Re: [OSM-talk] source=(survey, yahoo, gps...)

Shaun McDonald wrote: > I'm not going to waste my time updating a source tag on every > node, way or relation that I touch. For ways, in Potlatch, just press B (short for "Background tag") and it'll add the source tag corresponding to the currently selected background; source=Yahoo, source=NPE,

Re: [OSM-talk] Vandalism/user error?

On 09/09/2009 00:10, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > David Earl wrote: >> Richard - why do we still need this mode now you can save in >> Potlatch and groups of changes fit much better with changesets >> anyway? > > Lots of people still prefer it. I've not seen any evidence of people > mistakenly sel

Re: [OSM-talk] Vandalism/user error?

On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, David Earl wrote: > On 09/09/2009 00:10, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > > David Earl wrote: > >> Richard - why do we still need this mode now you can save in > >> Potlatch and groups of changes fit much better with changesets > >> anyway? > > > > Lots of people still prefer it. I've

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

We are diverting away from the original question. Is it OK to use Google Streetview data to check/confirm the data we have? Clearly its not OK to use the images to gather information for use in OSM due to derived data part of the copyright. Jack Stringer ___

Re: [OSM-talk] Vandalism/user error?

David Earl wrote: > I had to revert changes for someone this week who specifically said to > me that's what had happened - he didn't realize he was editing live > data. People don't read stuff in front of them. Well, you can't completely idiot-proof these things, and it's a great shame to incon

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On Wednesday 09 Sep 2009 3:21:02 pm Jack Stringer wrote: > We are diverting away from the original question. > > Is it OK to use Google Streetview data to check/confirm the data we have? no - for all the reasons already mentioned. It is not ok to use it for anything whatsoever to do with OSM. --

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

Anthony wrote: > Eh, I'd take on Google pro se (or with the help of free EFF lawyers or > the like) over the issue of the ToS, and based on US law I'm pretty sure > I'd win. However, I'm aware that other users of OSM don't have the > benefit US-jurisdictional copyright law with respect to factual

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 8:33 PM, Jonathan Bennett wrote: > > There's a difference between using one fact from a newspaper article, > and systematically extracting data from a database to reuse in another > database. Is there a difference between 1) using one fact from a newspaper article to use in

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On 09/09/09 11:46, Roy Wallace wrote: > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 8:33 PM, Jonathan > Bennett wrote: >> >> There's a difference between using one fact from a newspaper article, >> and systematically extracting data from a database to reuse in another >> database. > > Is there a difference between > 1

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote: > no - for all the reasons already mentioned. It is not ok to use it for > anything whatsoever to do with OSM. First, all I have seen here are just opinions. Second, copyright laws and definition of "derivative work" depends on the country

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Tom Hughes wrote: > Because (in the EU) Database Right kicks in and prohibits "substantial > extraction". > > Tom If someone starts to "copy" the photos themselves, yes you are right. But here, we speak about reading a street sign on a picture, not copying the pict

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On 09/09/09 11:55, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 09/09/09 11:46, Roy Wallace wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 8:33 PM, Jonathan >> Bennett wrote: >>> >>> There's a difference between using one fact from a newspaper article, >>> and systematically extracting data from a database to reuse in another >>> d

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On 09/09/09 12:07, Pieren wrote: > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Tom Hughes wrote: > >> Because (in the EU) Database Right kicks in and prohibits "substantial >> extraction". > > If someone starts to "copy" the photos themselves, yes you are right. > But here, we speak about reading a street s

[OSM-talk] wikipedia:fr edits

copied from rss feed for diary entries for attention of list Looks like there's been a lot of wikipedia:fr based edits from http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/paddiloo/edits -- is this now ok? [Don't have access to mailing list atm] ___ talk mailing li

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

Pieren wrote: > First, all I have seen here are just opinions. > [...] > There are some questions here : is the content of a photo > copyrighted like the photo itself ? May I humbly refer people to http://www.systemed.net/blog/?p=100 which deals principally with aerial photography, not Street

Re: [OSM-talk] wikipedia:fr edits

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 1:21 PM, Liz wrote: > copied from rss feed for diary entries > for attention of list > > > Looks like there's been a lot of wikipedia:fr based edits from > http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/paddiloo/edits -- is this now ok? > [Don't have access to mailing list atm] > This pe

