Re: [OSM-talk-be] Meeting with SPW (some elements of the discussion may also interest Flemish people)
On 2013-03-23 at 21:55, Julien Fastré wrote: > The SPW has also a request for our community (this is were flemish > people might be more interested !) > > They would like to use OSM to track changes in Wallonia. They would like > to know where to send their teams, where there is some new roads, or > where the roads or elements are modified. > > The problem is: how to track those changes ? If I add a new road in OSM, > is it a road build in the past month, or is it a road build years ago, > but which didn't exist in the osm'db ? And if I update a line "highway", > am I correcting some mistake, or adapting our map to some new reality ? > > We thought about one solution: a tag "since" to object which are updated > or build in the reality and modified in the db. Example: if a road has a > new bike lane, I update the line with JOSM and add the tag > "since=2013-01-01" on the object. Within SPW, they track the tags > "since" and see where are changes. Don't re-invent the wheel: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:start_date -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Lost property: one forest, messages, Bing
Le mercredi 14/11/2012 08:49:01 vous avez écrit : > I'm glad I've found you here because I've already met you in many places > on the map as a very active person, congratulations. I am not as much active nowadays, it was a lot more fun when the map was almost empty and I could go anywhere and map all the roads. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Lost property: one forest, messages, Bing
Hello Le lundi 12/11/2012 14:55:00 A.Pirard.Papou a écrit : > While dealing with borders, I discovered this unidentified multipolygon > <http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/150921> fortuitously. > Then I loaded the members and I found landuse = forest on one, that > makes it correct on the map. > Isn't landuse = forest supposed to be tagged on the relation instead? > > I've never been able to contact Renaud Michel on various subjects. That's me, I generally answer the messages I receive via OSM, I just checker and I had forgotten one (3 months ago), but I don't think it was from you. > To send an e-mail to someone, I must fill a web form asking her?/him to > reply so that I know his e-mail address to which I send my e-mail (not > only OSM). > Does anybody know when someone will invent a Web button next to the form > to do that automatically, or do I miss something? > > One of my messages is to beware of Bing. > At higher (closer) zooms, it may have in some places an erroneous offset > <http://www.google.be/search?&q=bing+offset+%28higher+OR+lower%29+zoom>. > I think that the lower zooms are always the correct ones. > JOSM allows to set an offset to compensate. I know, but I have compared bing image position with GPS traces and, at least near Liège, it is quite accurate (to a few meters). Actually, the old yahoo images that were used some years ago were a lot less accurate And I had to reposition them according to (my and other's) GPS traces. cheers -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Demande de libération de données de la Région Wallonne
Bonjour On mardi 13 mars 2012 at 22:17, Julien Fastré wrote : > Nous utilisons actuellement la licence "Open Database Licence" (ODBl) [1] Attention, ce n'est pas exact. D'abord jusqu'à présent les données sont encore distribuées sous licence CC- BY-SA 2.0, cela pourrait changer après le 1 avril, mais il reste encore une quantité non négligeable de donnée non compatibles, localisée dans certains pays, cf http://odbl.poole.ch/ De plus, même quand le changement sera fait et que la base de donnée sera distribuée sous ODbL (attention à la casse), les données sont contribuées sous les «contributor term» http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms qui autorisent plus largement OMSF à distribuer les données sous CC-BY-SA ODbL ou toute autre licence libre votée par 2/3 des contributeurs actifs. On donne donc un droit nettement plus large que de contribuer simplement sous ODbL, dans cinq ans les données pourraient être distribuées sous une licence qui n'existe pas encore. Je pense qu'il est important de ne pas occulter ce point pour ne pas avoir de surprises plus tard. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] ODBL
On dimanche 25 septembre 2011 at 18:32, Gerard Vanderveken wrote : > Actually, You are accepting both, and the new OdbL license for your > existing and future contributions, and the new contributor terms, which > makes it easier to change the license again, if there is a reason to do > so. For this change from CC-BY-SA to OdbL, everyone has to give its > acceptance, for changing to another (that would be then the third) > license a 2/3 majority is sufficient. > There is no license change from OdbL in the short future necessary or > foreseen, and so these contributor terms aren't strictly needed now, but > it is a good provision to be ready in a distant future for a > modernisation of the OdbL license should it be needed, and then the > transition will be much smoother by this majority principle. The current planet is still distributed under CC-By-SA only, but you are right that the CT already mention ODbL explicitly, so no new vote will be required for that change. What I wanted to point at, is that the CT actually gives OSMF a wider right than simply relicensing under ODbL, we have implicitly accepted any future license that is proposed by OSMF and accepted by enough active mappers. I think it is a good thing for the project (which is why I accepted them), but some people may not have the right to grant this if they have used some third party data. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] ODBL
Hello On dimanche 25 septembre 2011 at 14:23, Jo wrote : > I'm sending the following message to everybody who hasn't decided yet. Up > to now I sent it to all contributors who still have 1-150 elements in > the database in Belgium. From those I managed to have 8 extra people who > agreed. That's not all that much, but it's better than nothing. > Especially since their contributions form part of a chain. I've been > sending out messages like these before, which resulted in 4-5 people who > agreed. [...] > OSM changes its license. Could you please check whether you can agree to > release your contributions under the ODBL? The idea behind the license is > mostly the same as with CC-BY-SA. ODBL is more suited for a database, > which is what Openstreetmap is, at the core. > If you can't agree to the new license and contributor terms, your > contributions will have to be removed to move forward. This may have > consequences when people have built further on elements that you touched. > All their efforts may have been in vain as well. > For people like me who would like to try and save as much as possible > data, it means we have to put in inordinate amounts of time to sort out > what can be saved and what needs to be dropped. > So, please, log in for a moment on www.openstreetmap.org and indicate > whether you agree or not to the new license and contributor terms. This is not accurate, no decision has been taken (yet) to change the license from CC-BY-SA to ODbL. What is being asked now is to accept the contributor's term which grant a wider right to the OSMF by allowing it to relicense one's contributions if 2/3 of active mappers agree on the new license. The current target is ODbL, but maybe ten years in the future the community at that time may choose another license that they consider more appropriate. So by accepting the new CT, the contributors must actually have the required rights on all their contributions to grant this to the OSMF. For example, in the case of data contributed by some administration or private enterprise, the person who imported them in OSM must be sure he is allowed to accept the CT (some people explicitly refused the CT because of such problem). cheers -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Bing Updated
On mercredi 21 septembre 2011 at 11:18, Gerard Vanderveken wrote : > Bing updated the background imagery for JOSM and Potlatch to spring 2011. > I've also the impression the resolution is now on par with bing.com/maps. > Now you can map also very recent buildings and other objects. I hope they don't stop here, as it seems a work in progress. Looking over Liège at a place I know changed recently, hospital "le valdor" (see http://osm.org/go/0Eqqh5ZcK-) up to zoom 17 I now get images from 10/10/2010, but at zoom 18 and over it is still images from 10/6/2007 when the hospital was in re-construction. This is not a JOSM problem, as you can see on bing site http://be.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=50.63429469934849~5.589405251254638&lvl=17&dir=0&sty=h&form=LMLTCC We'll see in the coming days. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] street with no access for each driver
On mercredi 17 août 2011 at 19:08, Jan Herrygers wrote : > I'm new to OSM. I'm currently looking at the map in my neighbourhood and > correcting errors as I see them. Hello and welcome. > One thing I noticed is a street that is marked one-way in OSM, but I know > there is a "C3" sign on each end of the street: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.306022&lon=5.100308&zoom=18&layers=M > . So the street isn't one-way, access is simply prohibited for every > "bestuurder". > > The question is, how should I tag this in potlatch2? > Should I just set access=no? Pedestrians are allowed. > Or should I set horse=no and motor_vehicle=no? This doesn't seem all to > accurate, or is it? > bicycle=dismount seems a bit much for such a short road. > > I tried looking at some other streets that I know have a "C3" sign, but > they aren't tagged either. I don't know what is a "C3" sign, but if only pedestrian are allowed you can either tag it directly as highway=footway or highway=pedestrian (depending if it a small or large) or if it is a normal road that was restricted only to pedestrian you leave the highway as is and put access=no foot=yes or foot=designated (probably the later if the sign explicitly say it is designed for pedestrian) -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Problems with JOSM's unwanted behaviour.
On lundi 11 juillet 2011 at 13:03, Gerard Vanderveken wrote : > Renaud MICHEL wrote: > >Press Ctrl while clicking on the end note, JOSM will start a new way. > > No, this leads to a double node and the way is not connected to the > crossing. Right, I didn't pay attention this. But If you click on the last node of your way, then press Alt while adding the next node, then you end up with a new way that share its first node with the previous way. > >For that, I temporarily reverse the way to have the history on the good > >part, then reverse both part back (but this is only important for ways > >where the orientation matters, like oneways or rivers). > > That's what i try to do, when paying attention to it, but I feel JOSM > should do it automatically. JOSM can't know what part of the way should keep the history, so the best he can do automatically is to always assign the history in a consistent way. The other solutions is to ask the user which part of the way should retain the history, maybe there is a plugin to do that, but I personally prefer the way it works now. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Problems with JOSM's unwanted behaviour.
On lundi 11 juillet 2011 at 12:22, Gerard Vanderveken wrote : > - When you start drawing a way somewhere in a node, JOSM always assumes > you want to continue some way already present. > This is very annoying and unproductive, because this is nearly always > not what you wanted or intended. Press Ctrl while clicking on the end note, JOSM will start a new way. You can also start your new way at the second node, and then connect it to the end of the other way. > - When you split a way, the old id (and by consequence its history) are > always in the first part, and the second part gets a new id. > This way the history and id can be left by the smallest part. It should > always assigned to the biggest part. For that, I temporarily reverse the way to have the history on the good part, then reverse both part back (but this is only important for ways where the orientation matters, like oneways or rivers). -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Informal Meeting next Friday
Hello On mercredi 11 mai 2011 at 11:20, Julien Fastré wrote : > May I remind you our informal meeting this Friday ? > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Activities#Upcomin > g_activities Due to personnal problems, it is possible that I may not be able to come tomorrow. I'll decide tomorrow evening. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] tag street from calc file
On mardi 22 mars 2011 at 19:20, you wrote : > No, cycleway=opposite means exactly that - a one way road that > cyclists are allowed to ride in the opposite direction. See > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway And once again there is more than one way to tag it... That's the kind of thing that demotivate me about OSM. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] tag street from calc file
On mardi 22 mars 2011 at 18:39, Jo wrote : > cycleway=opposite (converted to the proper xml-format) and tag the way as > modified. I don't think that tag is appropriate. It implies that there is a real cycleway on the road, but in Liege (and many other places in wallonia) you simply have an exclusion to the oneway for bicycles. For those I use oneway:bicycle=no bicycle:oneway=no (not sure which one is more appropriate, so I always add both, looking at the wiki, the oneway:bicycle seems to be preferred) -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] sidewalk as ways or tags
On samedi 19 mars 2011 at 18:09, Ben Laenen wrote : > Renaud MICHEL wrote: > > He argues that the mapnik rendering of this show how irrationnal it is > > (which is a personnal preference on which I differ) and that those > > should be tagged on the main way. > > I personnally think that it is more topologically correct, having a > > parallel footway (where there exists ont) and foot=no on the main road, > > as on important roads you may not cross anywhere, but only where a > > crossing exists, so a separate way allow for correct routing for > > pedestrians. > > Can you show an example where this is the case, where you're not allowed > to cross a road, but are allowed to walk on sidewalks next to it? I may > have missed something, but I think the traffic code simply doesn't make > it possible to have such a situation. Except when there really is a > separate path next to the road, in which case the two just happen to be > parallel and in which case drawing the footpaths as separate ways is the > only logical option. And in which case you should really reconsider > whether "footway" is the right designation. You mean that a pedestrian is allowed to cross aven a national road anywhere he wants, and even walk on it? I have always thought that (and acted acordingly), if a crossing (be it controlled or not) is close enough you may not cross the road but must take the crossing. (close enough beeing around 50-100m, but I don't remember exactly) > Also, only put a tag like foot=no on the road when there are signs > explicitly forbidding pedestrians on the road. Without such a sign, the > road allows pedestrians walking along it (on the sidewalk or footway if > there is one which is part of the road, or on the road itself > otherwise), and crossing it anywhere they like, even if it would not be > wise to do so. Because without the sign, pedestrians can still walk on > the road if the sidewalk and verges happen to be blocked. Well, my reasoning was that, as I had mapped separately the walking part, that the main road sould not be used for walking. > > As an > > example, on this way > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/57687924 > > you may simply not cross the road between the bridges. > > (I don't create parallel footways for every road, only those where I > > consider it unwise to cross anywhere) > > "unwise" is a very subjective word. Tag the reality, nothing more. Well, the sidewalks exists in reality, so I could map them all if I wanted to (which I don't, as you wrote previously it is useless for residential roads). > That's a non-issue. These routers are getting better everyday. Don't > start modifying data to help them do something now which they might do > themselves tomorrow. > > If you're really not allowed to cross a road, then the road is either a > motorway, motorroad or has a sign forbidding access to pedestrians. And > in these cases paths next to it are separate from the road and need > their own ways. > > We're of course still left with the issue of linking footways and > cycleways to a road so a router can tell whether a pedestrian has to > follow the path next to it (when these paths are part of the road) or > not (when the path is a separate road itself), but then we probably > enter the realm of the previous discussion on this list: street > relations... OK, I don't really understand your point about linking to a road, btu I will replace my highway=footways by footway=* on the main road where they are only sidewalks. But that will probably mean splitting ways once more where sidewalks start/end. thank you for your answer -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
[OSM-talk-be] sidewalk as ways or tags
Hello I have recently had a small edit war with user nondidju regarding my tracing of sidewalks as separate ways, see http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7461451 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7528743 He argues that the mapnik rendering of this show how irrationnal it is (which is a personnal preference on which I differ) and that those should be tagged on the main way. I personnally think that it is more topologically correct, having a parallel footway (where there exists ont) and foot=no on the main road, as on important roads you may not cross anywhere, but only where a crossing exists, so a separate way allow for correct routing for pedestrians. As an example, on this way http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/57687924 you may simply not cross the road between the bridges. (I don't create parallel footways for every road, only those where I consider it unwise to cross anywhere) Another example http://osm.org/go/0EqqLNEt0-- Here you may not cross the road on sides of bridge "Albert 1er", you may either take the tunnel on the right side, or go to the traffic signal on the left. >From a recent discussion on newbies@ http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/newbies/2011-March/006340.html it seems the recommanded way to tag those is to use a footway tag on the main road, but with this, routing engines have to do a preprossing to recreate the topologically correct ways, or have a more complex algorithm taking into account on which side of the road you are walking and where you way cross. And the problem is harder for roundabouts, see for example this one http://osm.org/go/0B964M9V@-- and his brothers along the motorway http://osm.org/go/0B965o7BK-- how would that be represented with only tags on the roads? This will end up splitting the ways many times. Now, I agree that bridges don't look very well on the rendering, but that is already a problem when you have separated roads on the same bridge (see previous link), and that is a renderer problem, maybe missing a "bridge bed" information to know that the ways share the same bridge. I saw a related discussion some month ago, but I don't this it ended with a way to tag it. I didn't find anything related on the pages of WikiProject Belgium (but I may have missed it). So I would like to have your thought and opinions on the matter. I think tracing ways to represent sidewalks for roads you should not cross anywhere adds valuable informations, bu if everybody is against it I will retag it as footway=left/right/both/none where appropriate. cf http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Advanced_footway_and_cycleway thank you -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] est-ce qu'on sait placer des photos sur OSM (et est-ce que c'est utile ?)
On lundi 14 février 2011 at 22:53, Moosh wrote : > est-ce qu'on sait placer des photos sur OSM (et est-ce que c'est utile ?) > > par exemple si je veux placer les "chapelles", les châteaux d'eau, les > facades de restaurant. .? Non, ce n'est pas l'endroit pour placer ce genre d'informations, car si l'image n'est pas hébergée dans un endroit permanent cela va faire de nombreux liens morts et inutiles dans la base de données. Ce qui peut éventuellement se faire, c'est placer un lien vers la page wikipedia correspondante (si elle existe) avec le tag wikipedia, cf http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wikipedia il suffit d' placer la langue et le titre de la page, pas besoin d'y mettre l'URL complète. bonsoir -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Bingify Belgium
On jeudi 23 décembre 2010 at 16:21, Kenny Moens wrote : > Also some parts to watch out for, which I already experienced: don't try > to blindly trust bing data, the data isn't perfectly current. For > example in my town of Houtvenne there is a new street (at least 1 year > old), which is not visible on Bing yet, but which I mapped earlier on by > means of GPX tracks. Yes, I can point you to a few places in Liege where bing is outdated, mainly new roundabouts (we never get enough of those) :-) -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Bingify Belgium
On jeudi 23 décembre 2010 at 16:47, Peter Leemans wrote : > Also did some 'electrifying' work in very different regions > Same here for Nijlen and region. Done that too, it is fun to search for the next tower to continue the power line. I also draw rivers (some parts of Meuse, Sambre and Vesdre so far), and use it to add many details to places I know (mainly in Namur and Liege). > Got a question with respect to the landuse. > I see different ways of connecting different neighbouring land-uses. > Is it recommended to reuse the same points, or as I did, just draw the > borders very close to each other. My personal rule is, if the landuse are really connected (there is nothing between them, or only a barrier) I reuse the same nodes. If there is a highway, or a track between them I trace the three of them separated. I never connect a landuse to a highway, to do so would require to draw the highway as an area to connect the correct edge to the landuse. I think that a highway drawn as a single line is supposed to correspond to the center of the road/way. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Mapping of Boundary
