On 5/9/2024 5:33 AM, Florian Lohoff wrote:
At least in Germany we have a grid of Basestations which offer their
RTCM 3.1/3.2 Data via NTRIP which is called SAPOS. As there are huge
differences between different states at least in some of them its for
Free.
When I last looked 5 years ago, the
a variable
number of components.
Mike
On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 8:26 AM Martin Trautmann via talk <
talk@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> Is there any JSON converter that you would recommend?
>
> There are plenty of web services, but none of those worked for me, on
> <
> https:/
On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 12:53 PM Harsha Somaya wrote:
> The data on these trees is only added if the user consents.
>
To what exactly have these users consented? Putting their data in the
public domain? To some other license? We need more specifics.
> I am creating an open source app with my
there are other
things that you, or others can point out, it would further the journey to
better communication.
Mike
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
On Wed, May 3, 2023, 1:00 PM Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:
> I would caution against hyper-simplifying the combativeness of the mailing
> lists
>
I am not sure using a term such as "combative" is going to be effective in
bringing about the change you desire. First the term has strong negative
mple, you responded to the entire
list, and now we know you feel there has been "anger, outrage, and
catigation" on this list. If you provide more details to the list, I am
sure most of us will make an effort to do better (as long as it doesn't
involve refraining
am assuming that you had the best of
intentions and that you were not trying to mislead anyone.
As Frederick pointed out, members of some other working groups seem to do a
very good job of making it clear as to whether they are speaking as part of
a WG or as an indiv
ith some things you are doing, some agree with things you are doing, we
are having a discussion. We learn and get better by being open to ideas
from those that do not agree with us.
Mike
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
enough. I got the
impression that this was a CWG survey.
Mike
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
cational, commercial or governmental." [0]
If this isn't the case, then the above referenced OSMF page should be
edited to reflect this.
Mike
[0]
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Licence_and_Legal_FAQ#1.3._What_can_I_do_with_the_OSM_Data
?
__
Hi,
AT has removed the block and email service to OSM has resumed.
Thanks for your help!
Regards,
Mike
On 1/30/2023 9:24 AM, Grant Slater wrote:
Hi Mike,
We have now reached out to ATT asking them to unblock the
OpenStreetMap.org mail relay server or provide us with more detail
block.
Mike
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 11:22 AM Minh Nguyen via talk
wrote:
> Vào lúc 09:55 2022-12-05, Zeke Farwell đã viết:
> > That is a good summary, though "Once the OSM available satellite imagery
> > does not show the feature"
1) There are other sources that an armchair mapper can use other than
general public"
Is this acceptable? In my mind it is not as the whole community should
have access in order to verify and build on these edits.
Thoughts?
Mike
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
and Strava for some time. Tagging the ols trail with a
life cycle prefix lets other mappers know that what they are seeing on
imagery doesn't match reality.
Mike
>
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
&g
options enabled
> for the mechanism to work (or you need to replace all the data).
>
Thanks. Unfortunately most of the time I will be surveying without a data
connection, so this isn't going to work for me.
>
> Simon
>
> PS: osm-talk is not a suitable forum for support questions.
>
ications" is 30 meters - under most conditions my
phone's location should be more accurate than that.
What am I doing wrong?
Mike
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
ess places of worship report looks good, but for me equally
as important is places of worship with no religion. Any chance of that being
added?
Cheers,
Mike
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
else. For example, since both your employer FB and
the OSMF have an interest in "attribution guidelines", I would think you
should recuse yourself from any work or decision making by the board in
this matter, should you be elected. Just my 2 cents...
Mike
__
On 11/12/2020 1:09 PM, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
Now I understand the occurrence of Maps.me POI simultaneously with a
redundant note. This is even worse than I imagined.
That clears up something that I had seen in new users. I had thought
they first created a note because that is the
e name of a road it connects, but it should use the ref of a road that
connects!
Regards,
Mike
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
you might have of these
facilities) so that other mappers can benefit from your knowledge.
Just my two cents,
Mike
On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 3:37 PM Karson Sommer
wrote:
> Over the past month, I have mapped across the state of Iowa, attempting to
> add athletic facilities which were absent
arate issue if you would like. Let me know.
Mike
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Based on some likely Wiki-Fiddling, I'd like to see the Trunk road
comments about the US tagging cleaned up to match reality. (I realize
that is harder than just reverting to a previous point in time).
___
Talk-us mailing list
On 9/27/2020 11:22 PM, Jack Burke wrote:
I'm on Slack, and I originally posted a comment about this editor on
some roads in Florida (that I'm familiar with), but the responses I
saw seemed to be somewhat "meh" so I didn't pursue it.
There are so many small arguments "this is a trunk" "no, a
On 9/27/2020 11:22 PM, Jack Burke wrote:
and he has a diary
entry about what he's doing (in addition to what he has on his profile
page about it). He changed*every single* trunk road in Georgia to
primary, and from what I can tell, in Florida, too. I haven't yet
expanded my examination into
vides some
assurance that someone doesn't add it back to OSM using and old source
(imagery, GPX tracks, etc).
Mike
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 9:36 AM Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 25/09/2020 16:04, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Wondering if there was a consensus on tagging an
On 9/22/2020 9:26 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
The extra hamlet nodes are import remainders that haven't yet been
converted to landuse areas. The general landuse zones for that area
have been identified, but do not exactly correspond to the named
subdivisions. As I get a
On 9/22/2020 8:56 PM, Karson Sommer wrote:
Looking around the area of the edit, there is a lot of stuff from my
perspective that seems fishy. There are a bunch of place=hamlet nodes? I
certainly don't see anything that should be tagged as a hamlet, they all
look like place=neighborhood to
Thoughts on use of place=neighborhood for subdivisions?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/91255294
Note that there are many thousands already tagged this way (5000 plus
in a section of the southeast alone).
___
Talk-us mailing list
Thanks Kathleen and Mateusz!
I will thank Ron for the change and try to start a dialog with our DWG
about AllTrails asking their users to contact the DWG directly with map
errors.
Mike
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 5:21 AM Mateusz Konieczny via talk <
talk@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> AFAIK
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 2:02 PM Mike Thompson wrote:
> Has anyone tried contacting the AllTrails[0] people about their use of OSM
> without attribution? I am not talking about the "OSM Map Layer" that they
> offer, but rather the default "AllTrails Map Layer." A
ere may be local sources that are better). In the days leading up to a
planned hike or mountain bike ride I will make sure the OSM data in the
area is as up to date as I can make it using the available resources.
However, be aware that some apps only update their OSM data infrequently.
Mike
Hallo zusammen,
aus Gründen müssen wir für unsere Kunden prüfen, woher die OSM-Kacheln geladen
werden. Nicht europäische Server sind da ungewollt (z. B. wg. der
IP-Adressen-Übermittlung). Gibt es für die grauen Kacheln auch Server in
Europa, so wie bei den farbigen Kacheln z. B. bei
On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 7:34 PM brad wrote:
> I'm with Kevin, SteveA, etc, here. In the part of the world that I
> live, a map without national forest & BLM boundaries is very incomplete.
> A useful OSM needs this. The useful boundary would be the actual
> ownership boundary, not the outer
, types of travel allowed...
I use the free, open source, OSMAND app. https://osmand.net/
Mike
On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 3:49 PM wrote:
> Hi,
> Navigation app for my iOS device (Navigator by MapFactor) offers two
> choices regarding maps/navigation data source. These are (i) OpenStreetMaps
provide more
detail if required.
Kind Regards
Mike King
GIS Specialist
NHVR Solutions, Corporate Services
National Heavy Vehicle Regulator
P: 07 3309 8880 | E: mike.k...@nhvr.gov.au<mailto:mike.k...@nhvr.gov.au>
PO Box 492 | Fortitude Valley QLD 4006
Gasworks | Level 3, 76 Skyring Terrace|
nds like my driveway. If you are using my driveway without my
permission, either implicit (e.g. delivering a package) or explicit, I am
going to ask you to leave. I think you are conflating whether something is
"not allowed" with "can be prosecuted as a crime."
Mike
__
I am saying we don't have any
evidence one way or the other.
Mike
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On Sun, Aug 30, 2020, 9:02 AM Greg Troxel wrote:
> On 8/30/20 11:00, Mike Thompson wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 8:04 AM Greg Troxel > <mailto:g...@lexort.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 8:04 AM Greg Troxel wrote:
>
>
> Being on someone's land without permission is trespassing, but this is
> not a crime.
>
not a crime, until the land owner asks you leave and you fail to do so, at
least in Colorado.
>
>
>
hanges.
>
> From Ron's quick and positive response to the attribution issue I am
guessing he might be open to having a discussion about these other issues.
Once the attribution issue is actually fixed, should I send him a note
along those lines? Would you (Andy) be the appropriate contact
I have already heard back from the CEO of AllTrails. See his response
below. They are going to fix the issue. I am impressed!
=
Thanks for the note, Mike. I know that this is going to sound lame but I
swear it's the truth, and that's that you found a bug on our
Steve,
Thanks for the confirmation that the attribution is missing. I will let
you, and the rest of the list, know if and when I hear from them.
Mike
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 3:51 PM stevea wrote:
> Thanks very much you two: I've often meant to do something about
> alltrails' s
our site[0],
I didn't see any attribution on the map itself crediting OSM. The map
should have some text on it such as "Trail data © OpenStreetMap
contributors"[1]
Thanks
Mike
OSM Contributor Specializing in Trails
==
There are several other memb
I know that because I
have entered some rather obscure informal trails in OSMe, and they show up
in AllTrails just as I entered them in OSM.
Mike
[0] https://www.alltrails.com/ (in the search box enter the name of a
trail, park, or city to see their map.)
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 6:42 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us <
talk...@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> i will fix anything that i missed but the lines are truth.
>
> and it is not a polygon,
>
As far as I know, boundary relations have to, in effect, be polygons, in
other words, they have to close.
>
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 6:42 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us <
talk-us@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> i will fix anything that i missed but the lines are truth.
>
> and it is not a polygon,
>
As far as I know, boundary relations have to, in effect, be polygons, in
other words, they have to close.
>
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 5:24 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us <
talk-us@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> tiger is up to date on the web map using the current data i just think he
> picked the wrong year,
>
That relation was first created in 2009. According to the source tag, it
used 2008 Tiger data, so
in a built up area like this,
seems unusual to me.
Mike
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 5:04 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us <
talk-us@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> this is not the current boundary, could be more than 10 years + old,
>
> can’t the whole relation, #126598, northbrook, be delet
Mateusz, Kevin, Thanks for the advice. I will probably reach out to the
original mapper again, and if no source is provided, delete the names.
Mike
On Sun, Aug 9, 2020 at 11:27 AM Kevin Kenny wrote:
> The 'names' look like someone's field notes: 'Tarn A', 'Tarn B', 'Tarn C',
> 'Ta
several times but have never seen signs naming
these bodies of water.
6) I asked the mapper that added the names what their source was, and they
said they didn't remember.
7) I have several hiking books covering RMNP and none mention these water
bodies using these names.
Mike
[0]
https
which makes the
> map more useful to real people, not just cartographers.
>
> Thanks. That seems to be the safest approach as perhaps some data
consumers don't yet process route relations.
Mike
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
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 ->
Air is not a zero security risk, but the exposure is much lower than the
old days of Flash.
I hate the security problems that came from Flash, as well as almost
anything from Adobe, but I think the premise of this project to improve
maintainability is important. Although not part of this
ng the lines of what you are saying, I will
make some edits.
Mike
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
I have come across a number of examples[0] of route relations where all the
trails in a given park have been put into a single relation. Is this a
recommended use for route relations?
Mike
[0]
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10962561
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8409089
don't want to break anything...
Mike
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
ou are just talking about being
connected, I don't think it matters. I would still add "Road" to the name.
Mike
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
he name tag should be for the name only.
Mike
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 7:10 AM brad wrote:
> Hmmm, interesting. I'm not sure they compact very many roads around
> here (CO).
