User talk:Wollschaf

This is a RFC. Please leave a message :)

time-based tagging

Tags may be time-dependent. Perhaps a road is closed for some hours on certain days of the week for a type of vehicle. A bridge may be open only at special times... time-based speed limits, parking restrictions, and so on. It is impossible to think about all the possible cases.

Thus a method is needed to define that ANY key can be valid,invalid or changed depending on the time.

• key_timedvalue_(Keyname)
  • {string defining values of a key for certain timeslots}
    • Example: key_valid_way_lanes="h=8-16,d=0-7:2;h=16-8,d=0-7:1" could be used to describe a road that changes the number of lanes every day a week at 8 and 16 o'clock.

• key_valid_(Keyname)
  • {string defining timeslots the key is valid}
    • Example: key_valid_path="m=4-9" makes the path accessible in the summer, else it is ignored.

• key_invalid_(Keyname)
  • {string defining timeslots the key is invalid}

• key_valid_until_(Keyname)
  • date+time
    • Example: temporary alternative road because of construction area

• key_invalid_until_(Keyname)
  • date+time
    • a road that currently is in construction

• key_valid_from_(Keyname)
  • date+time

• key_invalid_from_(Keyname)
  • date+time

So... ferry timetables can be embedded into the map data this way, too: just open the last piece of road at the harbour the right times ;) It is of course possible to do a lot of stuff with the time-based tagging that just makes no sense.

A flexible scheme to represent the different timeslots has to be found.

Hi Wollschaf,

while you refer to attributes still in service, maybe its you who can give me a hint to the historic dimension, as the saying goes, by when a road is build, by when a certain part of a castel ist build (and destroyed). This would enable to travel in time through the map (then obviously infinite maps) for which tags have to be invented. This is a must and would extend WikiPedia to the utmost.... scoid 21:48, 23 Aug 2006 (BST)

Proposed_features/Pedestrianised_road

Hi, User:Bruce89 has sugessted to change the value for the Proposed_features/Pedestrianised_road from pedistrian to precint. So I think its the best to start a new voting period. Can you please go to that page and vote again? Sven Anders 11:33, 20 September 2006 (BST)

OpenGL OSMplotter in 3D?

Hey Wollschaf,

I'm also working on some OSM 3D app to for browsing (see my user page), I'd like to contact you for sharing ideas and/or contributing, please email me :)

Dotslash 10:47, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Ich wollte nur mal kurz Hallo sagen. Ich wohne in Mannheim-Wallstadt und habe als Kind in Gorxheim gewohnt. Weinheim hast Du ja schon echt gut hinbekommen :-) -- LosHawlos 15:21, 4 May 2007 (BST)

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:Gpsgl.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".

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) 17:53, 12 March 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:Nodes by lat.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|Wollschaf}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.

Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified 2022, May}} 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) 11:17, 20 May 2022 (UTC)