On dimanche 05 décembre 2010 at 12:30, Ben Laenen wrote : > Boundaries used to be bound to streams, roads etc, but not any more. > Now they're all defined by sets of coordinates. If for example bad > weather happens and the stream suddenly follows a different course, > the boundary won't move with it. And there are many streams and rivers > that changed course over time (mostly with some human help of course), > but where the boundaries never followed suit. Thank you. On talk some people argued that in their country come boundary were legally bound to some physical feature, and I didn't know what was the case for Belgium. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Mapping of Boundary
Hello Le dimanche 05 décembre 2010 à 10:02, Kenny Moens a écrit : > In the region where I live (Hulshout), some of the borders are recently > mapped, but they don't follow the exact features which form the border. > For example, in the area between Ramsel and Westmeerbeek the city border > follows the "Steenkensbeek" which I recently mapped based on Bing data, > if I look at the border itself it has much less points and more-or-less > follows the stream, but not exactly as it should be. > > How is the best way to correct this? > > * Splitting the border and adding the tags/relations of the border > to the stream. Which would mean the line of the stream would both > represent the border and the stream itself. > * Glueing all points of the border towards the stream, so that they > form a single line (but are effectively still two separate lines). > * Or something else. There has been discussions about this on the talk list. From what I understood, I'd say: - If the border is legally bound to the stream, and should move with it in case its path change, then you should tag it on the same way (or share the nodes). - If it is actually on the same path than the stream, but must stay where it is in case the stream path change, then draw a separate way, approximately over the stream, but not sharing nodes. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Busroutes
Le samedi 13 novembre 2010 à 15:37, Jo a écrit : > Now I'll go and eradicate the child relations... after that, not sure if > I'll touch any public transport data anymore, apart from a bus stop here > or there. Why? It is much more easier to have the common part of alternative bus routes in a single relation shared by all the alternatives. In Liège I have mapped bus route 10, there are 3 variation of this bus route: 10 Fléron http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1148168 10 Mangée http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1148170 10 Romsée http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1148169 Up to Fléron, those three are identical, so that common part is in relation http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1148167 which is shared by the three, further, 10 Magnée and Romsée share a small part which I have put in relation http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1148166 It is much easier to have it that way, if a bus stop change in the common part it must only be changed in one relation (and maybe others if the same stop is part of different routes, like 38b). I intend to do the same for other bus routes that I map (I already have a work in progress for 33 which also have alternatives (33 Vaux, 33 Trooz). -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Busroutes
Le samedi 13 novembre 2010 à 14:42, Gerard Vanderveken a écrit : > I tend to consider them as copyrighted material, and thus forbidden to > be used at all with OSM How can a number be copyrighted? -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] MapQuest Belgium
Le mercredi 20 octobre 2010 à 10:05, Lennard a écrit : > Today, MapQuest rolled out a Belgian version of their Open MapQuest > program. This is based on OpenStreetMap data and also uses several tools > that have come to be regarded as part and parcel of OSM: The mapnik > renderer is used to create the map, and Nominatim is used as the search > engine. You can also click on the symbols at the top of the page, to get > popups on the map with the category you searched for. > > Currently it seems to be in French only, but I'm sure they've planned a > Dutch language version in the future: > > http://open.mapquest.be/ It doesn't work at all in konqueror (from KDE 4.4), either with khtml or webkit. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] busroutes
Le mercredi 11 août 2010 à 13:26, Ben Laenen a écrit : > You could fill in the roles of those nodes in the relation of course. > I've even seen the bus stop nodes being numbered, so you'd get > something like "stop_15" as a role. The number was used before API0.6, when relations didn't preserve ordering, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:type=route#Members -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] busroutes
Le mardi 10 août 2010 à 12:41, Ben Laenen a écrit : > Yes, please put the bus stop nodes next to the way, not on the way. OK, that seems more logical anyway. > btw, the page talks about an *extra* node on the way, used together with > the bus stop node next to the way. Is it useful? If I split the route in two relations, forward and backward, most bus stops will only be part of one relation or the other. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] busroutes
Le mardi 10 août 2010 à 10:22, Tim Francois a écrit : > +1. Yup, this is what is currently happening in most of the UK - a > separate relation for the 'up' and 'down' bus routes, so that > forwards/backwards (which is kinda broken as a concept in this case) > is not required! I'm interested, for now I have created single relation for a bus route in Liège. How should I tag the two separate relations? The page http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Buses doesn't talk about double relation, but suggests that bus_stop should be put on the way, but the bus stops are not on the road but along it. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] CORINE Land Cover 2000 (now with permission)
Le lundi 07 juin 2010 à 14:42, