Nice idea.
http://www.ohgizmo.com/2010/08/04/calculate-estimated-cab-fares-with-bing-maps/
Jim
--
datalude: information security
e: j...@datalude.com
___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
2010/8/5 Mark Van den Borre m...@markvdb.be
* annual maintenance cost: 250€, = 700€ if turnover =6000€ (or
almost zero if we have a capable accountant volunteering)
Zero it is :-)
--
wannes
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
Heiko,
Heiko Jacobs wrote:
Everyone discusses consequenzes of the decision of removing
data from non-accepting people, but it seems, that they all
have forgotten, WHY they have decided to remove data?
Because. as I explained to you yesterday, CC-BY-SA does not allow
redistribution of data
Frederik Ramm schrieb:
Heiko,
Heiko Jacobs wrote:
Everyone discusses consequenzes of the decision of removing
data from non-accepting people, but it seems, that they all
have forgotten, WHY they have decided to remove data?
Because. as I explained to you yesterday, CC-BY-SA does not allow
On 5 August 2010 18:04, Heiko Jacobs heiko.jac...@gmx.de wrote:
I don't want youre private guesses.
I want to have official facts.
Unless someone sues another in court over this issues, you are only
going to get guesses.
What's the problem to do this for the reasons of data loss, too?
The
On 08/05/2010 12:11 PM, John Smith wrote:
On 5 August 2010 21:02, Grant Slateropenstreet...@firefishy.com wrote:
On 4 August 2010 22:25, Lized...@billiau.net wrote:
As you realise, in my jurisdiction, CC-by-SA is a better licence than ODbL, as
it has been well checked and has government use.
On Aug 4, 2010, at 10:30 PM, John Smith wrote:
On 5 August 2010 12:59, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
This is simple straw man crap. 80n invents a deadline, proceeds to piss off
everyone, take all our time and thus slow things down, then declare we're
not meeting the deadline.
On Aug 5, 2010, at 6:43 AM, SteveC wrote:
On Aug 4, 2010, at 10:30 PM, John Smith wrote:
On 5 August 2010 12:59, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
This is simple straw man crap. 80n invents a deadline, proceeds to piss off
everyone, take all our time and thus slow things down, then
Liz wrote:
As you realise, in my jurisdiction, CC-by-SA is a better licence than
ODbL,
as it has been well checked and has government use.
No. It isn't that simple.
Two recent, very high-profile judgements in Australia both repudiate the
notion that copyright can protect collections of
On 5 August 2010 22:33, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
The conversation we had recently on this list indicated that three years
from after the next Australian election would be the minimum timescale.
That's assuming they actually have a desire or reason to change...
Otherwise it could take
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Two recent, very high-profile judgements in Australia both repudiate the
notion that copyright can protect collections of unoriginal facts. These are
IceTV vs Nine Network (last year) and Telstra vs Phone Directories
On 5 August 2010 23:12, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
I am, however, sure that any legal case involving infringement of OSM data
in Australia would be judged following IceTV vs Nine Network and Telstra vs
Phone Directories, rather than following any licence which the legislature
On 5 August 2010 22:43, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
I agree, FUD isn't fun. But it's you and a couple of others having a
significant time sink effect on the people trying to move it forward.
I'm not the one that came up with ambiguous wording for the new CTs
that makes a lot of the
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 08/05/2010 02:49 PM, Anthony wrote:
I don't see that's different from any other drawing,
in digital form.
It depends how creative/original it is.
No it doesn't. It depends whether or not it crosses the threshold of
On 08/05/2010 02:37 PM, Anthony wrote:
The idea
that copyright does not cover maps is very strange when you consider
that.
Nobody has said that it doesn't.
The point is that Geodata is not a visual work of cartography.
- Rob.
___
legal-talk
On 08/05/2010 03:07 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Rob Myersr...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 08/05/2010 02:49 PM, Anthony wrote:
I don't see that's different from any other drawing,
in digital form.
It depends how creative/original it is.
No it doesn't. It depends whether
On 08/05/2010 03:20 PM, Anthony wrote:
Still waiting for that definition of geodata.
It's a contraction of geographical data.
Just because the map is
in digitized vector format doesn't mean it's not a digital version of
a visual work of cartography.
The fixed form is different. The fact
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 08/05/2010 03:20 PM, Anthony wrote:
Still waiting for that definition of geodata.
It's a contraction of geographical data.
I didn't ask for an expanded form, I asked for a definition. If you'd
like to be tricky, you can
- Original Message -
From: John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
To: Licensing and other legal discussions. legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2010 9:25 AM
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data
[snip]
The reason for the data loss is as Frederik
On 6 August 2010 01:01, David Groom revi...@pacific-rim.net wrote:
Now John Smith in his statement above says almost nothing except CC0 and PD
data is compatible with the new contributor terms. Lets take CC0 data,
there is still a rights holder of the data, who has released the data under
CC0.
David Groom wrote:
personally I'm still waiting for a reply to the question I asked on
this list on 20 July entitled Query over Contributor Terms.
Just as a reminder, the address of the Licensing Working Group is not
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org . :)
If you have a 'blocker'-type issue and
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 11:08 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6 August 2010 01:02, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Call it mapping for the renderer if you want. Call it a violation
of the rules of OSM. But that's a copyrightable work.
So would any use of the smoothness
On 08/05/2010 03:50 PM, Anthony wrote:
I say such a definition is not possible to create.
Then why are you asking for one?
It is trivial to define geodata as geographical data in database form. A
rendered map isn't geodata because it isn't in database form.
The fixed form is different.
On 08/05/2010 04:17 PM, Anthony wrote:
Bottom line is it doesn't matter. Even if I broke the rules of OSM
while creating it, I'm still entitled to the copyright on my work.
If you are entitled to copyright. The point of the breaking the rules
is that the creativity/originality that breaking
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 08/05/2010 05:09 PM, Anthony wrote:
And OSM is more than just geographical data. A way isn't geographical
data.
A way is geographical data. Or possibly geographical metadata. ;-)
I don't think so. Ways contain
The test for copyrightability is some amount of creativity. Case law
suggests that this can be very minimal. Rather than looking for what is
factual and thus not copyrightable, let's look for what is.
There are many things that meet the almost trivial threshold that legally
constitutes
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 08/05/2010 08:20 PM, Anthony wrote:
I don't think so. Ways contain geographical data, but they're more
than *just* geographical data.
I don't know what else
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Jamie Smith jamiekrsm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 08/05/2010 08:20 PM, Anthony wrote:
I don't think so. Ways contain geographical data,
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:08 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
They're vector graphics.
They are vectors, but they sure aren't graphics. Not until they get
rendered.
Is an svg file not graphics until it gets rendered?
Rendered != rasterised. The vector data has no natural visual form.
They're vector graphics.
They are vectors, but they sure aren't graphics. Not until they get rendered.
Is an svg file not graphics until it gets rendered?
Rendered != rasterised. The vector data has no natural visual form.
This is supposed to be a mailing list for legal discussions
+1
On Aug 5, 2010, at 3:43 PM, Lars Aronsson wrote:
They're vector graphics.
They are vectors, but they sure aren't graphics. Not until they get
rendered.
Is an svg file not graphics until it gets rendered?
Rendered != rasterised. The vector data has no natural visual form.
This is
On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 07:42:35PM -0400, Richard Weait wrote:
The presumption is that contributors who joined under ccbysa only,
have the right to choose whether to proceed under ODbL or not. Do you
suggest that they should not have a choice?
Not arguing against people having a choice, but I
On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 04:17:13PM +0100, Emilie Laffray wrote:
Except that in many jurisdictions, true PD doesn't exist like in France,
where you cannot remove the moral right of someone even if you sold your
rights.
