Re: [OSM-talk] Ways divided by paint?

[Mike N]

On 7/4/2019 10:33 AM, Jack Armstrong dan...@sprynet.com wrote:

In the given example, turns were already permitted prior to the additional 
superfluous lanes being added. This creates confusion and unnecessary clutter 
and should not be encouraged. The intersection was fine before the addition of 
the highway links. The new links add nothing to the map other than clutter.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?changeset=70997250#map=20/39.57344/-104.98491


  The links do improve turn-by-turn instructions, in the case of 
following a large vehicle and not being sure where to leave the main 
lane of traffic to make a left turn.But it's also possible that 
adding turn lanes and/or change:lanes could work (but I'm not familiar 
with change:lanes enough to know for sure).


   I think some areas are more likely to add a physical divider based 
on history of traffic flow and available funds.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Map of Population Density vs. OpenStreetMap density

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

On Fri, July 5, 2019 2:40 pm, Christoph Hormann wrote:
>
> One warning:  All global population data sets that exist are rough
> estimates with usually significant systematic biases and errors.  For
> example in Switzerland the data set you used sees high population
> density in mountain areas with no basis in reality.

Same in rural Senegal. Low-resolution population data I guess.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Map of Population Density vs. OpenStreetMap density

[Christoph Hormann]

On Friday 05 July 2019, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote:
>
> http://disaster.ninja/live/
> 65046,bivariate_class;id=GDACS_EQ_1183112_1265046;layer=default-style;
>position=-13.88712117940031,30.076044779387132;zoom=2.4760319802318693
>>
>
> What do you think?

Are your densities in people/object per ground square kilometers or per 
mercator square kilometers? (just to be sure - this is the number one 
mistake of any kind of density analysis in the OSM context)

One warning:  All global population data sets that exist are rough 
estimates with usually significant systematic biases and errors.  For 
example in Switzerland the data set you used sees high population 
density in mountain areas with no basis in reality.

And i am not a fan of deliberately pixelated visualizations where the 
data is shown in a pixel grid at a coarser resolution than what the 
display offers.

Apart from that this is an interesting analysis.  It would be kind of 
nice to also do it separately for density of features that actually 
correlate with population density in reality (buildings, roads, 
addresses, shops etc.) and physical geography, which can be mapped just 
as densely in areas with no population as in densely populated areas.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Map of Population Density vs. OpenStreetMap density

[Komяpa]

Hi,

In HOT mailing list I was advised to bring a part of a thing we did to
wider audience :)

We've correlated global population datasets with plain OpenStreetMap
objects count. The main use case is to quickly determine how much is there
to map in case of natural disaster in a smaller region, but the map itself
is global - it's interesting to see what's around you and find the spots to
map next, even outside of the disaster.

http://disaster.ninja/live/


What do you think?

(The HOT list thread if you are interested in disaster.ninja tool itself:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/2019-June/014908.html)

Darafei Praliaskouski
kontur.io
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-legal-talk] Proposal for a revision of JA:Available Data

[Mateusz Konieczny]

5 Jul 2019, 05:22 by yumean1...@gmail.com:

> The main point at issue is whether we are allowed to use official websites 
> that provide primary information or not.
> Some of us think that we can use data from official websites unless it is 
> prohibited by their term of service.
>
I am not a lawyer, please correct me if I am wrong:
- facts are not copyrightable and from copyright view it does not matter 
whatever
one copied information from opening hours sign or from website
- collections of facts may have copyright or copyright like restrictions, 
copying
phone book or all branches of $CORPORATION may be not OK
- copying collections of facts is not OK also when distributed among many people
(that is why Wikidata is problematic - copying database one fact at time is not 
removing
sui generis database rights)

> is also against using official websites. His opinion is that we would able to 
> map POIs without surveying on the ground at all
> if it was OK to use data from websites. 
> (example: > 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ja/2019-June/010604.html 
> >  )
>
1) Some survey is necessary to check whatever data is trustworthy and up to date
2) Even if true it would not influence copyright status of such data
3) Imports (mapping POIs without surveying) is acceptable in case of good data 
on a suitable
license and following import guidelines and there are cases of succesfull and 
useful imports
doing this.

> What do you think about the issue?
>
I am sure that mapping opening hours, name etc from signs is OK.
I am sure that mapping opening hours, name etc from website of individual 
business is OK.
I am sure that "we would able to map POIs without surveying on the ground at 
all" does not
matter as far as copyright status of such data is concerned.

I am not sure is it OK to systematically copy such data from website that is 
basically a database.
I am not sure is it OK to systematically copy such data from website that is 
basically a database,
with individuals copying one fact at time.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk