User talk:Pieren

You can also contact me at pieren3[whereyouknow]gmail.com in English and German

article cadastre et josm

bonjour Vous avez raison concernant la page que j ai créé, elle est redondante avec d'autres. En fait oui mon problème est que je trouve qu'il n'y a pas assez de capture d'écran pour montrer les étapes dans l'utilisation de josm.Je lis souvent de la doc ou les auteurs ne décrivent pas assez les étapes qu'il utilisent un peu comme les url absolues et relatives; on ne sait pas le point de départ. Suis présent de manière épisodique donc toutes personnes enregistrées peuvent modifier ou supprimer mon article ( pas de problèmes) , sinon beau travail pour le cadastre .. .( j utilise..ais une licence geofla ign .... ) Cordialement France-59-valenciennes 00:17, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

carte osm avec garmin et oziexplorer

Bonjour pieren , me pose 2 questions concernant osm et les logiciels de "navigation" . A quoi bon participer à osm si la carte ne sert pas dans nos logiciel de navigation ( orientation)

• 1) je vois que vous utiliser un garmin . Est il facile d'obtenir FACILEMENT des données osm sous garmin en utilisant window ( xp ou vista ) ?
• 2) Me pose la même question pour oziexplorer
• 3) la page WikiProject France/Cadastre est très intéressante mais il serait bien d'avoir un tutoriel qui explique comment participer à ce projet (outils a utiliser et procédure à suivre pour obtenir par soi même la limite d'une commune). Me demande quel est le nombre de personnes qui participent à ce projet ? Serait il possible d'avoir le nombre de participant à ce projet en plus du nombre de communes sous osm / département  ?

cordialement je narrive pas a signer mon identifiant User:France-59-valenciennes

• ai compris la touche alt + la touche 2 !! ( suis comme un ordinateur il faut être explicite ) Merci beaucoups
• France-59-valenciennes 15:13, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

france 59 valenciennes

Est crée une page cadastre ( et pas geoportail), car ne souhaite pas m'éloigner du sujet cadastre ou approfondir dans le geoportail. Ai mis un lien dans l'introduction de l'article Plugin/Cadastre-fr vers WikiProject France/Cadastre. Pour le geoportail il y a wikipedia

france 59 valenciennes

bonjour merci pour vos commentaire s , comment dois je faire pour vous epo,nndre en utilisant le meme protocole ? ne connais que le wiki et ne savais pas qqu il etait possible de comuniquer alerter quelqu un e nutilisant le "talk" ? Ne fait que m enregistrer sur tous les sites en rapport a osm ( wiki map) et de donenr des information sur moi et les villes dont je souhaites voir la cartographie apparaitre.

Traduction

Salut, Pieren,

J'ai effectivement profité de quelques jours de congés pour entamer la traduction de la FAQ. Cela prend pas mal de temps et je n'ai pas toujours le bon vocabulaire, que ce soit en anglais ou en français :-/

Oui, la partie francophone manque de traductions, et c'est suite à une discussion sur le chan IRC #osm-fr que j'ai entrepris de traduire la FAQ. Personnellement j'arrive à me débrouiller avec l'anglais mais je comprends que ça puisse en rebuter certains et il serait dommage de perdre de possibles contributeurs à cause de ça.

Au niveau de la coordination/supervision, à ma connaissance il n'y a rien mais je n'ai pas vraiment cherché à vrai dire. Dans la FAQ, j'ai été obligé de laisser plein de liens vers les pages anglophones parce qu'il n'y a pas encore leur équivalent en français.

Il faudrait peut-être envoyer un mail sur la liste talk-fr pour essayer de motiver les troupes...

A+

BD Foret

Salut Pieren, Je n'ai pas de BD sur les couverts forestiers spécifiques à l'ONF. Par contre, il me semble que la base de données "Corine Landcover" est disponible gratuitement dans ses versions anciennes cf.forum GeoRezo. Si la licence le permet ce pourrait être une excellente source pour les couverts forestiers en France et en Europe. Cf. Potential_Datasources --Alban 16:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Removed INSEE as a possible source

Why ? The INSEE data are free. If you have any doubts, please contact the concerned group. And please do not remove wiki sections if you are not 100% sure or without a talk with the concerned group, or without a comment justifying your correction. Pieren 11:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Not free, Data license quoted appears not to allow for modifications, Open Street Map is CC-By_SA not CC-BY-NC.

Your comment concerning talk page consensus noted. ShakespeareFan00 00:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Further- Have flagged some of the unfree ones in the headers for the data source concerned, based on the links given. ShakespeareFan00 15:46, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Template wiki memory problems

I've had to disable the template inclusions on Map Features because (at the moment at least) they are causing out-of-memory errors as the wiki processes them all.

This is a fairly urgent thing we should try to fix. Obviously it doesn't look too good cosmetically speaking, at the moment, and also it's difficult to search. It has also meant that a lot of translated information is lost, temporarily until we solve this.

There are two angles on the problem. I suspect that the server genuinely is low on memory, because back on Saturday it seemed to slow down and die all together, which surely means it's not too healthy, so I'm hoping that one of the System Administratorss is actually investigating, but I guess I should contact them directly to check if they're doing anything. But the other thing is perhaps we can scale back on the tree of template inclusions we have set up there.

This is why I'm asking you. Any ideas how this can be simplified? I'm afraid I'm not sure what type of thing is using a lot of memory particularly, but I imagine it must be the sheer number of included templates. I'm thinking one idea is might be to avoid using {{IconNode}}, {{IconWay}}, and {{IconArea}} everywhere, just reference the images more directly.

You could head over to this forum discussion on the matter too: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=597

-- Harry Wood 15:12, 9 April 2008 (BST)

ping

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Emj&action=edit&section=2

E-Roads

Hi, regarding to the e-roads, you wrote: "I didn't find where it is explicitely writen that a space should stand between E and the number, excepted that the examples are so writen" - well, as far as I know, these writings are not examples but a complete list of the e-roads and therewith this is the definition ... omitting the space or substituting it with a hyphen is surely not forbidden, as it can often be seen - but why not use the official definition in openstreetmap? For german roads and their references I am sure that there should always be a space between the letter(s) and the number, because the references in all official maps are with spaces - in contrast to what you (still) find in openstreetmap - but it's easier to correct it now than later. Regarding the rendering, the national standards should be recognized (in germany, the motorways are marked with a blue sign and white number (the "A" is omitted), and it's easy to omit the space if necessary - so in future there will not be a problem with the rendering because of the spaces ... (is there a better place to discuss that?) Greetings, -- Schusch 13:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposed features/Path

Hi, regarding your opposition to the Path proposal: The additional tag for cycleways is only needed if we stop to use highway=cycleway. Looking at the other voters' opinions, this is unlikely to happen. However, while a single designation can easily be expressed using highway=*, multiple designations (e.g. a path designated equally for foot and bike usage) cannot properly be expressed using highway=* only. As I'd like to see a tagging scheme to deal with those cases, I suggest that you change your vote to indicate that you specifically oppose the deprecation of footway/cycleway/bridleway, while remaining neutral to the core proposal (as User:Cartinus did) – unless, of course, you hold other objections to the idea itself that you have not mentioned yet. --Tordanik 08:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

It:Highway

Done, thanks :-) --CVi 21:16, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

wiki template KeyDescription and image missing

Yes. You're right :-)

Hi Pieren, you writed in Template:Map Features:properties that we have to use "bridge" with a layer. Why? For me its genuine, that a bridge goes over something. Same as a house does not need to say that it is over the ground. Bridge with layer=+1 sounds like "white white horse"... --Markus 14:58, 14 October 2008 (UTC) PS: same for "tunnel": it goes under something.

left name

The reason I tagged it as abandoned was that the last meaningful edit was in May. Feel free to resurrect it or something. I was just trying to unclog the proposed features page from dead pages. Circeus 08:58, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Smoothness

In conflict resolution, it is generally accepted to maintain the status quo ante, and not to engage in the disputed actions while this continues. The presence of smoothness=* on Map Features is disputed, therefore it shall not appear until it is sorted out. I will not enter into any further discussion on this point. Chriscf 16:56, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I refer the honorable member to the answer I gave some moments ago. Chriscf 17:22, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

6ème réunion IRC

J'en nettoyé, mon idée était que barré voulait dire "plus à l'ordre du jour pour moi" Mais néanmoins lisible pour que quelqu'un puisse, s'il le souhaite ré-ouvrir cette possibilité Sletuffe 17:16, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Template translation

Thanks for the Template translation method, I was really wondering what's the mechanism since I didn't quite found really useful information.

limite administrative

1- D ou proviennent les limites administratives communal présent dans osm. 2- les feuilles d'un même tableau d assemblage d'une commune sont ils produits/mise à jour la même année ? 3- les limites des feuilles du sont elles légalement importable dans osm ? ( techniquement je sais faire ) FR:Cadastre User:France-59-valenciennes

baby hatch

Hello Pieren,

no, don't worry, the activity about baby hatches is not planned by "pro live" organisations, though I think that they sometimes save lives. This has nothing to do with abortion. I am forcing baby hatches in Germany to be mapped because there is a need of a complete and up to date map - at the moment it is very hard to find information on "where ist the closest baby hatch" because the operators of baby hatches in German speaking countries all use different names for it (Babyklappe, Babynest, Babykörbchen, Aktion Moses, Aktion Findelkind, ... ). As it is an approved feature, I did an undo on your changes. --Lulu-Ann 08:40, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Besançon

Merci pour l’info...

Je transforme... FrViPofm 14:03, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Commentaires sur la page Réunion

Toujours pertinent.

J'ai en effet de gros souci avec la définition des highways. La Réunion est un terrain difficile et je n'ai guère trouvé de solution pour adapter la taille des chemins pour le rendu. le highway=residential est trompeur, j'ai déjà sur la carte adjoint les tags width=2.5 (je vais d'ailleurs sans doute leur appliquer celui que tu as donné est_width=* certainement plus adapter). C'est justement la réalité du terrain qui m'a contraint à appliquer highway=service au lieu de "residentail"(au passage, il est possible de leur donner des noms, ce qui a orienté ce choix technique), pourtant résidentiels ils le sont bien dans le sens où ils permettent l'accès à un groupe d'habitation, mais il n'y a que les lots neuf (sur les 15 dernière années) qui possède des voies normalisées. Le problème reste et demeure, j'ai déjà pensé au highway=track tracktype=grade1 et appliqué dans certain cas, l'ennui est que jusqu'à présent mapnik et osmrender ne donne pas le même rendu. je vais travailler sur le narrow, je ne le connaissait pas (peut être très inondé à la Réunion, le réseau s'en ressent), j'aimerai aussi trouver un tag pour les chutes pierres qui sont ici assez courantes.

Je ne veux pas "adapter" dans le sens déformer le tag "Primary" ou "Secondary", il s'agit bien de comprendre qu'à la Réunion su l'on se réfère aux strictes classifications, on devrait se retrouver avec une route primaire et un zeste de routes secondaires et tertiaire, puis tout le reste en unclassified ou résidentiel. Or dans les faits et le terrain c'est loin d'être le cas. Certaine route primaire sont loin d'avoir le physique d'une route primaire de métropole mais elles n'en demeurent pas moins primaire au regard de l'importance du trafique et de l'usage. Il en va de même pour les secondaires et les tertiaires. Jettes un oeil à la carte et tu comprends mieux que tout les long discours sur lesquels je pourrais épuiser mes doigts (Celle de la [ouest] où j'ai beaucoup travaillé e particulier). Note qu'il reste beaucoup de travail à faire de ce côté là et ce qui à été classé aujourd'hui pourra se trouver classé différemment demain selon les infos récoltées.

Je refais la roue, sans doute, cependant c'est peut être le highway=residential dont il faudrait discuté, un seul type n'est vraiment pas suffisant, c'est trop monolithique, je ne perd pas de vue que OSM pourra être utilisé sur des navigateur personnel évolué. highway=unclassified ne résout pas le problème, çà me fait un peu penser "on noie le poisson et demerde a ou zot toute!"(comprend qui pourra). Un highway=residential_narrow avec rendu spécifique, pourquoi pas?

