[talk-ph] Capas, Tarlac Coverage
Hi, This concerns me: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=15.35855lon=120.53538zoom=16layers=B000FTF See screenshot: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3127/3289629754_381c35989a_b.jpg Upper left - OSM Map Upper right - same are over merkaator with the existing yahoo image (no high-res yahoo image) Lower right - same area in Google Earth It is possible though that it came from a GPS trace. -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] First Philippine mapping party
Eugene - not Feb 28 Michael Cole - March 14 Maning - March 7 On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Michael Cole colemic...@gmail.com wrote: March 14 regards On Monday 16 February 2009 19:28:05 maning sambale wrote: So there's: maning, eugene, mike cole and YOU! Please vote for your preferred date: I think I'll bring along the family too. On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Michael Cole colemic...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday 16 February 2009 17:08:30 Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: Can I get the Tagaytay Crosswinds area? Saturdays are my day out with the family.. Perfect place to take them.. Then travel about with them.. And an easy place also to leave them at a hotel or somewhere for a swim. Just tell us the date.. I will be there... ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Capas, Tarlac Coverage
On Wednesday 18 February 2009 11:38:40 maning sambale wrote: Hi, This concerns me: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=15.35855lon=120.53538zoom=16layers=B00 0FTF See screenshot: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3127/3289629754_381c35989a_b.jpg Upper left - OSM Map Upper right - same are over merkaator with the existing yahoo image (no high-res yahoo image) Lower right - same area in Google Earth It is possible though that it came from a GPS trace. Do you have the log of who changed it? ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Capas, Tarlac Coverage
I've sent the mapper a message via the osm messaging on another topic, but got no reply so far. On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Michael Cole colemic...@gmail.com wrote: On Wednesday 18 February 2009 11:38:40 maning sambale wrote: Hi, This concerns me: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=15.35855lon=120.53538zoom=16layers=B00 0FTF See screenshot: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3127/3289629754_381c35989a_b.jpg Upper left - OSM Map Upper right - same are over merkaator with the existing yahoo image (no high-res yahoo image) Lower right - same area in Google Earth It is possible though that it came from a GPS trace. Do you have the log of who changed it? ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
On 17 Feb 2009, at 00:18, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, SteveC wrote: As you both know several years of work went in to that blog, and not just by me. Maybe you should both think twice before dismissing it all. It would help if, instead of * singling out participants (you both), * making false allegation (that they wanted to dismiss it all), and * implying that their postings are thoughtless (think twice) you would simply do your part in answering the valid questions raised, namely by 80n and, after your posting, Gustav: Because 80n knows the answers Frederik, this is called politics. Best Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] NHD Dataset
Hi all, Mapnik already support this,see: http://openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/24849/ But production osmarender not yet: http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.6758lon=15.9996zoom=12layers=0B00FTF What's the problem with osmarender patch? The problem is that neither bobkare nor I really can review the patch. It is attached to http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/1435. If Frederik or someone else with enough time and knowledge of perl and osmarender tells me looks good to me I'll apply it. If somebody else with svn access wants to apply it without review fine with me too. I just don't want to break everthing by applying a patch I don't understand. Patrick Petschge Kilian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 9:18 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: Because 80n knows the answers Frederik, this is called politics. But I, and many others, don't know the answer. I was asking a question. - Gustav ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Beta testers required for new Windows Mobile OSM Client
2009/2/12 George Styles geo...@ripnet.co.uk: At the moment its simply freeware. I want to GPL it, but need to open a sourceforge account etc etc, and havent had time yet... If you just need a place for source version control, you can request an OSM SVN account and use that as a repository for the code. -- Regards, Thomas Wood (Edgemaster) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Norbert Hoffmann nhoffm...@spamfence.net wrote: Andy Allan wrote: And every time using :left and :right comes up, we all have a big discussion about it and then nobody pays any attention and it comes up again a few months later. Perhaps this is because the concept leftright is so simple - and the aversion against editors, that are not totally key-ignorant is not so easy to understand. And nobody pays attention. The main problem is that two-way roads have no inherent, real-world, direction - neither side of the road is the right or the left. Or rather, both sides of the road are the right or the left, depending on which way you are facing. The only place that right and left has any intrinsic sense is on one-way roads, which *do* have an inherent direction (and signs to that effect). Let's say you have a church beside a road. If it's a oneway street, it makes some kind of sense to say it's halfway along the road, over on the left. Let's say you have a church beside a two-way road. If I said it's halfway along the road, over on the right, you still wouldn't know which side of the road it is on. Now the problem is that most people at the moment in OpenStreetMap are tech-heads, and are so used to mental constructs and abstractions like every road having a completely arbitrary intrinsic direction - but that doesn't mean it's a great idea. Editor support is less important - and far easier to fix - than explaining to all the people who don't even realise that all roads have a direction in openstreetmap - and except for oneway roads, I have no idea which ways are pointing in which directions, and it shouldn't be important unless it *has* to be important. Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Intermittent rendering of multipolygons for buildings
I'm trying to render some buildings with holes in and using multipolygon relations to do it, but they don't always render. See, for example Whitehall[1], where the HMRC/Treasury building is rendered with its holes but the Foreign Office building to the north of it doesn't have its multiple holes rendered, nor does the smaller building to the east of this which only has one inner and one outer part. Is there a specific direction the ways have to go in on the outer and inner parts of the relation? Can I use more than one inner part to the relation to create holes? The wiki page at [2] suggests this should be possible with multiple inner ways that don't necessarily have to point in the same direction (though Mapnik may require the ways to go in different directions). Would be grateful for any insight. [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.50283lon=-0.12689zoom=17layers=B000FTF [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon Cheers, Dan -- Dan Karran d...@karran.net www.dankarran.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Splitting Long Ways/Polygons
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 19:50:07 +0100, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: For long waterways, it is absoutely usual to split them into a number of ways of manageable size (think not only of the API limit but of someone downloading an area touched by the river in JOSM!). Optionally, use a relation to group the parts. What is the correct relation to use here? I am only aware of relations tagged type=street to group long streets. I use them when combining long streets for low zoom levels and would like to do the same for long waterways and coastlines. The same is true for large areas, with the exception that you *must* use a relation (see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Relation:multipolygon, under advanced multipolygons). When polygons and roads are split, I am currently relying in my API0.6-code on the correct order of elements (relations are ordered with api 0.6). If one way does not fit where the last ended a new polygon/polyline is started. Does anyone have an algorithm to combine these that can work recursively starting with a single way and using no global searches (e.g. only getWaysForNode(), never getAllWays(Bounds)). Marcus ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 8:18 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: On 17 Feb 2009, at 00:18, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, SteveC wrote: As you both know several years of work went in to that blog, and not just by me. Maybe you should both think twice before dismissing it all. It would help if, instead of * singling out participants (you both), * making false allegation (that they wanted to dismiss it all), and * implying that their postings are thoughtless (think twice) you would simply do your part in answering the valid questions raised, namely by 80n and, after your posting, Gustav: Because 80n knows the answers Frederik, this is called politics. NOT politics at all. In my post, which appears to have been misinterpreted, I asked three questions. Two were rhetorical and answered in the following sentence: So, what makes opengeodata.org the official OpenStreetMap blog anyway? It's linked prominently on the OSM front page. Who contributes to it? I have an account there and most posts appear to be from OSMF board members but I don't know if all board members have an account and in the past there have been posts from non-board members as well. The rest of my post was largely informational, sharing my knowledge of the current situation and this was followed by my third question which was: So who's got any ideas or suggestions? Steve, I don't normally write rhetorical questions, its not my usual writing style, so I'm sure you misread my post and responded impulsively. But, perhaps you can provide some ideas or suggestions about how to make it clearer what each blog represents. 80n ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
On 17/02/2009 10:36, Andy Allan wrote: On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Norbert Hoffmann nhoffm...@spamfence.net wrote: Andy Allan wrote: And every time using :left and :right comes up, we all have a big discussion about it and then nobody pays any attention and it comes up again a few months later. Perhaps this is because the concept leftright is so simple - and the aversion against editors, that are not totally key-ignorant is not so easy to understand. And nobody pays attention. The main problem is that two-way roads have no inherent, real-world, direction - neither side of the road is the right or the left. Or rather, both sides of the road are the right or the left, depending on which way you are facing. The only place that right and left has any intrinsic sense is on one-way roads, which *do* have an inherent direction (and signs to that effect). Let's say you have a church beside a road. If it's a oneway street, it makes some kind of sense to say it's halfway along the road, over on the left. Let's say you have a church beside a two-way road. If I said it's halfway along the road, over on the right, you still wouldn't know which side of the road it is on. Now the problem is that most people at the moment in OpenStreetMap are tech-heads, and are so used to mental constructs and abstractions like every road having a completely arbitrary intrinsic direction - but that doesn't mean it's a great idea. Editor support is less important - and far easier to fix - than explaining to all the people who don't even realise that all roads have a direction in openstreetmap - and except for oneway roads, I have no idea which ways are pointing in which directions, and it shouldn't be important unless it *has* to be important. Real People often talk about the church on the left when you're heading towards somewhereville, so it's not *that* alien a concept. And in terms of the other concepts you have to understand to edit the map, it's hardly a big one. And you do already have to know about it - for one way streets and also for rivers and also for boundaries where exactly this left/right issue arises. So I think you're overstating the problem with this, and the reason it isn't widely adopted is because there has been no consensus in the past, not because it is fundamentally hard. There's only really two ways to deal with this geometrical relationship: relative or absolute. left/right is relative and suffers from lack of a natural direction to base it on; north/south/east/west is absolute, so is independent of any reversals done in the editor, but suffers badly on roads which turn more than 90 - 180 degrees - so you'd have to split them, which is just as arbitrary a rule as using the direction, though probably rarer. Since for any N people discussing something in OSM there always seem to be N+1 opinions, the only way this is likely to be resolved is if people just do it (in their preferred way) and see if one of them wins. It's more likely to win if the renderers act on it. Incidentally, :left/:right (or :north, etc) have a problem with languages on names. So if the name on the left (north) is different, using name:left (name:north) would have to be dealt with as a special case as name:x is usually used with x as a language. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Intermittent rendering of multipolygons for buildings
Dan Karran schrieb: I'm trying to render some buildings with holes in and using multipolygon relations to do it, but they don't always render. See, for example Whitehall[1], where the HMRC/Treasury building is rendered with its holes but the Foreign Office building to the north of it doesn't have its multiple holes rendered, nor does the smaller building to the east of this which only has one inner and one outer part. Would be grateful for any insight. Mapnik seems to have trouble with more than one hole. if you look closely the HMRC/Treasury is not mapped as one, but two buildings, each with one hole. As to the building to the east, I don't know. -- Dirk-Lüder Deelkar Kreie Bremen - 53.0952°N 8.8652°E signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
