2009/12/17 Steve Bennett :
> Hmm, no one thought of registering "Open Maps" as a trademark as well as
> "OpenStreetMap"?
Weren't you the one agreeing with me that the words "open" and "free"
have been abused too much and are too ambigious the other day?
___
2009/12/17 John Smith :
> What a pity the whole basis for Copenhagen is a complete and utter
> sham, it's true global warming is man made, the moment some men
> started fudging the figures and lying about anything that disagreed
> with political agendas.
>
> Sure the world i
2009/12/17 Emilie Laffray :
>
>
> 2009/12/17 Jean-Marc Liotier
>>
>> The quality of OpenStreetMap's work speaks for itself, but it seems that
>> we need to speak about it too - especially now that Google is attempting
>> to to appear as holding the moral high ground by using terms such as
>> "citi
2009/12/17 Kenneth Gonsalves :
> On Thursday 17 Dec 2009 1:03:16 pm Andreas Labres wrote:
>> Patrick from talk-at found this by chance:
>>
>> http://openmaps.eu/
>>
>> They seem to be reinventing the wheel, somehow...
>>
> license looks proprietary
>From their copyright page:
As our name suggests
2009/12/15 Steve Bennett :
> My argument stands. There is no need to tag layers *except* in those
> situations. And in those situations, layers are absolutely required.
> (Well, except that underground car parks are/will be tagged as
> underground...and again, a convention should be in place to avo
2009/12/15 Steve Bennett :
> Carefully talking out what these "sane defaults" are, documenting, and
> using them is not "the lazy thing to do".
You are assuming people are going to go to lengths to read such doco
and more to the point understand the implications and as a result
alter their behavio
2009/12/15 Steve Bennett :
> Um, the layer tag helps specifically *only* in cases with bridges over
> bridges...which are exceedingly rare. So I would dispute your premise
> that "the layer tag always helps on a bridge".
And tunnels over tunnels, possibly multi-story underground car parks
too when
2009/12/15 Steve Bennett :
> That's the right thing to do.
Right is a preconceived notion, in this case it's the lazy thing to
do, not nessicarily the right thing to do.
> Not if you document them. I agree that you can't leave everything up
This is where explicit tagging can save people from poo
2009/12/15 Peter Childs :
> If you have a bridge or a tunnel you don't need a layer tag a bridge
> infers it "goes over" a tunnel that it "goes over"
Let's start with the basics, we're talking about a water way and a
road way, what if neither is tagged with layer or tunnel or bridge
tags and ther
2009/12/15 Steve Bennett :
> IMHO, tagging "layer=1 bridge=yes" for a road going over water is an
> example of a hack, and "tagging for the renderer". The information
> "bridge=1" is more than enough to render with, so "layer=1" can *only*
> be interpreted as giving a renderer a crutch.
Without la
2009/12/15 Steve Bennett :
> Asbolutely nothing. You're wy overthinking this, both of you.
> Layers are just a hack to make stuff render. It's not like
It's not a hack, it's an easy way to order some elements when
rendering so things look right. A hack would be using the layer tag to
alter the
2009/12/15 Anthony :
> Okay, but here's the thing. We don't put a fence at layer=1, even though
> it's on top of the ground. Because then it wouldn't be a barrier to travel
> along the ground.
It's attached to the ground... bridges are usually above at least some
ground level thing...
_
2009/12/15 Steve Bennett :
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 2:36 PM, John Smith wrote:
>> I tend to mark bridges as layer=1 and anything at ground level I don't
>> set a layer tag, which seems the most logical to me since ditches
>> aren't under the ground etc.
>
>
2009/12/15 Anthony :
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 10:31 PM, John Smith
> wrote:
>>
>> 2009/12/15 Anthony :
>> > No, if you break copyright law you can be taken to court to make sure
>> > you
>> > don't break copyright law in the future. If "b
2009/12/15 Steve Bennett :
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 1:31 PM, Anthony wrote:
>> In a park is a ditch. There is a very small bridge going over the ditch.
>> I've tagged the ditch with barrier=ditch. Should the ditch be layer=-1?
>> Even though the park is layer=0?
>
> Layers are only there to exp
2009/12/15 Anthony :
> Browsewrap may or may not be enforceable. And even if it is enforceable any
> judgment for damages would probably be minimal. But I'm willing to abide by
> the terms of service of the sites that I visit, at least when I take the
> time to read them. Not doing so is effecti
2009/12/15 Steve Bennett :
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Anthony wrote:
>> Read Jacobsen v. Katzer, and the commentary on it, and then get back to us.