Re: [OSM-talk] wikipedia:fr edits

2009/9/9 Pieren : > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 1:21 PM, Liz wrote: >> copied from rss feed for diary entries >> for attention of list >> >> >> Looks like there's been a lot of wikipedia:fr based edits from >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/paddiloo/edits -- is this now ok? >> [Don't have access to m

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 1:14 PM, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 09/09/09 11:55, Tom Hughes wrote: >> On 09/09/09 11:46, Roy Wallace wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 8:33 PM, Jonathan >>> Bennett   wrote: There's a difference between using one fact from a newspaper article, and systematically

Re: [OSM-talk] wikipedia:fr edits

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Thomas Wood wrote: > In that case, the coordinates should surely not be in wikipedia either? Is "commercial reuse" allowed on wikipedia licence? I don't know and I'm not a wikipedia contributor. I just asked them where they found the coordinates and I saw that the

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

2009/9/9 Pieren > > > The example of a newspaper is a bad example. You cannot copy a text > writen by somebody else. This is because it is his own creation. If > you write yourself an article, It is allowed to mention some parts of > an other article, small extracts are allowed as long as they ar

Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation

On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 01:18:33PM +0100, Brian Quinion wrote: > On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Valent > Turkovic wrote: > > Hi, I'm using address interpolation for the first time so I would like to > > ask if somebody can check if I did it ok or if there are some errors: > > > > http://www.openst

Re: [OSM-talk] Seoul

2009/9/9 Andrew Errington > > > I don't disagree. However, the convention has been established, and it's > not entirely a bad thing. It means I can contribute to the map (in > English) and I can read the map at the OSM site (because Mapnik renders > the name=* tag, not a language-specific tag).

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

Obligatory IANAL disclaimer. Let's be honest, we would like to avoid it as much as possible not because copyright law is in fact in our side (*checking* facts with other, commercial sources IS NOT copying and IS NOT covered by copyright law, period). We want to avoid just because we *think* (s

Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation

>> I'd suggest moving all the following tags >> >> addr:city = Osijek >> addr:country = 385 >> addr:postcode = 31000 >> addr:street = Starigradska >> >> to the way (rather than the individual nodes). And I'd suggest that >> addr:country = 385 is unlikely to be understood. > > No! Please don't d

Re: [OSM-talk] Seoul

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 1:17 AM, Andrew Errington < a.erring...@lancaster.ac.uk> wrote: > Actually, the convention is that objects should be tagged with four names. > The 'name=*' tag is Hangul followed by English in brackets. This is the > most important, as it is the 'fallback' tag for renderin

Re: [OSM-talk] Seoul

2009/9/9 Gustav Foseid > How do we deal with all other languages than English that does not use > Hangul characters? Do we need to tag all these place names with all language > codes? name=* should contain the native language value name:en=* should contain the English translation name:isocode s

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

2009/9/9 Pieren : > If someone starts to "copy" the photos themselves, yes you are right. > But here, we speak about reading a street sign on a picture, not > copying the picture. Legal arguments aside, there is very few street signs I've seen on google street view that I can read anyway, most of

Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation

> No! Please don't do that. That makes it harder to use. Then > there are two > possible ways, where data can be. Please use only > addr:interpolation on > the way and everything else on the nodes. Which seems to be the opposite of what the section on the Karlsruhe interpolation wiki section says

Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation

>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/489432179 >> >> I'd suggest moving all the following tags >> >> addr:city = Osijek >> addr:country = 385 >> addr:postcode = 31000 >> addr:street = Starigradska > No! Please don't do that. That makes it harder to use. Then there are two > possible ways, w

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

2009/9/9 Ian Dees : > Back in March, Ed Parsons pointed out [0] that since StreetView images are > Google-owned, if someone asked nicely-enough we could get them to give us a > license to explicitly map based on the streetview images (similar to the > explicit license we have with Yahoo). I'm not

[OSM-talk] How to map cemetery ?

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/graveyard This page is old/unfinished and very ambiguous. Can somebody make clear how to tag cemeteries, and how to name them correctly? If I have polygon do I add name= to polygon or do I add a point in the middle of cemetery with amenity=ceme

Re: [OSM-talk] How to map cemetery ?

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Valent Turkovic wrote: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/graveyard > > This page is old/unfinished and very ambiguous. Can somebody make > clear how to tag cemeteries, and how to name them correctly? > > If I have polygon do I add name= to polyg

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Monopoly City Streets

OK, so it seems that they're using GMaps as the background, and OSM as the actual street data provider. See: http://chippy2005.googlepages.com/MonopolyCityStreets_1252505633167.png http://chippy2005.googlepages.com/MapCompareGeofabrikTools_12525056572.png Still deserves some more investigation..

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

Noticed in the archives[1] that my mail was chopped off, so resending with some different characters around Ed's email: [1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-September/041753.html 2009/9/9 Dan Karran : > 2009/9/9 Ian Dees : > >> Back in March, Ed Parsons pointed out [0] that sinc

Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation

Ed Loach wrote: >> possible ways, where data can be. Please use only >> addr:interpolation on >> the way and everything else on the nodes. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/House_numbers/Karlsruhe_Schema#Using_interpolation_to_mark_many_houses_along_a_way > (shortened to ht

Re: [OSM-talk] wikipedia:fr edits

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 1:21 PM, Liz wrote: > copied from rss feed for diary entries > for attention of list > > > Looks like there's been a lot of wikipedia:fr based edits from > http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/paddiloo/edits -- is this now ok? > [Don't have access to mailing list atm] > After a

Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation

On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 02:51:36PM +0100, Ed Loach wrote: > > No! Please don't do that. That makes it harder to use. Then > > there are two > > possible ways, where data can be. Please use only > > addr:interpolation on > > the way and everything else on the nodes. > > Which seems to be the oppos

Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation

On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 02:57:52PM +0100, Brian Quinion wrote: > >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/489432179 > >> > >> I'd suggest moving all the following tags > >> > >> addr:city = Osijek > >> addr:country = 385 > >> addr:postcode = 31000 > >> addr:street = Starigradska > > > No! Pleas

Re: [OSM-talk] wikipedia:fr edits

Pieren gmail.com> writes: >>Looks like there's been a lot of wikipedia:fr based edits from >>http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/paddiloo/edits -- is this now ok? >After analysis, it seems that a bot is making a massive import of >copyrighted data from the IGN in France. I sent a mail to >data os

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Data Used in Upcoming Monopoly Game

Ian Dees gmail.com> writes: >Check this out: http://blog.monopolycitystreets.com/2009/09/almost-there.html Hmph, all the news reporting has been 'Google Maps' this and 'Google' that... I hadn't seen any article mentioning OSM. Then again, from this screenshot:

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

Perhaps the OSM database should be moved out of the EU to a location that doesn't suffer from a Database Rights law.Extracting from no-EU data source by people not in the EU would then be okay for sure. Extending the Database Rights law to extracting turn restrictions from Streetview is a str

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Monopoly City Streets

Iván Sánchez Ortega writes: >>>By the sound of that, it seems that they're joining up the GMaps data and >>>the OSM data, and filtering out the street names in common. >I think that their DB is a derivative work of the OSM data and that >share-alike should apply. Even if that is true, they are

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Data Used in Upcoming Monopoly Game

El Miércoles, 9 de Septiembre de 2009, Ed Avis escribió: > Perhaps they are using OSM for data, dividing up the world into streets > that players can buy and sell, but rendering the Google Maps tiles > underneath. That seems a bit lame. They are. More info at legal@ and IRC. -- -

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Data Used in Upcoming Monopoly Game

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Ed Avis wrote: > Perhaps they are using OSM for data, dividing up the world into streets > that > players can buy and sell, but rendering the Google Maps tiles underneath. > That seems a bit lame. > I'm playing it right now, and this appears to be exactly the cas

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Data Used in Upcoming Monopoly Game

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Peter Childs wrote: > Oh great so you can buy a street, that does not exist on the map Great! > You can buy a street that does not exist on the Google Maps tiles, yes. > Oh and an unmapped street that is on Google but not on OSM whats the > charge. (Or is i

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Data Used in Upcoming Monopoly Game

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Ed Avis wrote: > Does the osmify bookmarklet > < > http://blog.johnmckerrell.com/2007/12/31/new-version-of-osmify-bookmarklet/ > > > work in the Monopoly game? > No. It appears that they might be using a special instance of the Google Maps API so the classes migh

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Data Used in Upcoming Monopoly Game

2009/9/9 Ian Dees : > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Ed Avis wrote: >> >> Perhaps they are using OSM for data, dividing up the world into streets >> that >> players can buy and sell, but rendering the Google Maps tiles underneath. >> That seems a bit lame. > > I'm playing it right now, and this

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Data Used in Upcoming Monopoly Game

On 9 Sep 2009, at 17:00, Ian Dees wrote: On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Ed Avis wrote: Does the osmify bookmarklet work in the Monopoly game? No. It appears that they might be using a special instance of the

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Data Used in Upcoming Monopoly Game

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Shaun McDonald wrote: > > The game is built using Flash so the osmify bookmarklet won't work as it > needs the javascript api instead. > > The game is built entirely with JavaScript and HTML. Only the top and bottom status bars are done with Flash. The map and its

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

David Muir Sharnoff wrote: > Perhaps the OSM database should be moved out of the EU to a location > that doesn't suffer from a Database Rights law.Extracting from > no-EU data source by people not in the EU would then be okay for sure. Great! Let us know when you've secured the funding for thi

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Data Used in Upcoming Monopoly Game

On 9 Sep 2009, at 17:16, Ian Dees wrote: On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Shaun McDonald > wrote: The game is built using Flash so the osmify bookmarklet won't work as it needs the javascript api instead. The game is built entirely with JavaScript and HTML. Only the top and bottom st

Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation

>> that you can ignore tags on the way just doesn't work. Your advise > Do you have numbers for that? There are, as of last Wednesday: 46899 uses with addr:street in this way I described 209340 uses with addr:street used to link a building outline to a street 2947067 uses with addr:street used t

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Jonathan Bennett wrote: > If the photos are geocoded -- which SV's are -- then you are deriving > data from the whole product, both picture and location. This constitutes > a database. While the law on this may be a grey area, it's not worth our > while becoming the

Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation

Hi, Brian Quinion wrote: > No, duplication is almost always bad (caching may be an exception). > Inconsistent data is the enemy of all good database management *Inconsistent* data is surely not desirable, but *redundant* information may well have its place because it makes it easier to spot err

Re: [OSM-talk] Vandalism/user error?

> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, David Earl wrote: >> On 09/09/2009 00:10, Richard Fairhurst wrote: >> > David Earl wrote: >> >> Richard - why do we still need this mode now you can save in >> >> Potlatch and groups of changes fit much better with changesets >> >> anyway? >> > >> > Lots of people still prefer

[OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - greenhouse_horticulture

This proposal for tagging land covered with greenhouses is now open for voting. Please visit the proposal and cast your vote at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/greenhouse_horticulture Polderrunner ___ talk mailing list talk@opens

Re: [OSM-talk] How to map cemetery ?

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Richard Weait wrote: > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Valent > Turkovic wrote: >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/graveyard >> >> This page is old/unfinished and very ambiguous. Can somebody make >> clear how to tag cemeteries, and how to name

Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation

On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Brian Quinion wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Valent > Turkovic wrote: >> Hi, I'm using address interpolation for the first time so I would like to >> ask if somebody can check if I did it ok or if there are some errors: >> >> http://www.openstreetma

Re: [OSM-talk] How to map cemetery ?

On 09/09/2009 21:43, Valent Turkovic wrote: > Is grave_yard tag used? I don't see it in JOSM. Why is the wiki so > confusing for this simple thing to map. I think the original distinction was that a graveyard is the burial ground around a church, while a cemetery is a separate pice of land set a

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On 09/09/2009 12:07, Pieren wrote: > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Tom Hughes wrote: >> Because (in the EU) Database Right kicks in and prohibits "substantial >> extraction". >> >> Tom > > If someone starts to "copy" the photos themselves, yes you are right. > But here, we speak about reading a

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 10:06:07PM +0100, David Earl wrote: > we are potentially infringing the copyright of the map used to > geolocate it. This applies even to CCbySA photos gelocated on flickr > etc, unless they were located using OSM in the first place, or by > GPS. But there is no way to know

Re: [OSM-talk] How to map cemetery ?