Regarding http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/left_name , Andy Allan wrote: And nobody pays attention. Probably as a result of there being no software support (because nobody paid attention...), and because it's historically been a comparatively rare use case. Though I'm working right now with a group of local cyclists who might plausibly want to denote which side of a two-way street a given farcility is on so that they can be more effectively avoided. At least I think that's the reason... except for oneway roads, I have no idea which ways are pointing in which directions, and it shouldn't be important unless it *has* to be important. For this it would have to be important. Can people take a look at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Way_Direction_Dependant and make sure we've caught everything? Thanks. -- Andrew Chadwick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
A few points to throw in the mix: * Do we have people who want to write a blog for the project as a whole? - Blogging requires quite a bit of commitment, especially for such a fast moving project, if things get busy elsewhere, the blogs tend to suffer. * Assuming we have enough people interested, should we have some kind of editorial policy (i.e. no Wee Poo Street notifications, or max two LOLcat pictures a month)? * If we create a new blog - can/should we import the relevant tagged entries from opengeodata? * Can we simply rename opengeodata or point to blog subdomain? (Where is it hosted?) tim ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
2009/2/17 Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com: On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Norbert Hoffmann nhoffm...@spamfence.net wrote: Andy Allan wrote: And every time using :left and :right comes up, we all have a big discussion about it and then nobody pays any attention and it comes up again a few months later. Perhaps this is because the concept leftright is so simple - and the aversion against editors, that are not totally key-ignorant is not so easy to understand. And nobody pays attention. The main problem is that two-way roads have no inherent, real-world, direction - neither side of the road is the right or the left. Or rather, both sides of the road are the right or the left, depending on which way you are facing. The only place that right and left has any intrinsic sense is on one-way roads, which *do* have an inherent direction (and signs to that effect). Let's say you have a church beside a road. If it's a oneway street, it makes some kind of sense to say it's halfway along the road, over on the left. Let's say you have a church beside a two-way road. If I said it's halfway along the road, over on the right, you still wouldn't know which side of the road it is on. Now the problem is that most people at the moment in OpenStreetMap are tech-heads, and are so used to mental constructs and abstractions like every road having a completely arbitrary intrinsic direction - but that doesn't mean it's a great idea. Editor support is less important - and far easier to fix - than explaining to all the people who don't even realise that all roads have a direction in openstreetmap - and except for oneway roads, I have no idea which ways are pointing in which directions, and it shouldn't be important unless it *has* to be important. Of course you expect any decent editor to solve the problem by letting the user choose which side of the way to apply the feature to. It really doesn't matter what the tagging is, the editor will have to solve the UI problem in almost exactly the same way. The only way of avoiding this issue in some non-confusing way is to not use tagging as the answer. Some complex relation with a this side member which still needs editor support. Or just adding another way to the database for each left/right feature, which becomes hard when you try to connect things together. The reason this gets ignored is because it's hard, and most solutions don't work for normal people without editor support, and our editors don't support it. Plus every time someone comes up with a solution, everybody points out the problems with it, which mostly seem to be worrying about the data being accidentally corrupted (ie: reversing ways), or not being easy for newbies/non-techies. And that's true for just about any method of entering data that isn't simple. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
2009/2/16 Norbert Hoffmann nhoffm...@spamfence.net: Andy Allan wrote: And every time using :left and :right comes up, we all have a big discussion about it and then nobody pays any attention and it comes up again a few months later. Perhaps this is because the concept leftright is so simple - and the aversion against editors, that are not totally key-ignorant is not so easy to understand. Umm... all the current editors are key aware. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
Having thought about this a bit overnight I personally feel that the project should have an OSM specific blog that gets used for OSM community announcements, worthy news items and OSMF announcements. Announcements are easy as they report fact and it's just a matter of deciding if the announcement is worthy of publication on a blog or not. News is a little more subjective so needs a little more care. OSMF stuff is easy because OSMF can decide internally before an announcement is made. If the OSM community can establish a small moderator group they could receive potential blog posts from anyone, the image of the week approach as suggested by Peter. The group would hopefully also deal with language issues if a post needs putting up in more than one language (alternative versions perhaps on the wiki for instance). It would also be nice for OSM to have a permanent archive of Steve's personal blog posts to OGD that he and others made about the development and progress of OSM in the early months/years. Steve, would you be ok with those entries being copied? Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk- boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of 80n Sent: 17 February 2009 11:02 AM To: SteveC Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org? On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 8:18 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: On 17 Feb 2009, at 00:18, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, SteveC wrote: As you both know several years of work went in to that blog, and not just by me. Maybe you should both think twice before dismissing it all. It would help if, instead of * singling out participants (you both), * making false allegation (that they wanted to dismiss it all), and * implying that their postings are thoughtless (think twice) you would simply do your part in answering the valid questions raised, namely by 80n and, after your posting, Gustav: Because 80n knows the answers Frederik, this is called politics. NOT politics at all. In my post, which appears to have been misinterpreted, I asked three questions. Two were rhetorical and answered in the following sentence: So, what makes opengeodata.org http://opengeodata.org/ the official OpenStreetMap blog anyway? It's linked prominently on the OSM front page. Who contributes to it? I have an account there and most posts appear to be from OSMF board members but I don't know if all board members have an account and in the past there have been posts from non-board members as well. The rest of my post was largely informational, sharing my knowledge of the current situation and this was followed by my third question which was: So who's got any ideas or suggestions? Steve, I don't normally write rhetorical questions, its not my usual writing style, so I'm sure you misread my post and responded impulsively. But, perhaps you can provide some ideas or suggestions about how to make it clearer what each blog represents. 80n No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.25/1956 - Release Date: 02/16/09 18:31:00 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Intermittent rendering of multipolygons for buildings
I'm trying to render some buildings with holes in and using multipolygon relations to do it, but they don't always render. See, for example Whitehall[1], where the HMRC/Treasury building is rendered with its holes but the Foreign Office building to the north of it doesn't have its multiple holes rendered, nor does the smaller building to the east of this which only has one inner and one outer part. Would be grateful for any insight. Mapnik seems to have trouble with more than one hole. if you look closely the HMRC/Treasury is not mapped as one, but two buildings, each with one hole. As to the building to the east, I don't know. For me also buildings with multiple holes work fine, but only when the outer part goes clockwise and the inner parts go anticlockwise and are without any tag. Even with a created_by tag the holes had not been created for this example http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.139768lon=11.549817zoom=17. Without any tags in the inner parts the holes appeared. The created_by tags of the inner parts in example [1] may be the problem. Cheers, Michael ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
Yes and at the board meeting we should talk about osmf just owning the ogd site. Ogd has great traffic and ranking and id suggest not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) ajrli...@googlemail.com wrote: Having thought about this a bit overnight I personally feel that the project should have an OSM specific blog that gets used for OSM community announcements, worthy news items and OSMF announcements. Announcements are easy as they report fact and it's just a matter of deciding if the announcement is worthy of publication on a blog or not. News is a little more subjective so needs a little more care. OSMF stuff is easy because OSMF can decide internally before an announcement is made. If the OSM community can establish a small moderator group they could receive potential blog posts from anyone, the image of the week approach as suggested by Peter. The group would hopefully also deal with language issues if a post needs putting up in more than one language (alternative versions perhaps on the wiki for instance). It would also be nice for OSM to have a permanent archive of Steve's personal blog posts to OGD that he and others made about the development and progress of OSM in the early months/years. Steve, would you be ok with those entries being copied? Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk- boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of 80n Sent: 17 February 2009 11:02 AM To: SteveC Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org? On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 8:18 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: On 17 Feb 2009, at 00:18, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, SteveC wrote: As you both know several years of work went in to that blog, and not just by me. Maybe you should both think twice before dismissing it all. It would help if, instead of * singling out participants (you both), * making false allegation (that they wanted to dismiss it all), and * implying that their postings are thoughtless (think twice) you would simply do your part in answering the valid questions raised, namely by 80n and, after your posting, Gustav: Because 80n knows the answers Frederik, this is called politics. NOT politics at all. In my post, which appears to have been misinterpreted, I asked three questions. Two were rhetorical and answered in the following sentence: So, what makes opengeodata.org http://opengeodata.org/ the official OpenStreetMap blog anyway? It's linked prominently on the OSM front page. Who contributes to it? I have an account there and most posts appear to be from OSMF board members but I don't know if all board members have an account and in the past there have been posts from non-board members as well. The rest of my post was largely informational, sharing my knowledge of the current situation and this was followed by my third question which was: So who's got any ideas or suggestions? Steve, I don't normally write rhetorical questions, its not my usual writing style, so I'm sure you misread my post and responded impulsively. But, perhaps you can provide some ideas or suggestions about how to make it clearer what each blog represents. 80n No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.25/1956 - Release Date: 02/16/09 18:31:00 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Intermittent rendering of multipolygons for buildings
nor does the smaller building to the east of this which only has one inner and one outer part. The smaller building has an error in the outer part (double node at the top left outer corner). This probably causes the error in not displaying the inner hole. Cheers, Michael [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.50283lon=-0.12689zoom=17layers=B000FTF ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
Dave Stubbs wrote: The only way of avoiding this issue in some non-confusing way is to not use tagging as the answer. Some complex relation with a this side member which still needs editor support. Or just adding another way to the database for each left/right feature, which becomes hard when you try to connect things together. Particularly when one of the side things you might want to tag is a cycleway or a strip of parking between the vehicle carriageway (part of our concept of a highway) and the foot sidewalk/pavement (also included in our highways, as a sort of bonus feature). Sticking your fingers in your ears and humming is a *fine* strategy to adopt when people begin talking about relations for this sort of thing, particularly when you can assume that there'd probably be a fairly reasonable, natural spatial hierarchy to such things. OSM simply doesn't tag to that degree of detail most of the time. If it did, it'd be implemented as a full-on GIS system. I personally want a system where I never need to tag things like http://realcycling.blogspot.com/2009/02/arrowing-experience-in-tavistock-place.html in any level of detail other than cycleway=rgh! (on the left) But saying has some things along the side of it is something we can do already. It'd be helpful sometimes to add on the left to that. -- Andrew Chadwick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Intermittent rendering of multipolygons for buildings
2009/2/17 Michael Telgkamp michael.telgk...@gmail.com: nor does the smaller building to the east of this which only has one inner and one outer part. The smaller building has an error in the outer part (double node at the top left outer corner). This probably causes the error in not displaying the inner hole. Ah, I hadn't spotted that in Potlatch.. thanks! Cheers, Dan -- Dan Karran d...@karran.net www.dankarran.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
Editor support is less important - and far easier to fix - than explaining to all the people who don't even realise that all roads have a direction in openstreetmap - and except for oneway roads, I have no idea which ways are pointing in which directions, and it shouldn't be important unless it *has* to be important. I don't think people are going to arbitrarily use the :left/:right tagging, except for cases where they feel it is necessary. It's certainly not something people new to the project will do as a first thing, and will only ever need it if they come up against something they want to map which is more complicated. Hopefully then they'd ask either here, on OSM-newbies or read the wiki to find a solution. So left and right relative to the direction of the way in the database (as displayed bottom left in Potlatch or with arrow heads in JOSM), is a logical solution for where you have things on only one side of the road (perhaps something like pavement:left=yes, pavement:right = no or something). Similarly the :forward/:backward proposal for where speed limits differ in opposite directions and other such cases. Oneway is strange in that as well as yes/no you can have oneway=-1 for one way in the opposite direction of the way, and I still can't work out why that is necessary. Ed ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
On Tuesday, 17 February 2009 10:36:16 +, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Norbert Hoffmann nhoffm...@spamfence.net wrote: Andy Allan wrote: And every time using :left and :right comes up, we all have a big discussion about it and then nobody pays any attention and it comes up again a few months later. Perhaps this is because the concept leftright is so simple - and the aversion against editors, that are not totally key-ignorant is not so easy to understand. And nobody pays attention. The main problem is that two-way roads have no inherent, real-world, direction - neither side of the road is the right or the left. Or rather, both sides of the road are the right or the left, depending on which way you are facing. Ok, if this is true, what is _your_ solution for the problem of placing something on the left or right side of a road ... or a direction-dependent tagging of a way attribute (e.g. oneway for a set of vehicles, different speed limits for both directions etc.)? Roads or ways have no ``inherent, real-world, direction'', but they have a direction within the OSM model. A way is represented by an ordered set of nodes, thus the way has something which is called digitization direction. If I want to tag attributes/properties which are true only relative to this digitization direction, I will use a _simple_ means to specify this ... and after reading all the current and past discussions about left/right or in direction/ against direction IMHO a direction relative tag _is_ a simple and normal concept. The only place that right and left has any intrinsic sense is on one-way roads, which *do* have an inherent direction (and signs to that effect). One-way roads do _not_ have an inherent direction. I am usually allowed and I can walk _against_ a one-way road. And I know a lot of one-way roads where I can cycle against the direction, or where busses are allowed to drive against the direction. This property is vehicle-dependent. Additionally the current special handling of oneway and its special cases (oneway=-1 for a oneway against the digitization direction!) shows that there is a need for a concept for direction-dependent tags. Why not use the inherent digitization direction, define and document a simple tagging concept for direction dependent tags, and add support for it to all editors and tools as it is already done for the oneway tag? [...] Now the problem is that most people at the moment in OpenStreetMap are tech-heads, and are so used to mental constructs and abstractions like every road having a completely arbitrary intrinsic direction - but that doesn't mean it's a great idea. It is not the best idea. On the other hand I have seen no other idea which is simpler to understand. Editor support is less important - and far easier to fix - than explaining to all the people who don't even realise that all roads have a direction in openstreetmap - and except for oneway roads, I have no idea which ways are pointing in which directions, and it shouldn't be important unless it *has* to be important. If I want to add a direction- or side-dependent tag/object to the map, the editors have to show the current (digitization) direction of the road. To edit a map we use a lot of mental constructs and abstractions of the real world (a real world road is not a line with a few pixel width, a real world intersection consists not only of two lines connected by a simple node etc.). -bernd ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
Andy Allan wrote: And nobody pays attention. The main problem is that two-way roads have no inherent, real-world, direction - neither side of the road is the right or the left. Or rather, both sides of the road are the right or the left, depending on which way you are facing. And that's why in real-world you would say Look in the direction to the railstation and then the church is on your left. If you want to describe objects with a handedness you'll need some concept of sides. If you call it left/right, green/red or nearer to some related point at the side/farther from ... doesn't really make a difference. Perhaps, if always the same proposal is made (Let's use the order stored in the db to define a /direction/ of a way and then use right and left to /name/ the sides.) this is the most user friendly method? Norbert has followed the discussions for only the last 1 1/2 years ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
While sympathetic to the underlying need being discussed in this thread, I suspect there is a further problem. Although a way has an intrinsic sense in OSM, this is fairly volatile! All it needs is someone to reverse a way - and this can happen rather easily, say, when combining two ways with the same tags but different senses (yes - there is a warning but it's all too easy to click through). Reversing the ways then, of course, reverses the 'left' and 'right' descriptors with their differing tags! This leads me to wonder whether an absolute sense (north, south, etc.) is still better even though it might require that a way is divided a bit. Most ways do have a 'general' compass direction for long segments even if this is often more human-obvious than machine-obvious. The main exceptions are likely to be short residential streets on housing developments etc. - 'circles' etc. - but these are less likely to require unilateral tagging. Btw, I have encountered the same problem with canals. Some mappers describe towpaths as being 'left' or 'right'. Personally, I prefer to map the towpath as a separate way alongside the canal - with the added advantage that this allows me to tag the towpath, e.g. with access rights, surface condition, barriers, reference numbers, route relations, etc. Perhaps this would also be a better approach for e.g. cycleways alongside motor roads? Although, I have to admit that it doesnt solve the problem of unilateral naming. Mike Harris -Original Message- From: David Earl [mailto:da...@frankieandshadow.com] Sent: 17 February 2009 11:10 To: Andy Allan Cc: Norbert Hoffmann; talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features) On 17/02/2009 10:36, Andy Allan wrote: On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Norbert Hoffmann nhoffm...@spamfence.net wrote: Andy Allan wrote: And every time using :left and :right comes up, we all have a big discussion about it and then nobody pays any attention and it comes up again a few months later. Perhaps this is because the concept leftright is so simple - and the aversion against editors, that are not totally key-ignorant is not so easy to understand. And nobody pays attention. The main problem is that two-way roads have no inherent, real-world, direction - neither side of the road is the right or the left. Or rather, both sides of the road are the right or the left, depending on which way you are facing. The only place that right and left has any intrinsic sense is on one-way roads, which *do* have an inherent direction (and signs to that effect). Let's say you have a church beside a road. If it's a oneway street, it makes some kind of sense to say it's halfway along the road, over on the left. Let's say you have a church beside a two-way road. If I said it's halfway along the road, over on the right, you still wouldn't know which side of the road it is on. Now the problem is that most people at the moment in OpenStreetMap are tech-heads, and are so used to mental constructs and abstractions like every road having a completely arbitrary intrinsic direction - but that doesn't mean it's a great idea. Editor support is less important - and far easier to fix - than explaining to all the people who don't even realise that all roads have a direction in openstreetmap - and except for oneway roads, I have no idea which ways are pointing in which directions, and it shouldn't be important unless it *has* to be important. Real People often talk about the church on the left when you're heading towards somewhereville, so it's not *that* alien a concept. And in terms of the other concepts you have to understand to edit the map, it's hardly a big one. And you do already have to know about it - for one way streets and also for rivers and also for boundaries where exactly this left/right issue arises. So I think you're overstating the problem with this, and the reason it isn't widely adopted is because there has been no consensus in the past, not because it is fundamentally hard. There's only really two ways to deal with this geometrical relationship: relative or absolute. left/right is relative and suffers from lack of a natural direction to base it on; north/south/east/west is absolute, so is independent of any reversals done in the editor, but suffers badly on roads which turn more than 90 - 180 degrees - so you'd have to split them, which is just as arbitrary a rule as using the direction, though probably rarer. Since for any N people discussing something in OSM there always seem to be N+1 opinions, the only way this is likely to be resolved is if people just do it (in their preferred way) and see if one of them wins. It's more likely to win if the renderers act on it. Incidentally, :left/:right (or :north, etc) have a problem with languages on names. So if the name on the left (north) is different, using name:left (name:north) would have to be
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
In my original post, I hadn't realised that blog links tended to be only official project announcements. I assumed that blog would show all the stuff which is happening in the OSM project, in a community-led way that reflects the wiki-like nature of the project. However, the OSM front page seems already to make this distinction between News and blogs, since the hyperlinked text is currently News / blog. So how about linking the two words separately? News can be important changes from approved people that affect the whole world at once, like new servers etc. Blogs can be all the interesting stuff that's happening locally, like new areas being mapped, people testing new mapping ideas, random photos and mapping stories, announcements from non-OSM entities like cloudmade, etc. p.s. how come the OSM front page doesn't contain a link to the foundation website? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
Mike Harris wrote: While sympathetic to the underlying need being discussed in this thread, I suspect there is a further problem. Although a way has an intrinsic sense in OSM, this is fairly volatile! All it needs is someone to reverse a way - and this can happen rather easily, say, when combining two ways with the same tags but different senses (yes - there is a warning but it's all too easy to click through). Reversing the ways then, of course, reverses the 'left' and 'right' descriptors with their differing tags! Yes, it'd be nice and simple to implement. Just swap any :left and :right -suffixed tags. That's why http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/right_left#Consequences_for_software discusses it in some detail. If people whine about it enough, I'll make osm2go do something like this, as a sort of reference implementation :) We're probably being lazy about oneway, and I'm entirely in favour of building simple smarts like this into an editor that's as simple and Joe-Consumer-focused as osm2go: I want to make it difficult for Joe Consumer to do the wrong thing accidentally without getting in his/her face (no warning dialogs, just do the right thing given that there's a single, obvious, 99%-of-the-time right thing to do here) This leads me to wonder whether an absolute sense (north, south, etc.) is still better even though it might require that a way is divided a bit. Most ways do have a 'general' compass direction for long segments even if this is often more human-obvious than machine-obvious. The main exceptions are likely to be short residential streets on housing developments etc. - 'circles' etc. - but these are less likely to require unilateral tagging. Hmm. An argument from plausible estate design; innovative! :) For the reasons you stated, :north, :south etc would break down for some ways. Also, if an editor rotates the way, it'd also have to rotate some of the tags. Some of the time. It's really quite a bit more complicated than a :left/:right scheme for coding, and it doesn't buy you much more expressiveness. For points, it makes more sense. But pub:heading=degrees and pub:distance=metres would be finer-grained for those XD Btw, I have encountered the same problem with canals. Some mappers describe towpaths as being 'left' or 'right'. Personally, I prefer to map the towpath as a separate way alongside the canal - with the added advantage that this allows me to tag the towpath, e.g. with access rights, surface condition, barriers, reference numbers, route relations, etc. For towpaths, I'd agree. They're 'sufficiently segregated' from the waterway in my head (you have to change mode fairly significantly to go from one to the other!) Perhaps this would also be a better approach for e.g. cycleways alongside motor roads? Although, I have to admit that it doesn’t solve the problem of unilateral naming. Sometimes, sometimes not. Cycleways where you can/sometimes have to rejoin the ordinary carriageway should not be, :left and :right (or cycleway=opposite_*, broken though it is) do that more plausibly because then you're dealing with the same road. Cycleways that are long, continuous, separated by a grass verge, or go along the sides of 70MPH roads get the separate treatment when I tag them (often they need things like lit=yes/no too, those ones). -- Andrew Chadwick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
OJ W wrote: p.s. how come the OSM front page doesn't contain a link to the foundation website? Hysterical Raisins. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://www.compton.nu/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
and how come sidebars on the map can be opened by: * clicking on one of the external links (map key) * selecting a map layer (data viewer) * selecting a tab (export) * submitting a form (search) it seems we like to give people a nice surprise when they use certain UI elements, different to what they're expecting, given that: * all the other hyperlinks go to a different webpage * selecting any of the other map layers changes the map layer * selecting any of the other tabs changes the tab being displayed On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 1:31 PM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: OJ W wrote: p.s. how come the OSM front page doesn't contain a link to the foundation website? Hysterical Raisins. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://www.compton.nu/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
OJ W wrote: and how come sidebars on the map can be opened by: * clicking on one of the external links (map key) * selecting a map layer (data viewer) * selecting a tab (export) * submitting a form (search) Because those are the things which need them? Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://www.compton.nu/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymme trical roadside features)
Andrew Chadwick (mailing lists andrewc-email-lists at piffle.org writes: Further to Tobias's raising of :mode, :wet, :direction etc. for pseudovoting, I'd like to raise a general method for tagging properties of the two sides of the road: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/right_left The proposal suggests an interpretation of suffixes like property:left=value property:right=value I see one big trouble. If not so clever editor (program or human being) is changing the direction of the road withour swapping left/right keys, nobody can correct the situation without local knowlegde of the area mapped. Left or right are not enough by themselves but there must be some additional information. Left is in the west tag would give more exact information as well as Left, as user xx saw it on January, 29th 2009. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
Much encouraged that there is a coder (?) view that it's pretty simple to implement automated left /right tag reversal if a way is reversed (and I assume the main renderers are sense-aware where ways are concerned?). This was my main concern and if this is generally agreed to be the case I'll switch from the 'not sure' camp into the 'left / right' camp. Mike Harris -Original Message- From: Andrew Chadwick [mailto:a.t.chadw...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Chadwick (email lists) Sent: 17 February 2009 13:25 To: talk@openstreetmap.org Cc: Mike Harris; 'David Earl'; 'Andy Allan'; 'Norbert Hoffmann' Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features) Mike Harris wrote: While sympathetic to the underlying need being discussed in this thread, I suspect there is a further problem. Although a way has an intrinsic sense in OSM, this is fairly volatile! All it needs is someone to reverse a way - and this can happen rather easily, say, when combining two ways with the same tags but different senses (yes - there is a warning but it's all too easy to click through). Reversing the ways then, of course, reverses the 'left' and 'right' descriptors with their differing tags! Yes, it'd be nice and simple to implement. Just swap any :left and :right -suffixed tags. That's why http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/right_left#Consequences_for_software discusses it in some detail. If people whine about it enough, I'll make osm2go do something like this, as a sort of reference implementation :) We're probably being lazy about oneway, and I'm entirely in favour of building simple smarts like this into an editor that's as simple and Joe-Consumer-focused as osm2go: I want to make it difficult for Joe Consumer to do the wrong thing accidentally without getting in his/her face (no warning dialogs, just do the right thing given that there's a single, obvious, 99%-of-the-time right thing to do here) This leads me to wonder whether an absolute sense (north, south, etc.) is still better even though it might require that a way is divided a bit. Most ways do have a 'general' compass direction for long segments even if this is often more human-obvious than machine-obvious. The main exceptions are likely to be short residential streets on housing developments etc. - 'circles' etc. - but these are less likely to require unilateral tagging. Hmm. An argument from plausible estate design; innovative! :) For the reasons you stated, :north, :south etc would break down for some ways. Also, if an editor rotates the way, it'd also have to rotate some of the tags. Some of the time. It's really quite a bit more complicated than a :left/:right scheme for coding, and it doesn't buy you much more expressiveness. For points, it makes more sense. But pub:heading=degrees and pub:distance=metres would be finer-grained for those XD Btw, I have encountered the same problem with canals. Some mappers describe towpaths as being 'left' or 'right'. Personally, I prefer to map the towpath as a separate way alongside the canal - with the added advantage that this allows me to tag the towpath, e.g. with access rights, surface condition, barriers, reference numbers, route relations, etc. For towpaths, I'd agree. They're 'sufficiently segregated' from the waterway in my head (you have to change mode fairly significantly to go from one to the other!) Perhaps this would also be a better approach for e.g. cycleways alongside motor roads? Although, I have to admit that it doesn’t solve the problem of unilateral naming. Sometimes, sometimes not. Cycleways where you can/sometimes have to rejoin the ordinary carriageway should not be, :left and :right (or cycleway=opposite_*, broken though it is) do that more plausibly because then you're dealing with the same road. Cycleways that are long, continuous, separated by a grass verge, or go along the sides of 70MPH roads get the separate treatment when I tag them (often they need things like lit=yes/no too, those ones). -- Andrew Chadwick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
Jukka Rahkonen wrote: Andrew Chadwick (mailing lists andrewc-email-lists at piffle.org writes: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/right_left The proposal suggests an interpretation of suffixes like property:left=value property:right=value I see one big trouble. If not so clever editor (program or human being) is changing the direction of the road withour swapping left/right keys, nobody can correct the situation without local knowlegde of the area mapped. Left or right are not enough by themselves but there must be some additional information. Left is in the west tag would give more exact information as well as Left, as user xx saw it on January, 29th 2009. Also true of oneway, of course, yet people seem to cope with that :) Corner case I just though of: oneway:left and oneway:right. Arguably a bit contrived and pointless, but presumably you'd have to flip twice... I'd say that the software aspect covered under http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/right_left#Consequences_for_software , but if you think we're missing anything, do comment on the wiki page. -- Andrew Chadwick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreet map.or g?
On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:50:04 +, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: OJ W wrote: and how come sidebars on the map can be opened by: * clicking on one of the external links (map key) * selecting a map layer (data viewer) * selecting a tab (export) * submitting a form (search) Because those are the things which need them? Well that's fine, but it's coming at the home page from a coder's point of view rather than a user's. I think it's fair to say that, from a usability standpoint, the OSM home page is pretty terrible. There's very little consistency, and language/graphics are often far from obvious. Clicking on the 'view' tab or the slightly cryptic 'permalink' text at the bottom right to get a URL to share with friends? Couldn't be more obvious! We can learn a lot from CloudMade's map homepage - http://maps.cloudmade.com Not that I have the time to do much about this, and I'm terrible with JS, but it's not enough to dismiss OJW's and others' concerns as though they're unfounded! Regards, Tom ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
Tom Chance wrote: On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:50:04 +, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: OJ W wrote: and how come sidebars on the map can be opened by: * clicking on one of the external links (map key) * selecting a map layer (data viewer) * selecting a tab (export) * submitting a form (search) Because those are the things which need them? Well that's fine, but it's coming at the home page from a coder's point of view rather than a user's. I think it's fair to say that, from a usability standpoint, the OSM home page is pretty terrible. There's very little consistency, and language/graphics are often far from obvious. Clicking on the 'view' tab or the slightly cryptic 'permalink' text at the bottom right to get a URL to share with friends? Couldn't be more obvious! We can learn a lot from CloudMade's map homepage - http://maps.cloudmade.com Not that I have the time to do much about this, and I'm terrible with JS, but it's not enough to dismiss OJW's and others' concerns as though they're unfounded! Tell me where I dismissed anything. I bet you can't, can you? There's a reason for that - I didn't dismiss anything. All I did was answer his question. I never said it was a good reason, though I personally don't think that the sidebar is a particularly major problem compared to many other things on the home page. Than again I'm just a programmer so what would I know about all these high falutin design things. Equally permalink is a fairly standard name for that concept now, even though (originally at least) it clearly wasn't something that most people could be expected to know. I would also point out that the site was never intended as a do everything end user mapping site like google maps, as that was never the aim of the project. The aim of the project was to create and provide data for other people to use to create flash end user sites. All of which is besides the point as I will be the first person to admit that I am completely and utterly useless designer, so if we have anybody that wants to help out with improving such things then I'm sure we'd all be very glad to hear from them. The only thing I ask is that any media/marketing types try to avoid overloading my buzzword filter too much. I really don't need to have any more synergies leveraged thank you. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://www.compton.nu/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk writes: Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: So, we have a pile of good intentioned legacy here. OGD carries posts on all sorts of open geo data stuff in the early days (Aug 2004) including the most important one http://www.opengeodata.org/?p=2 relating to OSM. Over time Steve and the others he handed out access to have posted principally about OSM but I'd argue it's never been the official OSM blog, it was just that it was the only blog where official stuff re OSM ended up. Should OSM have a separate blog, probably Blog or announcements list? I'd vote for the latter. Or both and a gateway in between. Matthias ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: Equally permalink is a fairly standard name for that concept now, even though (originally at least) it clearly wasn't something that most people could be expected to know. I get complaints about the lack of permalink on opencyclemap.org , even though there is one but with plain-english text instead of jargon. Ho hum. Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
I see one big trouble. If not so clever editor (program or human being) is changing the direction of the road withour swapping left/right keys, nobody can correct the situation without local knowlegde of the area mapped. Left or right are not enough by themselves but there must be some additional information. Left is in the west tag would give more exact information as well as Left, as user xx saw it on January, 29th 2009. As I understand it (from last time this discussion cropped up here) JOSM and Potlatch already handle the reversals of :left and :right tags, which covers most users. You could just as well say that any way with no matching public GPS trace or alternate source tag should be removed as there is insufficient information without local knowledge to know if it is correct or not. Ed ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) schrieb: Having thought about this a bit overnight I personally feel that the project should have an OSM specific blog that gets used for OSM community announcements, worthy news items and OSMF announcements. Announcements are easy as they report fact and it's just a matter of deciding if the announcement is worthy of publication on a blog or not. News is a little more subjective so needs a little more care. OSMF stuff is easy because OSMF can decide internally before an announcement is made. If the OSM community can establish a small moderator group they could receive potential blog posts from anyone, the image of the week approach as suggested by Peter. The group would hopefully also deal with language issues if a post needs putting up in more than one language (alternative versions perhaps on the wiki for instance). It would also be nice for OSM to have a permanent archive of Steve's personal blog posts to OGD that he and others made about the development and progress of OSM in the early months/years. +1 A OSM specific blog would also help to inform people on one place about important news. A lot of people can´t read the mailinglists, forums and all the wiki sites, thus it is hard for them to stay informed about important issues. Jonas ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
On Feb 17, 2009, at 6:02 AM, 80n wrote: Steve, I don't normally write rhetorical questions, its not my usual writing style, so I'm sure you misread my post and responded impulsively. But, perhaps you can provide some ideas or suggestions about how to make it clearer what each blog represents. This seems like the essence of the discussion: some people seem concerned that OSMF has no news outlet which represents only the board's collective or individual voice, and SteveC seems concerned that the board not lose the value of his work in promoting Opengeodata.org. I suggest that SteveC create, and the board use, an special user named OpenStreetMapFoundation, so that people will recognize that all OGD blog entries from that user are official OSM announcements. Does that leave anyone unsatisfied? -- Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson r...@cloudmade.com - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