>
> Wasn't there some case where one company sued another for not making
> source code available as required?
There has been a lot of these,
2009/12/15 Anthony :
> No, if you break copyright law you can be taken to court to make sure you
> don't break copyright law in the future. If "break licenses", then, well,
> it depends on the license. In the case of CC-BY-SA, if you breach the terms
You are confusing contracts with licenses, wo
2009/12/15 Anthony :
> CC-BY-SA isn't "enforcible" on anything. It grants rights, it doesn't take
> them away.
It's a license, if you break licenses on software you can be taken to
court to make sure you do follow them in future and are punished for
past digressions. So while it grants rights, th
2009/12/15 Anthony :
> Ah, but I don't plan on ever visiting the OSM website when and if they
> switch to the ODbL.
I doubt just visiting the OSM website without some kind of click
wrapper similar to nearmap.com does would force you to agree with ODBL
for just using the website. On the other hand
2009/12/15 Anthony :
> Yeah, well, a contract can't be enforced against people who agree to it.
I think you meant disagree, but only if you have a suitable
license/legal method that can enforce that term
> And don't you know, I have a contract on my web site which says that my data
> can't be use
2009/12/15 Anthony :
> CC-BY-SA says this: "You may not offer or impose any terms on the Work that
> alter or restrict the terms of this License or the recipients' exercise of
> the rights granted hereunder."
>
> The ODbL attempts to do exactly that.
Correct, but the reason for ODBL is because som
2009/12/15 Anthony :
> Again, I don't remember saying that. And if I did, I apologize.
Sorry if I'm mistaken, but I'm pretty sure you mentioned it.
> In any case, if OSM decides to take the position that my contributions are
> not copyrightable, and therefore they are free to incorporate them in
2009/12/15 Anthony :
> My primary reason for not wanting to release my data as PD is that I don't
> want to support OSM if it decides to go with the ODbL. A street map
> licensed under ODbL is not something I find worthy of my (uncompensated)
> support, and the fact that the project would go from
2009/12/14 Brendan Morley :
> Well it got mixed up as soon as "most maps you think of as free actually
> have legal or technical restrictions" collided with the existence of
> ShareAlike.
No, your assumptions are bumping into the share a like provision, you
assumed something that someone else assu
2009/12/14 Brendan Morley :
> And that requirement has a chilling effect (holds you back) on some
> "productive ways". Hypothetical example: I want to put my fast food joints
> on a map. If I licenced from a typical commercial provider, I pay a one time
> consideration, produce my mashed up work, a
2009/12/14 Steve Bennett :
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:37 PM, John Smith
> wrote:
>>> What is being lost though?
>>
>> When Google sucks up data what's being lost is supporting the greater
>> good, Google just sucks up all the data they can for their own go
2009/12/14 Brendan Morley :
> I agree! (-:
>
> When pondering this earlier today I realised one of the fundamental
> ambiguities is:
>
> Is freedom/openness enforced on the dataset *itself*? Or
> Is freedom/openness enforced on your right to *use* that dataset?
>
> I'd always assumed the second opt
2009/12/14 Brendan Morley :
> I suppose you would have hated contributing to Linux then.
GPL has similar sharing required by ODBL, if you had said BSD you
might have had a point, MS and others have taken BSD code and given
nothing back, they have recently been shown to have used GPL code and
as a
2009/12/14 Peter Childs :
> CCbySA says you must attribute where it came from, ODbl make no such
> demand. So by following ODbl you break CCbySA. and the law is
> about black and white not shades of grey.
CC-BY is attributation, CC-BY-SA is attributation + sharing changes
under the same licens
2009/12/14 Brendan Morley :
> I've seen the links and I trust I'm clear on what the LWP is up to. However
> that's not what I signed up for, to be honest. I mean it's an
> "OpenStreetMap" not a CopyleftMap or anything that unambiguous. I got sold
> on the blurb on that wiki page and didn't really n
2009/12/14 Brendan Morley :
>>Google has a lot of data and are good at getting more, be it official
>>or crowdsourced. It would be a huge loss for the collective knowledge
>>of everyone if this data escapes the virus. I can't afford that loss,
>>maybe you can.
