I agree.
Skyler Hawthorne skrev: (2 augusti 2020 19:30:09 CEST)
>In the absence of other proposals, even splitting it among the other
>two would be a much better use, in my opinion.
>
>--
>Skyler
>
>
>On Sun, Aug 2, 2020, at 13:27, Rory McCann wrote:
>> On 02.08.20 01:03, Skyler Hawthorne wrote:
Hi
Matthew Woehlke skrev: (3 augusti 2020 16:14:13 CEST)
>On 02/08/2020 06.05, Simon Poole wrote:
>
>I'm not saying iD is *bad*. It's a very nice editor *for its
>capabilities*. It's great for making *small* changes or introducing
>someone to OSM editing... but there are a lot of use cases stil
I agree with this.
Particularly Rust compiled to WebAssembly look very promising for building
applications like an editor. Rust is fast and safe and it already has multiple
OSM related crates.
See here for an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHJjmsw_Sx0
An editor written in Rust and c
I would recommend you to use another way to archive this. Open OsmAnd on your
phone and add a POI directly. You can add tags too if you remember them. Then
upload directly to OSM.
No JOSM or GPX file handling neccesary.
Andy Townsend skrev: (3 augusti 2020 00:09:44 CEST)
>On 02/08/2020 22:52, M
> In the absence of other proposals, even splitting it among the other two
> would be a much better use, in my opinion.
Chrm. iD gets the pile of money and the MAIN OpenStreetMap editor -
JOSM - gets NOTHING?
Or does this show that iD is so broken/unwanted that nobody wants to
work on it with
On 04/08/2020 11:19, pangoSE wrote:
I would recommend you to use another way to archive this. Open OsmAnd
on your phone and add a POI directly. You can add tags too if you
remember them. Then upload directly to OSM.
No JOSM or GPX file handling neccesary.
I use Vespucci for exactly that (no, I
sent from a phone
> On 4. Aug 2020, at 12:28, Andy Townsend wrote:
>
> I wrote down what I was there, other people's GPS traces, etc. etc.) and that
> really needs a desktop editor.
+1, while mobile editors are a great addition to our toolset, they cannot
substitute desktop editors. A mous
I disagree. For that sum of money I would be willing to start writing a new
editor in Rust compiled to WebAssembly and desktop and reach a state of basic
editing useability in 2 months.
See also https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohuTy8MmbLc
Cheers
Joseph Eisenberg skrev: (3 augusti 2020 01:00:49
mmd skrev: (2 augusti 2020 11:31:21 CEST)
>On 2020-08-01 12:42, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>> Ruffle is showing promise (https://github.com/ruffle-rs/ruffle) and
>is
>> under very active development, but does not yet support AS3 or the
>Flash
>> Player features that P2 needs. I would anticipate th
Martin Koppenhoefer skrev: (3 augusti 2020 01:10:09
CEST)
>
>
>sent from a phone
>
>> On 2. Aug 2020, at 18:11, Guillaume Rischard
> wrote:
>>
>> As someone who’s listed as having used 9 different editors on
>https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?Stereo (including “unknown”), I know how
>important the va
On 04/08/2020 05.30, pangoSE wrote:
On older hardware like my 2 core 2ghz laptop iD is slow. Loading
while saving an edit is slow, while JOSM is always fast and saving
does not close the edit view so you can continue without waiting for
a browser to load the iD editor again which is also slow.
sent from a phone
> On 4. Aug 2020, at 13:58, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>
> but I would practically *kill* for JOSM to have FreeCAD's suite of sketch
> constraints ;-).
you’re aware that there are sketch constraints for configurable angles (90, 60,
45 etc) and projection snaps? Hit 2 times „a
We should not ask anyone to do 2 months development work for 2500 euros.
I believe this size grant is only enough for 1 to 2 weeks, based on
international prices (though
I do not have any paid experience in this field)
- Joseph Eisenberg
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 4:08 AM pangoSE wrote:
> I disagr
Hi all,
I haven't seen OSM's birthday mentioned yet here this year: mark your
calendars
https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2020/08/01/celebrate-the-16th-osm-anniversary/
-jeff
--
Jeff McKenna
MapServer Consulting and Training Services
co-founder of FOSS4G
http://gatewaygeo.com/
On 04/08/2020 08.10, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
On 4. Aug 2020, at 13:58, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
but I would practically *kill* for JOSM to have FreeCAD's suite of sketch
constraints ;-).
you’re aware that there are sketch constraints for configurable
angles (90, 60, 45 etc) and projection sn
Could we move all the programming language du jour fanboying, apps that
have nothing to do OSM and other unrelated to the topic discussions
somewhere else please?
And yes it underlines my point that regardless of how exotic the feature
is, you are always going to find somebody that finds it critic
> At this time nobody is proposing anything more than giving P2 a bit more life
> for a small sum of money
And as myself and others have brought up, it's not a good idea to
spend money to port P2 from a dead technology to another dead
technology, if people still use it it's much more beneficial i
sent from a phone
> On 4. Aug 2020, at 16:26, Matthew Woehlke wrote
>
> Obviously, this would all almost surely be a temporary mode (maybe it
> persists as long as JOSM is open, but isn't uploaded), but since you usually
> draw once, that would be fine. (Bonus points if JOSM could automatica
sent from a phone
> On 4. Aug 2020, at 16:53, Simon Poole wrote:
>
> but it isn't a good measure of what the OSMF should spend its money on, weere
> applying an 80/20 rule is likely to be far more appropriate.
>
As I have said, I’m fine with spending 2500 on a dead proprietary technology
Am 04.08.2020 um 17:05 schrieb Alexandre Oliveira:
>> At this time nobody is proposing anything more than giving P2 a bit more
>> life for a small sum of money
> And as myself and others have brought up, it's not a good idea to
> spend money to port P2 from a dead technology to another dead
> tec
On 04/08/2020 11.08, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
On 4. Aug 2020, at 16:26, Matthew Woehlke wrote
Obviously, this would all almost surely be a temporary mode (maybe
it persists as long as JOSM is open, but isn't uploaded), but since
you usually draw once, that would be fine. (Bonus points if JOSM
On 8/4/2020 7:21 AM, pangoSE wrote:
I suggest we wait for ruffle to be ready and then compile P2 to first wasm and
then decompile it into C and then translate it into rust.
It can then be cleaned up and shipped to both as a desktop application and a
wasm binary run in the browser.
ruffle -> wa
Hello,
The OSMF board just published a proposal for a software
dispute resolution panel:
https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2020/08/04/proposal-for-software-dispute-resolution-panel/
.. and is asking for comments and feedback.
Please reply to this message ~ thank you.
warm greetings,
Dorothea
__
Indeed, this is exactly what I was thinking. From an engineering
maintenance perspective, even if you managed to get something
"working", the result would be an incomprehensible mess. I don't
usually like to speak in such extremes, and I certainly don't mean any
offense, but in this case it's warra
On Tuesday 04 August 2020, Dorothea Kazazi wrote:
>
> The OSMF board just published a proposal for a software
> dispute resolution panel:
> https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2020/08/04/proposal-for-software-dispu
>te-resolution-panel/
I guess i am asking too much if i envision the board creating a pa
Hi,
On 8/4/20 21:30, Christoph Hormann wrote:
> Significant parts of the authority the DWG has among mappers derive from
> the fact that it is not composed of political appointees.
Speaking as a DWG member, I always hoped that people would judge us by
the work we do, not how we got the job ;)
A
The Board hasn't decided on how the panel will be
formed/elected/appointed/choosen. Just because the document doesn't
address one issue, doesn't mean the opposite, horrible option will
happen. Do you think I'm going to support some Old Boy's Network of
corporate employees?
What would you sugg
Rory, I don't know about you, but I'm certainly hoping for a bunch of corporate
sell outs rubber stamping iD decisions and squashing the common mapper into
conformity. Why else would we be doing this?
On Tuesday, August 4, 2020, 04:37:00 PM EDT, Rory McCann
wrote:
The Board hasn't decide
Mikel, I might be misunderstanding what you meant, but in my opinion
conformity is required for this type of project, and I do hope iD/JOSM/...
help us achieve that. To clarify:
* features with the same meaning (type) should be mapped the same way,
otherwise each consumer must understand all of th
Re: "Rory, I don't know about you, but I'm certainly hoping for a bunch of
corporate sell outs rubber stamping iD decisions and squashing the common
mapper into conformity. Why else would we be doing this?"
This sarcastic comment is not a fair response to Christoph's concerns.
While we hope that
It was a joke more aimed at Rory and a continuation of the similar discussion
we’ve had on the board.
And yes I agree very much with the sentiment that we don’t want OSM to be
dominated by companies. or any single point of view for that matter.
I’ve come to not like that quote because I don’t bel
More seriously the line “all interests of the OSM community” was one we talked
a lot about on the board when writing this message, and had several versions,
and indeed we touched on how to best designate what was needed in composition
of the panel. I think it’s not possible to put together a spe
On Tuesday 04 August 2020, Rory McCann wrote:
> The Board hasn't decided on how the panel will be
> formed/elected/appointed/choosen.
Quoting from the proposal:
> In appointing members of the Panel, the Board shall strive for Panel
composition (membership) that reflects [...]
Seems there are so
I meant, that the board hasn't decided how the board will
vote/appoint/choose the members of this panel.
On 05/08/2020 01:07, Christoph Hormann wrote:
On Tuesday 04 August 2020, Rory McCann wrote:
The Board hasn't decided on how the panel will be
formed/elected/appointed/choosen.
Quoting fro
34 matches
Mail list logo