<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 25 August 2010 04:33, Anthony <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:osm@inbox.org">osm@inbox.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Grant Slater<br>
<<a href="mailto:openstreetmap@firefishy.com">openstreetmap@firefishy.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> On 24 August 2010 20:17, Stephan Knauss <<a href="mailto:osm@stephans-server.de">osm@stephans-server.de</a>> wrote:<br>
>> Is it possible to provide a list with userIDs that have agreed to the new<br>
>> terms?<br>
>><br>
><br>
> Yes this is planned to be made available shortly. It will be updated<br>
> on a regular schedule.<br>
><br>
> Last week's LWG minutes also have a nice graphic showing agreed contributors:<br>
> <a href="https://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_77rbr8fgfw" target="_blank">https://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_77rbr8fgfw</a><br>
<br>
</div>Yeah the list of user ids would be nice. I'd much rather see a<br>
picture of what the map will look like than raw number of edits. As<br>
John has alluded to (though only to a small extent), the graphic above<br>
is very misleading.<br>
<br>
Maybe the DWG could work on a slippy map based solely on the data<br>
which will be ODbL. It'd give them a way to test the algorithms for<br>
excluding/including data in addition to providing a visual.<br>
<div><div></div><br></div></blockquote></div><br>It is planned. User Ids will be released and we will provide planet to test the rules that are currently being discussed. Building a rendering could be something that we could do once we have the data up and running.<br>
<br>Emilie Laffray<br>