>
> What is being lost though?
When G
2009/12/14 Brendan Morley :
> And the copyleft mindset of the LWP continues to perpetuate substantial
> "legal [...] restrictions on [...] use." So really, the OSM project has
> failed to deliver on this latent demand.
I've seen the same comments regarding GPL v BSD licenses, free and
open are r
2009/12/14 Brendan Morley :
> What is *materially removed* from you if your "labour is used to
> commercially benefit others" and/or "commercial companies [are] just sucking
> up all
> the data and not giving hardly anything back in return if they extend the
> map"?
I'm not a source of free labour
2009/12/14 andrzej zaborowski :
> also something to do with 'geometry'. There are obviously interesting
> things in GIS that are not related to graphics like the datums and
> projections and geometry on a sphere and I don't know where one learns
> these, I know little about them.
Surveying and/or
2009/12/14 Anthony :
> I certainly don't remember saying that, and it doesn't sound like something
> I'd say. As I have said before, to protect my geodata, I use backups.
I was extrapolating based on what you stated earlier, backups are a
protection of sorts, but the discussion is about legal pro
2009/12/14 Serge Wroclawski :
> Practical, but knowing a little theory helps know how to apply the practical.
Theory only helps to point, practical is different because you are
dealing with software implementations of GIS, someone was making a
mapnik virtual image that might be as good a place to
2009/12/14 Serge Wroclawski :
> So where does someone like me begin? Is there a good book I can read?
> A video course online?
Are you more interested in theory aspects or practical aspects?
> I realize that many universities offer a GIS class, but I'm wondering
> if this is something that can be
2009/12/14 Anthony :
> No, I mean it isn't needed.
If everyone believed it wasn't needed we wouldn't be having this discussion...
> I believe you added something to my comments.
What did I add? You said cc-by-sa can't protect geodata (in your
jurisdiction), so it can't prevent it from being rebu
2009/12/14 Anthony :
> If the the data is not copyrightable, it is PD, and no "license" is going to
> magically make it not PD.
Not all legal systems are derived from the British/Common Law legal
system, there are others that instead of having all rights by default
you only have rights if granted
2009/12/13 Jon Burgess :
> On Fri, 2009-12-11 at 09:10 +1000, John Smith wrote:
>> It's slightly annoying now that things render so quickly that the
>> coastlines don't.
>
> I ran the coastcheck utility last night to update the coastline
> shapefiles on the main
2009/12/13 Brendan Morley :
> So John, given you wish to "don't want commercial companies just sucking up
> all the data and not giving hardly anything back in return if they extend
> the map" -
I never said at any point I agree with ODBL, I said I agreed with the intent.
2009/12/13 Anthony :
> If geodata is not copyrightable, then Share Alike is meaningless. The
> original work is public domain, and the modified work is also public domain.
Assuming public domains is a valid option, which isn't valid in all
jurisdictions. Even where PD is valid if you modify it an
2009/12/13 Anthony :
> If CC-BY-SA can enforce what? Attribution? If geodata isn't copyrightable,
> then it doesn't matter if the derivative works are released under CC-BY-SA.
CC-BY is attribution, CC-BY-SA is Attribution with Share Alike.
While geodata might not be, the meta data should be imh
2009/12/13 Anthony :
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 10:56 PM, John Smith
> wrote:
>>
>> That's the issue I have, I have no problem giving back to the
>> community, but I don't want commercial companies just sucking up all
>> the data and not giving hardly anyth
2009/12/13 Anthony :
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 8:17 PM, John Smith
> wrote:
>>
>> The problem I have with that is my labour is used to commercially
>> benefit others and in turn nothing they do would have to be returned
>> to the community.
>
> So you want to b
2009/12/13 wonderling :
> Where are there instructions for viewing data points?
> The format is: ., ., ., comments
>
> The need is to evaluate the validity of the points before publishing.
Convert it to an osm file and load it in JOSM as a new layer
___
2009/12/12 Brendan Morley :
> If "the intent of OSM is to represent the centerline of a road as accurately
> as possible" (and presumably other land features too) then this is another
> reason to consider dropping the SA requirement - or dual licencing or dual
> databases or being able to assign a
2009/12/11 Pieren :
> 45% "yes and consider all my data Public domain (no restrictions)"
That is until someone edits said PD data and then they want their
edits under ODBL at which point it's no longer PD...
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
2009/12/11 Elizabeth Dodd :
> so we don't need imported data?
>
> -- Forwarded Message --
>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Why PD is not better for business
> Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009
> From: paul youlten
> To: Liz
>
> Liz,
>
> The coastline I did back in the "old days" was between Has
2009/12/11 Paul Wagener :
> This might sound like a crazy idea, but can't we just ask businesses
> nicely about giving us their added data back?
> It has already got us this far. You'd be surprised how far a little
> mutual trust can get you.
Isn't that in essence what licenses are for?
_
2009/12/11 Anthony :
> I see no evidence that that's the case. I don't think attempting to impose
> a contractual agreement on others without their consent is going to work,
> and I think there will be significant negative side-effects to such immoral
> behavior.
I don't think immoral is the righ
It's slightly annoying now that things render so quickly that the
coastlines don't.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
2009/12/11 Anthony :
> It's not. However, if we could convince businesses to "give back to the
> community", it'd be better.
If you feel that way, the ODBL would in principal be the better option
to ensure it happens with a stick just to make sure.
___
2009/12/9 Shalabh :
> Is there anyway the AND data can be segmented such that it can be deleted in
> sections and a new track with correct attributes put in as and when a mapper
> gets the correct data? Now I am a BIG 0 as a programmer, so if this is a no
> go, what else can be done? Any suggestion
2009/12/9 Pieren :
> - yes and consider all my data PD
Umm what happens in jurisdictions where PD isnt' applicable?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
2009/12/8 Ed Avis :
> John Smith gmail.com> writes:
>
>>If GPLv3 was inspired by Tivo, I think this license is somewhat
>>inspired by Google and other commercial mapping companies, who have a
>>habbit of sucking in all the data they can get their hands on and
2009/12/8 Anthony :
> But if it's copyrighted, who owns the copyright on it? Each person who uses
> the tag? The people who participate in the list discussion? The OSMF?
You own the copyright on your changes but you also agreed to release
it at present under CC-BY-SA, as does everyone else, so
2009/12/8 David Fawcett :
> I have some questions about standard practices for coastlines and
> structures that define or protrude from the coast. Is there a
> specific place for discussion of this topic area, or is this list the
> best place?
For tagging, there is now a tagging list to discuss s
2009/12/8 Paul Houle :
> My major concern with a license change is compatibility with
> CC-BY-SA sources such as dbpedia, wikipedia, etc.
>
> So far as I'm concerned, dbpedia and freebase are the core of a
> linked data space that assigns taxonomic identifiers to (most) "things"
> that exi
2009/12/7 Graham Seaman :
> This is the aspect of the whole thing I find most worrying too: this
> signover of rights to a centralised body makes external attack much more
> possible. Is it really necessary for the OSMF to have both functions
> (management and rights ownership)? For example, I woul
2009/12/7 Anthony :
>> But I would argue that a selection of a finite set from an infinite
>> possible nodes that can represent the centerline of a road is a sufficiently
>> creative endeavor that is automatically afforded copyright according to the
>> US copyright system.
>
> Inaccuracy isn't copy
2009/12/6 Anthony :
> What, you say, you already had that right anyway? Well, here in the US, I
> already have the right to copy and redistribute the OSM database.
Depends what laws the laws in your jurisdictions are derived from.
Sometimes it's anything goes unless you aren't allowed to do it.
2009/12/6 Anthony :
> I prefer 1. Of course, what works for you isn't the same as what works for
> me. I'm fine with everything being public domain. Why an open content
> project would try to place restrictions on the use of a collection of facts
> is beyond me.
If GPLv3 was inspired by Tivo, I
2009/12/6 Anthony :
> Might want to check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Click-through_license . A
> quick scan finds one case where the license was found unenforceable (because
> it was unconscionable), and several where it was found enforceable.
As I said, the judgement I'm thinking of was a few
2009/12/6 SteveC :
> Read the wikipedia entry on tit for tat, and iterated prisoners dilemma.
That's just it, I'm trying to avoid the conjecture in coming up with
an opinion on if this is a good thing or not for me and my
contributions or not.
ie am I wasting time contributing to OSM if my contri
2009/12/6 Anthony :
>> Click through type agreements have already been deemed as
>> unenforceable,
>
> Can you provide me with a few links to back that up (off-list or on the
> legal list if you think it's too off-topic)? To my knowledge the
> enforceability is spotty and unclear.
Trying to find
2009/12/6 SteveC :
> By letting them know FUD and BS will be shot down.
And you are coming off just as unrational as you are claiming they are
being and not helping fence sitters one bit.
If you want a dictatorship on the matter say so, otherwise you or
others wanting the change need to address t
2009/12/6 SteveC :
> Are you also living on planet Frederik? Out of all the crazy claims
> this has to be the most crazy. Where have you been the past year of
> consultations?
How is insulting people going to help things?
___
talk mailing list
talk@open
2009/12/6 Anthony :
> No sense in wasting everyone's time if the OSMF members aren't going to
> agree to it anyway?
I'm pretty sure he meant asking contributors before threatening to
remove their contributions.
> It'll still be there. In perfect form for the fork which will inevitably
> arise.
2009/12/6 Richard Fairhurst :
> Creative Commons, of course, has practising copyright lawyers too. They have
> said that CC-BY-SA isn't applicable to data and we shouldn't use it.
There has also been a lot of data imported from Government sources
that released data as CC-BY-SA and I'm sure they ha
2009/12/6 Ulf Lamping :
> Iván Sánchez Ortega schrieb:
>> So you think that the OSMF is forcing people to do things, and controlling
>> instead of supporting?
>
> Does: "Say yes to the new license or we'll delete your data" sound more
> like supporting or controlling to you?
I had the unfortunate
2009/12/6 John Smith :
> 2009/12/6 Shaun McDonald :
>> The License Working Group has spent months, well probably nearer years, on
>> the license change. They know one heck of a lot more about legal systems
>> than myself. They are people that I trust. Therefore I'm g
2009/12/6 Shaun McDonald :
> The License Working Group has spent months, well probably nearer years, on
> the license change. They know one heck of a lot more about legal systems than
> myself. They are people that I trust. Therefore I'm going to listen to them,
> and let them just get on with i
2009/12/4 Steve Bennett :
> The main focus is *adding* information to roads currently mapped as single
> (non-divided) roads. Gaining information. Not losing. There are a huge
> number of places that this will add information that was not previously
> mapped.
This opens up a can of worms about mic
2009/12/4 Steve Bennett :
> Again, this proposal is not primarily about rendering. That's a nice benefit
> in some cases. The goals are:
> 1) More appropriate data structure
How is this more appropriate, you are loosing real world information
to improve rendering.
> 2) Better usability
How does
2009/12/4 :
> These marks are part tourist attraction, part survey control. Most are
> located where a car with an in-built GPS can drive right up to it, so
> the driver can check the accuracy of their GPS signal.
The Gympie co-ords are wonky to say the least, it puts the marker near
Kilcoy/Summe
2009/12/3 Richard Mann :
> Unless you want to write routines for pre-processing two almost-parallel
> ways back into a single way so it can be rendered neatly, I suggest it's a
> mapping problem. Don't make work for other people if you don't have to.
I thought we were trying to map the world in as
2009/12/3 Steve Bennett :
> I find the current practice of duplicating minor roads when there is a
> median strip pretty unsatisfactory. Even disregarding the effort, the
> end result never renders well: usually the street name is written
> twice, the one-way arrows get messy etc.
That's a problem
2009/12/2 Steve Bennett :
>
> IMHO, the US English/Australian English issue here is spurious. Australians
> certainly understand and use the word "ford" to mean a low water crossing.
I disagree, I've only ever heard them refered to as causeways and
fords up until I started mapping was a make of ca
A thought occurred to me, that people are only planning to use areas
because editors don't easily allow for widths to be entered
graphically.
I wonder how much work it would be if you could draw the way and then
stretch it sideways to fill out the extact area you wanted covered and
then the editor
2009/11/28 Konrad Skeri :
> They could be put as fee=prepaid/metered/unmetered
> Perhaps not optimal, but not entierly wrong.
metering=prepaid/metered/unmetered
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Why do you insist on limiting everything to just areas, the problem is
micro mapping, areas is one solution to it, but not the only solution.