For what it’s worth, you can’t actually remove moral rights in the UK
On 6 August 2010 06:48, Jamie Smith jamiekrsm...@gmail.com wrote:
They are vectors, but they sure aren't graphics. Not until they get rendered.
So a SVG file isn't copyrightable, until it is rendered?
___
legal-talk mailing list
Ben,
Ben Last wrote:
Actually, you can message them, since they are us (NearMap). Which
is my point; the edits come from us, and we're the ones taking on the
necessary responsibility. This is us, as a company aiming to support
OSM, trying to remove barriers from contributions; that's going to
On 5 August 2010 14:44, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
You're trying to remove two barriers at the same time, both quite
unrelated:
1. The barrier of users having to sign up to OSM;
2. The barrier of a (supposedly) complicated editing process.
An interesting take on it :) But I
On 5 August 2010 16:44, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
On the other hand, doing 1 in the above, is relatively cheap; we could do
that ourselves at any time by, say, allowing users to log in to OSM with any
OpenID credentials (just like we do on help.openstreetmap.org). I guess we
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote:
Actually... I'm not sure you would :) My reasoning is thus; OSM members are
interested in mapping, and relish the power of JOSM or Potlatch (I do
myself). You don't want a simpler editor, you want one that helps you do
OSM
Frederik Ramm wrote:
You're trying to remove two barriers at the same time, both quite
unrelated:
1. The barrier of users having to sign up to OSM;
2. The barrier of a (supposedly) complicated editing process.
No, they are not really unrelated. If 1 is prerequisite of 2 (which it is)
On 08/05/2010 09:25 AM, John Smith wrote:
You essentially have 2 camps here, the pragmatists who think anything
but minor data loss is unacceptable, and you have the idealists who
think even if we loose a most of data people will just put new freer
data back in and we'll be able to then license
Ben if I read this right then you're hiding the users from OSM and we'll see a
stream of edits from NearMap which are actually from multiple users. This is
why CM/matt/others built the OAuth code so that mapzen etc didn't do that,
because it's horrific.
The reason is pretty simple - the first
On 5 August 2010 11:27, Erik Johansson e...@kth.se wrote:
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote:
Actually... I'm not sure you would :) My reasoning is thus; OSM members are
interested in mapping, and relish the power of JOSM or Potlatch (I do
myself). You don't
On 5 August 2010 14:19, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
What makes you think that contractual element will offer any
protection in Australia? Has an Australian court case upheld the
enforcement of contractual restriction on people who didn't even know
the contract existed?
And who told you
It seems to me we have two sides trying to reach the same end point.
Ben and NearMap want to make it easy for people to use and contribute to OSM.
Steve and Frederik want to ensure for technical and legal reasons that
the changes from NearMap users doesn't cause problems in the OSM
database.
It
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:23 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 August 2010 22:44, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
Oh and BTW this exact dragging on is why I suggested we bound the problem by
signing up new users - so the problem doesn't grow every day with more and
more
On 5 August 2010 12:44, Kai Krueger kakrue...@gmail.com wrote:
Frederik Ramm wrote:
One signup page, one E-Mail
confirmation, and then click ok for the OAuth page. How often does the
modern Internet user do that every day?
Exactly that is the problem! I have to sign-up to far too many
On 05/08/10 14:23, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
Ben, why not look at the Rails code and offer an OpenID authentication
mechanism. I can't speak for the administrators, but it seems like if
some simple solution could be created that solves this ongoing issue
with OpenID, that it would solve your
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com wrote:
trollHum, I think that quite a few things on Wikipedia can be considered
creative in the first place allowing for copyrights to kick in. /troll
Hum, in Wikipedia, it is not the facts that is protected but the
On 5 August 2010 23:27, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:
Err actually, please don't start OpenID support from scratch as we already
have a branch with more or less complete OpenID support!
