On 03/30/2011 09:13 AM, Valent Turkovic wrote:
Ekipa da li netko sprema predavanje o OSM-u na DORS/CLUC konferenciji?
http://dorscluc.org/
Predlažem da ako pripremate neko predavanje vam ja pomognem oko uvodnog
dijela i odradim uvod tipa OSM for Dummies te onda prepustim ostatak
predavanja vama
-- Forwarded message --
From: Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz
Date: Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 5:39 AM
Subject: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap License Change Phase 3 begins Sunday
To: OSM talk t...@openstreetmap.org
OpenStreetMap License Change Phase 3 begins this Sunday. A full
On 13 April 2011 23:06, Francis Davey fjm...@gmail.com wrote:
Clause 2 is a grant for certain rights. From previous discussion here,
can I assume that I can agree if I'm not the copyright holder, and
that I only grant the rights I can under the licence I received the
data under?
That depends
James Livingston lists@... writes:
Using my account I have added data that is under various licences, some of
which
will and some of which won't be compatible with ODbL. To be able to keep any of
it, I'll presumably need to split my changesets up.
If Francis Davey's answer in another thread on
On 13 April 2011 22:24, James Livingston li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote:
With the upcoming requirement to accept/decline the contributor terms,
I thought it was about time to figure out whether and how I can agree to
them. I've had a look around but can't see any FAQs for the contributor
terms,
On 14 April 2011 08:54, Robert Whittaker (OSM)
robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote:
If I'm reading what Francis has written correctly, this would seem to
be a very real problem with CT 2.2.4, which would prevent us using
almost any source which wasn't PD or for which the contributor didn't
On 14 April 2011 09:34, Francis Davey fjm...@gmail.com wrote:
Strictly speaking, you can make use of them, but contributors are (i) in
breach of contract in contributing that material and (ii) may (in some
circumstances) infringe copyright by authorising OSMF to do acts which are
infringements
On 14 April 2011 09:57, Robert Whittaker (OSM)
robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote:
Has this option been considered by OSMF and/or LWG?
It, or something like it, has been mooted from time to time. There's no
reason why it could not be made to work legally.
Two issues might arise:
(1)
- Original Message -
From: Robert Whittaker (OSM) robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com
To: Licensing and other legal discussions. legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 8:54 AM
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Questions about CTs 1.2.4
On 13 April 2011 23:06, Francis
Hi,
On 04/14/2011 09:54 AM, Robert Whittaker (OSM) wrote:
If I'm reading what Francis has written correctly, this would seem to
be a very real problem with CT 2.2.4, which would prevent us using
almost any source which wasn't PD or for which the contributor didn't
own the copyright. In
Well, if there is a will, there will be a way. Be it in the user pages / an
OSMF hosted web site or outside.
How about we pick up this topic at an upcoming hack weekend?
I think badges are important to have for our dying community ;)
To get started, I created a wiki page.
Hi Folks
In the quite recesses of a Sydney neighborhood an (un)conference is being
planned for Sat. the 21st of May. The topic is Bridging the Gap - Disaster
Response.
As the name suggests the aim is to bring together people with formal
responsibility to respond to disasters and communities such
Teemu Koskinen teemu.koskinen at mbnet.fi writes:
I converted a few of the biggest lakes in Finland a few years ago to
coastlines, and they worked fine, until last year some other user converted
them to multipolygons with natural=water -tags. He also splitted the biggest
lake (Päijänne)
Jukka Rahkonen jukka.rahkonen at latuviitta.fi writes:
By the way, i checked that the biggest lake polygon in the data of the
National
land survey of Finland is the lake Saimaa, and it has exactly 287273 vertices
and more than 5000 islands. It is a bit heavy to handle in PostGIS and Oracle
On 12/04/2011 22:59, SomeoneElse wrote:
On 12/04/2011 19:56, Michael Collinson wrote:
As part of the process, the legal wording of the Contributor Terms
has been improved [3] on the basis of community feedback received and
to make them more friendly to individual contributors. The
On 14 April 2011 19:56, Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote:
Don't forget this is a pre-announcement! The technical implementation is
ongoing thanks to Tom, Matt and Grant. The revised contributor terms should
now be live and I have just got the go ahead to be able to announce that the
Hi Ed,
On 13/04/2011 16:15, Ed Avis wrote:
Michael Collinsonmikeat ayeltd.biz writes:
If you are a user of OpenStreetMap data, this does not affect you.
