[OSM-newbies] layers and rendering question

[Thomas Wood]

On Fri, 2008-11-07 at 14:44 +0900, Robert Helvie wrote:
> OK, so here is the Google Earth image just for clarity:
> http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/9470/gearthbx4.png
> 
> 
> The lower three bridges are tagged as layer 1. I tagged the upper
> bridge as layer 2 since it eventually crosses over two of the layer 1
> bridges. OK so far (I assume). But when viewed in JOSM I get this:
> http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/599/josmby9.png
> 
> 
> Obviously that upper, layer 2, bridge goes under the layer 1 bridge.
> It also goes under a non-layer tagged (layer 0) road just off image
> where my red gpx track can be seen.
> 
> My question is ... Does JOSM not bother to actually correctly render
> items with respect to layer? I have yet to upload the changes to the
> data to see if Mapnik or Osmarender renders them correctly, but I
> will. (I was more concerned with what JOSM was showing me.) If JOSM
> DOES take the layer tag into consideration, then any ideas on what is
> happening here?

I don't think that JOSM takes layering into account, osmarender and
mapnik should render it as you've described it.

> 
> Secondly ... First, no I am not using Google to trace roads. You'll
> notice the image shift can be a bit confusing. But I am wondering.
> Since Google does not actually have any road data in Korea, there is
> no way I could infringe on the copyright of "their" road data, but ...
> since I would just be using their image, then shifting it to match my
> tracks, and then tracing over other roads on the shifted image ... 
> 
> 
> Wouldn't this be OK under the fair use clause of intellectual property
> law, especially since I am not actually making a derivative work of
> any existing road data or an image from existing image data?
> 
> 
> If this horse has already been beaten to a pulp, forgive me. I may
> have missed the relevant chapter and verse.
> 
It has been beaten to a pulp, I believe we have contacted google in the
past about use of their aerial imagery and have specifically said no, it
would be infringing on their copyright.
IANAL - a detailed rundown may be on the legal-talk or legal-general
mailing lists.
> 
> Thanks for the comments.
> 
> 
> Robert
> 
> -- 
> "We should give meaning to life, not wait for life to give to 
> give us meaning. "
> ~ unknown
> ---
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> newbies mailing list
> newbies at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/newbies