David Earl wrote: > I think the original distinction was that a graveyard is the burial > ground around a church, while a cemetery is a separate pice of land set > aside for burials, not necessarily associated with a church, or a > denomination - in the UK, many of these are operated by local >

Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation

2009/9/9 Jochen Topf : > On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 02:57:52PM +0100, Brian Quinion wrote: >> Putting the tags on the way prevents inconsistency and duplication. > > Duplication is good. It helps with finding errors. Errors that would not be commited if there wasn't duplication in the first place ;)

Re: [OSM-talk] wikipedia:fr edits

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Ed Avis wrote: > That is, unless Wikipedia and the OSM project disagree about the legal status > of the information and whether it can be distributed under CC-BY-SA, in which > case you need to ask the legal-talk mailing list... Wikipedia's policy on deriving coordi

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:39 PM, John Smith wrote: > > Legal arguments aside, there is very few street signs I've seen on > google street view that I can read anyway, most of them seem to be > blurred out, either intentionally, due to motion blur or jpeg like > artifacts. Sure, but this discussion

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Data Used in Upcoming Monopoly Game

It's certianly slow and buggy, I'm guessing that is down to demand. Overall I'd give it a grade C, could do better. But, this has got me thinking... (a very dangerous thing) If this can be done with OSM data, would it be possible to create a Transport Tycoon type game along similar lines? Creat

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Data Used in Upcoming Monopoly Game

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Jennifer Campbell schreef: > If this can be done with OSM data, would it be possible to create a > Transport Tycoon type game along similar lines? Create bus routes and > run trains, boats, trucks along real streets? The only thing that I > doubt

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Data Used in Upcoming Monopoly Game

El Jueves, 10 de Septiembre de 2009, Jennifer Campbell escribió: > It's certianly slow and buggy, I'm guessing that is down to demand. > Overall I'd give it a grade C, could do better. I guess that it's overly unbalanced, given the surplus of players (and money) into the system. Not to talk about

Re: [OSM-talk] Vandalism/user error?

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 5:06 AM, wrote: > > Why not go straight into Edit and Save and then have a button to go to > Edit Live (one click to go there as now)? +1 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 7:28 AM, andrzej zaborowski wrote: > > in this case I agree we should stick to the schema the way it was > originally defined, good or bad, and I normally only use  addr:street > on the nodes. +1 > Another argument for doing that is that the addr:interpolation way is > a t

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

2009/9/10 Roy Wallace : > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:39 PM, John Smith wrote: >> >> Legal arguments aside, there is very few street signs I've seen on >> google street view that I can read anyway, most of them seem to be >> blurred out, either intentionally, due to motion blur or jpeg like >> artifa

Re: [OSM-talk] How to map cemetery ?

On 09/09/2009 22:00, David Earl wrote: > On 09/09/2009 21:43, Valent Turkovic wrote: > >> Is grave_yard tag used? I don't see it in JOSM. Why is the wiki so >> confusing for this simple thing to map. >> > I think the original distinction was that a graveyard is the burial > ground around

Re: [OSM-talk] How to map cemetery ?

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Craig Wallace wrote: > > Shouldn't the fact that they are next to / around a church be obvious > from the church marked on the map? And the cemetery can be tagged with > the operator / religion / denomination as appropriate. +1 > Also, I notice (according to Map F

Re: [OSM-talk] How to map cemetery ?

Craig Wallace schrieb: > On 09/09/2009 22:00, David Earl wrote: >> On 09/09/2009 21:43, Valent Turkovic wrote: >> >>> Is grave_yard tag used? I don't see it in JOSM. Why is the wiki so >>> confusing for this simple thing to map. >>> >> I think the original distinction was that a graveyard

Re: [OSM-talk] source=(survey, yahoo, gps...)

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 2:52 AM, John Smith wrote: > 2009/9/9 Anthony : > > > If the way lines up with the GPS trace, the GPS trace was used as the > source > > of data. If it doesn't, it wasn't (or it has been changed). > > > > Am I missing some reason that's not correct? > > You're assuming only

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 6:06 PM, Roy Wallace wrote: > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:39 PM, John Smith > wrote: > > > > Legal arguments aside, there is very few street signs I've seen on > > google street view that I can read anyway, most of them seem to be > > blurred out, either intentionally, due to

Re: [OSM-talk] How to map cemetery ?