Je vais rester sur ma position pour le moment avant de trouver mieux (et j'espère trouver mieux!!), mais j'informerai sur la page que çà ne tient que d'une considération personnelle discutable et discuté. Pour des utilisateurs qui débutent (surtout avec Podlach) ajouter "width" "smoothness" etc ... sont des attraits diffus et plutôt rébarbatif. Ça peut paraitre idiot mais il s'agit là d'être attractif, pas le contraire. faut quand même pas les faire fuir!

Pour le cartouche, ouais, encore la roue, mais même si je n'aurais jamais rien pu comprendre sur le fonctionnement du code sans le Template:place il en est pas moins assez mal foutu (un peu obscure), je voulais du simple pour des gens simples, par pour des zonzons comme moi ou des vétérans d'OSM. Qu'il soit bien adapter à la situation et l'usage donné.

Je n'ai d'ailleurs pas finis sur le Template:FR:SITUATION et j'en ai fait un autre pour les pages dédiée à un secteur en particulier (Template:FR:PROJECTION CARTE). D'ailleurs si tu connais l'astuce pour intégré slippy directement dans le template sans que ne soit déclaré une erreur code, je suis preneur, tout comme pour d'autres idées que je n'ai pas encore eu (et peut être capitales!!). Je viens de jeter un oeil sur la page de Mulhouse, j'avais déjà pensé à çà mais pas en premier pour "qu'on se marche pas sur les pieds" mais à cause des erreurs réseaux, çà m'est déjà arrivé et sincèrement c'est une horreur, Podlach c'est bien sympa, sauf quand il faut effacer les données. Je vais peut être envisager un layer provisoire directement sur la carte OSM à enlever une fois que le secteur est achevé. Je ne sais pas si c'est très orthodoxe, donne moi ton avis histoire que je ne déclenche pas les foudres des contributeurs!

Je pense aussi à un petit tuto directement sur la page Wiki pour initier au béaba du regroupement des possibles contributeurs, çà peut aider. j'ai vu aussi que dans "Category", il y avait aussi la notion de "Group", si tu peux m'en dire plus?

Pour les transcriptions du style highway=primary vers "Réseau routier Primaire", je le placerai en bulle dès que j'aurais compris comme cela fonctionne. Mais je tiens à garder le tag tel qu'il est présent dans le Map_Features, encore une histoire de possibles confusions que je veux éviter. Merci pour tes messages sympa, à chaque fois j'apprends un petit plus de code!

--mk67 14:03, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Message reçu

Je vais tâcher d'être plus orthodoxe avec mes ways et j'ai même déjà commencé. Je ne sais pas encore comment proposer une nouvelle forme de tag, mais je vais voir comment çà ce passe. le coup du residential_narrow n'est pas mauvais et le rendu ne serait par particulièrement difficile non plus si on le basait sur le rendu d'origine de "service" peur être un peu plus large (pas nécessairement) mais avec des ligne de marque différente, exemple couleur orange cadnium ou vert, d'ailleurs ce pourrait être applicable au tag lui-même mais aussi à sa nature ex highway=residential_narrow avec un rendu aux lignes oranges et avec l'option old=yes un rendu à lignes vertes pour les ruelles des villes anciennes, çà résoudrait beaucoup de chose pour bcp de monde en europe. je vais voir qu'elle est le meilleurs tag "emprunté" pour la zone "en travaux", je vais hélas devoir "tager pour le rendu" mais c'est pour la bonne cause. Merci encore pour tes conseils. Si toi ou d'autre ont des idées pour améliorer mes Templates les talks de leurs page respectives sont là pour çà. Template:FR:SITUATION Template:FR:PROJECTION CARTE

--mk67 21:03, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

type=boundary

Hi! I deprecated it because there were lengthy discussions (on talk and talk-de) about this in January 2009 after the german INFAS import. There were no strong points against this change and at least Germany has been completely retagged. Now some users begin to use type=boundary again so that it is very inconsistent. So I decided to change this wiki page to the current state of discussion. --LarsF 11:18, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I will have to disagree. There was discussion on the global ML and almost nobody disagreed (except me and a few others), this scheme is in use for five or more months now so I think it is time to update the Wiki to the current status of discussion (no objections in all this time, probably due to us not updating the wiki, see below). I think this could have been mentioned on the page, yes, but I only did see it yesterday after someone changed a few relations in germany from multipolygon to boundary. To sum it up (and follow it up with a question): I still don't really like using multipolygon for boundaries. I'd like to use type=boundary but I was (almost) the only one to think so (on talk and talk-de) so I gave in and used type=multipolygon. And I really would like to have consistent tagging for boundaries so I changed the wiki page to what was more or less agreed on. Everyone looking in the wiki for information now will see what he/she should use from now on and that there is an "old" way to do things.

