorway  Dálnice 
> >>
> >> must_have:highway=motorway,ref=D1,oneway=true
> >>
> >> don't_have:motorroad=*
> >>
> >> conditional:int_ref=E 55
> >>
> >> defaults:  lines=4,maxspeed=130,source:maxspeed=CZ:motorway
> > Spis "lanes", ne?
> >
> > A teda nevim, tagovat natvrdo maxspeed=130, je to zadouci? To by spis
> > chtelo nechat prazdny dokud to nekdo neprojede s tim ze tam ta 130
> > fakt je dovolena, ne? Takhle se objevi maxspeed=130 i na mistech kde
> > je to omezeny treba na 80...
> > Pavel
> 
> Tak dálnice je dálnice ne? Předpokládá se 130. Pokud tam je někde
> omezení, tak se otaguje dodatečně. Důležitější jsou přece značky a

Ne.

Kdyz chci vedet jestli jsem na dalnici, podivam se na
highway=motorway. Jo, na dalnici se casto jezdi 130.

Kdyz tam vsude bude maxspeed=130, nepoznam, jestli tam je opravdu 130,
nebo jestli to tam nekdo naprasil jen tak hromadne.

Totez s source:maxspeed=CZ:motorway.

A koneckoncu, ani to lanes=4 tam nema co delat. Pokud nevim, kolik tam
je pruhu, tak to nevyplnuju. Projel jsem celou D52, vsude byly 4
pruhy, ok, nastavim. Ale nebudu to nastavovat proto ze "dalnice
obvykle maji 4 pruhy". 
Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-cz] Mapování tras KČT - stav

[Karel Volný]

Dne Ne 22. listopadu 2015 11:05:53, Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):
> On 11/19/2015 11:14 AM, Karel Volný wrote:
> > teď jsme obcházeli nějaké hrady, před Bukovinou se nám ztratila
> > značka, tak
> 
> Coz je zrovna oblast kterou v taskmanu jeste nikdo neprosel.

... a zůstane nedokončená, neb informace nemám kompletní :-(

http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35512287

K.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [OSM-talk] What3words

[Peter Gervai]

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 2:01 PM, ajt1...@gmail.com  wrote:
> On 22/11/2015 12:51, Colin Smale wrote:

> ...and once again, as seems to be the norm in OSM, any minority interest
> which is not supported by the oligarchy gets mercilessly shot down.

> ... except it's not _just_ the "oligarchy", is it?  No-one on this list
> seems to have a good word for the original idea.

And even many of the the lurkers don't. Central repository is bad for
longevity.


Actually I'm impressed by Google's attempt called open-location-code,
it's actually pretty
useful, completely open and doesn't require a central authority. Kind
of no-brainer including
their already provided javascript on a page, and the hierarchical
approach is really neat.

grin

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] traffic calming

[Rob Nickerson]

On 22 November 2015 at 19:33, Chris Hill  wrote:

>
> Gerd did the work you describe but went ahead with an almost nation-wide
> mechanical edit without any prior discussion or description. That's why I
> asked him to revert it. Mechanical edits need to be discussed. He then
> indicated that he would discuss the tags on tagging@ - indeed he
> suggested leaving his edit and discussing it on tagging@. I wanted also
> to make it clear that tagging@ is not the best place to discuss
> mechanical edits - a lot of people avoid tagging@ to maintain the will to
> live.
>
>
I agree that mechanical edits *should* get discussed - I expect many don't
due to the negativity of mailing lists and no clear indication of when
something is accepted (the tagging mailing list went off topic instantly).
However when faced with a non-discussed mechanical edit I feel that a
pragmatic approach should be taken. In this instance I feel your response
was heavy handed. "OK, a mech edit that has not been discussed and agreed
will be reverted. That's the rules." is not particularly helpful or
supportive.

I also disagree with the instant revert in this case - perhaps a quick chat
on IRC would have helped to see if others wanted an instant revert. It now
looks like we have put Gerd off editing in the UK :-(

And now I definitely have wasted enough time on this matter!

Happy mapping,
Rob
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] traffic calming

[Chris Hill]

On 22/11/15 20:17, Steve Doerr wrote:

On 22/11/2015 19:37, Chris Hill wrote:


Mechanical edits need to be discussed. He then
indicated that he would discuss the tags on tagging@ - indeed he
suggested leaving his edit and discussing it on tagging@. I wanted also
to make it clear that tagging@ is not the best place to discuss
mechanical edits


So where is?

On a mailing list or IRC channel that relates to the area the mechanical 
edit is proposed to be. So in a GB-wide edit, talk-GB and #osm-gb makes 
sense to me.


--
Cheers, Chris (chillly)


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[OSM-talk-fr] Rencontre contributeurs de Paris-IdF 26/11/2015

[Donat ROBAUX]

Bonjour à tous,

Nous nous retrouvons jeudi 26 novembre 2015 à partir de 19h30 à la FPH 38
rue Saint Sabin, Paris 11.

Le reste des informations est sur le forum:
https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/viewtopic.php?f=18=2381
ou sur l'agenda du libre http://www.agendadulibre.org/events/10318

Donat
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] imagerie mapbox

[osm . sanspourriel]

faut-il ou pas rajouter cette possibilité dans la page uMap du wiki ?


Pour un simple affichage en fond, je ne pense pas qu'on soit encore 
dans les limites prévues ci-dessus.


Il faut voir côté IGN... j'avoue ne pas tout comprendre à leurs 
conditions d'utilisation, mais pour certains usages, les couches de 
bases sont utilisables gratuitement.


Heu, j'avoue ne pas comprendre : Laurent, tu veux dire proposer comme 
couche par défaut ou comme couche possible ?
Je vois que tu l'as fait, donc c'est possible (j'allais d'ailleurs le 
dire ;-)).

Tu veux dire proposer comme couche avec sa propre clé ?

Christian, oui, les conditions IGN sont peu claires et peu pratiques. Il 
y a quelques années, tu pouvais prendre un jeton gratuit (dans certaines 
limites) mais jeton à renouveler chaque année !


Pour paysage de France : pourquoi payer des tuiles OSM sur MapBox ? 
Pourquoi accepter des restrictions sur les surcouches alors que UMap (ou 
tout autre service basé sur Leaflet par exemple) ? Peut-être que vous 
n'atteignez pas les limites pour le moment.


Il y a aussi des WMS/TMS d'orthophotos qui peuvent être intéressants 
suivant les zones (donc sans doute pas intéressant pour Paysages de 
France : zones trop vastes). Pour la Bretagne : 
http://geobretagne.fr/mapfishapp/.



Jean-Yvon
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-GB] traffic calming

[Dave F.]

On 22/11/2015 20:55, Chris Hill wrote:
On a mailing list or IRC channel that relates to the area the 
mechanical edit is proposed to be. So in a GB-wide edit, talk-GB and 
#osm-gb makes sense to me.




But the amendments to the *tags* aren't GB specific. It needs to be 
discussed with as wide an array of users as possible.


Which, as I've said many times before, is why IRC should never be used 
to discuss matters that affect OSM. It's discussed with just a few BFFs 
who happen to live in the same time zones & are too scared to keep a 
record of their comments. I convinced those who use IRC have got 
ulterior motives which they want to keep hidden.


Dave F.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb