On Aug 5, 2008, at 08:53, Thorsten Feles wrote:
> Lennard voor den Dag schrieb:
>> That earlier proposal was highway=parking_aisle, not
>> service=parking_aisle (with highway=service) as it stands now, IIRC.
>>
>
> But its not getting better, the service key is already in use by the
> railways guy
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 11:58 +1000, Joseph Gentle wrote:
> You can see my beautiful city.
> http://maps.google.com.au/?ie=UTF8&ll=-33.911633,151.24054&spn=0.03298,0.065918&z=15&layer=c&cbll=-33.9172,151.226114&panoid=SF1CU5fcTX8XqlKyXRxwog&cbp=1,123.60785767574839,,0,6.094238783200709
>
> Good for
Robert Vollmert schrieb:
> On Aug 5, 2008, at 08:53, Thorsten Feles wrote:
>
>> Lennard voor den Dag schrieb:
>>> That earlier proposal was highway=parking_aisle, not
>>> service=parking_aisle (with highway=service) as it stands now, IIRC.
>>>
>>
>> But its not getting better, the service key is
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 10:36:14AM +0200, Erik Johansson wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:40 AM, Stefan Holst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 11:58 +1000, Joseph Gentle wrote:
> >>
> >> Good for filling in all the missing street names.
> > Interesting question. Are we allowed
wer-ist-roger wrote:
> Hello Stefan,
>
>> Interesting question. Are we allowed to use street view images for
>> mapping (filling in street names, amenities, house numbers) or do we
>> need explicit permission like for aerial images?
>
> If your not sure about the legal aspect DON'T use it!
> And
2008/8/5 Michal Migurski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Another way to save more disk space is to filter out the data you
>> don't
>> require. Either by applying a bounding box or by removing items from
>> the
>> default.style.
>
>
> So I'm definitely doing the bbox thing - I ran out of space on the
> vol
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 8:29 AM, Robert Vollmert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
lways guys. Even a path is called highway in osm, why change it ?
>
> I don't see the conflict: For railways, service=* distinguishes
> between different types of service lines, for highways it
> distinguishes between differ
Hi,
For those who are wondering why planet-osm.shaunmcdonald.me.uk isn't
working. It's because of a blip in my web host move.
It is now available from http://blogs.openstreetmap.org/
Shaun
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.ope
Stephen,
Stephen Gower wrote:
> That argument surely applies to aerial images also, and yet consensus is
> that getting facts from them would create a derived work incompatible with
> our licence.
Just for the record: The issue is highly contended and it would be wrong
to speak of consensus. If
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 10:36 +0200, Erik Johansson wrote:
> First of all I have never been able to see the name of a street in my
> 20 minutes of watching google streetview. But you shoudl be able to
> get these things from them:
It is no problem at all to spot street names and even house numbers f
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:40 AM, Stefan Holst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 11:58 +1000, Joseph Gentle wrote:
>> You can see my beautiful city.
>> http://maps.google.com.au/?ie=UTF8&ll=-33.911633,151.24054&spn=0.03298,0.065918&z=15&layer=c&cbll=-33.9172,151.226114&panoid=SF1CU5f
Hello Stefan,
> Interesting question. Are we allowed to use street view images for
> mapping (filling in street names, amenities, house numbers) or do we
> need explicit permission like for aerial images?
If your not sure about the legal aspect DON'T use it!
And from my point of few it is not all
Hi everyone (legal and dev),
Now that the Google Street view imagery is growing pretty rapidly, I
wonder if we could ask Google for permission to use the imagery to
improve the OpenStreetMap data. I know they do not allow us to use
their areal images, but part of the reason for that is that Google
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 11:29 AM, Stefan Holst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> And since they are facts and not *indexed* in a database so it should be ok.
>
> So, its couch-potato-mapping until Google blurrs street names and house
> numbers, too?
Google do index the names an publish that database ov
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 2:15 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's a page on the wiki devoted to this[1], someone
me
> produces a map
> for the UK[2] already but it looks like it isn't as frequently updated
> as you might like
Weekly, when I remember to do so. I've upd
How would we avoid looking at - or prove that we avoid looking at -
all the street names on Google Maps, with which Street View is
inextricably integrated?
- L
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/ta
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Andy Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Weekly, when I remember to do so.
This is the stuff cron was made for:)
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Maybe a statement about google street view has to go into the wiki?
An affidavit in court is a way a user can assert they didn't steal bits from
somewhere...
- me
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 6:09 AM, Laurence Penney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How would we avoid looking at - or prove that we avoid
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 2:10 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is the stuff cron was made for:)
You think my scripts are reliable enough to run twice in a row? :-)
Honestly though, it's not been bad for the last few weeks, but things
were often going wrong with the pro
Hi,
if I offer processed OSM data on my web site for others to use under
CC-BY-SA: Whom do the others have to give attribution? I usually expect
everyone to retain the "OpenStreetMap contributors" message and leave me
(or my company) out of the picture - but if I wanted to, could I also
I'm not quite sure who is considering this, but
http://www.cyclecheltenham.org.uk/map_standard.html claims to be "being
considered as the basis for a national standard."
The actual map looks pretty good for an end-user and exactly the sort of
thing I want to see. However, I can see that trying t
Stephen Gower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 10:36:14AM +0200, Erik Johansson wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:40 AM, Stefan Holst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 11:58 +1000, Joseph Gentle wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Good for filling in all the missing street
And using contacts or glasses is a derived work too... the vendor could
have twisted the photons to inject 'lye' street into your vision.
a
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Matthias Julius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Stephen Gower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 10:36:1
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Stephen Gower
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not quite sure who is considering this, but
> http://www.cyclecheltenham.org.uk/map_standard.html claims to be "being
> considered as the basis for a national standard."
Pah, 'standards' often just limit creativity. And
And what happens if a civil servant uses Google Maps to place the street name
signs? Then the real world becomes a google-maps-derived work, doesnt it?
Lucas
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] en nombre de Anselm Hook
Enviado el: mar 05/08/2008 18:31
Para: talk@openstreetma
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Stephen Gower
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not quite sure who is considering this, but
> http://www.cyclecheltenham.org.uk/map_standard.html claims to be "being
> considered as the basis for a national standard."
>
> The actual map looks pretty good for an end-us
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
2008/8/5 Stephen Gower :
> I'm not quite sure who is considering this, but
> http://www.cyclecheltenham.org.uk/map_standard.html claims to be "being
> considered as the basis for a national standard."
Good to see this getting some traction, Warrington
El Martes, 5 de Agosto de 2008, Matthias Julius escribió:
> Well, if reading a road sign from a picture is creating a derived work
> of that picture than looking up a word in a dictionary also creates a
> derived work of that dictionary.
Not really.
The issue here is that the road sign is not cov
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (vegard) writes:
> On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 11:07:24AM -, m*sh wrote:
>> On Mon, August 4, 2008 10:14, vegard wrote:
>> > For naming of streets in cities, where properties change very often and
>> > you have to make many small ways, it sometimes gets annoying that the
>> > nam
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Matthias Julius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (vegard) writes:
>
> > On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 11:07:24AM -, m*sh wrote:
> >> On Mon, August 4, 2008 10:14, vegard wrote:
> >> > For naming of streets in cities, where properties change very often
> a
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 5:49 PM, Matthias Julius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (vegard) writes:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 11:07:24AM -, m*sh wrote:
>>> On Mon, August 4, 2008 10:14, vegard wrote:
>>> > For naming of streets in cities, where properties change very often and
>>
On Tuesday 05 August 2008, Karl Newman wrote:
> Sounds like you're looking for this:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Segmented_
>Tag
Segmented tags doesn't solve data duplication for dual carriage ways, or
a set of roads with lots of cul-de-sacs with the same name, an
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Just for the record: The issue is highly contended and it would be wrong
> to speak of consensus. If there's any consensus then it is that "when in
> doubt we prefer to be careful" and so we don't copy from aerial images -
> even though many of us believe that it would be
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 8:10 PM, Laurence Penney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > And question 3 - so I am allowed to trace my house, and my
> > neighbour's, and my workplace, and the bakery I visit every morning,
> > and
> > my birthplace, and my parent's house...?
>
> I think you remember it accura
On 5 Aug 2008, at 14:28, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
> dont avoid looking at them. But add names according to your own
> knowledge.
Let's say I know reasonably well in my own mind most of the streets in
the centre of the town where I live. Let's also say there's a
particular street I want to n
Hi,
Laurence Penney wrote:
[stuff about contaminated state of mind prohibiting data entry to OSM]
It is conceivable that someone moves into a new town, gets everywhere by
legally using Google maps, never really looking at a street sign (at
least not before knowing exactly what will be on there
Hello,
Now that the highway=path has been moved to the "official" features
page, is there any more or less agreed way of tagging marked paths? I
see a lot of different proposal pages on this, but no real consensus. I
myself have been tagging my local area using trailblazed=yes, but it
would be
Hi,
Igor Brejc wrote:
> Do we have any lawyers in the OSM community to help clear this?
It is not an issue that can be cleared by lawyers since they have wildly
different opinions themselves. For example, one court in Germany has
said that the person operating the shutter on an aerial imagery c
Brejc wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Now that the highway=path has been moved to the "official" features
> page, is there any more or less agreed way of tagging marked paths? I
> see a lot of different proposal pages on this, but no real consensus. I
> myself have been tagging my local area using trailbl
Igor Brejc wrote:
> Now that the highway=path has been moved to the "official" features
> page, is there any more or less agreed way of tagging marked paths? I
> see a lot of different proposal pages on this, but no real consensus. I
> myself have been tagging my local area using trailblazed=ye
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 6:47 PM, Iván Sánchez Ortega
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> The issue here is that the road sign is not covered by any copyrights, but
> the
> G StreetView image *is*.
Here are a number of street signs that are likely to be covered by
copyright:
http://www.fotosearch.com/STK0
Hi,
Tom Hughes wrote:
> It was "approved" on the basis of a tiny vote on the wiki and I would
> say there is zero chance of most people switching from the tags that
> have been in use for several years to some new scheme that, as I
> understand it, requires about five tags for each path.
> Gi
Tom Hughes wrote:
> It was "approved" on the basis of a tiny vote on the wiki and I would
Uh, what? 34 votes is one of the largest votes of any proposed/approved
feature on the wiki.
> say there is zero chance of most people switching from the tags that
> have been in use for several years to
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Tom Hughes wrote:
>> It was "approved" on the basis of a tiny vote on the wiki and I would
>> say there is zero chance of most people switching from the tags that
>> have been in use for several years to some new scheme that, as I
>> understand it, requires about f
Alex Mauer wrote:
> Brejc wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Now that the highway=path has been moved to the "official" features
>> page, is there any more or less agreed way of tagging marked paths? I
>> see a lot of different proposal pages on this, but no real consensus. I
>> myself have been taggi
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I've never been a friend of that voting business but it seems to get
> more absurd every day. Is it perhaps time now to have a vote on
> abolishing votes altogehter - or should we continue to let people vote
> on whatever they like and ignore the results?
Do you have a be
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 15:20 -0500, Alex Mauer wrote:
> Tom Hughes wrote:
>
> > It was "approved" on the basis of a tiny vote on the wiki and I would
>
> Uh, what? 34 votes is one of the largest votes of any proposed/approved
> feature on the wiki.
>
> > say there is zero chance of most people
Igor Brejc wrote:
> Which tag value would I use for a path through the forest that is
> clearly visible, but with no markings? There are a lot of those in Slovenia.
It's probably not necessary to tag it specially at all as I expect this
is the default, but it looks like trail_visibility=excellent
Hi all,
A while ago I was looking for a way to integrate the current events from
the wiki into my calendar application. In the end I scratched my itch by
writing a quick screen-scraping script to generate an iCal feed[1].
Fast forward to the present day and the amount of activity in OSM has
incre
Jon Burgess wrote:
> The only thing I see an issue with is introducing the specific
> 'highway=path' tag. I see this as an unnecessary complication.
I guess it's a matter of perspective. I see it as a simplification:
instead of having three categories for one physical feature (and still
needing
Ok, let's add that the lifespan of the contamination is that of short
term memory.
- L
On 5 Aug 2008, at 19:14, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Laurence Penney wrote:
> [stuff about contaminated state of mind prohibiting data entry to OSM]
>
> It is conceivable that someone moves into a new tow
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jon Burgess wrote:
>
>> The only thing I see an issue with is introducing the specific
>> 'highway=path' tag. I see this as an unnecessary complication.
>
> I guess it's a matter of perspective. I see it as a simplification:
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:40 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> I've never been a friend of that voting business but it seems to get
>> more absurd every day. Is it perhaps time now to have a vote on
>> abolishing votes altogehter - or should we continue to let peopl
Dave Stubbs wrote:
> Gotcha. Excepth that, assuming you /can/ walk on it, that's what the
> rest of us have been using highway=footway for since the dawn of time
> (well, dawn of map features maybe. well, last couple of years at
> least).
>
> If it happened to have another purpose (ie: bikes or ho
> It is conceivable that someone moves into a new town, gets everywhere by
> legally using Google maps, never really looking at a street sign (at
> least not before knowing exactly what will be on there from his Google
> map), and after a year or so knowing most of the place by hard.
> According t
we could mark all the streets in the world with our own names
- me
***
> WARNING: This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain legally
> privileged, confidential or private information and may be protected by
> copyright.
Andy Allan wrote:
> highway tag with more than 100 instances. You can see that the
> highway=footway/cycleway/bridleway/pedestrian totals 509,920 instances
> (path has a respectible, but tiny by comparision, 2165). And everyone
Meh, bridleway/cycleway/footway have been around for at least 2 years,
2008/8/6 Ben Laenen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Tuesday 05 August 2008, Karl Newman wrote:
>> Sounds like you're looking for this:
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Segmented_
>>Tag
>
> Segmented tags doesn't solve data duplication for dual carriage ways, or
> a set of roa
58 matches
Mail list logo
