dieterdreist has commented on the following diary entries
|Thank you for your trust!||27 days ago||
Simon, I also would like to say thank you for your work and commitment in the past 2 years. Thank you for trying OSMF a bit more transparent, for communicating what was going on. As far as I can tell, you've been the best chairperson that OSMF has had so far and while I understand the reasons for you stepping back, I believe it is still a big loss for all of us.
|How can I get accurate locations in a forest ?||30 days ago||
IMHO of your set of GPS-enabled devices the only device to use is the GLO, forget about the phone and the tablet. Additionally to the good suggestions like avoiding wet foilage and possibly foilage at all (winter), setting the recording rate to 1 second, I suggest to be careful where you put the receiver. Put it as high as possible and don't create body shadow on it, e.g. put it on top of your hat. You should definitely not put it into any kind of pocket or bag.
|How to quickly find opening hours on websites||about 2 months ago||
if you want to extend your query, in Italian the term is "orari" or "orario"
|Making OSM more widely known||4 months ago||
I think referring to googleMaps and pointing out osm as free alternative is fine, because that's a product (almost) everyone is familiar with and you don't have to explain a lot
|Projekt Wickelmap||6 months ago||
Cooles Projekt. Interessant wären neben den von Dir genannten Objekten auch Orte wo man Windeln kaufen kann. Bisher gibt es dazu noch kaum Daten, man könnte z.B. den tag "sells" oder besser einen neuen tag wie "sells:diaper=yes" benutzen.
|OSM beim HVV||7 months ago||
super, wie schön ist das, endlich mal wieder jemand, der sich die Mühe macht, einen ansprechenden eigenen Stil zu rendern und nicht nur die seltsame Farbwahl/Regeln des offiziellen Stils zu übernehmen.
|Attributing OpenStreetMap||7 months ago||
@RobJN maybe it is not clearly in violation of the legal text (not saying it is not), but it is clearly in violation of the attribution recommendations given on osm.org.
|I mapped 100 countries in 100 days||7 months ago||
|Über Imports||7 months ago||
Danke für den Beitrag, Martin, kann dem nur zustimmen. Wer mal in einem Gebiet gemappt hat, wo "irgendwelche" Daten reinimportiert wurden (weil das ist es ja, die Selektion des Gemappten in diesen Gebieten erfolgt dadurch, was "zur Verfügung steht", nicht dadurch, was den Mapper interessiert), und erlebt hat, wie aufwendig die Korrektur solcher Datenmassen ist (weil in den Gebieten, wo mir die Imports aufgefallen sind die Daten nie dem entsprochen haben, was ein OSMapper gemappt hätte (hinsichtlich Lagegenauigkeit, Anzahl der Punkte / Auflösung / Generalisierung / tag-Präzision und -detaillierung etc.)), der kann eigentlich nur gegen Importe sein: entweder gibt es noch keine Mapper und es werden dadurch potentielle Mapper abgeschreckt, oder es gibt schon eine aktive Gruppe von Mappern, dann können die Importe kaum was bieten.
Ein paar Ausnahmen gibt es aber schon, z.B. Hausnummern (Erfassung sehr mühselig) und Grenzen, aber auch so was wie Ortsnamen, Gewässernamen und andere Namen von topographischen Objekten sind teilweise nur schwer anders zu bekommen. In diesen Fällen ist ein klassischer "Import" aber kaum möglich, das beste ist es da, einen Layer zur Verfügung zu stellen, aus dem man die Informationen die man konkret will / braucht "von Hand" übernehmen kann. Die erwähnten Gebäudeumrisse aus offiziellen Daten sind sicherlich auch interessant wenn man bedenkt, wie viel Aufwand in deren Erfassung gelegt wird (sofern sie klassisch vermessen sind und nicht auch "nur" aus Luftbildern abgepaust).
|Diversification with OSM||7 months ago||
yes, but for the carto-implementation of the mapnik style, github is the preferred place to file tickets, while trac is a heritage of former days. From time to time a developer checks for tickets in trac and pulls them to github, but the place where the people actually work is github.
I agree that I had also some problems initially in finding the josm trac as it is not part of trac.osm.org but is hosted on josm.openstreetmap.de (again, this is a heritage of the project past). Btw. also the JOSM wiki is hosted there and not on osm.org.
The policy for all these development subsystems is to make work easy for the developers, they choose the system they like to manage their code (and issues) in (e.g. svn vs. git).
|Tag für Quellenangaben eigener Geodaten||8 months ago||
ich pflichte auch dem Nakaner bei, metadaten bitte in die changeset tags, nicht an jedes einzelne Objekt.
|Geld für OpenStreetMap||9 months ago||
bzgl. amazon.com, frag' doch mal auf talk-us, da findet sich sicherlich jemand, alternativ direkt beim Amerikanischen Chapter anfragen (osm-us).
|Bahnhöfe in OpenStreetMap||10 months ago||
@malenki: +1, disused:= also der Präfix ist auf jedem Fall im Vergleich zu einem zusätzlichen tag wie disused=yes zu bevorzugen, um Verwechslungen und Fehlinterpretationen zu reduzieren. Dass disused=yes für stations nirgends ausgewertet wird, stimmt allerdings nicht, selbst auf der Hauptkarte hatte ich in Erinnerung, dass das berücksichtigt wird, die Erinnerung hielt einer Überprüfung allerdings nicht Stand, das tag wird zwar bei Kanälen und Bahngleisen ausgewertet, bei Bahnhöfen aber in der Tat nicht.
|Attribution and all that (a rant)||10 months ago||
@simon so there has been legal consultation? I am not asking to make it public, I have been hoping it might be accessible to foundation members, but I understand that this also might not be possible (in the end, everybody could become member of the foundation). I think what you could ask Apple for is a statement that they are not using ODbL data. This is not clear from their current attribution.
Have there also been talking with creative commons? I guess for them it is also very bad if open license violations don't even get accused because of fear that the license could not hold up (there is a lot of data around, often from PAs, which is also licensed creative commons).
And yes, basically this is a confirmation, if you are big/powerful enough you must not care for license obligations, especially if you use the data from 2004 to 2012.
In all this we should not forget that also OSM is starting to become powerful, even to resist in a court case, we are steering towards 2 million users, and my guess is the publicity we would get for being sued by Apple for asking that they respect our open license would be immense and their moral damage so huge, that they will probably not do it (and you'd be astonished how many donations we'd get in order to be able pursue a potential court case).
|Attribution and all that (a rant)||10 months ago||
@SOSM We don't even know whether they are only using cc-by-sa data or not, because they don't tell. The first thing we should ask them for is attribution according to the license they are using data under, so we can be clear on this point.
Secondly they are distributing our data also outside of the USA, so for Europe the data would still be protected under the database directive (and btw., as OSMF has its legal seat in London one could interpret that by downloading and re-distributing the data this would already be an agreement to the terms OSMF stated by that time for the use of the data. Unfortunately I don't find those older terms on the OSMF-site which might have legal relevance for the users of pre-license-change data). OSMF as legal representative of OSM who has taken the effort of collecting the data would still have some rights also for the cc-by-sa data I guess, at least in jurisdictions with special database rights. In the end it was them suggesting that © OSM Contributors would be a sufficient attribution for works based on OSM and one might argue that the single contributors by contributing have accepted this.
As a third point we always said that we might at least win morally by telling the world that Company X is using our data which we intended to share under share-alike provisions without giving back. But obviously to make this happen we must at least point our finger at who does this, instead what happened was that they didn't adhere to what the OSMF has in general asked for, for many years, from everybody, and OSMF, rather than complaning, was applauding.
I admit I am not a lawyer. Has someone in the past 2 years ever asked for legal advice on the issue of Apple using our data, and if yes, where is the documentation of the outcome?
|Attribution and all that (a rant)||10 months ago||
The lesson I have personally learned from the proceedings of the past 2 years: OSMF is not showing itself prepared or even willing to fight for correct attribution of the data taken from OSM. Apple is now using our data for almost 2 years in a major product of theirs (Apple Maps, part of their mobile and desktop OS) and still they are not attributing correctly (they do not confirm our copyright, they do not even mention the license (which has always been an obligation under all OSM licenses), they do not tell where they are using our data so people can't make use of the share alike rights that the license grants).
What has happened in 2 years? Almost nothing. On 7th of April 2012 the board has documented in the minutes of an extraordinary meeting with the title "Handling legal issue with Apple" : "The board feels that due to the importance and timeliness of the current issue and due to the heavy workload of the license change that LWG hand off the Apple issue to the Board to pursue."
Months later the case was returned to LWG. Until now the only change to the attribution they give (2 links away from the map, 1st link is "legal", second is "data from TomTom and others", almost at the bottom of a long list there is OSM) is that there is now a rough time span for the data (2011/2012), which doesn't even allow to determine which license they would have to indicate (as from 2012 there is ODbL and cc-by-sa2.0 data available, maybe they even mixed the 2? They alone know...). This is not your small FOSS project or grocery website, this is a major IT company with hundreds of millions of distributed copies of their software! They do ignore almost every obligation we have set up for the use of our data and nothing (apparently) happens, OSMF even welcomed them in 2012  and no word of incorrect attribution in the blog post ;-)
|What is the OpenStreetMap convention? Do we tag addresses on buildings or on separate nodes?||about 1 year ago||
We should map what is the reality. In some jurisdictions the numbers mark an entrance, in others they are assigned to an area (usually a parcel or a building). It is not always clear where the number applies to, if in doubt, use a node, but if you know the exact area a housenumber applies to it is better to put the number on this area. Using areas has the advantage that you can see the actual extension and you can infer the number for the included elements/occupants.
|OpenStreetMap and the Public Domain||about 1 year ago||
you have a good point when you mention that actually almost nobody can release his contributions into the PD, because it will most likely be tainted by the existing ODbL data around it (exceptions might be editing in an empty area or surrounded by other PD data)
|"Maproulette" in JOSM||about 1 year ago||
Bitte nicht blind Verbindungen herstellen, wenn Ihr die Stellen nicht kennt. Es gibt auch viele Stellen, wo man im echten Leben nicht durchkommt, zumindest nicht mit dem Auto, oft aber auch nicht mal zu Fuß (unterschiedliche Höhenebenen). Klar, das ist dann nicht besonders detailliert gemappt, wenn da nur 2 nicht verbundene Straßen sind und nicht z.B. ein Fußweg, ein fence, eine retaining_wall, etc. aber ohne Ortskenntnis geht das halt nicht. Falsche Verbindungen sind genauso schlecht wie nicht verbundene Straßen, die eigentlich verbunden gehören.
|Offset in Vigelandsparken, Oslo||about 1 year ago||
how many points did you measure? I fear that the differences aren't simple offsets but more complex, due to the way this imagery is produced.