If you want to have a discussion that's fine but you are merely
dismissing other view points because the problem has been too narrowly
defined to even bothe
2009/11/28 Roy Wallace :
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 5:47 AM, John Smith wrote:
>>
>> I've been seeing this thread develop, and apart from trying to use
>> areas and relations in all sorts of weird and wonderful ways wouldn't
>> it be simpler from a logical poin
I've been seeing this thread develop, and apart from trying to use
areas and relations in all sorts of weird and wonderful ways wouldn't
it be simpler from a logical point of view to treat ways as a grouping
of lanes and those lanes can be assigned tags that differ from the
ways, such as directions
2009/11/26 andrzej zaborowski :
> I assume layer is 0 if I don't add the layer tag.
Yes, which is usually anything at ground level.
> Hopefully this is the correct thing to assume because otherwise things
> will break if I have a bridge with no layer tag and a another bridge
No they won't break,
2009/11/25 Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason :
> Sorry for the confusion. I mixed up 2510 (a random recent commit) and
> 2255 (7 weeks old) in my browser and thought that the current JOSM
> tested had just been released based on 2510. Obviously it's not *that*
> big a deal if it has been out in JOSM tested a
2009/11/25 Woll :
> 3) Battery life
> Not long enough for day trips. The battery runs out in a few hours, even
> with ordinary usage of the iPhone, so on a day trip with a 2 hour car drive
> you can't map both the outward and inward journeys.
Here's an iPhone negaitve I didn't see mentioned before
2009/11/24 John Smith :
> 1 nautical mile is exactly 1852m
Sorry, it was set to 1853m.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nautical_mile
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
2009/11/24 Frederik Ramm :
> Maybe "~= 100km", but "== 60 nm". One nautical mile is exactly one minute of
Because they estimated the circumference to 36,000km, but it's over 40,000km
> arc. Say again which system was naturally suited for all things geo?
1 nautical mile is exactly 1852m
Actual c
2009/11/24 Anthony :
> Nevermind. That's about half an inch, and it doesn't seem to be less
> than a pixel (at my latitude/longitude, anyway). For some reason last
> time i calculated it I thought it was more.
You should use metric it's easier since metric distances were based on
a rough approxi
2009/11/24 andrzej zaborowski :
> If anyone has experience with any of the two and additionally the Palm
> Pre, I'd love to see a comparison too, and especially if there are any
> OSM related apps. My experience with Pre so far:
Is there a GSM version of the Pre yet?
2009/11/24 Valent Turkovic :
> - onboard GPS precision
The iPhone has a poor GPS chip from what I've read.
> - a bit bigger and heavier than iPhone
There is more than one phone that runs Android, some are very similar
in weight/size to the iPhone, also some have a physical keypad which
is much m
2009/11/23 Jean-Marc Liotier :
> So is anyone aware of automated tracing techniques that Google might be
> using ? Is automated tracing from legally available imagery something
I was under the impression that google used their mapmaker technology
and had employees, and since releasing it to the pu
2009/11/23 Sam Vekemans :
> Hi everyone,
> What do you think of the idea to convert the shp files to OSM, then to
> GPX and upload it that way?
I don't think this would be a good idea, they aren't GPS traces, it
would also remove or make more difficult if things need to be
attributed to know what
2009/11/21 Peter Childs :
> But most people have more CPU than they really know what to do with
> these days.
Actually it's going the other way, mobile phones and netbooks are
becoming the most common internet connected devices.
___
talk mailing lis
2009/11/21 Peter Childs :
> If we had an application, that could read osm and render on the fly we
> could have any zoom level we like, including zoom levels between zoom
> levels, (ie vector graphics)
>
> In theory Potlatch already does some of this, buts it written to enter
> data not render the
Was there some sort of consensus on how to tag these at all?
Even though I don't think they should be automatically guessed at, and
even though there is boundaries for most places in Australia, some
times the towns out grow the boundaries and it'd be useful to tag
these exceptions.
__
2009/11/20 Jean-Marc Liotier :
> The command line I am using for the plugin is
> 'gnome-web-photo --mode=photo --format=ppm "{0}" /dev/stdout | pnmcrop
> -white | pnmtopng'
I had no luck with gnome-web-photo on ubuntu at all, just get and
compile webkit-image, it's fairly trivial to do and works a
2009/11/20 Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason :
> Who's up for a virtual mapping party with this amazing imagery:
Currently we're trying to completely map out Carnarvon, which is a
small town about 1000km from the nearest city.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-24.8724&lon=113.6885&zoom=13&layers=B000FTF
1001 - 1100 of 1754 matches
Mail list logo
