If you look at the history of edits that user in South Africa, there
you will see absolutely the same story:
1) remove the correct data
2) adding bogus data
3) removal of their incorrect data
So I do not think that the problem is that he did not read the message.
2010/7/17 Frederik Ramm :
> Hi,
On 18 July 2010 04:53, Esther Loeliger wrote:
>
> To play the game, please download the installer from
> https://sourceforge.net/projects/team/. It should install without problems
> on Windows XP, Windows Vista and Windows 7 (32-bit and 64-bit).
Ahh windoze.. Sorry I use free software as in Debia
On 18 July 2010 12:10, Ross Scanlon wrote:
> The admin boundaries don't get moved with road/railway realignment and
> therefore without change from the original source we should not be moving
> them. So if they are not connected to railways/roads etc then errors will
> not be introduced.
In t
No, I'm not talking about Andril's talk. There was someone who had
created a small app using Spatialite and a GTK frontend during the
conference.
- Serge
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 09:49:41 +1000
Liz wrote:
> The original Murray River trace was either made by swampwallaby using vmap or
> by a few of us tracing from Landsat.
> The only surveyed points then would have been bridges and bridge piers.
>
> So the admin boundary, which is definitely not the w
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 7:23 PM, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> Someone gave a lightening talk at sotm about using Spatiallite with osm.
>
> Can the speaker please contact me off-list?
I remember that Andrii spoke of several NoSQL DBs, was spatiallite one of them
_
On 18 July 2010 09:49, Liz wrote:
> The original Murray River trace was either made by swampwallaby using vmap or
> by a few of us tracing from Landsat.
> The only surveyed points then would have been bridges and bridge piers.
Ross' problem was that the Murray River is using ABS data, which for
t
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010, Ross Scanlon wrote:
> Have a look at the Murray River, the correct state boundary is the
> southern bank but someone has changed parts of the river to be the admin
> boundary so when the map is drawn from the data the river appears in the
> wrong place. The same happens with
Someone gave a lightening talk at sotm about using Spatiallite with osm.
Can the speaker please contact me off-list?
Thanks,
- Serge
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Dear all
As part of my Master's project at Queen Mary, University of London, I'm
looking for participants to take part in a game centred on wayfinding
challenges in urban audio maps.
The game should take no longer than 20 minutes to complete and there
will be a prize draw with a total of ten
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
> there is no loss of data! It has always been said that the old data will
> remain available under the old license.
If you take somewhere between one third and one quarter of the data for a well
defined area and lock it up from further edits on OSM
Apollinaris Schoell schrieb:
On 17 Jul 2010, at 2:05 , Heiko Jacobs wrote:
I cannot accept a process with loss of data.
If there is a loss of data I will leave OSM.
there is no loss of data! It has always been said that the
old data will remain available under the old license.
This "last-CC-
According to what was announced when the news about the proposed new license
terms came out, any data that originated with someone who doesn't agree with
the new license will be removed from the database, meaning that any subsequent
edits to that data will be removed as well, even if the subsequ
Hi,
80n wrote:
Indeed, we've been suffering from this license-twiddling induced stasis
for far too long now. That's why I've proposed that the LWG/OSMF
achieve a clear and undeniable mandate by September 1st or just drop the
whole thing. We can't afford to let this cancer continue eating awa
Hi,
Michael Barabanov wrote:
A poll could be something like: "Would you find a it acceptable if OSMF
relicensed the whole dataset to ODBL without any data loss".
It should really be "Would you find it acceptable if OSMF relicensed the
whole dataset to ODbL without asking for consent from indi
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
>
> On 17 Jul 2010, at 2:05 , Heiko Jacobs wrote:
>
> >
> > I cannot accept a process with loss of data.
> > If there is a loss of data I will leave OSM.
> >
>
> there is no loss of data! It has always been said that the old data will
> r
On 17 Jul 2010, at 2:05 , Heiko Jacobs wrote:
>
> I cannot accept a process with loss of data.
> If there is a loss of data I will leave OSM.
>
there is no loss of data! It has always been said that the old data will remain
available under the old license.
> The only possibility to avoid los
A poll could be something like: "Would you find a it acceptable if OSMF
relicensed the whole dataset to ODBL without any data loss". If nothing
else, that'd give an idea of how people feel about licensing vs data itself.
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> 80n wrote
> 1. OSMF does change the license without any regard; people who are against
>> ODBL get pissed off and stop contributing (lost for OSM?). No data loss from
>> the database.