OpenStreetMap data continues to be licensed only under CC-BY-SA and
this will continue until we reach a critical mass of acceptance of
On 14/04/2011 10:56, Michael Collinson wrote:
The revised contributor terms should now be live and I have just got
the go ahead to be able to announce that the mandatory Accept/Decline
will be switched on on Sunday.
Thanks Mike - I spotted that they'd changed last night.
Cheers,
Andy
On 14/04/11 11:11, John Smith wrote:
On 14 April 2011 19:56, Michael Collinsonm...@ayeltd.biz wrote:
Don't forget this is a pre-announcement! The technical implementation is
ongoing thanks to Tom, Matt and Grant. The revised contributor terms should
now be live and I have just got the go
On 14 April 2011 22:20, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:
If you mean that currently there is no decline button for existing
contributors then that is a feature, not a bug. When making a decision
becomes mandatory on Sunday there will be a decline button.
I reported it several messages back.
OpenStreetMap License Change Phase 3 begins this Sunday. A full
announcement has gone to the Announce list and there is full information
at the Find out more about OpenStreetMap's upcoming license change
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/We_Are_Changing_The_License
link on
On 14/04/11 13:32, John Smith wrote:
On 14 April 2011 22:20, Tom Hughest...@compton.nu wrote:
If you mean that currently there is no decline button for existing
contributors then that is a feature, not a bug. When making a decision
becomes mandatory on Sunday there will be a decline button.
Hello,
It looks like some tiles are not rendering. For instance
http://b.tile.openstreetmap.org/17/35226/48373.png/status has been due
to be rendered for the last 24 hours when
http://b.tile.openstreetmap.org/15/8816/12104.png/status has been
updated today.
Why would some tile render and
Hi,
You can see here :
http://munin.openstreetmap.org/openstreetmap/yevaud.openstreetmap/index.html#renderd
that the render queue is filed, and if I understand it well new render
requests are rejected until the render queue decrease...
Vlad.
On 14 avr. 2011, at 15:16, Nakor wrote:
Hello,
On 4/14/2011 9:40 AM, Vladimir Vyskocil wrote:
Hi,
You can see here :
http://munin.openstreetmap.org/openstreetmap/yevaud.openstreetmap/index.html#renderd
that the render queue is filed, and if I understand it well new render
requests are rejected until the render queue decrease...
Vlad.
On 14 Apr 2011, at 14:44, Nakor wrote:
On 4/14/2011 9:40 AM, Vladimir Vyskocil wrote:
Hi,
You can see here :
http://munin.openstreetmap.org/openstreetmap/yevaud.openstreetmap/index.html#renderd
that the render queue is filed, and if I understand it well new render
requests are
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 8:37 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
the contract you signed when accepting older versions CTs will of
course not be changed or automatically updated by newer versions of
these CTs (like the current one). But that does not necessarily imply
that
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Dermot McNally derm...@gmail.com wrote:
I guess the problem with continuing to allow CC distribution of the
data is that that would leave OSM unprotected in those jurisdictions
where CC isn't recognised for map data.
1) What jurisdictions would that be?
2) If
mc == Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz writes:
mc In summary: This only affects you if you are an OpenStreetMap
mc contributor who registered before 12th May 2010 and have not taken
mc part in our voluntary re-licensing program. Before being able to
mc edit, you will have accept or
Hi Anthony,
Anthony wrote:
I guess the problem with continuing to allow CC distribution of the
data is that that would leave OSM unprotected in those jurisdictions
where CC isn't recognised for map data.
1) What jurisdictions would that be?
2) If the license isn't recognized, doesn't
Hi,
Eric Marsden wrote:
It is not clear to me, from your message or from what I have read on
the wiki, whether choosing Decline is a irreversible decision, or
whether one would still be able later to accept the licence + CT.
Decline is reversible. Accept isn't. Once we've got you, we'll
On 12 April 2011 21:08, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
On 12/04/2011 01:54, Andrew Gregory wrote:
Vespucci 0.7.0 (released a few days ago) has added OS Historic 1:25K. Is
that what you're after?
Thanks for the reply but It's the current 1:25k that I'm after.
Although I use OSM
Also from the graph it looks like the queue when almost empty during
the past 24 hours so why would the tile not be rendered in that case?
Really? The queue has been full 18 hours a day or more for the past
two weeks.
Bob
Sorry I was not clear The queue went almost empty (for some
Hi Nakor.
As far as I know the queue is the whole knowledge about tiles which have
to be rerendered.
If a tile has to be rerendered due to a changeset, that tile is
submitted to the queue exactly once, at the time the queue management
reads that changeset.
If the queue is full at that time,
Why is the queue not enhanced to avoid instances where tile-rendering
queries are rejected due to a full queue?
With regards,
Svavar Kjarrval
On 04/14/2011 03:15 PM, Peter Wendorff wrote:
Hi Nakor.
As far as I know the queue is the whole knowledge about tiles which
have to be rerendered.
If
On 4/14/2011 11:15 AM, Peter Wendorff wrote:
Hi Nakor.
As far as I know the queue is the whole knowledge about tiles which
have to be rerendered.
If a tile has to be rerendered due to a changeset, that tile is
submitted to the queue exactly once, at the time the queue management
reads that
How would you enhance the queue? Make it longer? How much longer?
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Svavar Kjarrval sva...@kjarrval.iswrote:
Why is the queue not enhanced to avoid instances where tile-rendering
queries are rejected due to a full queue?
With regards,
Svavar Kjarrval
On
You can, I believe, right click on a tile and do view image (in
Firefox at least, it may be different in whatever browser you use).
This brings up a URL such as:
http://tile.openstreetmap.org/14/8149/5492.png
add /dirty to the end:
http://tile.openstreetmap.org/14/8149/5492.png/dirty
Request
Nakor wrote:
Thanks for the explanations. So that means that the particular tiles
that got rejected because the queue was full could stay due to be
rendered forever supposing there are no more changes made to the data
they conatin?
Not forever, but until such a time that somebody requests the
Enhancing the queue is not meant neccesserily to make it longer.
Although I should've referred to the queueing process to be more clear.
As Andrew pointed out, a really long queue can cause latency issues in
regards to rendering so that's not such a good idea. There are at least
two ways to
Unfortunately I some of my edits used some sources that looked fine under
the for CC-by-SA terms but on closer inspection of the ODBL terms, which was
done after I blindly followed the advice of another contributor, I am not at
all comfortable that the work would stand up legally for CC-by-ODBL
Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Mike Collinson wrote:
If you were a contributor before this date and have not accepted yet,
you will be asked to accept or decline the new terms. You can find
background information about this on the main wiki page [2]. If you use
an off-line editor like
You can also just do like me and many others and abandon *submitting*
data end start *using* OSM data.
OSM was made to use data and not to contribute: Create a innovative
application or use geodata (OSM) in a surprising way.
And since some of us want to make it more difficult to contribute to OSM
On 14 April 2011 18:12, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
Nathan Edgars II wrote:
What happens in the future if I decline? Can I accept at a later date?
Since there has been no response to this, I plan to:
*hold off on accepting or declining with my NE2 account
*create a new
Dermot McNally wrote:
On 14 April 2011 18:12, Nathan Edgars II lt;nerou...@gmail.comgt; wrote:
Nathan Edgars II wrote:
What happens in the future if I decline? Can I accept at a later date?
Since there has been no response to this, I plan to:
*hold off on accepting or declining with
On 12 April 2011 21:11, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
What happens in the future if I decline? Can I accept at a later date?
Yes you can accept at a later date.
Regards
Grant
Part of LWG.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On 14 April 2011 19:50, Dermot McNally derm...@gmail.com wrote:
But your suggested course of action has me confused - you are happy to
make contributions under the new CT and intend to do so, but yet you
wish to vote against the change. Your choice, I supposed.
I see it logical. Wanting to
On 14 April 2011 17:26, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote:
Unfortunately I some of my edits used some sources that looked fine under
the for CC-by-SA terms but on closer inspection of the ODBL terms, which was
done after I blindly followed the advice of another contributor, I am not at
On 14 April 2011 19:05, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
I oppose the change, primarily because of the damage it will cause. I've
already seen what removing small amounts of data will do
(http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2011-March/057318.html) and
do not wish to see
On 14 April 2011 19:05, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you. Do you speak for the OSMF?
No - hence my silence and no doubt that of others when you asked
before. But I have been following the licence issue attentively and
have seen this question answered more than once from
On 14 April 2011 19:12, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
I see it logical. Wanting to contribute to the currently biggest,
most fun free map, with most impact on the industry and a name you got
used to, you soon will have no choice other than to do so under then
new CT because
On 4/14/2011 2:20 PM, Grant Slater wrote:
The revert script used to remove Anthony's edits (which were traced
from Google) was a basic revert script which only used API methods.
