Re: [OSM-talk] routing across open spaces

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:11 PM, David Murn wrote: > On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 18:21 -0500, Anthony wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 4:42 PM, David Murn wrote: >> > However, please understand that >> > most of us use routing software, expecting it not to try and take >> > shortcuts across unmapped are

Re: [OSM-talk] Osmosis exception

Hi, On 06.12.2010 19:58, Carsten Nielsen wrote: Same situation with osmosis 0.38, only node no ways on talk-de had been similar reports. Frederik mentioned he will replace the version on the server. Stephan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetm

Re: [OSM-talk] routing across open spaces

On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 18:21 -0500, Anthony wrote: > On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 4:42 PM, David Murn wrote: > > However, please understand that > > most of us use routing software, expecting it not to try and take > > shortcuts across unmapped areas. > > Who said anything about taking shortcuts across

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

On Mon, 6 Dec 2010 23:46:21 +0100 andrzej zaborowski wrote: > On 6 December 2010 23:23, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: > >> >> If Nearmap is CC-BY-SA, they're compatible now. > >> > > >> > What about at changeover though?  Im pretty sure Steve asked this > >> > question in relation to data in the future,

Re: [OSM-talk] routing across open spaces

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Anthony wrote: > On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Dave F. wrote: >> On 05/12/2010 22:07, Anthony wrote: >>>  - which, if all they >>> know about is the perimeter, is probably a good thing. >> >> Eh? I thought you said you'd "love it" if it cut directly across an are

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Someone already had a look at the Bing Terms of Use?

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 4:55 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > PR is more important than legal. As most people on this list know, with > CC-BY-SA being next to invalid for Geodata in the US, any of the big US > players could long have taken our data an run. Why haven't they? Because they also distribute

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 10:00:57AM +, Ed Avis wrote: > > In an attempt to fix this I have asked the maintainer of > to add a data check. Where a choice of languages > exists for a name, then there should be one that corresponds to the main > 'name' tag. In other w

Re: [OSM-talk] Working for Mapquest as of today

Welcome! And not a moment too soon! -Randy On Dec 6, 2010 5:59 PM, "Emilie Laffray" wrote: > Hello, > > I am pleased to announce that I started working at MapQuest today. I want to > let the OSM community know how excited I am about this new opportunity. I > will continue in my capacity as an ele

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Serge Wroclawski wrote: > The CT isn't a license, it's a terms of agreement. That means you've > given OSMF a license to the data, and now you're asking them to revoke > that license. > > This would be (moral if not legal) equivalent of someone offering up a > progr

Re: [OSM-talk] Working for Mapquest as of today

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Emilie Laffray wrote: > Hello, > > I am pleased to announce that I started working at MapQuest today. I want > to let the OSM community know how excited I am about this new opportunity. I > will continue in my capacity as an elected member of the OSMF board, and as

Re: [OSM-talk] routing across open spaces

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 4:42 PM, David Murn wrote: > However, please understand that > most of us use routing software, expecting it not to try and take > shortcuts across unmapped areas. Who said anything about taking shortcuts across *unmapped* areas? How in the world would that work?

Re: [OSM-talk] routing across open spaces

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Dave F. wrote: > On 05/12/2010 22:07, Anthony wrote: >> >> On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Dave F.  wrote: >>> >>> As long as there are external ways connecting  to the area, a router >>> should >>> be able to find the appropriate entrances&  exits by tracking the

Re: [OSM-talk] Working for Mapquest as of today

Congrats! good luck! mike On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Emilie Laffray wrote: > Hello, > > I am pleased to announce that I started working at MapQuest today. I want to > let the OSM community know how excited I am about this new opportunity. I > will continue in my capacity as an elected membe

Re: [OSM-talk] Working for Mapquest as of today

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Emilie Laffray wrote: > Hello, > > I am pleased to announce that I started working at MapQuest today. Congratulations, Emilie! So you'll be working on search for the commercial site, not on the Open Team. Looks like MapQuest better look out. I think OpenStreetMa

[OSM-talk] Working for Mapquest as of today

Hello, I am pleased to announce that I started working at MapQuest today. I want to let the OSM community know how excited I am about this new opportunity. I will continue in my capacity as an elected member of the OSMF board, and as Treasurer. I will be the technical product manager for the main

Re: [OSM-talk] routing across open spaces

On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 21:57 +, Dave F. wrote: > On 06/12/2010 21:42, David Murn wrote: > > Okay, so are we going around the perimeter of the polygon or are we > > taking a straight line cutting directly across an area? > > I think you've deliberately not taken on board many of the points made

