On 1/14/2012 1:20 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
As you can see, the situation for highways / interstates is
particularly bad in SC / GA. I'd say that is a priority if you want to
help out.
I've not had any reply back from my 'Decliner'-contact in SC about a
public domain option. At this point,
Hi,
On 01/15/2012 12:16 AM, Toby Murray wrote:
Not correct; anonymous users are know to OSM with their e-mail address and
user name, it's just that these details are never revealed through the API.
Right, which is exactly what is happening in this case, isn't it?
A sorry. I thought that when
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 1:29 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 01/14/2012 08:14 PM, Toby Murray wrote:
>>
>> I think this is an anonymous user. This was an option early in OSM
>> history that was done away with a while ago. They can still agree...
>> but obviously we have no way of contactin
On 1/14/2012 1:20 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
As you can see, the situation for highways / interstates is
particularly bad in SC / GA.
I'm still checking the PD option for most of one of the SC decliner's
work - I should hear back this weekend.
__
Hi,
On 01/14/2012 08:14 PM, Toby Murray wrote:
I think this is an anonymous user. This was an option early in OSM
history that was done away with a while ago. They can still agree...
but obviously we have no way of contacting them
Not correct; anonymous users are know to OSM with their e-mail
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 12:06:37PM -0500, Richard Welty wrote:
>> On 1/13/12 10:49 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>> >If your own area is clean, please consider helping out in more heavily
>> >affected areas.
>> >
>> The Capital District
On 1/14/12 1:20 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
i know Martijn has a bunch of issues out in the SLC area, so i'm
volunteering to take assignments from him to do cleanups out there.
Thanks. I'm asking for help on the main infrastructure in part
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 12:06:37PM -0500, Richard Welty wrote:
> On 1/13/12 10:49 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> >If your own area is clean, please consider helping out in more heavily
> >affected areas.
> >
> The Capital District of NY is in pretty good shape and i cleaned up the
> things that were
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
> On 1/13/12 10:49 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>>
>> If your own area is clean, please consider helping out in more heavily
>> affected areas.
>>
> The Capital District of NY is in pretty good shape and i cleaned up the
> things that were goin
On 1/13/12 10:49 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
If your own area is clean, please consider helping out in more heavily
affected areas.
The Capital District of NY is in pretty good shape and i cleaned up the
things that were going to be the worst problems already.
i know Martijn has a bunch of iss
On 14 January 2012 01:19, Andrew Cleveland wrote:
> So every TIGER way in the western US will require the odbl=clean tag?
No, the bot edits are assumed by LWG to not deserve protection, plus
additionally all the related changesets are on Frederik Ramm's
whitelist which I think is likely to be use
On Sat, 2012-01-14 at 00:18 +0100, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> On 13 January 2012 22:50, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 12:44:30PM -0700, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> >
> >> I do that too. There is of course a small chance of the decliner
> >> changing his or her mind, so I only dele
On 13 January 2012 22:50, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 12:44:30PM -0700, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>
>> I do that too. There is of course a small chance of the decliner
>> changing his or her mind, so I only delete data that is tainted by a
>> decliner that I have personally been in
If you really want to understand this you will need to ask a lawyer. or start a
discussen on talk-legal
to me it looks like some political game and splitting hairs about some of the
CT details. Considering balrog-kun has a new account where CT is accepted and
this declaration then all the data
On 1/13/2012 4:50 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
Speaking of, has anyone talked to balrog-kun yet? I know he was at
one point insanely prolific and I often stumble across his data, he's
currently a decliner.
I don't have a clue what the below statement means, since he hasn't
said he'll make his edi
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 12:44:30PM -0700, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>
>> I do that too. There is of course a small chance of the decliner
>> changing his or her mind, so I only delete data that is tainted by a
>> decliner that I have personally
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 12:44:30PM -0700, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> I do that too. There is of course a small chance of the decliner
> changing his or her mind, so I only delete data that is tainted by a
> decliner that I have personally been in touch with about the license
> change and my best ju
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> I will even pre-emptively delete stuff that I know would otherwise get
>> deleted automatically, because that way I am in control, I see what happens,
>> I see the side effects, a
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 01/13/2012 06:39 PM, Peter Dobratz wrote:
>>
>> I agree that it makes more sense to clean up the map after the deletes
>> from the license change have taken affect. As far as I know, it's still
>> being sorted out exactly which
Hi,
On 01/13/2012 06:39 PM, Peter Dobratz wrote:
I agree that it makes more sense to clean up the map after the deletes
from the license change have taken affect. As far as I know, it's still
being sorted out exactly which portions of the map will be deleted.
Personally, in the area I care fo
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Mike N wrote:
>>
>> On 1/13/2012 10:49 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>>>
>>> * Remap data that remains at risk of being removed, following the
>>> guidelines on the wiki (see links below).
>>
>>
>> Assumi
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Peter Dobratz wrote:
> [ ... ] it makes more sense to clean up the map after the deletes from
> the license change have taken affect.
I disagree. It's always better to go mapping than to not go mapping.
That's the core value of OSM; improve the data.
If nothing
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Mike N wrote:
>>
>> On 1/13/2012 10:49 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>>>
>>> * Remap data that remains at risk of being removed, following the
>>> guidelines on the wiki (see links below).
>>
>>
>> Assuming t
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> There are several things we can do together to minimize the data loss
> and ensure a smooth changeover to the new license:
> * Contact mappers who have declined or not agreed yet.
I've heard this theme over and over again, that the major
On 1/13/2012 12:39 PM, Peter Dobratz wrote:
I agree that it makes more sense to clean up the map after the deletes
from the license change have taken affect.
Except that the April Fools change will not preserve a lot of the
additions (if a non-agreer splits a way, and you add a maxspeed, how is
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Mike N wrote:
> On 1/13/2012 10:49 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>
>> * Remap data that remains at risk of being removed, following the
>> guidelines on the wiki (see links below).
>>
>
> Assuming that the April 1 delete is a smart delete, is it better to wait
> un
On 1/13/2012 10:49 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
* Remap data that remains at risk of being removed, following the
guidelines on the wiki (see links below).
Assuming that the April 1 delete is a smart delete, is it better to wait
until afterward? I'm thinking of this -
1 TIGER - agreer
2 B
Hi all,
The final phase of the license changeover to the Open Database
License[1] from our current CC-BY-SA is drawing near. From April 1[2],
current OpenStreetMap data will only be available under the new
license. This means that all data that was contributed by those who
did not agree to the new
28 matches
Mail list logo
