Re: [talk-au] A way to go

2011-12-02 Thread Andrew Laughton
On 2 December 2011 09:43, Richard Weait wrote: > Dear Andrew, > > Are you the same person as user id:28334 "laughton_andrew" who has > declined? If you think that government data inclusion is likely to > convince other mappers, is it enough for you? Do you have other > issues that you wish to s

Re: [talk-au] A way to go

2011-12-02 Thread John Henderson
On 02/12/11 12:27, Andrew Laughton wrote: I would like a copy of the map before these deletes are made for my GPS, has someone done this before these deletes were done ? I'm not sure exactly what you're looking for, but I've got a copy of http://download.geofabrik.de/osm/australia-oceania.osm.

Re: [talk-au] A way to go

2011-12-02 Thread Nilbog_aus_OSM
com] Sent: Friday, 2 December 2011 12:42 PM To: OSM Australian Talk List Subject: Re: [talk-au] A way to go On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 8:27 PM, Andrew Laughton wrote: > On 2 December 2011 07:20, John Henderson wrote: >> >> On 02/12/11 09:00, Richard Weait wrote: >> >>>

Re: [talk-au] A way to go and missing towns

2011-12-01 Thread El Segundo Can't win
of these tools (or discussion thereof) that would assist with remapping?     From: Richard Weait To: OSM Australian Talk List Sent: Friday, 2 December 2011 12:42 PM Subject: Re: [talk-au] A way to go and missing towns On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 9:09 PM, El Se

Re: [talk-au] A way to go and missing towns

2011-12-01 Thread Richard Weait
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 9:09 PM, El Segundo Can't win wrote: > Late to the conversation but.. > > First up, from people have said, what cc-cleaner is doing is shocking > vandalism, whether they intend it or not. I'm disappointed by deletions without remapping. One way to defeat that is by rem

[talk-au] A way to go and missing towns

2011-12-01 Thread El Segundo Can't win
Late to the conversation but..   First up, from people have said, what cc-cleaner is doing is shocking vandalism, whether they intend it or not.   In a worst case scenario, all non-CT compliant information will be expunged on 1st April. There is no need to delete it (especially manually) befo

Re: [talk-au] A way to go

2011-12-01 Thread Richard Weait
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 8:27 PM, Andrew Laughton wrote: > On 2 December 2011 07:20, John Henderson wrote: >> >> On 02/12/11 09:00, Richard Weait wrote: >> >>> Deleting tainted data and remapping by local mappers is far superior >>> to waiting until March 31 and running a script. >>> >>> So removin

Re: [talk-au] A way to go

2011-12-01 Thread Andrew Laughton
On 2 December 2011 07:20, John Henderson wrote: > On 02/12/11 09:00, Richard Weait wrote: > > Deleting tainted data and remapping by local mappers is far superior >> to waiting until March 31 and running a script. >> >> So removing data from decliners and remapping it, and reaching out >> to tho

Re: [talk-au] A way to go

2011-12-01 Thread John Henderson
On 02/12/11 09:00, Richard Weait wrote: Deleting tainted data and remapping by local mappers is far superior to waiting until March 31 and running a script. So removing data from decliners and remapping it, and reaching out to those who haven't yet responded is valid and valuable. Thanks for

Re: [talk-au] A way to go

2011-12-01 Thread Richard Weait
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Mark Pulley wrote: > Has a date been set for the removal of CC-BY-SA-only data yet? Before 01 April 2012 http://blog.osmfoundation.org/2011/11/16/odbl-progress/ Deleting tainted data and remapping by local mappers is far superior to waiting until March 31 and run

Re: [talk-au] A way to go

2011-12-01 Thread Mark Pulley
I've been thinking for a while about the best way to remove CC-BY-SA-only data when the time comes. As already noted, some people have started already by deleting large areas of data and re-adding from bing (losing all the tags) - which at best may be unnecessary, and at present (as no date has

Re: [talk-au] A way to go

2011-11-23 Thread Nick Hocking
Ian wrote - "I started a thread on talk a while ago about how to handle this situation, but it went nowhere, with the thread (as usual) hijacked to talk about licencing issues unr

Re: [talk-au] A way to go.

2011-11-14 Thread Ian Sergeant
I started a thread on talk a while ago about how to handle this situation, but it went nowhere, with the thread (as usual) hijacked to talk about licencing issues unrelated to the practicality of implementation. http://www.mail-archive.com/talk@openstreetmap.org/msg39790.html My suggestion was a

Re: [talk-au] A way to go.

2011-11-13 Thread Nick Hocking
Richard Wrote.. "" On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Nick Hocking wrote: > PAST > > 1) decliner traces a way into OSM > 2) acceptor surveys road and copies in street sign info and turn restriction > info into OSM > 3) decliner bot-a a

Re: [talk-au] A way to go.

2011-11-13 Thread Richard Weait
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Nick Hocking wrote: > PAST > > 1) decliner traces a way into OSM > 2) acceptor surveys road and copies in street sign info and turn restriction > info into OSM > 3) decliner bot-a adds maxspeed info > 4) decliner bot-b fixes incorrect maxspeed tag > 5) decliner add

[talk-au] A way to go.

2011-11-13 Thread Nick Hocking
PAST 1) decliner traces a way into OSM 2) acceptor surveys road and copies in street sign info and turn restriction info into OSM 3) decliner bot-a adds maxspeed info 4) decliner bot-b fixes incorrect maxspeed tag 5) decliner adds numlanes info 6) acceptor realigns way to smooth it out 7) acceptor