[Talk-us] Excellent progress, u.s.

Toby Murray toby.murray at gmail.com
Sun Apr 15 11:11:10 BST 2012

On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 7:26 PM, John F. Eldredge <john at jfeldredge.com> wrote:
> andrzej zaborowski <balrogg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 14 April 2012 03:30, John F. Eldredge <john at jfeldredge.com> wrote:
>> > One drawback to this new-coordinate technique is that, in some
>> cases, the tainted nodes will have been in the proper locations to
>> match the real world.  So, in order to make the cleanup bot not
>> consider the nodes to be tainted, we have to knowingly make the map
>> data less accurate than it had formerly been.
>> >
>> It also will remain tainted, only the bot will not know about it and
>> consider it untainted.  So it's a way to trick the bot and potentially
>> put the OSM Foundation under legal risk.
>> This is why the remapping effort before the bot run is finished, is a
>> Really Bad Idea.  It is both more time costly and it is provoking
>> users to cause incompatible IP to be preserved over the license
>> change, often unconsciously.  See all the ideas of using the
>> incompatible IP to create the new "compatible IP", such as using the
>> tainted coastlines data to remap small islands.  (RichardF said he
>> does not agree it's a bad idea, but he wouldn't explain which point he
>> disagrees with or why)
>> Cheers
> I was assuming that there was an additional data source, such as aerial photos and/or GPS traces, which could be used to judge the accuracy of the tainted node.  As I understand the way the bot judges taintedness, if you delete a tainted node, then insert a replacement node in the same location, the new node is also considered tainted even though it was added by someone who agreed to the new license terms, and even though that might be the correct location to mark the corner of a polygon.

Any new (version 1) node created by someone who has accepted the new
terms is clean and will be in the ODbL planet. The only exception
might be if it is an untagged node that is a member of a dirty way
that gets deleted. Although I'm not totally sure about this. If this
doesn't happen, we will end up with probably millions of orphaned
nodes. Also, the only way to replace a node with the exact same
location is to copy/paste it. It is virtually impossible for a human
to place a node at exactly the same location.

And shifting nodes by a few inches just to make it show up clean in
OSMI is definitely not ok. If a node is off and needs to be corrected,
then fine. But if you are moving it just to clean it, delete it
instead, along with any surrounding dirty nodes and recreate it based
on imagery or GPS or whatever you normally use to map. This is why I
delete all dirty nodes in a way and then use the w mode in JOSM to
recreate the geometry from clean sources.


More information about the Talk-us mailing list