[OSM-legal-talk] OSM Database Re-Build

[Simon Poole]

We (Switzerland and some parts of Germany) have for example started more 
or less systematic remapping of anonymous contributions. There is no 
real hope that a significant amount of this data will be re-licensed by 
the original mappers, and since these objects pre-date the introduction 
of history* (versions), they simply have to go.

Obviously remapping doesn't not change the on-the ground geometry so it 
is likely that replacement nodes will be at the same or at least nearby 
locations, regardless of  data source for the remapping (aerial images, 
GPS etc.).

Simon

Am 17.11.2011 07:07, schrieb ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen:
> You are right Richard.
> This O-trick actually is just a shortcut for delete and (re)place.
>
> Just the thread in which it is presented is a bit suspicious.
>
> The reason why anyone would want to remove a node and replace one at the same
> (or approximate) location "escapes"  my logic.
> It disturbs history, and makes no contribution to the database at all.
>
> Unless the license issue of course....
>
> And thank you for the compliment Richard (about the 0%) , I
> always appreciate comments from those who know better.
>
> Gert Gremmen
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Openstreetmap.nl  (alias: cetest)
>  Before printing, think about the environment.
>
>
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Richard Fairhurst [mailto:richard at systemed.net]
> Verzonden: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 9:22 PM
> Aan: legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OSM Database Re-Build
>
> Gert Gremmen wrote:
>> Using this O-trick violates the copyright of the previous
>> owner, just as copying from google would violate their
>> terms of service.
> As they have been for at least three years now, Gert, your opinions about
> Potlatch are 100% venting and 0% actual knowledge
> (http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2008-December/032278.html,
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-January/032977.html,
> etc.)
>
> If you actually _used_ the software - which you've never shown any sign of
> doing and which I don't expect you to do any time soon - you would see that
> this is simply removing a finger movement from "delete selected node, insert
> node at mouse position". The action is exactly the same, yet I don't hear
> you clamouring for the "insert node" function to be removed.
>
> It is a simple convenience for the mapper. As you would know if you actually
> used it, the node placement is entirely at the discretion of the mapper;
> Potlatch does not automatically place a node at the previous position or
> indeed anywhere. Just as with any other OSM editing, the mapper will usually
> be working from a background layer, such as Bing or a GPS track, and their
> placement will usually be based on this. And again, if you actually used the
> software, you would also find that Potlatch makes it very easy to add the
> source tag to a node or way during your edit, again with one single
> keypress.
>
> But why let the facts get in the way of a good rant, hey?
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-OSM-Database-Re-Build-tp6997302p7001734.html
> Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk