[Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 119, Issue 55

Ulrich Lamm ulamm.brem at t-online.de
Mon Aug 12 16:13:44 UTC 2019


1. The critics, I have answered on this way were not that I had used forbidden sources, but that my entries were not reliable.
2. Woodpeck has banned me just in the moment, when all geographic data of the state of Brandenburg got ODB status.
3. It is a difference either to take copies from databases (which is allowed only if these are ODB) or to know their contents.
Publishing without regard of the state of the art is a crime against the real users.
4. If you follow the development of my edits, you can see that I have continued systematical mapping, 
but after the first punishments, I have not entered informations that are available from public databases only.

Most of the essential informations I have recieved by phone from the maintaining corporations (Wasser- und Boden-Verbände).
Also pdf maps  are nothing yo can call a forbidden database. Look at the map I have linked at the onset of today's thread. Using the information of this map for a free hand drawing is no forbidden copy.
The relief can be read in ordinary maps and seen by visits of the localities.
Irregular colours of the meadows and fields can be seen from various orthophotos, and it is useful to read more than one of them,
as some thing can be invisible in one and obvious in another.

Best regards, Ulrich

Am 12.08.2019 um 17:30 schrieb tagging-request at openstreetmap.org:

>  Re: Culverts

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190812/9e8930b4/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list