[talk-au] Mapping "off track" hiking routes

forster at ozonline.com.au forster at ozonline.com.au
Fri Oct 23 09:59:58 UTC 2020


Thanks Mateusz

Women's refuges were mentioned as an example, an extreme one, that  
illustrated certain principles, not because they weren't already being  
handled well. Thanks for the information on mapping private  
information but I think the discussion around refuges still stands.

'Any decent router will not route over them.' True but for the tracks  
we are talking about I don't think a lot of people are using routers.

Re Don'tRender=yes, I never suggested it was a good idea, just a  
challenge for others to come up with a better idea.

A licence condition for data users is that they have a public policy  
for the Don'tRender tag
'That is fortunately impossible' why is it impossible?

'Note that deleting existing paths with "I do not want them rendered"  
is not an acceptable edit'
I don't think anybody suggested it was.

'Russia does not get to decide whatever their military bases can be  
mapped and rendered in OSM.'
Nobody said that Russia should should be able to. Its a point for  
discussion. What do you think should happen? Why? Why single out Russia?

PS thanks Steve for your second email.
thanks Phil for your clarification on 'illegal'

Tony

>
>
>
> Oct 23, 2020, 10:18 by forster at ozonline.com.au:
>
>> I am not morally responsible if an ex partner kills a woman in a   
>> women's refuge, he is, but I won't knowingly contribute to the   
>> process. And it doesn't wash with me to say they should put a guard  
>>  at the door because I have mapped a refuge.
>>
> Not mapping ones that are private and not signed falls under not   
> mapping private info.
>
> See   
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Limitations_on_mapping_private_information
> for an attempt to gather consensus opinion.
>
>>  Re access=no, if I recollect correctly they still display in OSM,   
>> only slightly more red.
>>
> This changed, now they display greish (less prominent)
>
>>
>>  You probably wouldn't notice. I haven't checked data users such as  
>>  Osmand and Strava.
>>
> Any decent router will not route over them.
>
>> Graeme
>> Thanks for your thoughts on 'how to'. I have given it some thought   
>> and don't have any really good answers. Please think of a better   
>> scheme.
>>
>> I mentioned a Don'tRender=yes tag but worry it may be too   
>> complicated for the benefit that results but here goes:
>>
>> a land owner or manager can add a Don'tRender=yes tag
>> OSM.org map would honour the tag in map mode
>>
> This is a bad idea.
>
>> A licence condition for data users is that they have a public   
>> policy for the Don'tRender tag
>>
> That is fortunately impossible.
>
>>
>> By having the item visible at edit time it eliminates the cycle of   
>> addition and deletion and edit wars.
>>
> You can do that by mapping line and tagging it with note.
>
> Note that deleting existing paths with "I do not want them rendered"  
>  is not an acceptable edit.
>
>> Let the mapping community decide whether the claim to be a land   
>> owner or manager is credible, if two organisations have credible   
>> claim to that then Don'tRender=disputed
>>
> Russia does not get to decide whatever their military bases can be   
> mapped and rendered in OSM.
>
> I knowingly and deliberately violated
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictions_on_geographic_data_in_China
> by mapping objects in China.
>
> _____________________________________________________
> This mail has been virus scanned by Australia On Line
> see http://www.australiaonline.net.au/mailscanning
>







More information about the Talk-au mailing list