I don't know when you started the process of creating the boundaries in France but if it was after January 2009 it is our fault (all of us discussing this on the ML) for not updating this Wiki page earlier. Sorry! What I would like to know is which tagging scheme you prefer (multipolygon with inner/outer or boundary with enclave/exclave)? And what do you think I should have done? --LarsF 12:47, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

left_name, right_name

I've responded to your message at User_talk:Achadwick#Proposed_features.2Fleft_name.29. --achadwick 00:34, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Tableau CLC

Arghh ! Je t'avais vu changer des couleurs de XYZ vers vert quand c'était accepté et de X'Y'Z' vers rouge quand c'était abandonné, et j'ai cru que tu voulais uniformiser et retirer donc les couleurs CLC, je me suis dis "pourquoi pas" vu que l'utilisation couleur de CLC est propre à CLC, indépendante de OSM et déjà présent sur la page principale, ... donc j'ai continué le changement. Peut m'importe, un revert est peut-être souhaitable. Sletuffe 14:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Mapping of GR

Hi Pieren, I read the discussions on the French mailing list, regarding the mapping of the GR in France, which is apparently not possible, due to the copyright of the FFR for the GRs. This summer I walked now the GR 70, Chemin de Stephenson, (not 100 %, I did some little changes), and I have now 250 km worth of traces. What would be your proposal to do with the traces ?

In any case, I think I can create a lot of ways (highway=road, as I do not know if it was on a road or trail, the area is largely unmapped)

The questions is now, if I should create a relation as well ? As far as I understood, I should exactly avoid to create a relation and call it "GR 70", right ? But what's about calling it "Chemin de Stevenson" or "Carsten's hike from Le Puy-En-Velay to Ales"

Or I give it my own number and start a OSM wiki page with a list of those ?

--Behrica 14:34, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Templates FR:Map Features

Salut Pieren,

Désolé, mais j'avais un peu fait une pause car c'est assez fastidieux comme boulot ; ça m'avait semblé pas trop gênant de laisser "à moitié fait" par rapport à avant. Si tu te sens de le finir, n'hésite pas ! Damouns 13:17, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

BugBuster

Hi Pieren, hope I undstood you correctly, you want that I make clear that I does not merge two nodes, just only delete doubled IDs in a way, right?

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php?title=User:B%C3%BCrste/BugBuster&diff=347548&oldid=347274

--Bürste 15:32, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Orchard

Bonsoir,

Normalement l'appel est lancé sur la liste 'talk', c'est pour ça que j'ai mis la date à RFC. Mais comme je ne suis pas abonné à cette liste, il y a un contrôle avant publication, il semble. Et ça c'est aléatoire. Peut-être qu'il faut relancer la proposition sur la liste 'talk'...

Je veux bien un coup de main. Je n'ai jamais fait de propositions, je ne suis pas sur d'avoir respecté toutes les étapes. Merci d'avance.

Vincent

Error 412

Bonjour,

J'ai envoyé un message à Jacques Lys, concernant l'import CLC et la suppression des points 514316578 et 514316579. Je n'ai pas le temps (et je ne sais pas comment) faire réapparaitre ces points. Bref Je ne peux pas relancer la machine. Bon courage. FrViPofm 06:47, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Sort order on Map Features

Thanks for the comment. I have added a section to the talk page to discuss sorting of Map Features. Let's continue the discussion there.PeterIto 10:43, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

cadastre-fr

Hi Pieren - I've a problem with georeferencing with the plugin - maybe you can help? Greetings -- Schusch 22:18, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

thanks for your reaction - I tried to give an explanation of my problem here - maybe it is of interest for somebody else ... -- Schusch 23:12, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

official_name

So, back to User_talk:Ilis, the official_name discussion. First of all, this key was cross-posted from Key:name. You're welcome to invite to this disscussion those people who first introdused it.

You wrote: long name - at least in Western Europe as far as I know - normally put in the standard name tag this is not always the case. Somehow long names are not put even for some country names:

• United Kingdom is put instead of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland;
• Luxembourg is put instead of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
• Belgium - instead of Kingdom of Belgium

And these are only few examples from Western Europe We are talking about the same sort of substitution here. A sensible commonly used official name is put in name, while a long official name is put in Key:official_name where applicable. The problem is not in using nat_name or loc_name instead of name, but the absense of an applicable key (other than official_name) for stating additional official names. --neutron 10:43, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

before continuing the discussion: why don't you just use the talk:key:name page or an official proposal to discuss this new tag and alternative solutions? would make more sense and open up the discussion to the public (its hard to find the information in user pages) --Marc 13:27, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Because I did not introduce the tag myself. I just explained that adding an undocumented key in the wiki is not correct ! I will fix this issue in the easy way for me. --Pieren 14:55, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

thanks a lot! --Marc 15:00, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Your easy way is quite odd in my opinion. Firstly, this is NOT a new key. It was copied into template page from the name page and it was documented. Secondly, it is already used worldwide mostly for country names. Thirdly, the key is still documented in other languages. So, your actions on starting another edit war are very dissapointing. --neutron 05:10, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

See my comments on your talk page. --Pieren 13:51, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Cyclable way in both directions whilst oneway for others

S1 at Bicycle#Miscellaneous show a situation where there is a oneway street that is accessible for cyclist the other way round, without explicit signage on the road. In some cases (Netherlands and Belgium) a restrictions sign or an allowance sign is placed at the start and the end of such roads.

I assume the cyclist is allowed to cycle both ways, although this in not mentioned explicitly here. For the dcutch and belgian situation where I am refering to it is allowed a such.

The tagging scheme here is flawed in my opinion; since there is nog road-signage a cycleway-tag is not appropriate. The alternative of using the bicycle:oneway=no in this situation has been on the talk lists, but never actually approved in a way I know of. What is your opinion on this? Does my proposal make sense to you? I will reformulate my question on the talk list in a few days.

--ivom 21:54, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

{{Icon}}

Hi! I think that link to images are useful, especially for beginers. Furthermore on talk page was a request for legend since 2009. I also didn't notice (for now) increased time of generating site. Yarl ✉ 14:11, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Actualisation du contenu d'une page

Bonjour

WikiProject France/Fonds de cartes#Carte Départements français de métropole aurai besoin d'une mise à jour... Cordialement, --Manu1400 12:35, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Forming a wiki team

Hi Pieren, saw your activities in the wiki cleanup. So are you interested in joining the wikiteam? Talk:Wiki#Forming_a_Wiki_Team --!i! 16:29, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

"MapQuest project of the week"

Not cool dude, not cool. Project of the week is mainly setup by Richard Weait, it has nothing to do with MapQuest. -- Firefishy 00:25, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Numéro dans la rue

Bonjour, Quelle est la règle pour les numéros des adresses dans une rue ? On met la clé addr:housenumber sur le bâtiment ? Ou on créé un nouveau point : plus long à faire mais permet de remplir les cas avec plusieurs adresses pour un même bâtiment ? Merci pour votre aide Pierrelm 14:23, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Salut, Merci pour les infos. Contributeur sur Wikipédia où il y a beaucoup de règles à connaitre, sinon, on se fait remonter les bretelles. Ici, c'est visiblement plus jeune et moins formalisé. Dans mon quartier, les numéros de parcelle du cadastre ne correspondent pas au numéro des bâtiments. Pierrelm 14:56, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Paris Progress

Hello - I noticed that you were quite active in Paris mapping, but at the same time I see that there have been no updates to the 'Paris' wiki page here since the end of 2010, at the same time that the 'cadastre' JOSM plugin is no longer working. I have recently begun actively participating in the Paris mapping project - could you give me any news about its state/progress? Where should I start?

Best,

ThePromenader.

about my reverts

Hi Pieren!

The reason I restored the previous version was that there is no justifiable reason to remove phrases like "fucking shit". They don't harm anyone, neither adults nor children. If someone is offended by them, its their problem, not OSMs. Indeed, profanity serves a very important purpose in communication, which consists of more than just the literal words that are transmitted. This means that you indeed altered a significant part of someone else's comment.

I will not restore it again, because I don't want to start an edit war, but please don't take this as an agreement! --Schuetzm 15:27, 15 July 2011 (BST)

Platforms

See my response to your question on my talk page. PeterIto 11:33, 8 May 2012 (BST)

Bicycle page

Hello Pieren,

I notice you've added extremely useful information regarding the tagging of cycle lanes and cycle tracks to the Bicycle page. However, as this primarily concerns the tagging of cycleway=*, I think those tables should be actually listed on the Key:cycleway page instead.

I've written about this at Talk:Bicycle#Proposed:_page_revamp.

I've also done some other minor changes to this page and to Key:cycleway as well. Maybe you could have a look? Thanks!

Best, Emkey08 (talk) 10:08, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

My concern is that the Bicycle page is so much focused on the cycleway=* tag that the other bicycle-related tags like highway=cycleway, bicycle_road=*, bicycle=*, and Cycle routes are getting quite lost in the shuffle. I think those features should all be equally mentioned on the Bicycle page, so that new users can get a quick and good overview of all bicycle features provided by OSM. The current bicycle page doesn't really serve that purpose IMHO.

I've created a draft for a new bicycle page at User:Emkey08/Bicycle_(draft), focused to give an overview of OSM cycling features, with links to the key pages which list all the glory details. --Emkey08 (talk) 17:04, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Re: not rendered my mapnik

The point is: if software does not understand a particular tag value, the tag value is not as useful. The problem for example occurs with shop=* or amenity=* even more often. If it's not shown by popular or case-specific software, it is as if the object does not exist. –Jengelh (talk) 01:19, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Translation of main wiki menu?

Hi Pieren, could you please tell me how can I change the translation of the main wiki menu (the one in upper left corner)? I would like to change some names there (The map) and redirect some pages to Czech translation (Map Features). I was not able to find out how do to it. It seems that it is done via Translate Wiki, but I was not able to find proper entries there. Thank you. Chrabros (talk) 08:45, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Missing file information

Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.

Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.

Are you the author of image File:Boundary complete.PNG ?

Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?

Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ".

Doing this would be already very useful.

Licensing - photos

In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?

In case where it is a photo you (except relatively rare cases) author can make it available under a specific free license.

Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?

Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?

If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.

You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.

Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified January 2022}} from the file page.

Licensing - other images

If it is not a photo situation gets a bit more complicated.

See Drafts/Media file license chart that may help.

note: if you took screenshot of program made by someone else, screenshot of OSM editor with aerial imagery: then licensing of that elements also matter and you are not a sole author.

note: If you downloaded image made by someone else then you are NOT the author.

Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.

Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.

Help

Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.

Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).

If you are interested in wider discussion about handling licencing at OSM Wiki, see this thread.

--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:17, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Missing file information

Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.

Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.

Are you the creator of image File:Boundary eclate.PNG ?

Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?

Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ" or "this is map generated from OpenStreetMap data and SRTM data" or "map generated from OSM data and only OSM data" or "This is my work based on file -link-to-page-with-that-file-and-its-licensing-info-" or "used file downloaded from internet to create it, no idea which one".

Doing this would be already very useful.

Licensing - photos

In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?

In case where it is a photo you (except relatively rare cases) author can make it available under a specific free license.

Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?

Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?

If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.

You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.

Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified March 2022}} from the file page.

Licensing - other images

If it is not a photo situation gets a bit more complicated.

See Drafts/Media file license chart that may help.

note: if you took screenshot of program made by someone else, screenshot of OSM editor with aerial imagery: then licensing of that elements also matter and you are not a sole author.

note: If you downloaded image made by someone else then you are NOT the author.

Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.

Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.

Help

Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.

Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).

If you are interested in wider discussion about handling licencing at OSM Wiki, see this thread.

(sorry if I missed something that already states license and source: I am looking through over 20 000 files and fixing obvious cases on my own, in other I ask people who upladed files, but it is possible that I missed something - in such case also please answer)

--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:07, 23 March 2022 (UTC)