Hi Tobias
That sounds better.
The main question is what "expect it to survive a hypothetical license
change" implies. My expectation is that because of practical
considerations any future licence would require downstream attribution
of OSM so that the OSMF can continue to offer third party
Am 29.11.2022 um 03:57 schrieb Minh Nguyen:
Vào lúc 15:48 2022-11-28, Tobias Knerr đã viết:
On 28.11.22 at Simon Poole wrote:
What is "OSM Contributor Terms compatibility" supposed to be?
Ok, this is clearly imprecise wording.¹
The context is that we would like to offer data donors a
I have concerns about the amount of effort we seem to be asking open data
set creators to make. I think it took me seven years to get the licensing
correct to be able to import the local bus stops and very early in the
process the head of the transit system said 'but we want you to use our
data.'
Vào lúc 15:48 2022-11-28, Tobias Knerr đã viết:
On 28.11.22 at Simon Poole wrote:
What is "OSM Contributor Terms compatibility" supposed to be?
Ok, this is clearly imprecise wording.¹
The context is that we would like to offer data donors a standard legal
text that they can use to make
No response has been received from mapper 设计在先 regarding permission from the
data set owners to add power=edge_server nodes to osm.
Changeset comments, a personal message and a data block have been used to try
to discuss with the mapper to no avail, therefore I have removed
power=edge_server
On 28.11.22 at Simon Poole wrote:
What is "OSM Contributor Terms compatibility" supposed to be?
Ok, this is clearly imprecise wording.¹
The context is that we would like to offer data donors a standard legal
text that they can use to make their data available to OSM in such a way
that we
Am 28.11.2022 um 20:11 schrieb Amanda McCann:
Hello fellow OSMers.
As you are no doubt aware, OSM requires that data imports be listed on the OSM
Wiki ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue ), including if the
source is “ODbL OK status”.
At the Nov. 2022 OSMF Board meeting
>> I'll be curious to hear feedback from this, too. Thanks for your efforts,
>> Lukas: I genuinely hope they help our map!
>
> I can see a use when you have three consecutive segments of a road, where the
> first and the last are named (the same) and the middle is not. This might
> indicate
I am a bit unsure on how to proceed from here...
Maybe let's start with some technical facts:
> IMHO a highway=service, track etc typically do not have names.
> Hopefully you account for that.
> And i am not shure the assumption that other road classes
> always have names holds up.
In the
Hello fellow OSMers.
As you are no doubt aware, OSM requires that data imports be listed on the OSM
Wiki ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue ), including if the
source is “ODbL OK status”.
At the Nov. 2022 OSMF Board meeting (25 Nov), the Board voted that imports
should,
Molto bene Flaminia,
ai piedi della fontana, lato sud! al 14 dicembre alle 19.30 allora.
Alessandro
Il giorno lun 28 nov 2022 alle ore 13:01 Flaminia Tumino <
flaminiatum...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> Ciao a tutt*,
> ultimo appuntamento del 2022 per un mapping party :)
> Appuntamento a Monti ai
> I can't really think what the Osmose people (in this example) could do to
> make people
> NOT blindly make changes in this way
>
Add ability to ban accounts from using Osmose?
And use it to ban people misusing it?
In theory there can be also some sort of fake elements
clearly labelled as
On Sun, Nov 27, 2022 at 09:16:14PM +0100, Lukas Toggenburger via talk wrote:
> Hi all
>
> As you might know, OSM data contains a lot of highway=* without
> name=*. Check your region using the following query:
>
IMHO a highway=service, track etc typically do not have names. Hopefully
you account
On Nov 28, 2022, at 5:57 AM, Maarten Deen wrote:
> Your remark seems reasonable ;)
Thanks, Maarten, I’m chuckling with mirthful laughter here.
> Thing is: this is not meant as a bot, so the usual caveats apply.
That IS an important consideration; thanks for highlighting that aspect. I
didn’t
On 28/11/2022 13:57, Maarten Deen wrote:
What the user wielding the QA tool does with that is his choice.
Indeed, but as we've seen in lots of places users sometimes blindly
follow "suggestions" without engaging their brains.
As an example, Osmose contains very clear information that users
Your remark seems reasonable ;)
Thing is: this is not meant as a bot, so the usual caveats apply. It just
serves as a highlight of "something might be wrong here", like so many QA tools
do. What the user wielding the QA tool does with that is his choice.
Does he automatically correct it? Wrong
See, saying “seems reasonable” actually seems reasonable, until one realizes
one doesn’t truly know. Ask yourself if others in OSM would agree if “seems
reasonable” is good enough to meet OSM’s criteria for data entry: you’ll get
mixed answers, though a sizable number will say “not really
grazie Flaminia, io ci sarò...
___
Talk-it-lazio mailing list
Talk-it-lazio@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it-lazio
Ciao a tutt*,
ultimo appuntamento del 2022 per un mapping party :)
Appuntamento a Monti ai piedi della fontana in piazzetta alle 19.30
https://osmcal.org/event/1741/
A presto
Flaminia
___
Talk-it-lazio mailing list
Talk-it-lazio@openstreetmap.org
Le 28.11.22 à 00:43, Dave F via talk a écrit :
a "high confidence" interpolation, from an armchair or anywhere, will
lead to inaccurate data being added to the OSM database.
if you have a road in 3 segments A B C and A+C have the ssame name,
then not only does it seem reasonable to me to add
Hi all
Thank you for your feedback so far.
> I can see a use when you have three consecutive segments
> of a road, where the first and the last are named (the same)
> and the middle is not. This might indicate an omission.
This is what I do. See
21 matches
Mail list logo