>>
>
> 2. OSMF does not do that; contributions of people who are against ODBL are
>> deleted, people who are against ODBL st
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 20:45, Antony Pegg wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> As requested last week, the MapQuest Mapnik style is available on GitHub,
> at:
>
> http://github.com/MapQuest/MapQuest-Mapnik-Style
>
> Its under an MIT license
This is great, it's really nice to see you guys being pro-active in
ope
Hi,
80n wrote:
We have never said to any contributors that their data is protected.
The only stipulation OSM ever made was that contributors had to agree to
license their data in a certain way before they were allowed to upload
it.
If we have really never said nor implied that our contribut
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 7:39 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> John Smith wrote:
>
>> On 17 July 2010 13:07, Michael Barabanov
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Consider two cases:
>>>
>>> 1. Current license does not cover the OSM data (I think that's the OSMF
>>> view). In this case, OSMF can just change t
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 2:39 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> We now know that anybody, at least in most jurisdictions and if he has a
> decent-sized legal budget and has not respect for ethics (i.e. is
> sufficiently evil), can effectively use our data as if it were unprotected.
> In other words, we w
As I know Anthony (one_half_3544) tried to contact this user on July 8
[1]. I tried on July 13
If we look at last activity of the user, we see that it not only adds
a fictitious objects, but also removes the valid data:
July 11:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/5190263
http://www.op
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 2:39 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> For a long time we assumed that the current license did indeed work, and we
> essentially told everyone who signed up that their data was protected.
>
And what does it mean for the data to be "protected"?
It doesn't mean that people who *u
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 14:59:45 +1000
Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 6:25 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote:
> > Whilst it's very usable for regional and remote areas for which there is no
> > data. There is no justification for joining making admin boundaries into
> > roads for metro areas
Hi,
Aleksandr Dezhin wrote:
I also tried to contact this user, but he ignores messages.
Anthony has posted on the 13rd. Today is the 17th. The user has last
been active on the 11th. Is it possible that he ignores messages because
he's away from the computer?
Has anyone actually contacted h
On 17 July 2010 22:04, John Smith wrote:
> On 17 July 2010 21:57, Heiko Jacobs wrote:
>> Did I misunderstood the posting below because of not perfect english?
>
> I was thinking about a different email, however it's the same case but
> has the wrong interpretation as to the scope.
>
The grounds
On 17 July 2010 21:57, Heiko Jacobs wrote:
> Did I misunderstood the posting below because of not perfect english?
I was thinking about a different email, however it's the same case but
has the wrong interpretation as to the scope.
___
talk mailing lis
I also tried to contact this user, but he ignores messages.
Here's another example of vandalism in a totally different region:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/735097523
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/
On 17 July 2010 18:34, Heiko Jacobs wrote:
> I saw anywhere in the deeps of discussion at legal, that also
> the new licence does not protect data in australia ...? Mmmmh ...
No, someone was claiming cc-by licenses we're valid in Australia, as a
reason to change to ODBL, if that is the case why d
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 7:39 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> John Smith wrote:
>
>> On 17 July 2010 13:07, Michael Barabanov
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Consider two cases:
>>>
>>> 1. Current license does not cover the OSM data (I think that's the OSMF
>>> view). In this case, OSMF can just change t
Tobias Knerr schrieb:
Loss of data is the primary concern about the license change for quite a
lot of mappers. Dealing with their worries is worth the delay.
+1
After reading ODbL I would say yes, OSM should change licence,
but after reading the process proposed for changing licence
including a
Michael Barabanov schrieb:
> Consider two cases:
>
> 1. Current license does not cover the OSM data (I think that's the OSMF
> view). In this case, OSMF can just change to ODBL without asking anyone.
> 2. Current license does cover the OSM data. Then there's no need to change.
>
> Where's the is
Hi,
Michael Barabanov wrote:
1. OSMF does change the license without any regard; people who are
against ODBL get pissed off and stop contributing (lost for OSM?). No
data loss from the database.
2. OSMF does not do that; contributions of people who are against ODBL
are deleted, people who ar
Thanks for the explanation. BTW, I think "pirate" is quite an overstatement
in this context. The proposed license is still a free/open license. Plus I
kind of suspect that most contributors care about potential data loss more
than CC license vs ODBL license, but I may be wrong. Still, let me adv
36 matches
Mail list logo