Is that OpenID support from other sites, like Nearmap, or is that
OpenID support from OSM?
Anthony wrote:
And who told you that OSM is a collection of unoriginal facts?
I did, last time I did some mapping. I faithfully recorded where the paths,
gates and stiles were, rather than pulling some fictitious locations out of
my ass.
I realise that you've been far too busy trolling the
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com
wrote:
trollHum, I think that quite a few things on Wikipedia can be considered
creative in the first place allowing for copyrights to kick in. /troll
Hum, in
On 05/08/10 14:33, John Smith wrote:
On 5 August 2010 23:27, Tom Hughest...@compton.nu wrote:
Err actually, please don't start OpenID support from scratch as we already
have a branch with more or less complete OpenID support!
Is that OpenID support from other sites, like Nearmap, or is that
On Aug 5, 2010, at 7:13 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:25 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
You essentially have 2 camps here, the pragmatists who think anything
but minor data loss is unacceptable, and you have the idealists who
think even if we loose a most of
On Aug 5, 2010, at 7:22 AM, John Smith wrote:
On 5 August 2010 22:43, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
I agree, FUD isn't fun. But it's you and a couple of others having a
significant time sink effect on the people trying to move it forward.
I'm not the one that came up with ambiguous
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:36 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Anthony wrote:
And who told you that OSM is a collection of unoriginal facts?
I did, last time I did some mapping. I faithfully recorded where the paths,
gates and stiles were, rather than pulling some fictitious
On Aug 5, 2010, at 7:23 AM, John Smith wrote:
On 5 August 2010 22:44, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
Oh and BTW this exact dragging on is why I suggested we bound the problem by
signing up new users - so the problem doesn't grow every day with more and
more people.
But that has it's
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
I've pretty much stopped uploading my maps to OSM precisely because of
this switch to ODbL.
Basically, I don't trust you to delete all of my work and all of the
derivatives based on it, when you switch.
On Aug 5, 2010, at 7:36 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Anthony wrote:
And who told you that OSM is a collection of unoriginal facts?
I did, last time I did some mapping. I faithfully recorded where the paths,
gates and stiles were, rather than pulling some fictitious locations out of
my
Hi,
Anthony wrote:
Which is to say, sure, it *contains* a collection of unoriginal facts, but it
expresses
those facts in a unique way.
Hey Google, you can have our unoriginal facts but please don't copy the
Osmarender map style, or the way we write our XML. Thanks.
Bye
Frederik
On 5 August 2010 23:34, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:
On 05/08/10 14:33, John Smith wrote:
On 5 August 2010 23:27, Tom Hughest...@compton.nu wrote:
Err actually, please don't start OpenID support from scratch as we
already
have a branch with more or less complete OpenID support!
Is
On 05/08/10 14:37, Anthony wrote:
By the way, if you know the history of copyright, you'll know that
maps were one of the first two types of works which were protected.
When copyright was invented, it protected books and maps. The idea
that copyright does not cover maps is very strange when
On 5 August 2010 23:42, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hey Google, you can have our unoriginal facts but please don't copy the
Osmarender map style, or the way we write our XML. Thanks.
Mapping isn't about recording pure fact, otherwise we'd simply convert
GPX data to map data
On 05/08/10 14:42, John Smith wrote:
On 5 August 2010 23:34, Tom Hughest...@compton.nu wrote:
On 05/08/10 14:33, John Smith wrote:
On 5 August 2010 23:27, Tom Hughest...@compton.nu wrote:
Err actually, please don't start OpenID support from scratch as we
already
have a branch with more
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:
On 05/08/10 14:37, Anthony wrote:
By the way, if you know the history of copyright, you'll know that
maps were one of the first two types of works which were protected.
When copyright was invented, it protected books and maps.
On 5 August 2010 23:44, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:
If the OpenID provider supplies sufficient data (basically an email address
and nickname) then they need do little more than click OK to accept the
details and then accept the terms.