On 10/09/2009 01:21, Ulf Lamping wrote: > Craig Wallace schrieb: > >> Though around here, quite a few of the graveyards next to churches are >> operated by the council, and they are called "placename Cemetery" or >> similar. >> > So what's the question now? > The question is what's th

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 8:48 AM, Peteris Krisjanis wrote: > > Actually, there is some other, more practical arguments why such > checking isn't healthy thing to do. First of all, it's still just > another source, not field check. Second, it is quite interesting what > happens when you *check* that

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

Has anyone set a letter to Google's legal department asking for clarification or permission? -Dave On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Anthony wrote: > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 8:48 AM, Peteris Krisjanis wrote: >> >> Actually, there is some other, more practical arguments why such >> checking isn't hea

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

2009/9/10 Anthony : > If the fact is binary (can turn left/can't turn left), then checking is > equal to copying, right? It seems there is 2 things in play here, 1 deriving information aka copying, 2 and simply a fact that is being stated. It seems to me most copyright questions will tend to err

Re: [OSM-talk] How to map cemetery ?

Craig Wallace schrieb: > On 10/09/2009 01:21, Ulf Lamping wrote: >> Well, it's simply a bad thing to indicate stuff by something that's >> "nearby". What's nearby? 1m/10m/100m/1000m? Is it indicated by a >> place_of_worship, a building=church or xy? >> > But why does it matter whether there is

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 11:00 AM, John Smith wrote: > > If you already know a fact and use street view to confirm it, I can't > see how this can be copying since it's something you already know > about some place, nothing has been derived. Perhaps a lawyer would argue that if you need to/choose t

Re: [OSM-talk] source=(survey, yahoo, gps...)

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Anthony wrote: > > Another possible solution would be if we could mark ways as obsolete or > historical rather than deleting them.  But I checked the wiki and apparently > this was proposed and rejected.  And I kind of see the argument against it. >  I don't know.

Re: [OSM-talk] How to map cemetery ?

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 11:19 AM, Ulf Lamping wrote: > > How would you describe it? Here goes... > If there are 30 graves (often even 100 years old) directly near a church > that's very certainly a grave_yard IMHO. amenity=cemetery cemetery:capacity=30 cemetery:year_span=1800-1900 If it is aff

Re: [OSM-talk] How to map cemetery ?

What landuse would you recommend for a cemetery? It's been said that all land should be covered by some landuse or other. Like putting in Landuse=retail but also listing the individual shops as amenities. So should we put both landuse=cemetery and an amenity=cemetery/graveyard node, or are you s

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

2009/9/10 Roy Wallace : > Richard's contribution was interesting though, and obviously does have > a basis in law (http://www.systemed.net/blog/?p=100). > Just because someone quotes legal cases doesn't mean it's legal advice, I think OSM is to the point that it needs to seek pro-bono legal advice

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 10:21 PM, John Smith wrote: > 2009/9/10 Roy Wallace : > > Richard's contribution was interesting though, and obviously does have > > a basis in law (http://www.systemed.net/blog/?p=100). > > > > Just because someone quotes legal cases doesn't mean it's legal > advice, I thin

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

2009/9/10 Anthony : > I'm not sure what help a lawyer is going to be - they're not going to be > able to guarantee you that much of anything is 100% (or 99.9%) safe in 100% > (or 95%, weighted by user-base) of jurisdictions, especially not for free. >  As Richard says in the comments, "In the UK, a

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 1:07 PM, John Smith wrote: > 2009/9/10 Anthony : >> I'm not sure what help a lawyer is going to be - they're not going to be >> able to guarantee you that much of anything is 100% (or 99.9%) safe in 100% >> (or 95%, weighted by user-base) of jurisdictions, especially not fo

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Street View copyright question

2009/9/10 Roy Wallace : > But being able to say "but lawyer X said we could!" in court will not > make you immune to lawsuits. Nonetheless, legal advice from a lawyer > would be great - John, any ideas on how to get this? It doesn't make you immune, but if you follow the legal advice it reduces t

Re: [OSM-talk] How to map cemetery ?

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Stephen Hope wrote: > 2009/9/10 Roy Wallace : >> >> By the way, I think a cemetery is better described as an amenity, not >> a landuse, as I think it is "a useful and important facility" moreso >> than "an area of land used by people" (from the wiki definitions of