Regarding http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/right_left , Ed Loach wrote: As I understand it (from last time this discussion cropped up here) JOSM and Potlatch already handle the reversals of :left and :right tags, which covers most users. This is not the case with either JOSM 1318 or JOSM 1418 (the current josm-latest.jar). I've tested with cycleway:left=track as well as foo:left=42. Probably this would need to be raised as a separate bug if people express general satisfaction. Can't speak for Potla(t)ch, not tried. -- Andrew Chadwick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] NHD Dataset
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 8:20 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: There really is not much other choice, as areas grow larger and the old idea of simply drawing touching polygons relies on a rendering style without a casing around the polygon. Yep, please avoid making one polygon by using two or more touching polygons. The cyclemap already renders forests with translucent fill and an edge symbolizer, which nicely shows up this problem. Frederik's advanced multipolygon concept is the best approach. Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
Mike Harris wrote: Much encouraged that there is a coder (?) Well, coder of a sort. It certainly would help if the suffixes were generally well known, documented and consistent so that if something has a :left on the end of it, software doing reversals knows that it should flip it to a :right every time without having to care about the part before the colon. view that it's pretty simple to implement automated left /right tag reversal if a way is reversed (and I assume the main renderers are sense-aware where ways are concerned?). Sense-aware? Yes, given that they all render oneway just fine. Ways are defined as an ordered set of nodes too, so the bit in the middle should be OK. (Whether something *should* be rendered is a different issue, of course, and always should be. There'd be a case for rendering side-specific names or parking in the default view, and bike lanes for the cycle layer, IMO. But that's just MO.) -- Andrew Chadwick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
This is not the case with either JOSM 1318 or JOSM 1418 (the current josm-latest.jar). I've tested with cycleway:left=track as well as foo:left=42. Probably this would need to be raised as a separate bug if people express general satisfaction. Can't speak for Potla(t)ch, not tried. I guess I should have tested, rather than relying on my memory. This post: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2008-October/030389.html does suggest that JOSM supported it. I also think I tried it in Potlatch recently when I reversed a boundary way with district:left/district:right tags (or maybe county:left/county:right tags), though haven’t gone back to remember whether I've remembered the tagging correctly. I do know I used the Potlatch button to copy tags from one boundary way section to another and then (using local knowledge) ended up having to swap all the left and right values in one case. Ed ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
This is not the case with either JOSM 1318 or JOSM 1418 (the current josm-latest.jar). I've tested with cycleway:left=track as well as foo:left=42. Probably this would need to be raised as a separate bug if people express general satisfaction. Actually, I've now checked the source, and it looks like whether it supports it or not is set through user preferences: if (Main.pref.getBoolean(tag-correction.reverse-way, true)) { And I don't think tag-correction.reverse-way exists under advanced preferences by default. Ed ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
On Feb 17, 2009, at 7:50 AM, Mike Harris wrote: Reversing the ways then, of course, reverses the 'left' and 'right' descriptors with their differing tags! Well, of course. I would expect that all editors would rename right - left and left - right when a way is reversed. Don't they do that already? -- Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson r...@cloudmade.com - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] [tagging] Maritime borders - Voting - (boundary=maritime)
After discussions on both the mailing list and the wiki we (that is myself and Skippern) have opened the proposed boundary=maritime for voting at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Maritime_borders We think this is the best way suggested to tag the whole hiearchy of maritime borders, in a way that is useful for both renderers, other data consumers and taggers. The proposal takes into account various claims of sovereignty, ranging from the baseline to the EEZ. Please be aware that this is a tag that is closely related to core map features (national borders), and the result of this vote is likely to influence most maps made using OSM data. Regards Gustav and Skippern (aka Aun) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging of maritime borders
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com wrote: I would suggest that maritime borders are not tagged the same way as land borders. Should we have a new tag for maritime borders? Stop tagging them? Ignore the problem? The proposal authored by Aun (Skippern) is now open for voting at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Maritime_borders - Gustav ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] OSM wiki local copy
Hello all, My friend asked me this question: Does anybody know how to download the local copy of OSM wiki? For instance, Wikipedia guys do provide DB dumps ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_database) but i've found no such thing on wiki.openstreetmap.org . I've failed with Wget - robots.txt says wget is a frequent problem so disallowed. Are there ways to have my very own copy of OSM wiki? Could you please help? Best regards, Igor Shubovych ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
Oneway is strange in that as well as yes/no you can have oneway=-1 for one way in the opposite direction of the way, and I still can't work out why that is necessary. Because none of the editors had a reverse way tool :-). I think JOSM could reverse a segment, but that's was about it. Figuring out the direction of a way was generally somewhat challenging. It's still useful if you happen to have another direction dependent tag which would otherwise conflict, but I can't actually think of one right now. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Oxford/Cotswolds mailing list
Oxford, Oxfordshire and the Cotswolds have as many mappers as anywhere in Britain, and such things as Mapnik, Potlatch and npemap.org.uk hail from our county - but we didn't have a mailing list. Now Mike Collinson has kindly set one up. The address is talk-gb-oxoncotswo...@openstreetmap.org and you can subscribe at http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-oxoncotswolds Topics of discussion will include, but are not limited to, Shall we go to the pub?. cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Marketplace
Hi I have written a proposal for Marketplace, a regulated area outdoor (or indoor) for trade of various commodities. I have used a couple of days in Draft, but have decided to push the proposal forward to RFC, and if there are few suggestions to improvements I will open it for vote in a couple of weeks. The proposal is found on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Marketplace I am on purpose omitting any subtags, as these have little to do with the marketplace tag itself. Many subkeys can be used to describe a marketplace, but I feel introducing them might result in long arguments, and long delays before this tag can be approved. -- Brgds Aun Johnsen aka Skippern via Webmail ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 12:45:00PM -, Ed Loach wrote: Oneway is strange in that as well as yes/no you can have oneway=-1 for one way in the opposite direction of the way, and I still can't work out why that is necessary. It used to be the case that the renderers wrote the name of the street in the direction the segments were drawn, so you'd always try to draw a street starting from the west and heading east. If the same street was one-way from east to west, we needed a way to indicate this without having the street label upside-down. s ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:48:17AM -, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: Having thought about this a bit overnight I personally feel that the project should have an OSM specific blog that gets used for OSM community announcements, worthy news items and OSMF announcements. This could easily be an announce mailing list as well as a blog, and accessible to even more people. Personally I am ok with a blog as long as it provides ATOM or RSS (pick a version) feeds, but I know others feel differently (and no, apparently rss2email doesn't cut it). Simon -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.—John Gall signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Translator
Hi All, The latest beta version of OpenStreetMap Translator is now available from http://www http://www.polygongis.com.polygongis.com http://www.polygongis.com. This version includes shp file export and data filtering. We would appreciate it if you could try this application out and let us know of any problems you have or enhancements that you would like to see in the future OpenStreetMap Translator allows you to 'cookie cut' data from OpenStreetMap and extract it into MapInfo and ESRI formats Thanks, Polygon GIS ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 07:51:12PM +, Dave Stubbs wrote: Oneway is strange in that as well as yes/no you can have oneway=-1 for one way in the opposite direction of the way, and I still can't work out why that is necessary. Because none of the editors had a reverse way tool :-). I think JOSM could reverse a segment, but that's was about it. Figuring out the direction of a way was generally somewhat challenging. Fortunately they do now, unless I'm misinterpreting. JOSM even handles oneway and *:left and *:right by swappng them. Simon -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.—John Gall signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cycle Map layer
Dave Stubbs wrote: 2009/2/9 Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk: Where does the Cycle Map get it's coastlines from? I happened to notice that some of the paths I mapped along the sea front near here, which required some adjustment to the coastline, have let to Mapnik and Osmarender layers having the revised coastline, but not the Cycle Map layer: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.93742lon=1.28818zoom=17layers=00B0FTF Or does it just refresh those less frequently than the other information portrayed? Yes, it only updates when I prod it. Prodding it now... may take a while though. Dave The coastlines for the cycle map in North America seem quite old, will those also be updated? I made many adjustments to the Mississippi River (and other bodies of water) in New Orleans some months ago which are currently not showing on the cycle layer. (In fact, the other style layers on opencyclemap.org -- CloudMade style, Mobile style, NoNames style -- also have out of date coastlines.) thanks, Matt ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Large OSM globe style images
Hi, this is probably a niche application but I have just played around a bit with the aim to create large (as in 5000x5000 pixel or bigger) globe-shaped images with ti...@home tiles. On a whole-world level, ti...@home tiles give a better impression of where we have something than the Mapnik ones. But Marble, which creates nice globe pictures, uses Mapnik, so I modified Marble's tile source and after that tricked Marble into running on a virtual 5000x5000 desktop so I could grab a nice image off of it. Here is an example: http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/marble.jpg And here is how to do it (needs Linux): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Frederik_Ramm/Creating_Very_Large_Marble_Images I would be interested in hearing other techniques for creating similar images with other tools. I'm sure it must be possible with Mapnik but you will have to import the whole planet and it will take ages to render that level of detail, and you would not have the interactivity that comes with Marble. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Adding architect names to buildings
Hi all, I've started adding architects names to buildings in Manchester (based on a combination of local history sources and Wikipedia), and so thought I'd better document the tag I'm using in case others want to do the same: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:architect The only problem I could think of was whether the key should be singular or plural. I got the feeling that the singular would match existing tags better. Looking through Tagwatch I noticed that both artist=* and artist_name=* have been used (presumably for public sculptures and art installation), and I did wonder whether architect_name=* would be better. It seems that artist_name=* matches old_name=* better, but on the other hand it's not particularly ambiguous having artist=* or architect=*. Any thoughts? Frankie -- Frankie Roberto Experience Designer, Rattle 0114 2706977 http://www.rattlecentral.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?
Hi, Many city governments in Massachusetts publish their parcel (lot) data for free reuse, either individually or through MassGIS. This data is appropriately licensed for re-use in OSM, and is informative -- in most cases, it has addresses which can be used for geocoding. I'm curious as to whether people believe that this data of this type is appropriate for upload into OSM. There are clear technical reasons why this data might not belong in OSM -- the quantity of data is significant, and you can imagine that it could create a much larger database. At the moment, I'd rather address the social aspect of whether this data is appropriate to upload to OSM. A description of the data in question with regard to MassGIS is available at: http://www.mass.gov/mgis/parcels.htm Looking forward to hearing any and all opinions on this matter. Best Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt MetaCarta ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Christopher Schmidt crschm...@metacarta.com wrote: Hi, Many city governments in Massachusetts publish their parcel (lot) data for free reuse, either individually or through MassGIS. In my quest to find free data to import in the US, I discovered that parcel data is almost universally available for free for almost every local jurisdiction I checked (released for tax purposes). Point is that this could potentially be a *lot* of data. It certainly would be very interesting to see, though! ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?
Property boundaries are definitely something that belongs in OSM, it's just boundary=administrative at a different level. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Christopher Schmidt crschm...@metacarta.com wrote: Hi, Many city governments in Massachusetts publish their parcel (lot) data for free reuse, either individually or through MassGIS. This data is appropriately licensed for re-use in OSM, and is informative -- in most cases, it has addresses which can be used for geocoding. I'm curious as to whether people believe that this data of this type is appropriate for upload into OSM. There are clear technical reasons why this data might not belong in OSM -- the quantity of data is significant, and you can imagine that it could create a much larger database. At the moment, I'd rather address the social aspect of whether this data is appropriate to upload to OSM. A description of the data in question with regard to MassGIS is available at: http://www.mass.gov/mgis/parcels.htm Looking forward to hearing any and all opinions on this matter. I'd say the address data definitely while the parcel data might be too micro at this junction. However, the parcel is closely bound to the address and it may be very difficult to associate an area currently in OSM with the address without the parcels. It seems like it comes down to whether or not the parcels are acceptable. Cheers, Adam ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?
On Feb 17, 2009, at 7:00 PM, Christopher Schmidt wrote: cases, it has addresses which can be used for geocoding For completely unrelated reasons (I was searching for an unfinished railroad and was looking to see if it existed in any property lines) (no, it didn't) (sigh) I had a copy of the parcel data for Oneida County, New York. It has the address in a fixed field, along with the name of the road. It would be trivially easy to set addr:housenumber and addr:street for the parcel. The trouble is that I don't know where in that parcel the building is to be found. And some parcels are quite strangely shaped, e.g. two squares overlapping only at a corner. And then the street name and the TIGER street name vary wildly, e.g. tiger:name_base=State Highway 13 and ocgov:loc_st_nam=Nys Rt 13 (or in another record, State Route 13 N). The latter only matters if the property is on a corner. I've noticed that the road is considered to be unowned, so there's only one way connecting those nodes. Thus, I'll look for the nodes with only one way, and tag the center of those nodes with the address. Might employ some heuristic to guess which road if multiple roads are found. -- Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson r...@cloudmade.com - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Large OSM globe style images
Hi, Maarten Deen wrote: That's nice! And now 360 pictures, all one degree rotated and a nice java application that you can rotate the globe. Oh, you need images for rotation around the poles too. I guess this is not something that can be rendered realtime? Well, the ti...@home tile creation process is probably as far away from realtime as it gets ;-) but Marble projects these tiles onto the globe quite quickly, indeed if you have a fast machine and a normal screen size then you get a real-time effect while turning the globe with your mouse. The very-large-Xvfb-through-VNC method that I discussed here of course does not lend itself to very high graphics performance though ;-) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] parcel data in OSM
Hi, ya, its certainly worth creating a tag proposal page for it. I would (imo) would like to see it only rendered when zooming in real close. Some other renderer might want to see it at a different zoom. When buying a house, you should know what land your getting :) p.s. I think a variation of that is available on Geobase for Canada :-) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] 3dShapes voor OpenStreetMaps-NL
Stefan de Konink wrote: Als NC hebben we er als OSM helaas niets aan. Dus denk er eens over na of BY-SA genoeg juridische en promotionele waarde kan bieden :) Maarten Hilferink wrote: Nav je opmerking over NC voorwaarden, heb ik besloten per 01-03-2009 de 3dShapes databank onder CC-BY-SA/3.0/NL beschikbaar te gaan stellen, behoudens juridische actie van het Kadaster. Dat betekent dat we tot die tijd een import kunnen voorbereiden :) En we *WEER* een geweldige Creative Commons bron hebben die echt leuk is :) Stefan ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] 3dShapes voor OpenStreetMaps-NL
Dat zou inderdaad geweldig zijn, als vaststaat dat 3D shapes niet als een afgeleid werk wordt gezien van Top10NL en het AHN. Ik kijk liever eerst de kat uit de boom... Frank Stefan de Konink wrote: Stefan de Konink wrote: Als NC hebben we er als OSM helaas niets aan. Dus denk er eens over na of BY-SA genoeg juridische en promotionele waarde kan bieden :) Maarten Hilferink wrote: Nav je opmerking over NC voorwaarden, heb ik besloten per 01-03-2009 de 3dShapes databank onder CC-BY-SA/3.0/NL beschikbaar te gaan stellen, behoudens juridische actie van het Kadaster. Dat betekent dat we tot die tijd een import kunnen voorbereiden :) En we *WEER* een geweldige Creative Commons bron hebben die echt leuk is :) Stefan ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [talk-au] Suburb boundaries - getting close
BlueMM bluemm1975-...@yahoo.com wrote: I also like Jack's suggestion on name old_name, plus the is_in tag. +1 for the is_in tag from me, definitely with , Australia appended. My reasons are pretty selfish - My choice of GPS software is Navit and it requires the is_in tag to search for towns. I'd be happy enough to try to modify the software to not require is_in but I haven't seen a better solution. -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [Talk-de] Welche Straßen fehlen noch in Erfurt ?
Hallo Holger, ich würde gern mal wissen welche Straßen in Erfurt noch fehlen. Dazu gibt es ja irgendwie eine Möglichkeit das herauszubekommen. Ich habe aber absolut keine Ahnung wie das geht. Im Netz gibt es ein Tool mit dem man eine Liste der vorhandenen OSM Straßen generieren kann: http://albspotter.org/osm/getstreets.php?minlat=50.93maxlat=51.06minlon=10.9maxlon=11.10 (Hmmm, bringt gerade eine Fehlermeldung. Probleme mit der API?) Diese Straßenliste dann einfach markieren und kopieren und in einer Textdatei (*.txt) speichern. Aus deiner anderen Quelle dann auch die Straßennamen i n ein andere Textdatei kopieren. Beide Textdateien erstmal sortieren lassen. (kann z.B. der Texteditor den ich verwende (EditplusWindows)) Vergleichen der beiden Textdateien mit einem Diff-Tool (z.B. DiffMerge (gibts für Windows, Linux, Mac) Das ganze ist natürlich nur für Dich zum Abgleichen der Daten gedacht. Wie die anderen schon sagten gibt es rechtliche Probleme wenn Du das veröffentlichen willst. Tschuess Michael ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Fahrradkarte für Garmin?
Frank Huebner hf...@arcormail.de wrote: Habt ihr andere Ideen? Ich hätte gerne was routingfähiges um ehrlich zu sein. Für kurze Touren und wenns anfängt zu regnen. Routing zum nächsten amenity=shelter :) Am besten von ganz Deutschland und einige Kilometer ins benachbarte Ausland rein. Keine Ahnung ob das OSM Schneideprogramm vom mkgmap Author routing über Kachelgrenzen unterstützt. Längere Touren plane ich im Voraus und spiele sie als GPX auf den Garmin. Die Anzeige von Relationen auf dem Garmin ist mir daher nicht wirklich wichtig. Derzeit benutze ich die Karten von Computerteddy mit Typfile und Höhenlinien da kann man die relevanten Tracktypes (1,2 =3) auch erkennen. Gruss Sven -- .. this message has been created using an outdated OS (UNIX-like) with an outdated mail- or newsreader (text-only) :-P /me is gig...@ircnet, http://sven.gegg.us/ on the Web ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] NSG - NP - NLP
Hallo, ich hätte mal ne Frage zu Naturschutzgebiet, Naturpark, Nationalpark. Laut MapFeatures kann man ja das NSG als leisure=nature_reserve bzw. als boundary=national_park (gleichzeitig für Nationalpark) rendern. Warum ist der boundary-tag für beide, sind doch ziemlich verschiedene Sachen? Wenn ich für NSG's das leisure-tag nutze, wird die Fläche teilweise von anderen (Wasser, Siedlung) überdeckt und man sieht den Verlauf nicht mehr. Soll das so sein? Wenn zu dem NSG ein Stück eines größeren Waldgebietes gehört, ist es dann ratsam dieses Stück Wald zu entfernen, da es sonst ja doppelt wäre? Gibt es eventuell auch ein tag für Naturpark oder sollen diese gar nicht dargestellt werden? in den tagwatch taucht boundary=natural_park einmal auf, das wäre doch was, oder? schönen Gruß Alex ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Luftbilder aus Bayern - Halbzeit
Hermann Kraus h...@scribus.info wrote: Wandinger: 'Bei weiteren Kooperationen würden wir natürlich Lizenz-Gebühren verlangen.' ROTFL! Das Projekt wäre natürlich ganz bestimmt bereit diese zu bezahlen. OpenStreetMap aber verspricht auf seiner Homepage: 'Unsere Daten sind frei und werden es auch bleiben.' (MZ, 26.01.09, Teil 1) Lizenzgebühren für die Nutzung der Luftbilder, so hab ich das jetzt zumindest verstanden. Ich glaub ja fast an ein Missverständniss, weil es unwahrscheinlich klingt, dass das LVA mit Lizenzeinnahmen durch OSM gerechnet hat. Was meint ihr? Ich glaube ja eher, dass da die eine Hand des Amtes nicht weiss was die andere tut! Die Daten, die hier auf DVD angekommen sind IMO eines Amtes, dass diese Dinge professionell macht nicht würdig! Erstens wurden sie dilletantisch skaliert und sind dadurch real deutlich unterhalb der versprochenen Auflösung (3.5m statt 2m!) und zweitens steht im TIFF-Header der Name eines anderen Kunden drin: TIFFTAG_SOFTWARE=Geodaten Bestellung von M*** S Was uns natürlich überhaupt nichts angeht! Ich frage mich warum die Daten überhaupt künstlich runterskaliert wurden. In der Originalauflösung wäre das abzeichnen von Häusern möglich gewesen! Gruss Sven -- Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety (Benjamin Franklin) /me is gig...@ircnet, http://sven.gegg.us/ on the Web ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Fahrradkarte für Garmin?