I have lived, or spent time in, rural parts of four states (MN, IA, OH and
CO) and I have never seen an unpaved road compacted. They get graded once
a year perhaps
On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 4:46 AM wrote:
> Mike,
>
> Good idea on the route references. What should the network be set to?
>
> Others on this list are better able to answer that question, but my
opinion is network=US:FS:
___
Talk-us maili
ommending that they be
made into route relations, which I am starting to do.
>
> TIGER seems to be at best very coarse, at worst fictional.
>
+1
Mike
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 2:23 PM Mark Wagner wrote:
>
> * Two adjacent sections of track being tagged as "grade 2" and "grade
> 4" not because of any difference in road surface, but because one has
> a line of grass between the ruts and the other doesn't.
>
In rural areas where I have spent
ar that there is only one way to map cycle lanes (i.e. not
separated from road) whereas there are two ways to map cycle tracks (separated
from a road).
Regards,
Mike
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
people (delivery
people, service people, invited guests. etc.) will need to be routed to the
residences at the end of those driveways. The router should just give a
warning to the user, such as "the final nn miles/km of your route are on
private roads".
Mike
"Private Road, Residents and Guests Only."
Mike
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Hallo zusammen,
wie kennzeichnet man eine Straße richtig, die es früher gab, die heute noch als
Bauwerk vorhanden, aber nicht im aktuellen amtlichen Straßenverzeichnis geführt
wird?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/11609716#map=18/51.49553/11.97901=D
Mike Elstermann
Von meinem iPad gesendet
or transport modes where the mapper had an incorrect
understanding of what it meant, so without the accompanying designation tag,
these values should be taken with a pinch of salt.
Regards,
Mike
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https:/
that does include a country
code.
Regards,
Mike
>Agree with ref:GB:uprn and ref:GB:usrn.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 4:57 AM wrote:
>
> That is standard construction for the old above ground telephone lines in
> the US - many times those lines would run along a rail bed, perhaps even
> for railroad signaling purposes.
Thanks Steve!
___
talk
Thanks François!
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 3:51 PM François Lacombe
wrote:
> Le sam. 27 juin 2020 à 20:08, Mike Thompson a
> écrit :
>
>> Any idea whether this is an old powerline or an old phone line? Photo is
>> geotagged, so if you download it and drop it into JOSM you
an old house in ruins), which back in the day was 110. In
which case, there would be a considerably percentage voltage drop over the
many km distnace this line spans.
Mike
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
for many km more or less along the track that above node is part of.
Wire is bare uninsulated. Most, or perhaps all, poles are still standing.
Wire is down in places.
How would you recommend mapping/tagging?
Thanks in advance for your help,
Mike
the
wind. Some summits have multiple such shelters.
Mike
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 1:07 PM Mike Thompson wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 1:03 PM Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us <
> talk-us@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> >
> > Is summit register something that is often foun
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 1:03 PM Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-us <
talk-us@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
> Is summit register something that is often found in USA mountains?
At least in Colorado they are. Nowadays they are often pieces of pvc
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 7:35 PM brad wrote:
>
> There are a few cases where property owners have put up illegal, or very
misleading signs.
I have come across this too. The signs are on private property, but face
you as you are traveling on a legal FS road and looking straight ahead. It
makes
es come to several of those
yellow property boundary signs. County level data does show the initial
part of the trail to be on private property. Just curious as in other
cases landowners have posted "no trespassing" signs blocking trails.
Mike
have both in OSM, including only US Gov owned lands in the
National Forests is preferable in my opinion.
Mike
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tal
at another, non local, mapper
got really enthusiastic a couple of years ago about changing all unpaved
roads to highway=track. Amazon Logistics people see this, and if they are
adding a road, they perhaps compare it to the existing content nearby, and
try to mimic that tagging.
Mike
a generic collection of sources (which
one did you use?). Sometimes the sources don't make sense, such as "Street
Side" when there is no Street Side content in the given area.