There were also mistakes made like reverting the items anthony had
deleted only after most of the cleanup/improvement
On 14 April 2011 18:26, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote:
Unfortunately I some of my edits used some sources that looked fine under
the for CC-by-SA terms but on closer inspection of the ODBL terms, which was
done after I blindly followed the advice of another contributor, I am not at
Dermot McNally wrote:
I applaud your ethics, but it seems to me that your chosen course of
action, unless you do intend to accept at a later stage for your
existing account,
I do, if we get to the point where we are removing data.
--
View this message in context:
- Original Message -
From: andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com
To: john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com
Cc: OpenStreetMap talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 7:34 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap License Change Phase 3 begins Sunday
On 14
On 14 April 2011 19:33, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote:
On 4/14/2011 2:20 PM, Grant Slater wrote:
The revert script used to remove Anthony's edits (which were traced
from Google) was a basic revert script which only used API methods.
There were also mistakes made like reverting the items
I am of exactly the same mind of NEII on this. When the OSMF holds the gun
to my head, I will eventually Accept. Until then, I'd like to keep my 'data
vote' opposed in order to slow down the impending train wreck as long as
possible.
My contributions aren't as numerous as his
On 4/14/2011 3:18 PM, Alex Ruddick wrote:
If NEII's (and others) are removed, we can add the United States to
Australia as 'countries the OSMF is willing to sacrifice.'
NEII: Please don't participate in any high risk sports or activities,
at least until all this is resolved. g
On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 18:50:22 +0100
Dermot McNally derm...@gmail.com wrote:
But your suggested course of action has me confused - you are happy to
make contributions under the new CT and intend to do so, but yet you
wish to vote against the change. Your choice, I supposed.
There are 2 distinct
On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 20:10:19 +0100
Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote:
I am sure there are going to be a few cases where difficult decisions
are going to have to be made. We will not have been the only open
source project to have had to make these sorts of decisions. The OSM
On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 19:24:28 +0100
Dermot McNally derm...@gmail.com wrote:
So by all means state your opinion and by all means share your
opinions with other mappers. But if, once a consensus is clear, The
Community comes out in favour of the change, many of us will think
very ill of people
Hi,
Alex Ruddick wrote:
I am of exactly the same mind of NEII on this. When the OSMF holds the
gun to my head, I will eventually Accept. Until then, I'd like to keep
my 'data vote' opposed in order to slow down the impending train wreck
as long as possible.
Do you expect any positive
On 14 April 2011 21:46, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote:
On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 20:10:19 +0100
Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote:
I am sure there are going to be a few cases where difficult decisions
are going to have to be made. We will not have been the only open
source
Hi,
Grant Slater wrote:
Part of Sysadmin Team, LWG Member, Data Working Group, Server order
guy, van driver and mapper.
^^ Lizard man!
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
talk mailing list
Frederik Ramm wrote:
There are regions in OSM where a visible no vote will lead to your
data being re-surveyed and replaced by other contributors rather
quickly.
This is vandalism and should be reverted.
Frederik Ramm wrote:
It's a hard language to use. We don't want to lose any
How else would you define the foundation?
The OSMF is a not-for-profit company registered in England and Wales,
the foundation has no paid staff and it is made up exclusively of
unpaid volenteers. The OSMF board is made up of democratically elected
volenteers. I am not an OSMF apologist,
On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 23:10:40 +0200
Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
We're not sacrificing countries. We saw that we have built our
project on (legal) sand, and we're moving to rectify the situation.
The patient may lose some tissue about this but he will live, and
after the wounds
On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 16:49 +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
Eric Marsden wrote:
It is not clear to me, from your message or from what I have read on
the wiki, whether choosing Decline is a irreversible decision, or
whether one would still be able later to accept the licence + CT.
On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 20:10 +0100, Grant Slater wrote:
I am sure there are going to be a few cases where difficult decisions
are going to have to be made. We will not have been the only open
source project to have had to make these sorts of decisions.
Out of interest Grant, what other
On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 18:50 +0100, Dermot McNally wrote:
But your suggested course of action has me confused - you are happy to
make contributions under the new CT and intend to do so, but yet you
wish to vote against the change. Your choice, I supposed.
Its not terribly confusing from here.
On 14 April 2011 23:38, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
Its not terribly confusing from here. What he is suggesting, is
creating an account to contribute 'clean' data, which he is prepared to
agree to OSMF's terms about. What he is voting against, is OSMF using
previously created
Hi,
David Murn wrote:
Out of interest Grant, what other large-scale open source projects have
changed their licence the way that OSM has? In fact, changed their
licence full-stop..?
Wikipedia went from GFDL to CC-BY-SA. Mozilla changed from MPL-only to
MPL/GPL/LGPL. Zope changed from a
On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 23:53 +0100, Dermot McNally wrote:
On 14 April 2011 23:38, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
Its not terribly confusing from here. What he is suggesting, is
creating an account to contribute 'clean' data, which he is prepared to
agree to OSMF's terms about.
Hi,
David Murn wrote:
What about if you become aware that once youve got someone, who has
agreed and who has contributed tainted data? Will you (or someone else
wielding the magical OSMF+3 wand) reverse it?
If data is tainted in a way that makes in incompatible with the
currently used
If data is tainted in a way that makes in incompatible with the currently
used license then it will have to be removed in order not to put the project
at risk (e.g. data copied from proprietary sources). This is independent of
the license change.
I assume that the currently used license means to
David,
David Murn wrote:
Did I just seriously read that right?
*Sigh*
You know as well as I do that Anthony is a troll with a long history,
here and elsewhere. He knows perfectly well, because he has been told a
thousand times, that one of the countries where CC-BY-SA doesn't work
for our
On 15 April 2011 00:49, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
Eric Marsden wrote:
It is not clear to me, from your message or from what I have read on
the wiki, whether choosing Decline is a irreversible decision, or
whether one would still be able later to accept the licence +
On 4/14/2011 7:08 PM, David Murn wrote:
So, please feel free to tell me where I invented anything?
I never said anything about the reason being because my old
contributions were tainted. I do understand the dilemma faced by those,
but, as far as I know, every change I made can be relicensed
On 15 April 2011 00:08, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
So, please feel free to tell me where I invented anything?
Right here:
What he is voting against, is OSMF using
previously created data which is not practical to split the 'clean' from
'tainted'.
As quoted in my earlier mail.
On Apr 14, 2011, at 1:52 AM, Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
Teemu Koskinen teemu.koskinen at mbnet.fi writes:
I converted a few of the biggest lakes in Finland a few years ago to
coastlines, and they worked fine, until last year some other user converted
them to multipolygons with natural=water
On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 01:08 +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
David Murn wrote:
What about if you become aware that once youve got someone, who has
agreed and who has contributed tainted data? Will you (or someone else
wielding the magical OSMF+3 wand) reverse it?
If data is tainted in
On 15 April 2011 12:51, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
This was a question in regards to whether you will reverse the selection
of someone accepting the new licence/terms, if you (or they) become
aware the data is tainted.
Wouldn't breach of clause 1 break the entire contract ?
On 14 April 2011 21:06, David Groom revi...@pacific-rim.net wrote:
- Original Message - From: andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com
Under the Contributor Terms 1.2.4 I believe it will be the
OpenStreetMap Foundation's responsibility to remove such data before
switching the license, you
On 14-4-2011 22:17, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
Is er iets mis gegaan met de 3dShapes import in Zeeland?
Het Veerse meer is wel erg wittig.
Ik denk dat deze blauw moet zijn.
In ieder geval lag er laatst nog water en water is blauw toch?
Waarom moet de import nu weer de (vermoedelijke) schuld
On 14-4-2011 22:29, Lennard wrote:
Die import is al van lang geleden, ergens vorig jaar. De huidige
drooglegging zal dus niets anders zijn dan een mapper aan het werk.
Zo, gefixt. De enige werkbare methode was het reverten van een berg
changesets van Tavernsenses. Het enige dat sneuvelde,
Hi Folks
In the quite recesses of a Sydney neighborhood an (un)conference is being
planned for Sat. the 21st of May. The topic is Bridging the Gap - Disaster
Response.
As the name suggests the aim is to bring together people with formal
responsibility to respond to disasters and communities such
bundesrainer o...@bundesrainer.de writes:
Am 13.04.2011 15:37, schrieb Tobias Knerr:
Am 13.04.2011 15:13, schrieb Alexander Matheisen:
Macht sie irgendwie unglaubwürdig...
Dass sie unabhängig von OSM sogar ihre eigenen Inhalte unter CC-BY-SA
stellen, würde ich positiv hervorheben. Dass sie
Tordanik wrote:
Ich gehe mal von einem Versehen aus, doch gerade eine Seite, die sich
mit verwandten Themen beschäftigt und auch ihre eigenen Inhalte unter
eine freie Lizenz stellt, sollte da eigentlich stärker drauf achten.
Im Allgemeinen wird die Namensnennung nicht als Kernbestandteil
Habe mich überall registriert und hoffe daß es nicht mehr klemmt!.
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Darstellung-von-geotagged-Bildern-in-OSM-tp5614338p6272220.html
Sent from the Germany mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hallo,
diese Nachricht betrifft nur diejenigen Benutzer, die sich vor dem
12. Mai 2010 angemeldet haben und die den neuen Contributor Terms noch
nicht zugestimmt haben.
Bislang kann man ja nur ja zur neuen Lizenz und den Contributor Terms
sagen - nicht nein.
Das wird sich am kommenden
Am Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:44:49 +0200
schrieb Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org:
Auch, wer nein ankreuzt, darf (vorerst) weiter editieren, und kann
es sich ggf. spaeter noch anders ueberlegen.
Darf ich mal anmerken, dass ich deutlich Zweifel hab, dass das
irgendeinen Sinn ergibt?
(mal böse
Frederik Ramm wrote:
diese Nachricht betrifft nur diejenigen Benutzer, die sich vor dem 12.
Mai 2010 angemeldet haben und die den neuen Contributor Terms noch
nicht zugestimmt haben.
Also mich eigentlich nicht, da bereits zugestimmt.
Auch, wer nein ankreuzt, darf (vorerst) weiter editieren,
Hallo,
ich erstelle gerade SLD Styles für Geoserver und orientiere mich dabei
am deutschen Mapnik Kartenstil.
Mir ist dabei aufgefallen das in der Datei layer-water.xml.inc (im
Gegensatz zum englischen Stil)
waterway=river keine Bezeichnung hat aber drain und ditch sehr wohl.
Hat das einen
Am 14. April 2011 18:51 schrieb yobiSource yobisou...@googlemail.com:
Hallo,
ich erstelle gerade SLD Styles für Geoserver und orientiere mich dabei am
deutschen Mapnik Kartenstil.
Mir ist dabei aufgefallen das in der Datei layer-water.xml.inc (im Gegensatz
zum englischen Stil)
Am 14.04.2011 18:37, schrieb Manuel Reimer:
Genau dieser Zwitter-Zustand, der jetzt schon ewig andauert, beginnt
zumindest mich so langsam zu nerven.
+1
Wenn man wirklich ODBL will, dann verstehe ich nicht, dass man
Nicht-Zustimmer noch editieren lässt.
Chris
Am 14.04.2011 19:44, schrieb Chris66:
Am 14.04.2011 18:37, schrieb Manuel Reimer:
Genau dieser Zwitter-Zustand, der jetzt schon ewig andauert, beginnt
zumindest mich so langsam zu nerven.
+1
Wenn man wirklich ODBL will, dann verstehe ich nicht, dass man
Nicht-Zustimmer noch editieren lässt.
Hallo,
Hanno Böck wrote:
Weiter: Gibt es noch den Plan, alle User, die nicht reagieren,
anzumailen? Das scheint mir äußerst sinnvoll, da ich davon
ausgehe, dass viele, die früher mal aktiv waren, nichts gegen einen
Lizenzwechsel haben, aber davon schlicht nichts mitbekommen haben.
Ja, den
Frederik Ramm schrieb am 14.04.2011 14:44:
Wer sich fuer Details zum Lizenzwechsel interessiert, der kann neben den
Informationen im Wiki auch meinen Vortrag von letzter Woche auf der
FOSSGIS-Konferenz anschauen:
Folien...
http://www.geofabrik.de/media/2011-04-06-fossgis-lizenzwechsel.pdf
Die neuen Hervorhebungen von ITO World sind ziemlich schmuck, aber es wird
wieder etwas als Fehler gebrandmarkt, was hier viele nicht als Fehler
empfinden. Mir ist hier
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ITO_Map#Buildings_and_addresses
aufgefallen. Gebäudeumrisse, die keine Hausnummer und keinen
Frederik Ramm schrieb:
http://openstreetmap.org/user/terms
Knuffig ist, daß ich einer rechtsverbindlichen Vereinbarung zustimmen
soll, die ich nicht verstehe.
Rainer
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
