User talk:Apm-wa

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

OSM on paper

Hi Apm-wa, thank you for your write-up of how you produced a big map on your printer! I have placed your tutorial into a new sub page: OSM on Paper/Printing via Maperitive, Easy Poster Printer and Microsoft ICE. It is better suited there, since it is a full tutorial-style, too big for the root page OSM on Paper. It would be nice if you could add some missing links and improve the wiki formatting. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 09:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

That's great, thanks for doing that. Improving the wiki format is a project for the future--will get to it as soon as I can. FYI we are producing 1.5 meter by 1.5 meter wall maps of Ashgabat city using this technique, and I'm happy to share the Maperitive style file with anyone interested in reproducing it. --Apm-wa (talk) 12:24, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
A big map, wow! :-)
Just upload the style file somewhere to a persistent storage or, maybe better, just paste the text onto a new wiki page - e.g. this one: OSM on Paper/Printing via Maperitive, Easy Poster Printer and Microsoft ICE/Ashgabat city Maperitive style file) and insert the link. Don't worry about the displayed format of the file. I will fix it for you then. It may be useful just to look into for someone. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 14:32, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
I tried adding text to the wiki page but even with a nowiki tag the formatting of the style sheet gets completely messed up--since it runs to 32 pages or so if printed, it would be a lot of work for you to reformat it. Do you have a suggestion for a server (persistent storage) where I could place a copy of the style file? That would probably be a more elegant solution anyway. --Apm-wa (talk) 04:38, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Just save it on this wiki page, do not care about how it looks. Sadly our file upload here does only accept images and office documents. I do not know (not now) a free storage which keeps the files (nearly) forever. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 18:41, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
OK, have done. --Apm-wa (talk) 01:08, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
formatted (should be copy&paste-able now) and linked in the page in case someone would like to have a direct download. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 20:49, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Most excellent! Thank you! --Apm-wa (talk) 01:00, 7 June 2016 (UTC)


Hi, I am currently writing a proposal to improve quality over the diplomatic objects. As you are the writer of the great office=diplomatic proposal, could you please give me your feedback before i discuss it on the Tagging mailing-list? It's still an early stage proposal. Thanks --Overflorian (talk) 17:42, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that was my effort. I have two minor suggestions. First, in common usage a phrase like "Consulate General" has both words capitalized, so your suggestions of how to tag diplomatic POIs would better be done in that style, e.g., "Branch Embassy" (rather than "Branch embassy"), "Consulate General", "Honorary Consulate", "Permanent Mission", etc. Second, I would advocate for short_name=* to be simply the name of the sending country. That will make the label actually "short", or at least shorter (the type of office is superfluous in a short name), and will not subtract information from the geospatial database, since that same info is reproduced in other tags.
I have one major suggestion, and that is to drop this subsection and to amend your text on liaison offices:
Internationaly unrecognized states are tagged diplomatic=liaison and liaison=liaison_office.
It includes for example the Order of Malta (see
The issue here is not whether a sovereign entity is internationally recognized, but whether it is recognized by the receiving side. If a country recognizes the SMOM as a sovereign state under the Vienna Convention, then the SMOM's diplomatic mission is an "embassy=yes" and not as a liaison office. Thus the handful of countries that recognize the Republic of China (Taiwan) would call the ROC diplomatic representation an "embassy" even though Taiwan is not allowed to join UN agencies and is not recognized by the United Nations.
Similarly I would amend this table in your proposal:


OSM object Current name Proposed name
node 3961788985 name=Ambassade de l’Ordre souverain de Malte nameːen=Order of Malta

official_nameːen=Sovereign Military Order of Malta

way 887733958 name=Economic and Commercial Office of the Embassy of the Peoples Republic of China name=Economic and Commercial Office of the Embassy of China

official_name=Economic and Commercial Office of the Embassy of the Peoples Republic of China

node 8910893849 name=Taipei Representative Office in Singapore name=Representative Office of Taiwan
The issue with Malta is covered above. A Maltese (SMOM) office should be tagged in accordance with its status according to the receiving side. An economic and commercial office should be a branch embassy (embassy=branch_embassy) as noted here:
These are the tertiary tag values for the office=diplomatic key/tag combination.
embassy yes nodearea Bears a sign labeling it as an embassy and is headed by an ambassador.
embassy branch_embassy nodearea Branch of an embassy headed by a diplomat below ambassadorial rank; may be in or outside the city where the embassy chancery is located.  It may be signed as a trade office or cultural center.

Apm-wa (talk) 15:02, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Apm-wa, thanks a lot for this very quick, detailed and lively answer.
You raised an issue directly related to data quality in the databaseː
An economic and commercial office should be a branch embassy (embassy=branch_embassy)
You are absolutely right, that was a mistake. That's fixed.
For the other topics, let me reply directly on the discussion page in order to keep track of itː
Thanks again.

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:40kph-sign.JPG ?

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|Apm-wa}} 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.


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) 16:16, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

As I noted on the page, "A 40 kilometer per hour sign in a school zone in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan. Photo by Allan Mustard." Since I am Allan Mustard, it means I took the photo. The metadata recorded also notes,
Camera manufacturer Apple
Camera model iPhone 6s
Date and time of data generation 17:16, 12 July 2018

This means that I took the photo with my iPhone on 12 July 2018, during my tour of duty in Ashgabat as U.S. ambassador to Turkmenistan. The bottom of the page reads, "Content is available under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 license unless otherwise noted." Since I made no other notation regarding copyright, you may rest assured that I made this photograph available under that license. Apm-wa (talk) 17:09, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for info! I edited the file page to clearly note the license (and I know about footer - sadly, many people uploaded random images found on the internet etc). Sorry for not matching username and name/surname Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:31, 27 March 2022 (UTC)


Hello! And sorry for bothering you, but descriptions of files you uploaded need to be improved.

You have uploaded files which are licensed as requiring attribution. But right now attribution is not specified properly.

Please, ask for help if something is confusing or unclear in this message.

Please, fix that problem with this uploads - note that images with unclear licensing situation may be deleted.

Attribution may be missing completely or just be specified in nonstandard way, in either case it needs to be improved. Note that using CC-BY files without specifying attribution is a copyright violation, which is often unethical and unwanted. So clearly specifying required attribution is needed if license which makes attribution mandatory was used.

If it is applying to your own work which not based on work by others - then you can select own user name or some other preferred attribution or even change license to for example {{CC0-self}}

For your own work: ensure that it is clearly stated at file page that you created image/took the photo/etc

For works by others - please ensure that there is link to the original source which confirms license and that you used proper attribution, or that source is clearly stated in some other way.

Especially for old OSM-baded maps, made from data before license change on 12 September 2012 you should use "map data © OpenStreetMap contributors" as at least part of attribution

For old OSM Carto maps, which predate license change on 12 September 2012 you can use a special template {{OSM Carto screenshot||old_license}}

You are author of also following ones, right?

Note entirely sure about this ones - is copyright status of original work known? It almost certainly is not blocking (likely some variant of public domain as official dpcuments), but would be nice to know this