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

On 6 December 2010 23:23, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: >> >> If Nearmap is CC-BY-SA, they're compatible now. >> > >> > What about at changeover though?  Im pretty sure Steve asked this >> > question in relation to data in the future, not the present. >> >> It's incompatible even at present. > > could you

Re: [OSM-talk] Glittermap

Just saw a tweet from Ed Parsons that might be relevant to glittermap! "Use with care animated pins http://goo.gl/a3Q8g, could be the mapping equivalent of " So fun! Really addictive game, how can we feed them? ___ talk mailing list talk@open

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

On Mon, 6 Dec 2010 22:45:00 +0100 andrzej zaborowski wrote: > >> If Nearmap is CC-BY-SA, they're compatible now. > > > > What about at changeover though?  Im pretty sure Steve asked this > > question in relation to data in the future, not the present. > > It's incompatible even at present.

Re: [OSM-talk] routing across open spaces

On 06/12/2010 21:42, David Murn wrote: On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 21:18 +, Dave F. wrote: On 06/12/2010 21:06, David Murn wrote: On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 20:56 +, Dave F. wrote: - which, if all they know about is the perimeter, is probably a good thing. Eh? I thought you said you'd "love

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

On 6 December 2010 20:44, David Murn wrote: > On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 08:55 -0500, Serge Wroclawski wrote: >> This should really be taking place on the legal list but nonetheless: >> >> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: >> > Hi, >> >  So, this is awkward. According to my profile,

Re: [OSM-talk] routing across open spaces

On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 21:18 +, Dave F. wrote: > On 06/12/2010 21:06, David Murn wrote: > > On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 20:56 +, Dave F. wrote: > > > >>>- which, if all they > >>> know about is the perimeter, is probably a good thing. > >> Eh? I thought you said you'd "love it" if it cut direc

Re: [OSM-talk] routing across open spaces

On 06/12/2010 21:06, David Murn wrote: On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 20:56 +, Dave F. wrote: - which, if all they know about is the perimeter, is probably a good thing. Eh? I thought you said you'd "love it" if it cut directly across an area?? They don't have to *follow* the perimeter just use

Re: [OSM-talk] routing across open spaces

On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 20:56 +, Dave F. wrote: > > - which, if all they > > know about is the perimeter, is probably a good thing. > > Eh? I thought you said you'd "love it" if it cut directly across an area?? > > They don't have to *follow* the perimeter just use it to find the best > exi

Re: [OSM-talk] Glittermap

Just saw a tweet from Ed Parsons that might be relevant to glittermap! "Use with care animated pins http://goo.gl/a3Q8g, could be the mapping equivalent of " Toby On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Steven Johnson wrote: > Yes, glitter today, dragons & sea monsters tomorrow. > SEJ > > "A seri

Re: [OSM-talk] routing across open spaces

On 05/12/2010 22:07, Anthony wrote: On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Dave F. wrote: As long as there are external ways connecting to the area, a router should be able to find the appropriate entrances& exits by tracking the perimeter. I thought they were already able to do that, but maybe not

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 21:15 +0100, Ulf Lamping wrote: > Am 06.12.2010 17:58, schrieb Serge Wroclawski: > > The LWG is part of the OSMF, and the OSMF is who runs this project. > > The LWG is part of the OSMF, and the OSMF is part of the ~3 people > who runs this project :-) If the OSMF board

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

On Mon, 6 Dec 2010 09:41:05 -0500 Richard Weait wrote: > We're* also expecting to implement a way for you to flag edits that > shouldn't be promoted to CT/ODbL, so you'll be able to accept CT, and > flag those changesets that are incompatible individually. The bad > ones won't be brought forward

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

Am 06.12.2010 17:58, schrieb Serge Wroclawski: The LWG is part of the OSMF, and the OSMF is who runs this project. The LWG is part of the OSMF, and the OSMF is part of the ~3 people who runs this project :-) Regards, ULFL ___ talk mailing list

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 08:55 -0500, Serge Wroclawski wrote: > This should really be taking place on the legal list but nonetheless: > > On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: > > Hi, > > So, this is awkward. According to my profile, I've "agreed to the > > new Contributor Terms". I

Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-legal-talk] Unsetting CT flag

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 6:58 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > > pec...@gmail.com wrote: > >> License is fine. It is CT which in fact still allows OSMF to change >> data license to any other "free license" (which could be strip "share >> alike" and "attribution" requirements) what blocks usage. I

Re: [OSM-talk] Osmosis exception

Same situation with osmosis 0.38, only node no ways Carsten Den 05-12-2010 20:50, Carsten Nielsen skrev: I dont recall where I saw the "--read-bin" option but se it is also mentioned in the recent geofabrik blogpost http://blog.geofabrik.de/en/?p=75 and yes I have tried to replace it with the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

Hi, pec...@gmail.com wrote: License is fine. It is CT which in fact still allows OSMF to change data license to any other "free license" (which could be strip "share alike" and "attribution" requirements) what blocks usage. In fact, there is NO license which allows such CT to coexist. Only PD, a

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

There are likely to be cases where two or more of the possible languages use an identical name for the same location or entity. Plus, in addition to any official languages for a particular country, you may have additional languages spoken by the local people. For example, the official language

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

2010/12/6 Serge Wroclawski : > On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:42 AM, andrzej zaborowski wrote: >> On 6 December 2010 14:55, Serge Wroclawski wrote: >>> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: Hi,  So, this is awkward. According to my profile, I've "agreed to the new Contri

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:42 AM, andrzej zaborowski wrote: > On 6 December 2010 14:55, Serge Wroclawski wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: >>> Hi, >>>  So, this is awkward. According to my profile, I've "agreed to the >>> new Contributor Terms". I have no recollection

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

- Original Message - From: "Serge Wroclawski" To: "Steve Bennett" Cc: "Open Street Map mailing list" Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 1:55 PM Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag This should really be taking place on the legal list but nonetheless: On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:09 A

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

On 6 December 2010 14:55, Serge Wroclawski wrote: > On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: >> Hi, >>  So, this is awkward. According to my profile, I've "agreed to the >> new Contributor Terms". I have no recollection of having done so, and >> obviously I don't want to agree to them

[OSM-talk] Announce: Bing Aerial image age viewer

Hi all, For those of you wondering when the Bing aerials were photographed for your area (like me), I created a viewer for that. Give it a try: http://mvexel.dev.openstreetmap.org/bing/ It uses the date given in a Bing custom HTTP header, which is often correct, but not always. Date error report

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

Frederik Ramm schrieb: Erik, On 12/06/10 11:19, Erik Johansson wrote: :-) Well does anyone have code to add name as "local language" in postgis, what are the options? Lets not complicate your remark by enumerating all multilingual areas in the world, where names means power The question was a

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

I think that the pertinent question is whether Steve deliberately accepted the CT and license or was he hijacked by a bad UI. David. PS. Wow, reading all of the emails on this subject over the last year, it is clear that this license issue and the way that it has been handled is obviously the be

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: > Hi, >  So, this is awkward. > From a pragmatic legal perspective, it seems to me that any > nearmap-sourced edits that I made while under the effects of the CT > are totally invalid anyway, so should be moved to a non-CT account. We're* also

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

On 6 December 2010 23:55, Serge Wroclawski wrote: > This should really be taking place on the legal list but nonetheless: > > On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: >> Hi, >> So, this is awkward. According to my profile, I've "agreed to the >> new Contributor Terms". I have no reco

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

This should really be taking place on the legal list but nonetheless: On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: > Hi, >  So, this is awkward. According to my profile, I've "agreed to the > new Contributor Terms". I have no recollection of having done so, and > obviously I don't want to

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Someone already had a look at the Bing Terms of Use?

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: > On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Andrew Harvey > wrote: >> with and what they aren't. I don't think the Bing people have clearly >> stated what they consider acceptable and what they don't. > > It would be a very strange world if Steve Coast

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

On 6 December 2010 13:18, Ed Avis wrote: > Brian Quinion brian.quinion.co.uk> writes: >>This list is entirely of my own construction and probably misses >>quite a few countries default languages.  I welcome any improvements! > > Shouldn't it be tagged as part of the map, rather than a separate fi

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

Brian Quinion brian.quinion.co.uk> writes: >This is the approach I've already taken - the next version of >Nominatim has a field country_default_language_code as part of the >country details OK I guess that takes care of it, so we don't need additional per-object tags. >This list is entirely of

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

Le 06/12/2010 12:52, Steve Bennett a écrit : On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 9:48 PM, Ed Avis wrote: We could add per-country or per-geographical-area rules about what the 'default' language is. But that seems like the wrong answer, and would give the wrong result in many cases. Seems like t

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

On 6 December 2010 11:41, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Erik, > > On 12/06/10 11:19, Erik Johansson wrote: >> >> :-) Well does anyone have code to add name as "local language" in >> postgis, what are the options? Lets not complicate your remark by >> enumerating all multilingual areas in the world, where

Re: [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

On 06/12/10 12:09, Steve Bennett wrote: > 1) Could someone please unset this flag for me: (User: stevage) This is really a policy issue I think. > 2) Could someone please tell me when it got set? 2010-08-13 01:44:38.6323 UTC > And for bonus points: > 3) Could someone provide evidence that I di

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

On 6 Dec 2010, at 10:10, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > On 12/06/2010 11:00 AM, Ed Avis wrote: >> Given that, and the user's preferred languages [en, fr], what name should be >> picked? The program cannot know that the name 'Scotland' is in English > > Why? Are there places in Scotland that ha

[OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

Hi, So, this is awkward. According to my profile, I've "agreed to the new Contributor Terms". I have no recollection of having done so, and obviously I don't want to agree to them while they're incompatible with Nearmap. Sadly, the GUI doesn't tell me when this flag was set, nor does it provide a

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

Frederik Ramm remote.org> writes: >>We could add per-country or per-geographical-area rules about what the >>'default' language is. > >I guess those don't have to be "added", do they? Is it not implicit that >places in France will by default have the French name in their "name" tag? Yes, but t

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Someone already had a look at the Bing Terms of Use?

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote: > with and what they aren't. I don't think the Bing people have clearly > stated what they consider acceptable and what they don't. It would be a very strange world if Steve Coast announced that OSM could use Bing maps, and he meant something o

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 9:48 PM, Ed Avis wrote: > We could add per-country or per-geographical-area rules about what the > 'default' > language is.  But that seems like the wrong answer, and would give the wrong > result in many cases. Seems like the right answer to me. There are lots of things t

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

Erik, On 12/06/10 11:19, Erik Johansson wrote: :-) Well does anyone have code to add name as "local language" in postgis, what are the options? Lets not complicate your remark by enumerating all multilingual areas in the world, where names means power The question was about Nominatim originall

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

Hi, On 12/06/10 11:48, Ed Avis wrote: We could add per-country or per-geographical-area rules about what the 'default' language is. I guess those don't have to be "added", do they? Is it not implicit that places in France will by default have the French name in their "name" tag? But that s

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Ed Avis wrote: > Frederik Ramm remote.org> writes: > >>>Given that, and the user's preferred languages [en, fr], what name should be >>>picked?  The program cannot know that the name 'Scotland' is in English >> >>Why? Are there places in Scotland that have a Gaeli

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

Le 06/12/2010 11:22, MD a écrit : Hi, Ed Avis wrote: [...] I believe the answer, as so often, is to improve the tagging used so that software has the information it needs. In this case an explicit English- language name should be added, so we have name=Scotland name:en=Scotland

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

Frederik Ramm remote.org> writes: >>Given that, and the user's preferred languages [en, fr], what name should be >>picked? The program cannot know that the name 'Scotland' is in English > >Why? Are there places in Scotland that have a Gaelic name in the "name" >tag? There may be, but in the ab

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

Hi, Ed Avis wrote: [...] > I believe the answer, as so often, is to improve the tagging used so that > software has the information it needs. In this case an explicit English- > language name should be added, so we have > > name=Scotland > name:en=Scotland > name:fr=Ecosse > name

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > On 12/06/2010 11:00 AM, Ed Avis wrote: >> >> Given that, and the user's preferred languages [en, fr], what name should >> be >> picked?  The program cannot know that the name 'Scotland' is in English > > Why? Are there places in Scotl

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Someone already had a look at the Bing Terms of Use?

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > The situation is sufficient for me to use Bing imagery for tracing. I'm not > looking at the legal side of it, I'm just looking at the size of the PR > disaster should Microsoft attempt to backtrack in any way. > > PR is more important than le

Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

Hi, On 12/06/2010 11:00 AM, Ed Avis wrote: Given that, and the user's preferred languages [en, fr], what name should be picked? The program cannot know that the name 'Scotland' is in English Why? Are there places in Scotland that have a Gaelic name in the "name" tag? Bye Frederik

[OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language

This message explains a problem that user interfaces such as Nominatim have when choosing the correct localized 'name' tag to show to the user, why I believe this is caused by incomplete tagging, and a proposal to fix it. I was surprised when searching on the OSM home page to find Edinburgh was n