That would probably satisfy Nearmap and others trying
JohnSmitty wrote:
Will they still need to register with OSM?
Have a look at the link to the source code I posted earlier (I know you are
a coder, so I can send you that way...).
You can also have a look at http://openid.dev.openstreetmap.org/ although
that is by now outdated, has it hasn't
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 1:42 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
Ben if I read this right then you're hiding the users from OSM and we'll see
a stream of edits from NearMap which are actually from multiple users. This
is why CM/matt/others built the OAuth code so that mapzen etc didn't do
On 05/08/10 14:50, Anthony chuntered on:
Still waiting for that definition of geodata.
It's a contraction of geographical data.
I didn't ask for an expanded form, I asked for a definition.
You are aware that there are aspects to life that aren't connected to
copyright? Like the definition
Hi,
On 5 August 2010 17:09, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:
Let's imagine nearmap have been running their new editor and
'cloaking' all their users under the one account for a couple of
years, and that their editor is great and everyone wants to use it.
* I want to run a mapping
Bernhard,
The * is a wild card for the light number.
The Render Hint has one additional parameter, the suggested radius of the
sector arc that will appear on the chart.
All the previous items are to create the annotation.
You are correct about the limited range of seamarks available. As I said,
On 05/08/2010 14:44, Tom Hughes wrote:
If the OpenID provider supplies sufficient data (basically an email
address and nickname) then they need do little more than click OK to
accept the details and then accept the terms.
Are you going to take the email address on trust? It is really very easy
On 05/08/10 20:35, David Earl wrote:
Are you going to take the email address on trust? It is really very easy
to set up an OpenID provider which supplies any old email address on
request. (There are some I think you can trust in principle - we know
for example that Google and Yahoo provide
On 08/05/2010 08:20 PM, Anthony wrote:
I don't think so. Ways contain geographical data, but they're more
than *just* geographical data.
I don't know what else they are.
The fact that the form is fixed on the hard drive is less important than
that it's fixed as a database or as an image
Ma edastaks selle küsimuse laiemale kogukonnale: on kellelgi võimalus
minna sel ajal Wikipedia-koleegidele Valgamaal külla ja rääkida
OpenStreetMap-ist? Samal ajal peaksin ise Pärnu mapping party-l (ja
sellega seotud koolitusseminaril) olema, muidu oleksin ise kindlasti
käsi. Kui on, siis andke
On 5 August 2010 22:26, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
Francis
Indeed. Let's start getting specific. The threshold in the US is very low
- which incidentally is where this you can't copyright facts stuff
originated.
I may have missed that part of the discussion. If you mean that the US
is
Foi vc que subiu uma imagen chamada cbers-2b-hrc?
Tentei acessar ela mais ficou ampulheta com Loading map data
indefinidamente...
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 7:00 AM, vitor vitor.geo...@gmail.com wrote:
Uma possível opção para colocarmos as imagens do CBERS.
Vitor
-- Forwarded message
Hallo,
ich wollte mich mal mit Osmosis befassen.
Nachdem ich mir die aktuelle Version
(http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~bretth/osmosis-build/osmosis-latest.zip)
geholt habe, musste ich feststellen, das eine osmosis.jar nicht enthalten
ist.
Was habe ich falsch gemacht?
Gruß
Jacques
Hallo,
Jacques Nietsch wrote:
Nachdem ich mir die aktuelle Version
(http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~bretth/osmosis-build/osmosis-latest.zip)
geholt habe, musste ich feststellen, das eine osmosis.jar nicht
enthalten ist.
Stimmt.
Was habe ich falsch gemacht?
Nichts. Seit 0.36 gibt es keine
Am 5. August 2010 11:54 schrieb Jacques Nietsch jacques.niet...@gmx.de:
Nachdem ich mir die aktuelle Version
(http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~bretth/osmosis-build/osmosis-latest.zip)
geholt habe, musste ich feststellen, das eine osmosis.jar nicht enthalten
ist.