Am 17. Februar 2009 10:28 schrieb Sven Geggus li...@fuchsschwanzdomain.de: Frank Huebner hf...@arcormail.de wrote: Habt ihr andere Ideen? Ich hätte gerne was routingfähiges um ehrlich zu sein. Für kurze Touren und wenns anfängt zu regnen. Routing zum nächsten amenity=shelter :) ja, das waere sehr cool, mit Beruecksichtigung der Oberflaechenbeschaffenheit Am besten von ganz Deutschland und einige Kilometer ins benachbarte Ausland rein. Keine Ahnung ob das OSM Schneideprogramm vom mkgmap Author routing über Kachelgrenzen unterstützt. nee, besser gleich von ganz Europa. Gruss Martin ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Gebäude durchsichtig rendern
Am 16. Februar 2009 02:16 schrieb Johann H. Addicks addi...@gmx.net: Die einen zählen reale Stockwerke (Straße über Tunnel, unter Brücke), das ist ja auch, wie es gedacht ist, sind topologische Stockwerke, also ist ueber/unter für andere reicht ein Belang (Tennisplatz auf Freizeitgelände) und für die dritten es es nur ein Attribut um Renderern etwas aufzuzwingen. 2 und 3 sind m.E. das gleiche, da es ja nicht um reale (kreuzungsfreie) Hoehenunterschiede geht. Also so nicht machen. Gruss Martin ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Luftbilder aus Bayern - Halbzeit
Hi, From: Sven Geggus li...@fuchsschwanzdomain.de [..] Ich frage mich warum die Daten ?berhaupt k?nstlich runterskaliert wurden. In der Originalaufl?sung w?re das abzeichnen von H?usern m?glich gewesen! [..] vielleicht darum!? /Andreas ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] NSG - NP - NLP
Kleine Frage zum Betreff: Was tut der Notlandeplatz in der Aufstellung von Naturreservaten? Ich vermute mal, dass diese inzwischen zumindest in Deutschland nicht nur abandonned sind, sondern auch sämtlicherweise rückgebaut wurden und daher auch das Rendering der Autobahnen nicht dadurch verändert werden sollte. Bei Ersatzübergangsstellen (vulgo: Nato-Rampen) sieht es anders aus, die werden auch in 20 Jahren noch in der Landschaft herumliegen. -jha- ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] NSG - NP - NLP
Hi, Kleine Frage zum Betreff: Was tut der Notlandeplatz in der Aufstellung von Naturreservaten? naja, laut meiner Karte ist das die Abkürzung für Nationalpark. Im ersten Satz meiner mail hab ich die 4 Abkürzungen ja auch ausgeschrieben ;-) schönen Gruß Alex ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Höhennetz/Höhendatenbank
Tobias, danke für Deine Klarstellung! Es ging mir darum, ob man die Erdoberfläche *oder* die Erdoberfläche inklusive aller auf der Erdoberfläche befindlichen Objekte haben möchte. Ich denke, Kunstobjekte (Bauwerke...) sollten eher vermieden werden. OpenDEM.org wäre dann sicher besser. Gruß Franz-Josef Tobias Wendorff schrieb: Dr. Franz-Josef Behr schrieb: Tja. DTM oder DEM? Was wollen wir? Die Triangulation kommt aber später...erst nach den Punkten Huch, nach meinem Wissen sind DTM und DEM das Gleiche? Lass uns doch mal auf Deutsch reden :-) DGM = Digitales Geländemodell, die natürliche Geländeform der Erdoberfläche ohne Bebauung und Bepflanzung DOM = Digitales Oberflächenmodell, die Geländeform aller auf der Erdoberfläche befindlichen Objekte DHM = Digitales Höhenmodell, Oberbegriff für die regelmäßig oder dunregelmäßig erhobenen Daten. Ein primäres DHM beschreibt die Originalmessdaten, ein sekundäres DHM die daraus abgeleiteten Daten. DEM wäre daher ein Allgemeinbegriff, was DGM und DEM beinhaltet. DEM = Digital Elevation Model. Daher würde ich mich für OpenDEM aussprechen. Die Domain kann man ja sicher ummelden :-) Grüße Tobias Achja, habe ich schon erwähnt, dass aus der DGK5 bald die ABK (Amtliche Basiskarte) wird? ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Regards / Cordialement Dr. Franz-Josef Behr Participate in http://www.opengeocoding.org! We live at the start of the information age and not enough people care that someone else gains rights to their personal things, their information, friends, images, photos, music... People really need to read the licenses they sign up to. http://www.guardian.co.uk/users/ivanidea Prof. Dr. Franz-Josef Behr - Home Office Author of: Strategisches GIS-Management - http://www.gis-management.de eMail: franz-josef.b...@hft-stuttgart.de http://www.gis-news.de Tel: +49 (0)721 / 453980-1 sowie 45 33 35 Fax: +49 (0)721 / 453980-7 sowie via web.de: +49 (0)1212-5-12048213 begin:vcard fn:Dr. Franz-Josef^Behr n:Behr;Franz-Josef org:Stuttgart University of Applied Sciences (SUAS);Faculty of Geomatics, Computer Science and Mathematics adr;quoted-printable:;;Schellingstra=C3=9Fe 24, ;Stuttgart;;D-70174;Germany title:Prof. tel;work:+49) 711/8926-2606 tel;home:+49 (0)721 / 453980-1 url:http://www.hft-stuttgart.de/ version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz
Johann H. Addicks schrieb: Was der Autor einfordert ist jedoch eine Generalisierung. Und das wird nicht einfach. Neben Entwicklungsaufwand für einen zweiten Pass wird es vermutlich riesige Regelsetze brauchen, um Kriterien für zuträgliche Element-Dichten im Umkreis von zu bestimmen und zudem noch zusätzliche Minimalabstände zu definieren. Davon rede ich, seit ich bei OpenStreetMap aktiv bin. Allerdings ist es natürlich nur ein Folgeproblem, welches aus OpenStreetMap abgeleitet ist. Die OpenStreetMap-Mitglieder bezeichnen sich als Mapper, was im Endeffekt jedoch falsch ist. Ein Mapper ist der Kartograph. Was wir eher sind, sind Collectors (Sammler) oder Surveyors (Vermesser / Erhebende). Wir sammeln POIs und erheben die Welt um uns rum. Die Kartographie ist ja nur eine Anwendung, ein jahrhundertealtes Handwerk, was bei uns der komplett durch Osmarender, Mapnik und Kosmos abgedeckt wird. Der Mapnik-Oberfritz ist zwar ein Kartograph, aber er Mapnik ist einfach zu beschränkt. Die Rendering-Engine ist zwar schön, aber die Kartographie-Engine ist kacke. Man kann PostGIS die problemlos Generalisierung rauslocken, was das Kartographiebild massiv verschönern würde, dafür haben wir dann aber Probleme an angrenzen Flächen und an Objekten, die neben der Straße liegen. Die verschiedenen Regelsätze könnte man vielleicht hinbekommen, dazu braucht es aber Leute, die das konstant weiterführen. Wir haben ja keinen festen Kartographieschlüssel - dieser ist aufgrund des Freiheitsgedanken von OSM ja leider nicht gewünscht. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Bitmap-Karte offline kalibrieren?
Frederik Ramm schrieb: Mir faellt ein, dass die aktuellste (eventuell Beta-) Version von QGIS einen OSM-Editor als Plugin haben soll. Dann kannst Du Dir sogar den JOSM sparen ,-) Ach, ehrlich? *runterlad* ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Luftbilder aus Bayern - Halbzeit
Hallo Sven, Lizenzgebühren für die Nutzung der Luftbilder Luftbilder wurden bisher nur gegen Lizenzgebühr zur Nutzung abgegeben. Im Pilotprojekt soll geprüft werden, ob die freie Nutzung von DOP-2m künftig ermöglicht werden soll. Die (ungeschickte) Formulierung der Presseabteilung wird gerade geprüft. Ich werde berichten. Die Daten, die hier auf DVD angekommen sind wurden dilletantisch skaliert sind deutlich unterhalb der versprochenen Auflösung (3.5m statt 2m!) Kannst Du mir das (per PM?) etwas detaillierter beschreiben? auch was Du daran ggf. noch korrigieren konntest. Bzw. konkrete Wünsche formulieren? Dann kann ich es in meinen Bericht aufnehmen. Ich frage mich warum die Daten überhaupt künstlich runterskaliert wurden. In der Originalauflösung wäre das abzeichnen von Häusern möglich gewesen! Ja, das wäre wirklich ein Qualitätsvorteil! Gruss, Markus ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Höhennetz/Höhendatenbank
Hallo DrFrJoBe, Dr. Franz-Josef Behr schrieb: Es ging mir darum, ob man die Erdoberfläche *oder* die Erdoberfläche inklusive aller auf der Erdoberfläche befindlichen Objekte haben möchte. Ich denke, Kunstobjekte (Bauwerke...) sollten eher vermieden werden. OpenDEM.org wäre dann sicher besser. Das sehe ich genauso, denn die Kunstobjekte haben wir ja schon in OSM. Um eine DOM oder ein DGM zu erzeugen, können wir die Daten aus OSM ableiten, so wie es die Vermessungsämter auch machen. Dort werden die Laserscanning-Daten anhand der Liegenschaftskarten korrigiert. Grüße Tobias ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz
Hallo, Tobias Wendorff wrote: Was der Autor einfordert ist jedoch eine Generalisierung. Und das wird nicht einfach. Neben Entwicklungsaufwand für einen zweiten Pass wird es vermutlich riesige Regelsetze brauchen, um Kriterien für zuträgliche Element-Dichten im Umkreis von zu bestimmen und zudem noch zusätzliche Minimalabstände zu definieren. [...] Die Kartographie ist ja nur eine Anwendung, ein jahrhundertealtes Handwerk, was bei uns der komplett durch Osmarender, Mapnik und Kosmos abgedeckt wird. Tobias hat recht; Kartographie ist nicht das Kerngeschaeft von OSM, sondern eine von vielen moeglichen Anwendungen. Die Kartographie hat bei OSM sehr stark Mittel-zum-Zweck-Charakter; die Leute wollen ihre Arbeit bestaetigt sehen. Wuerde man jetzt beginnen, in dichter besiedelten Gebieten z.B. vereinzelte Kneipen nicht mehr einzuzeichnen, waehrend die weit und breit einzige Kneipe in einem Dorf sehr wohl verzeichnet ist - eine aus kartographischer Sicht durchaus vernuenftige Ueberlegung - so wuerde dies zu Verwirrungen bei den Mappern fuehren (ich hab doch da was eingetgragen, wieso ist das nicht da). Man kann PostGIS die problemlos Generalisierung rauslocken, was das Kartographiebild massiv verschönern würde, Wuerde ich so nicht unterschreiben; erstens ganz gewiss nicht problemlos, zweitens vermute ich, dass eine gute Generalisierung niemals vollautomatisch machbar ist. Die verschiedenen Regelsätze könnte man vielleicht hinbekommen, Ich denke nicht, dass es eine Frage von Regelsaetzen ist. Bye Frederik ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz
Frederik Ramm schrieb: Tobias hat recht; ^ Dööt Dööt Dööt Dööt. Man kann PostGIS die problemlos Generalisierung rauslocken, was das Kartographiebild massiv verschönern würde, Wuerde ich so nicht unterschreiben; erstens ganz gewiss nicht problemlos, zweitens vermute ich, dass eine gute Generalisierung niemals vollautomatisch machbar ist. Die Frage ist: Was ist gut? Guck' Dir doch die DTKs oder das Digitale Stadtplanwerk Ruhrgebiet an - ich finde das ziemlich gut. Der aktuelle Mapnik (damit meine ich die Kartographie auf der Hauptseite) macht komplett Unsinn. In Zoomstufe 13 werden noch einzelne Häuser und Wege angezeigt - schrecklich. Die verschiedenen Regelsätze könnte man vielleicht hinbekommen, Ich denke nicht, dass es eine Frage von Regelsaetzen ist. Ich sagte auch nur, dass man es hinbekommen würde, aber nicht dass es die Problemlösung wäre. Es würde jedoch das Kartenbild entspannter und die Zeichenschlüsselentwicklung einfacher machen. Grüße Tobias ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Access: Unbefugter Aufenthalt nicht erlaubt
Wer eine inzwischen etwas längere Diskussion um die Beschilderung von Straßen durch nicht umfriedete Hafenbereiche nachlesen möchte: http://de.wikipedia.org/w/ index.php?title=Wikipedia:Auskunft#Unbefugter_Aufenthalt_nicht_erlaubt. (kurz: http://tinyurl.com/bfs967 ) Frage hier: access=private für die Schmickstraße zwischen Franziusplatz und Intzestraße? -jha- ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Höhennetz/Höhendatenbank
Tobias Wendorff schrieb: OpenDEM.org wäre dann sicher besser. Das sehe ich genauso, denn die Kunstobjekte haben wir ja schon in OSM. Nein, moment ... dann wäre es ja doch DTM, also openDTM.org?! ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Tiny Wiki URL?
