Hi, I have tidied up my OS Opendata Map (http://www.maps.webhop.net/osm_opendata ).
The changes are: - Lines and dots are smaller so it looks less of a mess. - It excludes source tags containing '25k', 'os7' and 'photos', which were giving quite a lot of false positives, especially in Scotland. Let me know if you see any others and I can exclude them. - I have left my original layer available as 'tiles1', but this is not displayed by default - you can add it with the '+' control to see the differences. - The about <http://www.maps.webhop.net/osm_opendata/about.html> page has been updated to describe how it works better (still crude, but more complicated SQL!). There are still some surprising things here - for example National Cycle Route 1 is highlighted, even though I know that the bits I added are not from OS Opendata (see the bit from Whitby to Sunderland here<http://www.maps.webhop.net/osm_opendata/?zoom=10&lat=54.6778&lon=-1.37818&layers=BFT>). It seems that someone has tagged the relation (Relation Number 9579) with 'OS_OpenData_StreetView' - I don't know why they would have done this? Regards Graham. On 20 July 2010 23:40, Graham Jones <grahamjones...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Thank you all for your comments. > I'll not get into the licence change debate here - plenty of that on > osm-talk.... > > - I agree that there are a few surprises highlighted here. There are a > couple of cycle tracks highlighted that I survryed myself, so I will have to > check the underlying data. When I get home I will improve the filtering to > exclude os 1:25k references. > - I will see what I can do with the rendering as Gregory suggests. > - The supermarkets reference is copy-and-paste-itis on my behalf - sorry! > - Emilie is probably right that strictly I should be interested in history, > but I cant do that easily from a planet extract, and I don't think it will > matter too much with opendata being so recent. A curious legal point is > that if a way was originally derived from os-opendata, but subsequently > re-surveyed, is it still derived from opendata? > > Graham > > ____________________ > Graham Jones > (from my phone) > > On Jul 20, 2010 4:41 PM, "80n" <80n...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Robert Whittaker (OSM) < > robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com <robert.whittaker%2b...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > >... > What's more, because Produced Works can be published under a restrictive > license we couldn't get the additional data back by tracing either. ODbL + > CT makes getting data back into OSM much harder than it is now by a massive > degree. > > BTW, how would a corporation agree to the Contributor Terms anyway? The > sign-up page only caters for individuals. Has, for example, CloudMade, > agreed to the contributor terms yet and how could we tell if they had? > > 80n > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > -- Dr. Graham Jones Hartlepool, UK email: grahamjones...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