Mike
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 3:56 PM Andreas Vilén
wrote:
> Maybe the mappers think unclassified
On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 10:54 PM Bradley White
wrote:
>
> > A relation for all would be ok too, as long as the private inholdings
are
> > not removed from the NF (which I think has been done in some cases).
>
>
> IMO, a tagging scheme that better represents the meaning of these two
> boundaries
can't share
an edge) and still have a valid multipolygon.
2) Holes (inner rings) are not part of the polygon. Thus if one did an
analysis of (for example) a series of points, any points that fall in one
of the holes would not register as being inside the multipolygon, even
though they are inside t
ant to develop something else to represent the same thing.
>
> Is Brad or Mike proposing something else, like two multipolygons to
describe one national forest?
One polygon for the administrative boundary of the NF which was established
by Congress.
Zero or more polygons describing limita
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 6:31 PM Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
>
> > I was thinking just create separate polygons for inholdings, tagged
with access=private and possibly ownership=private
>
> While many Americans like to put "no trespassing" signs on their private
property, a privately owned parcel is
ve for your insightful comments.
I was thinking just create separate polygons for inholdings, tagged with
access=private and possibly ownership=private
Mike
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 2:43 PM Paul White wrote:
>
>
>
> Which one would be better? Looking forward to feedback.
I think we need both. I am open to suggestions as how to accomplish that.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
matter how
recent, is going to show that detail, especially with the tree cover in
that area. Remote mappers can do a lot of good, sometimes they get things
wrong. It is great that you are local and can correct these things.
Mike
___
Talk-us mailing li
matter how
recent, is going to show that detail, especially with the tree cover in
that area. Remote mappers can do a lot of good, sometimes they get things
wrong. It is great that you are local and can correct these things.
Mike
___
talk mailing list
JOSM validator does report a number of errors and warnings in the area, but
I don't think they are related to this specific change set.
Mike
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 11:16 AM Mike Thompson wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:53 AM <80hnhtv4a...@bk.ru> wrote:
> >
>
JOSM validator does report a number of errors and warnings in the area, but
I don't think they are related to this specific change set.
Mike
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 11:16 AM Mike Thompson wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:53 AM <80hnhtv4a...@bk.ru> wrote:
> >
>
to specific constructive feedback.
The only very minor issue I see is:
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/816385173 and
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/703399318 could probably be combined.
Mike
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetm
to specific constructive feedback.
The only very minor issue I see is:
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/816385173 and
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/703399318 could probably be combined.
Mike
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetm
What is the issue? It looks legit to me. Am I missing something?
Mike
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:11 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us <
talk...@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> Added a service road.
>
> Edited about hours ago by
>
> Version #1 · Changeset #86698283
>
>
What is the issue? It looks legit to me. Am I missing something?
Mike
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:11 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us <
talk-us@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> Added a service road.
>
> Edited about hours ago by
>
> Version #1 · Changeset #86698283
>
>
Dave,
Can you provide the URL so those of us that no longer have access can
manually add it back in?
Thanks,
Mike
On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 9:40 PM Mike Thompson wrote:
> I use it quite often. It is good for names of water bodies. However, I
> just checked now, and it doesn'
I use it quite often. It is good for names of water bodies. However, I
just checked now, and it doesn't seem to be listed on the imagery menu any
more.
Mike
On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 9:37 PM Dave Swarthout
wrote:
> I'm still seeing it and using it for my mapping chores in Alaska.
>
&g
On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 11:20 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us <
talk-us@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
> I am not copying any thing, just looking at a satellite view from google
.
>
> it was a ruler.
This isn't really about OSM, it is about the Google Maps Terms of Service,
which by using Google Maps,
On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 11:20 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us <
talk...@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
> I am not copying any thing, just looking at a satellite view from google
.
>
> it was a ruler.
This isn't really about OSM, it is about the Google Maps Terms of Service,
which by using Google Maps,
According to the Google Maps Terms of service, you cannot use it in any way
to make another map. [0] I would think that would include using its ruler
if the purpose of using the ruler is to edit OSM.
[0] 2.d of https://www.google.com/help/terms_maps/
On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 9:47 AM
1 - 100 of 2316 matches
Mail list logo
