from:"Matthias"

> Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. Dezember 2019 um 01:00 Uhr
> Von: "Martin Koppenhoefer" 
>
> it will contain a lot of postcode information from the original OpenStreetMap 
> database,
> in adapted/translated form. Whether the amount is sufficient to be considered 
> substantial
> will have to be evaluated based on the actual db that is created/the actual 
> numbers.
> To create an accurate postcode polygon from point features you will need a 
> lot of them,
> so probably already a handful of them would be considered substantial.

There are 5,650,789,072 nodes in OSM database. But the EU database directive 
wants to
protect the investment (in money). If it was damn hard to collect the nodes 
belonging
to the postcodes, only a few thousand nodes might be more substantial.

I think, that's a moralistic point of view. I'll neither collect a substantial 
part
of the whole OSM database, nor you could proof that there was big investment 
made to
collect the data. Since the users are working for free, the only investment are 
the
servers.

Like I said, that's a moralistic point of view.

I've got an offer today to get the data for about 3,500 Euro. This allows me to 
select
the data and even publish the postal code and the merged postal geometries with 
attribution.
It's another non-free dataset, but it solves my problem.


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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

> Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2019 um 17:03 Uhr
> Von: "Tom Lee via legal-talk" 
> 
> This is an admirable impulse, but it is worth emphasizing that those of
> us who participate on OSM listservs are a small and unrepresentative
> fraction of the project's 5.9 million registered users. Lists like this
> one are a great way to find the slice of users who are most interested
> and passionate about a particular issue, and who consequently can be
> expected to have well-informed (and often strongly held) opinions that
> reflect the gamut of possible answers.

I understand this, but the girls and guys here do already have some
knowledge about this topic. I know many OSM mappers, which would never
be able to discuss about this license questions. And many don't even
use a GIS to be able to intersect two different data sources :-)
  
> But if you are seeking consensus, the closest thing available is the
> text of the license itself and guidelines that have been approved by
> elected members of the OSMF board. Usually when there is broad agreement
> on an issue, the answer is memorialized in a wiki page that people find
> before they wind up here :-)_

Why doesn't the OSMF write about fundamental stuff then? I think,
ST_Intersects() is one of the main tools in GIS world. Why don't
give a clear statement on this?

Since the ODbL has never changed, it's fixed. So there could be
something like an FAQ or matrix to look up what triggers share-alike
and what not?

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] distance calculations

> Von: "Nuno Caldeira" 
> it's a derivated, therefore share alike. I'm glad they trusted OSM data. 

So the distance calculations are derivated, of course.
But what about their points of interests? They've interacted with the roads.

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

[OSM-legal-talk] distance calculations

Dear IANALs,

I'm sorry to ask an additional question.

A while ago, I've listened to a talk about navigation of pupils from their home 
to the school - it was used to decide whether the pupil gets a free bus ticket 
or not.

The distance calculation was done by a land registry office, which didn't have 
a route-able road & path network, but had trust in the OSM data, since they 
inspected it for quite a while. For completeness, they've used their own 
housing and school locations, but didn't use any from OSM.

They routed from the pupil's house to the school on the OSM network. Of course, 
the results were released in public.
Do such distance calculations also trigger share-alike on the non-free data 
(here: schools & houses).

Regards,
Matthias


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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

Christoph.

> Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2019 um 12:03 Uhr
> Von: "Christoph Hormann" 
>
> This is definitely a better approach than trying to find loopholes in
> the license with brute force and wishful thinking.  Even if that is
> possible and you can present an interpretation of the wording of the
> ODbL that supports your use case without share-alike this was clearly
> not the intention of the OSM community when adopting the ODbL to do so.

It never was my intention to brute force a hole. I just thought, OSM data can 
be used, as long I don't mix anything or fill my missing data. I thought, 
proper attribution like "selected by using OSM data ..." would be fine for your.

> > I didn't expected OpenStreetMap to be such non-free and permissive
> > :-(
>
> The usual view is that share-alike provisions do not make something
> non-free or non-open because they are meant to protect and extend the
> freedom and only constrain users of truly non-free data.  But anyone
> can have a different opinion on that of course.

Sorry to say this, but I don't feel like you want to protect your data. It 
feels like you want to grab all the data, your data comes into contact with. 
"Viral" is the right term here - do you know the Borg? :-)

> Both share-alike and attribution play an important role in OSM in the
> social contract between mappers and data users.  In return for being
> able to use the results of the work of the mappers for free, data users
> are required to share improvements of the data or the results of
> producing something of additional value in combination with other data
> under open license terms.

If attribution would pay a role, than "(c) Non-Free data, selected by using OSM 
data ..." would be possible.
That might be an idea for future license drafts.

Regards,
Matthias

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

Simon,

> Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2019 um 13:33 Uhr
> Von: "Simon Poole" 
>
> Just to be clear: you asked a question on an unmoderated, publicly
> accessible mailing list on which everybody can voice their opinions
> however unfounded they are or not, and now you are unhappy with that you
> got a cacophony of conflicting opinions, which is exactly what you
> should have expected.

I was aware of this and just wanted to get a consensus by the data creators: 
the users.
Looking at the opinion of the mass it shows me, that my approach of using OSM 
as a source of selecting the data doesn't seem to be fine. More of you are 
saying "share-alike", so I have to deal with this.

Like I sad before:
I would have been fine at attributing OpenStreetMap as selection. Now, I 
neither can use OSM data, nor add my dataset to yours.
A lose-lose-situation :-(

> The official guidance on geo-coding from the OSMF can be found here
> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Geocoding_-_Guideline

I think that is what Kathleen tried to explain, but got confused by others.
I'm sad that paying a lawyer is more expensive than paying for other datasets 
:-)

Regards,
Matthias

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

I don't care about the money it costs, I even would pay for OpenStreetMap. I just wanted to use OSM, since the data quality is pretty high in the area I need it.

 

In a future license it would be better to allow attributions like "Data: (c) Non-Free, selected using (c) OpenStreetMap under ODbL...".

Now, I neither can use your data, nor add my dataset to yours. A lose-lose-situation :-(

 

Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2019 um 10:34 Uhr
Von: "Nuno Caldeira" 
An: "Licensing and other legal discussions." 
Betreff: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data






that's unfair, it is free, you don't have to pay for it. it just has a license, or else map companies would use our data 
 






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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

2019-12-15 Thread matthias . straetling

> Von: "Christoph Hormann" 
>
> The idea that your process of intersecting non-OSM data with OSM based
> admin polygons results in a collective database is not realistic.  To
> me this kind of operation would be a textbook example of something
> generating a derivative database - you combine OSM data with non-OSM
> data to generate something of additional value compared to either of
> these data sets alone.  This is exactly the kind of scenario
> share-alike is meant for and why it was chosen as license for OSM.  But
> there are of course fairly strong economic interests for this not being
> subject to share-alike so people think of ways to interpret the ODbL
> accordingly.

Okay, I'll canceld all plans to use OpenStreetMap for this task.
I've contacted several commercial data providers and hope to get offers 
tomorrow.

I didn't expected OpenStreetMap to be such non-free and permissive :-(

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

2019-12-14 Thread matthias . straetling

>
> existing OSMF community guidelines suggest spatial operations like
> ST_Difference() and ST_Intersection() yield Derivative Databases that
> are subject to share-alike.

Let's take the Collective Database Guideline, you've mentioned:
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Collective_Database_Guideline_Guideline

"Technically a reference between non-OSM and OSM data can be by a database key 
or any other method of identifying a specific OSM or non-OSM element that may 
be used with a database join."

So actually, I just need to create a collective database, put the non-free data 
in one table and OSM data in another.
For table joining, I'm using ST_Intersects() and I'm fine?

Confusing.

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

2019-12-13 Thread matthias . straetling

Hi Mateusz,

>> No, ODbL does not apply to any database that does not include OSM data.
> It is true but misleading to mention here as this database contains 
> transformed OSM data.
 
So if I don't merge the postcodes, it's fine?

>> There is no OSM data in the secondary list so it is not a Derivative 
>> Database.
> This is blatantly untrue. There is OSM data there, only transformed.

So as soon I'm selecting any data using OSM polygons, it gets transformed OSM 
data?
They're not even touching on the same layer, since it's a different feature 
type.

Regards,
Matthias


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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

2019-12-13 Thread matthias . straetling

Hi Lars-Daniel, yeah, same here.

 

I've read you tried to do similar work in the past. I think, you've merged postcodes with OSM data in a seperate column and didn't need to attribute it as share-alike.



 

What did you end up with?

 


Gesendet: Freitag, 13. Dezember 2019 um 19:25 Uhr
Von: "Lars-Daniel Weber" 
An: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Betreff: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data



Please stop constructing such cases. This case clearly would have the intention of reproducing the OSM database.

My intention is the trivial use of OpenStreetMap. A normal process in the GIS world.






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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

Let me get into detail is this project to proof that this case isn't constructed.

We've purchased geodata with real estate prices (houses & flats) for Germany's federal state "Northrhine Westfalia". Each row has coordinates in WGS84. The TOS of the purchhased dataset state, that it's not allowed to relicense the pricing data or the coordinates under another license. So we can't go ODbL here.

We want to extract postcode areas (more than 100 nodes) from the OSM database and merge them into sensefull peaces, like market regions. Of course, we can release those new areas, since they're clearly ODbL.

Using this market regions, we would like to calculate the average housing and flat prices and display them on a map. We also would like to display the exact position on a new layer (not mixed with OSM data).

I've seen plenty of websites displaying such prices, especially newspapers. All were based on Mapbox or Carto.

Gesendet: Donnerstag, 12. Dezember 2019 um 20:31 Uhr
Von: "Simon Poole"
An: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Betreff: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

Yes, if a Derivative Database was created in the first place, and that is not clear at all, see:

“Derivative Database” – Means a database based upon the Database, and
includes any translation, adaptation, arrangement, modification, or any
other alteration of the Database or of a Substantial part of the
Contents. This includes, but is not limited to, Extracting or
Re-utilising the whole or a Substantial part of the Contents in a new
Database.

Essentially the question is if the envelopes of the extracted points are a substantial extract of our data (because they represent the residual information/data from OSM), while it is obviously possible to construct cases were this would be the case, in the typical relatively sparse POI scenario I don't quite see that.

I don't particularly like engaging in these discussion because they tend to end up being arguments about how many angels can stand on a pin and are not answerable outside of the detailed specifics of the actual use case (which are typically not available).

Simon

Am 12.12.2019 um 20:05 schrieb Nuno Caldeira:

https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/index.html

the license is quite clear and 4.2 applies to the case you mention. any use of OSM data (over 100 nodes) combined with proprietary data results in more open data under ODbL.

we are here to create more open data, not to feed proprietary data than is lock under their TOS.

On Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 18:53 , wrote:

> From a practical point of view, boundaries in OSM rarely originate from surveys,
> you might be lucky to be able to identify the original source (most likely open data)
> which may have a more liberal license than ODbL (check the history and changeset
> source tags / object source tags).

But I neither want to merge OSM data or add it to my data. I just want to use it to
select points of my dataset.

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

___legal-talk mailing listlegal-talk@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

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

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

> we are here to create more open data, not to feed proprietary data than is 
> lock under their TOS.  

I want to apologize for my misunderstanding: my final product does not contain 
any OpenStreetMap data.

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

> From a practical point of view, boundaries in OSM rarely originate from 
> surveys,
> you might be lucky to be able to identify the original source (most likely 
> open data)
> which may have a more liberal license than ODbL (check the history and 
> changeset
> source tags / object source tags).

But I neither want to merge OSM data or add it to my data. I just want to use 
it to
select points of my dataset.

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

Hi,

> when you write „number of boundaries“, you intend „boundary points“?

No, for example postcodes. I want to merge some of them to new polygons.

Regards,
Matthias

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

Hi,

> In my NAL opinion, the result will be derived from OSM data and
> therefore inherits the ODbL license. This does, however, not mean that
> you have to publish it; but *if* you publish (or "publilcy use") it,
> then it has to be available under ODbL. If you just use it internally
> then it is still ODbL but that doesn't matter to you.

Oh wait. I don't want to publish the modified OpenStreetMap data.
I want to publish the proprietary dataset, which I've selected using the 
OpenStreetMap data.
For example, I want to select the non-free points using postcode polygons, 
derived from OpenStreetMap.

Regards,
Matthias

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

[OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

2019-12-11 Thread matthias . straetling

Dear IANALs,

I want to use polygons (district boundaries) from OSM dataset to select points 
for a proprietary dataset.
The OSM dataset might be altered trivially (f.e. boundaries might be merged 
where needed).
The proprietary data isn't allowed to be used freely and is incompatible with 
ODBL.

The result of the intersections is a geodatabase, which doesn't contain any OSM 
data.

Is there some kind of share-alike? Does the resulting dataset need attribution 
like "selected with OSM data"?

Regards,
Matthias

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

Re: [Talk-de] Geoportal Wiesbaden WMS

2018-11-29 Thread Matthias Gutjahr

Hallo Joachim,

Ich gehe mal davon aus, dass es keine oder zumindest keine positive Antwort
vom Vermessungsamt bzw. der Stadt Wiesbaden gab?

Viele Grüße
Matthias

Am Mi., 9. Mai 2018 um 22:49 Uhr schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com>:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 9. May 2018, at 12:00, Simon Poole  wrote:
> >
> > Ein freundlicher dezenter Hinweis, dass sie unsere Marke missbrauchen
> > wäre ev. auch noch angebracht.
>
>
> welche Marke, hat die OSMF OpenWiMap registriert?
>
> Wenn das Wort eine Neuschöpfung (bsp. Pepsi, Aral, ...) ist hat man es
> vermutlich leichter, ähnliche Namen zu verfolgen, aber wenn die Marke aus
> der Kombination dreier beschreibender Allerweltswörter wie Open (data),
> Straße und Karte (bzw. Straßenkarte) besteht, wird man schwer damit
> durchkommen, anderen Open data Karten die Benutzung dieser Beschreibung zu
> untersagen, wenn sie nicht genau gleich ist. Müsste man um es sicher zu
> wissen vor Gericht ausprobieren.
>
> Was haltet ihr hiervon, unter markenrechtlichen Gesichtspunkten?
> https://open.sourcemap.com/
>
> AFAIK muss man Marken auch verteidigen, sonst kann sie auf Antrag gelöscht
> werden sofern sie zum Gattungsbegriff geworden ist. Weiß jemand ob die OSMF
> dafür Ressourcen eingeplant hat?
>
> Gruß,
> Martin
>
>
> ___
> 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: [OSM-talk-fr] cimetière et religion

2018-07-27 Thread Matthias Dietrich

Bonjour,

Pour continuer dans les exceptions, il y a l'Alsace et la Moselle, non
soumises à la loi de 1905 (Strasbourg a d'ailleurs ouvert un cimetière
musulman en 2012).

Le ven. 27 juil. 2018 à 17:10, Topographe Fou  a
écrit :

> Bonjour,
>
> Attention, il peut y avoir des exceptions françaises : carrés musulmans (
> https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carr%C3%A9_musulman), cimetières juifs
> (ex : https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cimeti%C3%A8re_juif_de_Besan%C3%A7on),
> cimetières de communautés religieuses (majoritairement chrétiennes dans le
> cas français) et peut être aussi quelques autres cimetières privés
> jouissant de dérogations ou de statuts pré-1905.
>
> Bref les lois ont évoluées depuis 1905. A tenir compte dans la mise à jour
> de la page des cimetières.
>
> Dans le cas présent, je ne me suis pas renseigné mais il est probable que
> ce soit un cimetière municipal ordinaire et donc sans confession (à
> vérifier et sources si la confession est appropriée)
>
> Cordialement,
>
> LeTopographeFou
>
>   Message original
> De: pe...@adrieng.fr
> Envoyé: 27 juillet 2018 2:32 PM
> À: talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> Répondre à: talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> Objet: [OSM-talk-fr] cimetière et religion
>
> Bonjour,
>
> J'ai eu la surprise de voir un cimetière tagué avec une religion (catho) :
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/70372780#map=18/48.00631/6.71545
>
> Or en France les cimetières sont des espaces laïques, par la loi de 1905
> (article 28) :
>
> « Il est interdit, à l'avenir, d'élever ou d'apposer aucun signe ou
> emblème religieux sur les monuments publics ou en quelque emplacement
> public que ce soit, à l'exception des édifices servant au culte, des
> terrains de sépulture dans les cimetières, des monuments funéraires,
> ainsi que des musées ou expositions. »
>
>
> https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=LEGITEXT06070169=20180727
>
> À mon sens, seule les tombes peuvent donc être marquées d'une religion,
> mais en aucun cas le cimetière complet ! C'est d'ailleurs la position de
> la Fédération de la libre pensée, confirmé par le Conseil d'État :
>
>
> https://www.fnlp.fr/news/413/17/Croix-sur-les-parties-communes-des-cimetieres.html
>
>
> Si personne n'y voit d'inconvénient, je compte donc corriger ce
> cimetière, et indiquer clairement cette réflexion sur la page wiki
> concernant le tag cimetière. Un test OSMOSE là-dessus comblerait à coup
> sûr les défenseurs de la laïcité, mais c'est au delà de mes compétences…
>
>
> Bonne journée
>
> Adrien
>
> ___
> 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
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] [osm-alsace] name:gsw pour les noms régionals?

2018-07-07 Thread Matthias Dietrich

Bonjour Christine,

Oui, le code "gsw" est utilisé pour l'alsacien, du moins pour sa forme
alémanique. Il n'existe pas à ma connaissance de code ISO pour le francique
(fränkisch).
Voir
http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/langcodes-keyword.php?SearchTerm=gsw=ALL=Go

En tout cas, c'est ce que j'utilise pour les noms de rues en alsacien.




Le sam. 7 juil. 2018 à 12:07, Christine Karch  a
écrit :

> Bonjour,
>
> je veux faire un peu le "mapping" à Strasbourg et environs, aussi chez
> nous à Kehl/Hanauerland, ou le dialecte est pareil. On voit sur les
> panneaux de rue les noms régionals. J'ai déjà trouvé des examples comme
> "name:gsw=Knowligass" pour Rue de L'Ail. etc. dans la base de donnés
> d'OpenStreetMap.
>
> Je n'ai pas trouvé des examples à Kehl. Mais c'est sûr, qu'on
> voudrais/devrais prendre le même tag.
>
> Ma question, c'est: on prend le tag "name:gsw" pour les noms régionals
> sur ces panneaux de rues? Je demande parce que ne veux pas rater.
>
> Christine
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-de] Geoportal Wiesbaden WMS

2018-05-02 Thread Matthias Gutjahr

Hi Joachim,

vielen Dank! Bin gespannt auf die Antwort.

Viele Grüße
Matthias

Am 2. Mai 2018 um 11:59 schrieb Joachim Kast <osm...@dd1gj.de>:

> Hallo Matthias,
>
> ich habe mit dem Vermessungsamt der Stadt Wiesbaden telefoniert und eine
> "offizielle" Anfrage für das DOP gestellt.
>
> Viele Grüße
> Joachim  (Ansprechpartner für Behörden)
>
>
> > Hallo,
> >
> > die Stadt Wiesbaden bietet schon seit knapp zwei Jahren auf ihrem
> Geoportal
> > unter dem Namen "OpenWIMap" WMS URLs für offenbar regelmäßig
> aktualisierte
> > Orthophotos u.ä. an unter einer CC BY-NC-SA Lizenz:
> > http://geoportal.wiesbaden.de/OpenWIMap.html . Soweit ich weiß, sind die
> > Bilder daher nicht fürs Mappen in OSM nutzbar.
> >
> > Es gibt aber Behörden, die explizit eine Ausnahme machen für OSM (z.B.
> > drüben in Main:
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mainz/amtliche_Daten_f%C3%BCr_OSM).
> >
> > Weiß jemand, wie diesbezüglich die Lage in Wiesbaden ist? Gab es
> vielleicht
> > schon eine Anfrage bei der Stadt? Ist da irgendwo etwas dokumentiert (auf
> > dieser Liste und im Forum habe ich bisher nichts gefunden)? Was kann man
> da
> > ggf. unternehmen?
> >
> > Viele Grüße
> > Matthias
>
> ___
> 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-de] Geoportal Wiesbaden WMS

2018-05-02 Thread Matthias Gutjahr

Hallo,

die Stadt Wiesbaden bietet schon seit knapp zwei Jahren auf ihrem Geoportal
unter dem Namen "OpenWIMap" WMS URLs für offenbar regelmäßig aktualisierte
Orthophotos u.ä. an unter einer CC BY-NC-SA Lizenz:
http://geoportal.wiesbaden.de/OpenWIMap.html . Soweit ich weiß, sind die
Bilder daher nicht fürs Mappen in OSM nutzbar.

Es gibt aber Behörden, die explizit eine Ausnahme machen für OSM (z.B.
drüben in Main:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mainz/amtliche_Daten_f%C3%BCr_OSM).

Weiß jemand, wie diesbezüglich die Lage in Wiesbaden ist? Gab es vielleicht
schon eine Anfrage bei der Stadt? Ist da irgendwo etwas dokumentiert (auf
dieser Liste und im Forum habe ich bisher nichts gefunden)? Was kann man da
ggf. unternehmen?

Viele Grüße
Matthias
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

[Talk-de] hi

2016-08-26 Thread Matthias Regiert

Greetings! 

Just wanted to say hi and tell you how much  I  miss you, here are some 
interesting things for you  <http://nguspuhuci.nycredhead.com/lnnxex>

Yours faithfully, Matthias Regiert


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

[Talk-de] useful information

2016-08-22 Thread Matthias Regiert

Dear! 

I thought this  information regarding my favourite stuff may be usefull for you 
too, just take a look here <http://tushaxospa.specific-steps.com/lnqxp>

Sincerely, Matthias Regiert


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

[OSM-legal-talk] Comparing geodata results in ODbL? (was metadata)

2015-10-16 Thread Matthias Meißer

Hi there,

even if I (tried to) follow the metadata-guideline-discussion, I like to ask 
OSMF about a dedicated usecase that is somewhat related to the meta-topic:

We like to compare our (sadly closed source) vector building outlines, with the 
existing buildings in OSM. So we touch both (seperate) datasets and compare if 
a OSM building is covered by our buildings. We delete that existing building 
and it remains an OSM dataset with buildings that we don't have yet.

While it's not a problem to share the resulting OSM dataset, we are afraid, if 
we might need to share the original official building outlines? Our goal is to 
render the result and add it to a webmap.
Don't get me wrong, we don't try 'to rip of' OSM, but can't release the 
official building outlines of the whole state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (we 
don't own them). Instead we like to share another result of the comparison: 
where are buildings still missed in OSM (and could be traced by the community), 
so the opposite direction of the compare.

We tried to discuss this question already with the local and the german OSM 
communities and different senior mappers, but we are still a bit sceptical 
about our interpretation of the ODbL terms. It would be nice to get an answer 
by the OSMF :-)

kind regards from the city of Rostock,
Matthias Meißer
user:KVLA-HRO-Mei




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

[OSRM-talk] Using custom data


Hi list,

I'm running a little experiment with using custom geo data for OSRM.
Following the advice of [1], I converted my data to OSM XML format, for 
now neglecting all kinds of tags/attributes etc. (this could be done later).
You can find the resulting OSM file here: 
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/56544580/extract.osm

The file can be viewed correctly using JOSM.