Du musst die osmosi (Linux) oder
Am 05.08.2010 11:54, schrieb Jacques Nietsch:
Hallo,
ich wollte mich mal mit Osmosis befassen.
Nachdem ich mir die aktuelle Version
(http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~bretth/osmosis-build/osmosis-latest.zip)
geholt habe, musste ich feststellen, das eine osmosis.jar nicht
enthalten ist.
Was habe
Hallo,
Am 05.08.2010, 12:18 Uhr, schrieb Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org:
Hallo,
Jacques Nietsch wrote:
Nachdem ich mir die aktuelle Version
(http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~bretth/osmosis-build/osmosis-latest.zip)
geholt habe, musste ich feststellen, das eine osmosis.jar nicht
enthalten
Da ja gerade nach osmosis gefragt wurde:
mit der Option --used_node bekomme ich zu abgefragten ways die
zugehörigen Knoten mitgeliefert.
Was muss ich denn angeben, wenn ich Relationen samt Wegen und deren
Knoten haben möchte?
Eine Option --used_ways scheint es ja nicht zu geben.
Gruß,
Kann ich Dir nicht sagen - aber eine Anfrage auf der osmosis-dev mailing
list würde Dir wahrscheinlich mehr Aufschluß bringen.
bye
Nop
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Noch-ne-Frage-zu-osmosis-tp5376126p5376225.html
Sent from the Germany mailing
Hallo,
André Joost wrote:
Was muss ich denn angeben, wenn ich Relationen samt Wegen und deren
Knoten haben möchte?
Es gibt ja gar keine Filtermoeglichkeit fuer Relationen (--relation-key
oder --relation-key-value), insofern ergibt auch ein gib mir zu allen
ausgefilterten Relationen auch die
Am 05.08.10 14:50, schrieb Frederik Ramm:
Hallo,
André Joost wrote:
Was muss ich denn angeben, wenn ich Relationen samt Wegen und deren
Knoten haben möchte?
Es gibt ja gar keine Filtermoeglichkeit fuer Relationen (--relation-key
oder --relation-key-value), insofern ergibt auch ein gib mir zu
Am 02.08.2010 14:51, schrieb Alexander Matheisen:
Wenn nichts angegeben ist, kann man eigentlich auch kein maxspeed
angeben, denn dies gibt ja die erlaubte Höchstgeschwindigkeit an. Ist
nichts angegeben, kann man ja z.B. auch nicht für zu schnelles Fahren
bestraft werden.
Ich greife das doch
Hi,
Da sich die Diskussion um das Tagging von Fahrradstraßen schon recht
lange hinzieht, habe ich mir mal die Freiheit genommen, den (aus meiner
Sicht) aktuellen Stand in einer neuen Wiki Seite zu dokumentieren:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bicycle_road
Das aktuelle Proposal zu
Am 05.08.2010 19:35, schrieb Sebastian Klein:
Theoretisch wäre es wünschenswert, wenn die anderen Merkmale durch
dieses eine Tag impliziert wären. Da die Anzahl der Fahrradstraßen in
den meisten Städten noch überschaubar ist, halte ich es allerdings für
vertretbar, die wichtigsten Merkmale
Hallo Sebastian,
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bicycle_road
Danke für die Zusammenfassung. Ein paar Anmerkungen dazu:
Das aktuelle Proposal zu highway=cycleway [1] scheint sich nicht so
recht durchzusetzen (2x verwendet)[2], was daran liegen mag, dass es in
Mapnik nicht gerendert
Thomas Ineichen wrote:
Hier war wohl highway=cycleroad gemeint..
Ups, ja genau.
- bicycle=designated bedeutet *nicht*, dass keine anderen Fahrzeug-
arten zugelassen wären, sondern nur, dass der Weg speziell für
Fahrräder geeignet ist; vehicle=no darf also nicht weggelassen
Thomas Ineichen schrieb:
Zum Tagging:
- bicycle=designated bedeutet *nicht*, dass keine anderen Fahrzeug-
arten zugelassen wären, sondern nur, dass der Weg speziell für
Fahrräder geeignet ist; vehicle=no darf also nicht weggelassen
werden.
vehicle=no heißt: Verbot für
Heiko Jacobs wrote:
Thomas Ineichen schrieb:
Zum Tagging:
- bicycle=designated bedeutet *nicht*, dass keine anderen Fahrzeug-
arten zugelassen wären, sondern nur, dass der Weg speziell für
Fahrräder geeignet ist; vehicle=no darf also nicht weggelassen
werden.
vehicle=no
Am 18.07.2010 10:52, schrieb André Riedel:
http://arnulf.us/PLZ
Wurden/Werden die Grenzen dazu noch einmal neu Umprojeziert? Bisher
sehe ich durchweg einen Nordost-Drift der Daten.
Neben der Verschiebung gibt es auch falsche Zuordnungen in der Karte.
Die Rader Insel
Sebastian Klein schrieb:
Heiko Jacobs wrote:
Das ist Murks.
Nein!
Ich meinte das im Sinne von überflüssig.
Bei der Fahrradstr./Kfz frei erstmal alle Fahrzeuge weg,
dann alle Fahrzeuge wieder zulassen.
Und auch bei de Fahrradstraße ohne Kfz frei reicht
motor_vehicle=no, bicycle=designated
Heiko Jacobs wrote:
Sebastian Klein schrieb:
Heiko Jacobs wrote:
Das ist Murks.
Nein!
Ich meinte das im Sinne von überflüssig.
OK, war aber leicht misszuverstehen...
Bei der Fahrradstr./Kfz frei erstmal alle Fahrzeuge weg,
dann alle Fahrzeuge wieder zulassen.
Ja, das ist eine
Tom Müller schrieb:
Am 02.08.2010 14:51, schrieb Alexander Matheisen:
Wenn nichts angegeben ist, kann man eigentlich auch kein maxspeed
angeben, denn dies gibt ja die erlaubte Höchstgeschwindigkeit an. Ist
nichts angegeben, kann man ja z.B. auch nicht für zu schnelles Fahren
bestraft werden.
Garry schrieb:
Am 05.08.2010 19:35, schrieb Sebastian Klein:
Theoretisch wäre es wünschenswert, wenn die anderen Merkmale durch
dieses eine Tag impliziert wären. Da die Anzahl der Fahrradstraßen in
den meisten Städten noch überschaubar ist, halte ich es allerdings für
vertretbar, die
Sebastian Klein schrieb:
Das aktuelle Proposal zu highway=cycleroad [1] scheint sich nicht so
recht durchzusetzen (2x verwendet)[2], was daran liegen mag, dass es in
Mapnik nicht gerendert wird.
Osmarender hätte es gerendert ...
Da habe ich es nämlich schon vor ewigen Zeiten eingebaut.
Bin
Sebastian Klein schrieb:
einfach als bicycle_road=yes kennzeichnen.
Sehe gerade, dass es in
http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Germany/De/tags.html
auch schon paar cycleroad=yes und cyclestreet=yes gibt,
die habe ich auch noch schnell in Osmarender eingebaut...
cycleway=cyclestreet gibt's auch, wäre
Stephan Wolff schrieb:
Die Rader Insel (http://osm.org/go/0Hm4ng1s--) gehört administrativ zu
Schacht-Audorf und Rade, zwei Gemeinden südlich des NOK. Der einzige
Straßenzugang geht über Borgstedt auf der Nordseite des Kanals. Die
Insel hat daher auch die PLZ 24794 (Borgstedt). In den
1 - 100 of 224 matches
Mail list logo
