[talk-au] Cool cartography geek stuff
http://www.maproomblog.com/2011/01/map_projections_applied_to_photos.php jim -- _ Jim Croft ~ jim.cr...@gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~ http://about.me/jrc 'A civilized society is one which tolerates eccentricity to the point of doubtful sanity.' - Robert Frost, poet (1874-1963) Please send URIs, not attachments: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
-- Forwarded message -- From: Steve Coast Date: 4 February 2011 03:17 Subject: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with To: t...@openstreetmap.org http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2011/02/03/automatically-detect-roads-with-bing-aerial-imagery.aspx ___ talk mailing list t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Fwd: Railway Station Naming Dispute
-- Forwarded message -- From: Luke Woolley Date: 4 February 2011 13:02 Subject: Re: [talk-au] Railway Station Naming Dispute To: Stephen Hope I can tell you now, the other editor has a problem with this. A couple of times I've done name=Ferntree Gully and alt_name=Fern Tree Gully but they have been quickly reverted to their version. I'm going to change it again to the one word versions, PM the other editor, i'll give him the link to this discussion, and then i'll await their reply and go from there. I'll also mention about how generally 'what's on the ground' gets preference over other names if they are different. Whether they want to sign up to the mailing list to participate in this discussion is also something i'll mention. On 4 February 2011 12:08, Stephen Hope wrote: > I'd keep both names - name= and alt_name= ( or old_name=). This is > better for lookup purposes, as either version would then find this > station. And it's not wrong, as it seems the other version was > correct at one time. > > Whether that would be acceptable to the other editor is another problem. > > Stephen > > On 3 February 2011 20:22, Luke Woolley wrote: >> Doesn't happen too often on OSM, unlike Wikipedia, but i've found myself in >> an edit war with another user and I would like some opinions. >> There are two railway stations in outer eastern Melbourne, Ferntree Gully >> and Upper Ferntree Gully. These stations have in the past been named Fern >> Tree Gully and Upper Fern Tree Gully. >> I've been changing the names for a while now to the one word version because >> it's the current public spelling of the station. It's used in newspapers, >> the Metlink (official melbourne public transport) website, virtually any >> signage or publication uses the one word version. I feel that this version >> is warranted on OSM in terms of it being what the station is publicly know >> as at this point in time, and to help with searching (and any future >> implementation of OSM data for journey planning) >> Another user has been changing the station names to the two word version. >> Their explanation is that because the stations were officially named in the >> two word fashion a while back. In recent times, the name changed back to the >> one word version in all known publications and signage, but was not >> officially changed back. >> (http://www.vicsig.net/infrastructure/location/Ferntree-Gully and http://www.vicsig.net/infrastructure/location/Upper-Ferntree-Gully) >> So any opinions as to how I should go about this? >> ___ >> Talk-au mailing list >> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >> >> > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 10:38 +1000, Stephen Hope wrote: > On 3 February 2011 09:28, David Murn wrote: > > I also wonder how this works, using your example, if the user had > > entered street names and then another user came along and fixed a > > spelling mistake in one which they had surveyed themselves. When the > > changeset is relicenced, you have v1 of an object under a non-compatible > > licence, and v2 is compatible, so what happens to the object? > > It goes away. All objects get rolled back to the last valid state > that have no unlicensed edits before them. So any object where v1 is > unlicensed is gone, no matter how many changes have been done to it > since. That was my worry, but I figured that the powers-that-be wouldnt push a change through that would devastate the map so much. > This is one reason I have stopped doing any work around my area, until > this mess gets sorted out. I suspect that all this area is going to > go away, so any work I do in the meantime is wasted, whether it is in > itself valid or not. I hadnt thought of that perspective. Id simply cut back on my mapping because the lack of nearmap basically made it fruitless. I do have to wonder though, how many mappers have dropped off their edits during this whole changeover period, for that reason or similar. The only consolation is that any work you do isnt so much 'wasted' because it will be maintained in the public export and the numerous forks. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Railway Station Naming Dispute
I'd keep both names - name= and alt_name= ( or old_name=). This is better for lookup purposes, as either version would then find this station. And it's not wrong, as it seems the other version was correct at one time. Whether that would be acceptable to the other editor is another problem. Stephen On 3 February 2011 20:22, Luke Woolley wrote: > Doesn't happen too often on OSM, unlike Wikipedia, but i've found myself in > an edit war with another user and I would like some opinions. > There are two railway stations in outer eastern Melbourne, Ferntree Gully > and Upper Ferntree Gully. These stations have in the past been named Fern > Tree Gully and Upper Fern Tree Gully. > I've been changing the names for a while now to the one word version because > it's the current public spelling of the station. It's used in newspapers, > the Metlink (official melbourne public transport) website, virtually any > signage or publication uses the one word version. I feel that this version > is warranted on OSM in terms of it being what the station is publicly know > as at this point in time, and to help with searching (and any future > implementation of OSM data for journey planning) > Another user has been changing the station names to the two word version. > Their explanation is that because the stations were officially named in the > two word fashion a while back. In recent times, the name changed back to the > one word version in all known publications and signage, but was not > officially changed back. > (http://www.vicsig.net/infrastructure/location/Ferntree-Gully and http://www.vicsig.net/infrastructure/location/Upper-Ferntree-Gully) > So any opinions as to how I should go about this? > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] waterway=coastline