I also created a very basic profile: 
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/56544580/custom.lua
This profile should just contain the necessary variables read by 
osrm-extract. It should not exclude any of the OSM nodes or ways, just 
let them all pass through to the routing graph. Also, there should be no 
turn restrictions.


The processing chain (extract, prepare) runs successfully and I can also 
start the osrm-routed server.
The locate and nearest services are working fine. However, the viaroute 
service returns only a valid route, if just one segment is involved. As 
soon as there are junctions, no route can be calculated (code 207).


Can this be related to the turn restrictions? I had hoped they would be 
entirely ignored if switched off in the profile.

Or am I missing something else important in my profile or data?
Are there maybe any OSM tags which are absolutely required by OSRM 
directly, even if a fully customised profile is being used?


Any help or suggestions on this are greatly appreciated!

Many thanks and best regards,
Matthias

--
[1] - 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osrm-talk/2015-May/000844.html



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

Re: [OSRM-talk] Using custom data


Hi Daniel,

many thanks for your answer!
Now I understand... Unfortunately, that makes things much more 
complicated :-(
I though OSRM, clever as it is, would do the noding itself and not just 
rely on the OSM data.


So I guess I have to build a topology or at least node my custom input 
data beforehand, in order to be able to create a noded OSM dataset.

Well, I'll try that... :-)

Thanks again,
Matthias

On 15.10.2015 17:34, Daniel Patterson wrote:

Hi Matthias,

  Emil is right, your ways are not connected.  The connection needs to 
happen like this:


  


  

  
   <- same node as in way 1

  

  It is not enough to just have nodes at the same lat/lon, you 
actually have to refer to the same  for ways to be joined.

  If you fix that in your file, you should be able to route on it.

daniel

On Oct 15, 2015, at 8:28 AM, Matthias Loeks <matth...@loeks.net 
<mailto:matth...@loeks.net>> wrote:


Hi Emil,

thanks for your answer.
Well, they look correct in JOSM and I paid attention to add the nodes 
and then the node relations in the ways properly when assembling the 
OSM XML.


Does OSRM rely on any additional OSM nodes at the junctions? Doesn't 
it node the graph itself anyway?


Cheers,
Matthias

On 15.10.2015 14:20, Emil Tin wrote:

Are you sure segments are connected at the noded?

Sendt fra min HTC-telefon

- Reply message -
Fra: "Matthias Loeks"<matth...@loeks.net>
Til:"osrm-talk@openstreetmap.org"<osrm-talk@openstreetmap.org>
Emne: [OSRM-talk] Using custom data
Dato: tor, okt. 15, 2015 13:19

Hi list,

I'm running a little experiment with using custom geo data for OSRM.
Following the advice of [1], I converted my data to OSM XML format, for
now neglecting all kinds of tags/attributes etc. (this could be done 
later).

You can find the resulting OSM file here:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/56544580/extract.osm
The file can be viewed correctly using JOSM.

I also created a very basic profile:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/56544580/custom.lua
This profile should just contain the necessary variables read by
osrm-extract. It should not exclude any of the OSM nodes or ways, just
let them all pass through to the routing graph. Also, there should 
be no

turn restrictions.

The processing chain (extract, prepare) runs successfully and I can 
also

start the osrm-routed server.
The locate and nearest services are working fine. However, the viaroute
service returns only a valid route, if just one segment is involved. As
soon as there are junctions, no route can be calculated (code 207).

Can this be related to the turn restrictions? I had hoped they would be
entirely ignored if switched off in the profile.
Or am I missing something else important in my profile or data?
Are there maybe any OSM tags which are absolutely required by OSRM
directly, even if a fully customised profile is being used?

Any help or suggestions on this are greatly appreciated!

Many thanks and best regards,
Matthias

--
[1] -
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osrm-talk/2015-May/000844.html


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


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

___
OSRM-talk mailing list
OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org <mailto:OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk




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

Re: [OSRM-talk] State of the Art - Dynamic Routing


Patrick,

thanks again for your explanations and opinions about dynamic updates to 
the graph.


Being aware of the complex scenario that dynamic updates introduce, I'd 
still like to think about the great features that it would allow for!
Implementing per-request dynamics to some extent would enable use cases 
like traffic-based routing, disaster routing (avoiding locked down 
roads), truck routing ... and much more.

Anything of these topics on the OSRM roadmap? ;-)

Of course, the "how" (to implement) is crucial here... Due to my lack of 
knowledge about both CH and C++, I cannot offer help unfortunately.
I thought it has to be possible somehow, since GraphHopper offers this 
traffic data integration thing [1], which might show the way how to do this?


Best,
Matthias

--
[1] - https://github.com/karussell/graphhopper-traffic-data-integration


On 14.10.2015 13:05, Patrick Niklaus wrote:

certain edges in the contracted graph should have to be ignored


If that set of 'dynamic edges' is known in advance you could use a
technique that does not contract nodes adjacent to that edges. This
would mean for those edges you could update the weights without
re-contraction. On the pre-processing side adding support for this is
quite trivial, essentially it is a variation of partial contraction.
However adding an interface for
updating the graph would be new. The main problem there is that you
either add some sort of "override set" to the query graph, or have a
copy for each graph for each thread.
The first implementation will incur high penalties on query time (you
would need an additional check every time you read the edge weight),
the second approach would have a high memory usage.

Currently we don't plan to implement this. But if anyone likes to give
it a try, I will of course help were I can.

Best,
Patrick

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 12:18 PM, Matthias Loeks <matth...@loeks.net> wrote:

HI Patrick,

many thanks for your extensive answer and your interesting insights into the
possibilities of achieving dynamic routing with CH.

While partial graph contraction may be an option for adding traffic data
e.g. every 15 minutes, I'm afraid that it is still not an option if each
individual request has to deal with e.g. different  avoid areas.
Each request would then need a differently contracted/pre-processed graph...
(impossible to pre-process on the fly)

Do you think there is any possibility to add some sort of "dynamic layer" on
top of the contracted graph? Based on the information in this layer, certain
edges in the contracted graph should have to be ignored by the routing
algorithm.
Is such a thing possible and are there any plans to incorporate this (or
similar concepts) into OSRM? Or is this just contrary to the CH approach and
only solveable with a usual (slow) Dijkstra?

Thanks a lot for your help!

Cheers,
Matthias


On 09.10.2015 15:37, Patrick Niklaus wrote:

If you want to ingest dynamic data like traffic information into the
routing, the main objective is to reduce pre-processing times so that
the data will not be stale before you can actually serve requests from
it.

There are several ways you can achieve this:
1. Don't do any pre-processing.
  In that case you just use a normal Dijkstra based search.
2. Do pre-processing but don't update it on traffic updates.
 For example if you use something ALT-based you can calculate the
heuristic using the average value and still yield good performance.
3. Re-run pre-processing and make it fast enough for your given update
cycle.
 The primary knobs you can turn there are:
 - reduce the size of your dataset
 - reduce the quality of the pre-processing

We have been working on supporting 3 in OSRM with CH. We added a
parameter to now contract the graph completely but only partially.
This as dire consequences for query times however, depending on which
quality factor you pick. If you contract the graph only 95% you will
half your pre-processing time and increase the runtime 100x depending
on your dataset size. Features like alternative searches, distance
tables and similar will not work with this approach since it is much
too slow.

You can try partial contraction with `4.8.1` by using the `-k`
parameter like `-k 0.95` will contract the graph only to 95%.

Supporting real time traffic updates while still supporting
continental sized networks is not exactly trivial, even more so if you
support advanced features like turn restrictions. Consider the fact
that just reading/writing such a graph from/to disk might take longer
than your usual update cycle.

We are working on making it easier to support this for smaller
datasets though (like countries). Of course CH is really not suited
that well for this task, but it enables you to use the same platform
and process until CH can be replaced with alternative approaches.

Best,
Patrick


___
OSRM-talk mailing li

Re: [OSRM-talk] Using custom data