Hallo Community, wäre es möglich, unserem Wiki einen URL-Service beizubringen? eine Art: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/?id=1234 mit Weiterleitung zum richtigen Artikel, z.B. .../index.php/Georeferenzierung So könnte man an bestimmten Nodes einfach etwas kurzes drantaggen: note:wiki_id = 1234 oder wiki_id = 1234 statt note:wiki = http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Georeferenzierung Dürfte die Datenbank stark entspannen. Grüße Tobias ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz
Dirk Stöcker schrieb: Das wird aber nicht automatisiert erstellt. Wenn ich die Vorgehensweise richtig verstanden habe basiert die Erstellung der Karten auf zwei Datensätzen. Einmal der reinen Geometrie und einmal den Render-Hints. Diese Render-Hints wollen wir ja nicht in der Datenbank... als müsste man vielleicht auch hier ein Parallelprojekt laufen lassen, welches sich ausschließlich mit der Kartographie beschäftigt. Interessiert aber sicher nur die wenigsten. Bei mir stößt aber immer noch das MAP bei OSM böse auf. Und wenn nicht alles falsch ist, was ich im Studium gelernt habe oder die künstliche Intelligenz irgendwann mal richtig gut ist, werden wir wohl ohne Render-Hints keine Vernünftigen Karten erstellen können. Demnach wäre der Typ mit seiner Seminararbeit durchgefallen, weil die Kritik nicht gerechtfertig ist? :-) Grüße Tobias ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz
On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Tobias Wendorff wrote: Dirk Stöcker schrieb: Das wird aber nicht automatisiert erstellt. Wenn ich die Vorgehensweise richtig verstanden habe basiert die Erstellung der Karten auf zwei Datensätzen. Einmal der reinen Geometrie und einmal den Render-Hints. Diese Render-Hints wollen wir ja nicht in der Datenbank... als müsste man vielleicht auch hier ein Parallelprojekt laufen lassen, welches sich ausschließlich mit der Kartographie beschäftigt. Interessiert aber sicher nur die wenigsten. Bei mir stößt aber immer noch das MAP bei OSM böse auf. Warum wollen wir die nicht? Die Render-Fixes wollen wir nicht. Aber Hints halte ich schon für sinnvoll. Statt osmarender:noname ein [no]display=masstab[|]x ist eine sinnvolle Sache. Nur muss auch dafür OSM noch viel lernen. Erstmal sollten wir die Grunddaten erfassen. Und die automatische Algorithmen müssen auch erstmal so gut sein, dass die Basis korrekt ist. Hints sollen ja nur Sachen lösen die prinzipiell maschinell kaum lösbar sind. Nicht wie momentan die Unzulänglichkeiten der Kartenerstellung ausbügeln. Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz
On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Tobias Wendorff wrote: Man kann PostGIS die problemlos Generalisierung rauslocken, was das Kartographiebild massiv verschönern würde, Wuerde ich so nicht unterschreiben; erstens ganz gewiss nicht problemlos, zweitens vermute ich, dass eine gute Generalisierung niemals vollautomatisch machbar ist. Die Frage ist: Was ist gut? Guck' Dir doch die DTKs oder das Digitale Stadtplanwerk Ruhrgebiet an - ich finde das ziemlich gut. Das wird aber nicht automatisiert erstellt. Wenn ich die Vorgehensweise richtig verstanden habe basiert die Erstellung der Karten auf zwei Datensätzen. Einmal der reinen Geometrie und einmal den Render-Hints. Und wenn nicht alles falsch ist, was ich im Studium gelernt habe oder die künstliche Intelligenz irgendwann mal richtig gut ist, werden wir wohl ohne Render-Hints keine Vernünftigen Karten erstellen können. Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz
Dirk Stöcker schrieb: Warum wollen wir die nicht? Die Render-Fixes wollen wir nicht. Aber Hints halte ich schon für sinnvoll. Ich bin mir ganz sicher, dass ich für sowas in meinen OSM-Anfängen häufig kritisiert wurde, weil ein Hint nichts mit den eigentlichen Geodaten zu tun hat. Statt osmarender:noname ein [no]display=masstab[|]x ist eine sinnvolle Sache. Nur muss auch dafür OSM noch viel lernen. Erstmal sollten wir die Grunddaten erfassen. Salami-Taktik also? Erste Welle zeichnet die Straßen ein, zweite Welle die Hausnummern, dritte Welle die Rendering-Hints? Wenn ich rausgehe, versuche ich das alles parallel zu tun, weil die Chance sehr gering sein kann, dass jemandem auffällt, dass etwas fehlt. Und die automatische Algorithmen müssen auch erstmal so gut sein, dass die Basis korrekt ist. Hints sollen ja nur Sachen lösen die prinzipiell maschinell kaum lösbar sind. Nicht wie momentan die Unzulänglichkeiten der Kartenerstellung ausbügeln. Leider habe ich keinen Zugang zu Mapnik und habe nach Basis-Python und JAVA nicht noch Lust, C oder vertieftes Python zu lernen. Dinge, wie die Generalisierung von Gebäuden sind in den Anfängen recht simpel und es gibt viele freie Texte dazu ... nur die Integration dieser Texte ist wieder eine andere Baustelle. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz
Zitat Tobias Wendorff: Dirk Stöcker schrieb: [...]. Nur muss auch dafür OSM noch viel lernen. Erstmal sollten wir die Grunddaten erfassen. Salami-Taktik also? Erste Welle zeichnet die Straßen ein, zweite Welle die Hausnummern, dritte Welle die Rendering-Hints? Genau so. Anders wird es nicht funktionieren. Wenn ich rausgehe, versuche ich das alles parallel zu tun, Es wird immer beim Versuch bleiben. weil die Chance sehr gering sein kann, dass jemandem auffällt, dass etwas fehlt. -v bitte -- Michael ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz
On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Tobias Wendorff wrote: Dirk Stöcker schrieb: Warum wollen wir die nicht? Die Render-Fixes wollen wir nicht. Aber Hints halte ich schon für sinnvoll. Ich bin mir ganz sicher, dass ich für sowas in meinen OSM-Anfängen häufig kritisiert wurde, weil ein Hint nichts mit den eigentlichen Geodaten zu tun hat. Tja. Nicht jeder vertritt meine Meinung. Aber vielleicht braucht man für gewisse Erkenntnisse einfach das zugehörige Fachwissen. Ich versuche auch selten jemanden der nicht will von meiner Meinung zu überzeugen. Ich mache einfach und beobachte die Ergebnisse. Wenn es sich in meine Richtung entwickelt ist das schön, wenn etwas anderes vernünftiges rauskommt habe ich auch nichts dagegen. Hauptsache es entwickelt sich. Statt osmarender:noname ein [no]display=masstab[|]x ist eine sinnvolle Sache. Nur muss auch dafür OSM noch viel lernen. Erstmal sollten wir die Grunddaten erfassen. Salami-Taktik also? Erste Welle zeichnet die Straßen ein, zweite Welle die Hausnummern, dritte Welle die Rendering-Hints? OSM durchläuft einen evolutionären Prozess. Das was morgen richtig ist kann heute noch falsch sein. Man kann Entwicklungen anstossen aber keine Revolutionen machen. Jeder der versucht OSM zu revolutionieren (wie Du manchmal) wird verlieren. Die Taktik der kleinen Schritte funktioniert hingegen meistens :-) Leider habe ich keinen Zugang zu Mapnik und habe nach Basis-Python und JAVA nicht noch Lust, C oder vertieftes Python zu lernen. Dinge, wie die Generalisierung von Gebäuden sind in den Anfängen recht simpel und es gibt viele freie Texte dazu ... nur die Integration dieser Texte ist wieder eine andere Baustelle. Hier hoffe ich, dass die Wissenschaft einspringt. Ist gibt so viele Studenten, die Diplomarbeiten und Studienarbeiten schreiben müssen. Statt diese auf rein theoretische Arbeiten loszulassen bietet OSM die Chance die Erkenntnisse an einem riesigen Datenbestand zu testen. Und am einfachsten geht dass, wenn man die Tools direkt anpasst. Ich denke die Entwicklungen in dieser Richtung werden zunehmen. Du darfst nicht vergessen, das man OSM eigentlich erst ab letztem Jahr richtig ernst nehmen kann. Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz
Michael Buege schrieb: weil die Chance sehr gering sein kann, dass jemandem auffällt, dass etwas fehlt. -v bitte Ach, die Straße ist bei OSM ja schon drin; da muss ich nicht mehr hin. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz
Hallo, Tobias Wendorff wrote: Dirk Stöcker schrieb: Warum wollen wir die nicht? Die Render-Fixes wollen wir nicht. Aber Hints halte ich schon für sinnvoll. Ich bin mir ganz sicher, dass ich für sowas in meinen OSM-Anfängen häufig kritisiert wurde, weil ein Hint nichts mit den eigentlichen Geodaten zu tun hat. Von mir bestimmt nicht, ich predige schon seit jeher: Die Realitaet verdrehen, damits auf der Karte falsch aussieht: schlecht. Zusaetzliche Informationen einzubauen, die eine bessere Kartenausgabe ermoeglichen: gut. Ich glaube, und auch das schreibe ich auf dieser Liste zum dritten oder vierten Mal, dass OSM hier seine crowdsourcing power gut einbringen kann, denn die weltweit agierenden Profis werden auf immer dazu verdammt sein, das Problem schoene Karte algorithmisch loesen zu muessen, waehrend wir das mit menschlicher Intelligenz koennen. Bye Frederik ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Luftbilder aus Bayern - Halbzeit
Andreas Fritsche schrieb: From: Sven Geggus li...@fuchsschwanzdomain.de [..] Ich frage mich warum die Daten ?berhaupt k?nstlich runterskaliert wurden. In der Originalaufl?sung w?re das abzeichnen von H?usern m?glich gewesen! [..] vielleicht darum!? Das würde keinen Sinn ergeben. Uns wurden Bilder in 2m-Auflösung versprochen... Warum sollten sie die Bilder künstlich runterskalieren. Ich vermute eher, dass einer der Mitarbeiter gepfuscht hat. André signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de