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:50 AM, David Groom wrote: > Since I created many of the canals in this area, and tagged them as waterway Btw - thanks. I did some cycling in that area in November last year (Gold Coast to Surfers, up to the Spit, then up to Lamington NP and back) and used the OSM maps on my Garmin Oregon. The quality was great - the canals rendered really well. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] waterway=coastline
- Original Message - From: "Peter Watson" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 10:40 AM Subject: [talk-au] waterway=coastline Hi Everyone, I have noticed that all the Gold Coast canals are taged with waterway=coastline. I understand that the coastline should connect around the coastline in an unbroken line. ie. should connect across the river where it meets the sea. I understand the canals should be done with tag waterway=riverbank probably as relations. Is this correct? Thanks Peter Watson Peter I assume you are referring to areas such as http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-28.01742&lon=153.41865&zoom=16 Since I created many of the canals in this area, and tagged them as waterway = coastline here are my thoughts. Coastline nodes and ways were originally imported using PGS data. This had relatively poor resolution and the result back in 2007 was a mess. Using yahoo imagery I tidied up the location of the ways, tracing them as best I could. At that time it was easiest to maintain the natural=coastline tag on these ways as it preserved an unbroken run of coastline as I edited. I never changed these to waterway = riverbank tagging. In part that was due to: a) My intention was to get the map looking right. I was fixing errors identified by the coastline error checker, and once the errors were fixed I didn't bother to think about the tagging. I was after all running imports on other parts of the globe, and trying to fix errors there as well. b) Back in 2007 there was less consensus than there is today about which ways should be tagged as natural = coastline. For what its worth, if today I were tagging the area I referred to above, I would use of waterway = riverbank on the majority of these canals. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Railway Station Naming Dispute
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 4:39 PM, John Berkers wrote: > I'm relatively new to OSM, but thought that I would weigh into the debate. Hi John, Welcome! And great local background. Thank you. > Lastly, the original request was for advice on how to handle the situation > with the other OSM user. AFAIK the other user may not subscribe to this > list, so while having this debate here is good, the other user may not > even be aware of it. Is there a way to handle 'disputes' such as this one > so that once a consensus is reached after a reasonable discussion, an > adjustment to the name can be made, without it being reverted? Conflict resolution differs according to the participants, of course. Some suggestions are provided on the wiki. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Railway Station Naming Dispute
I'm relatively new to OSM, but thought that I would weigh into the debate. I lived in Ferntree Gully for 5 years (84-89), and then travelled through both Upper Ferntree Gully and Ferntree Gully stations for another 10-15 years. As far as I can remember, the signs at the station have always used the one word version. Yeah, they changed colour from the old style signs to the current Metlink signs, but they always said "Ferntree", and not "Fern Tree". My opinion is that the maps should reflect what is actually there, and should not be using the designated "official" name from an old government publication. I did conduct a brief Google search also, and came across some old Acts of Parliament regarding the construction, and subsequent widening and electrification, of the stretch from "Fern Tree Gully" to "Gembrook". However, as these date back to 1948 at their most recent, and the name is not currently being used in this way, I think that this does nothing to add weight to the argument that the two word version of the names should be used. Lastly, the original request was for advice on how to handle the situation with the other OSM user. AFAIK the other user may not subscribe to this list, so while having this debate here is good, the other user may not even be aware of it. Is there a way to handle 'disputes' such as this one so that once a consensus is reached after a reasonable discussion, an adjustment to the name can be made, without it being reverted? My $0.02. > name:Furntree Gully; Furn tree Gully. > Ie, name it both ways, with the popular spelling first. > Just a suggestion, I personally think it should be "Furntree Gully". > > > > > > On 3 February 2011 21:29, Steve Bennett wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Alex Lum >> wrote: >>> In any case, we should be mapping what's "on-the-ground" anyway, i.e. >>> the station signage (unless this signage is contradictory in which case >>> it may be required to use official records). >> >> I thought the policy wherever it's written was using whatever the >> locals think it is. I'm wary of placing too much trust in signage, >> because with bike paths in particular, that approach gets you nowhere >> fast. But if there's an official operator (which there is), whatever >> their website says sounds like a good start. >> >> We definitely shouldn't have a situation where one person swears blind >> that "the real name" of something is xxx even though common sense >> dictates that it's yyy. >> >> Steve >> >> ___ >> Talk-au mailing list >> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >> > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > -- John Berkers ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Railway Station Naming Dispute
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: > On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Alex Lum wrote: >> In any case, we should be mapping what's "on-the-ground" anyway, i.e. the >> station signage (unless this signage is contradictory in which case it may >> be required to use official records). > > I thought the policy – wherever it's written – was using whatever the > locals think it is. I'm wary of placing too much trust in signage, > because with bike paths in particular, that approach gets you nowhere > fast. But if there's an official operator (which there is), whatever > their website says sounds like a good start. > > We definitely shouldn't have a situation where one person swears blind > that "the real name" of something is xxx even though common sense > dictates that it's yyy. There is merit in both "on the ground" and "local usage" but the details matter. I wonder if local mappers could come to an agreement by using both name and old_name? There may not be a general answer beyond, "what's the best you can collectively agree to?" As an example, I have a local bit of motorway that appears to be "just more of highway 8." It is, in fact, a high speed bypass of highway 8 which still exists as a local road. Wikipedia suggests that the bypass is officially highway 7187, an un-sign-posted, internal reference number for the highway department. It would be correct, in some ways to use ref=7187, as this is the internal reference number. It would be correct in other ways to use ref=8 based on local, common usage. In the end, the local mappers agreed to leave this section of motorway with no ref=, since this section has no posted highway number "reassurance markers". http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/4001108/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.40796&lon=-80.39076&zoom=15&layers=M Best regards, Richard ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Railway Station Naming Dispute
name:Furntree Gully; Furn tree Gully. Ie, name it both ways, with the popular spelling first. Just a suggestion, I personally think it should be "Furntree Gully". On 3 February 2011 21:29, Steve Bennett wrote: > On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Alex Lum wrote: >> In any case, we should be mapping what's "on-the-ground" anyway, i.e. the >> station signage (unless this signage is contradictory in which case it may >> be required to use official records). > > I thought the policy – wherever it's written – was using whatever the > locals think it is. I'm wary of placing too much trust in signage, > because with bike paths in particular, that approach gets you nowhere > fast. But if there's an official operator (which there is), whatever > their website says sounds like a good start. > > We definitely shouldn't have a situation where one person swears blind > that "the real name" of something is xxx even though common sense > dictates that it's yyy. > > Steve > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Railway Station Naming Dispute
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Alex Lum wrote: > In any case, we should be mapping what's "on-the-ground" anyway, i.e. the > station signage (unless this signage is contradictory in which case it may be > required to use official records). I thought the policy – wherever it's written – was using whatever the locals think it is. I'm wary of placing too much trust in signage, because with bike paths in particular, that approach gets you nowhere fast. But if there's an official operator (which there is), whatever their website says sounds like a good start. We definitely shouldn't have a situation where one person swears blind that "the real name" of something is xxx even though common sense dictates that it's yyy. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Railway Station Naming Dispute
I had a look at the Vicnames database which is about as official as it gets regarding registered geographic names in Victoria. According to Vicnames both stations were registered on 2 May 1966 as the one-word versions: Ferntree Gully and Upper Ferntree Gully. While I am loath to dispute the accuracy of a rail enthusiast web page which tend to be pretty thorough, I would place more faith in the official government name registry than a rail web page which says the name was changed in the 1970s, especially given the large amount of material that concurs with the "Ferntree" version. In any case, we should be mapping what's "on-the-ground" anyway, i.e. the station signage (unless this signage is contradictory in which case it may be required to use official records). Alex. > Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 21:22:06 +1100 > From: Luke Woolley > To: OSM Australian Talk List > Subject: [talk-au] Railway Station Naming Dispute > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Doesn't happen too often on OSM, unlike Wikipedia, but i've found myself in > an edit war with another user and I would like some opinions. > > There are two railway stations in outer eastern Melbourne, Ferntree Gully and > Upper Ferntree Gully. These stations have in the past been named Fern Tree > Gully and Upper Fern Tree Gully. > > I've been changing the names for a while now to the one word version because > it's the current public spelling of the station. It's used in newspapers, the > Metlink (official melbourne public transport) website, virtually any signage > or publication uses the one word version. I feel that this version is > warranted on OSM in terms of it being what the station is publicly know as at > this point in time, and to help with searching (and any future implementation > of OSM data for journey planning) > > Another user has been changing the station names to the two word version. > Their explanation is that because the stations were officially named in the > two word fashion a while back. In recent times, the name changed back to the > one word version in all known publications and signage, but was not > officially changed back. > (http://www.vicsig.net/infrastructure/location/Ferntree-Gully and > http://www.vicsig.net/infrastructure/location/Upper-Ferntree-Gully) > > So any opinions as to how I should go about this? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Railway Station Naming Dispute
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:22 PM, Luke Woolley wrote: > Their explanation is that because the stations were officially named in the > two word fashion a while back. In recent times, the name changed back to the > one word version in all known publications and signage, but was not > officially changed back. I don't understand - the "name changed" but "was not officially changed back"? Afaik, it's Ferntree Gully, and that's how it should be in OSM. Sounds like the other party is getting a bit hung up on some particular source they have designated canonical...although we have no such policy. Fwiw, I live near Glenhuntly Station - so named despite the spelling of Glen Huntly (suburb) and Glen Huntly Rd. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Fwd: HOT for Cyclone Yasi
-- Forwarded message -- From: Shoaib Burq Date: 3 February 2011 20:12 Subject: Re: HOT for Cyclone Yasi To: Mikel Maron Cc: John Smith , Kashif Rasul , hot...@gmail.com I am not sure if there are any specific needs yet. Mapping and Planning Support Group (MAPS) http://maps-group.org had had deployments to Red Cross QLD for the last 4-5 weeks and in the last few days they had been providing maps of suburbs that would need evacuating. They have also been creating maps of suburb demographics. I expect the control room of Red Cross and other agencies is very very busy right now. more soon Shoaib On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Mikel Maron wrote: > Are you all, or others in the Australian community, wanting to coordinate > response to Cyclone Yasi? What are the mapping needs if any? > -Mikel > > == Mikel Maron == > +254(0)724899738 @mikel s:mikelmaron > http://mapkibera.org/ > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Haiti > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Railway Station Naming Dispute
Doesn't happen too often on OSM, unlike Wikipedia, but i've found myself in an edit war with another user and I would like some opinions. There are two railway stations in outer eastern Melbourne, Ferntree Gully and Upper Ferntree Gully. These stations have in the past been named Fern Tree Gully and Upper Fern Tree Gully. I've been changing the names for a while now to the one word version because it's the current public spelling of the station. It's used in newspapers, the Metlink (official melbourne public transport) website, virtually any signage or publication uses the one word version. I feel that this version is warranted on OSM in terms of it being what the station is publicly know as at this point in time, and to help with searching (and any future implementation of OSM data for journey planning) Another user has been changing the station names to the two word version. Their explanation is that because the stations were officially named in the two word fashion a while back. In recent times, the name changed back to the one word version in all known publications and signage, but was not officially changed back. (http://www.vicsig.net/infrastructure/location/Ferntree-Gully and http://www.vicsig.net/infrastructure/location/Upper-Ferntree-Gully) So any opinions as to how I should go about this?___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: HOT for Cyclone Yasi
I forwarded this to Mikel, but can anyone else reply please CC the following addresses: Mikel Maron , Shoaib Burq , Kashif Rasul , hot...@gmail.com On 3 February 2011 18:38, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: > On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 12:52:28 +1000 > John Smith wrote: > >> Are you all, or others in the Australian community, wanting to >> coordinate response to Cyclone Yasi? What are the mapping needs if >> any? >> -Mikel > > I don't think anyone has a clue at present > It will remain very cloudy for some days yet, so no possibility of > satellite imaging to check for damaged buildings etc > > From my household one will be leaving tomorrow for emergency work and > be away for the week coming. Not likely to have contact with the top of > the emergency hierarchy during this period, just work on the ground. > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: HOT for Cyclone Yasi
On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 12:52:28 +1000 John Smith wrote: > Are you all, or others in the Australian community, wanting to > coordinate response to Cyclone Yasi? What are the mapping needs if > any? > -Mikel I don't think anyone has a clue at present It will remain very cloudy for some days yet, so no possibility of satellite imaging to check for damaged buildings etc >From my household one will be leaving tomorrow for emergency work and be away for the week coming. Not likely to have contact with the top of the emergency hierarchy during this period, just work on the ground. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
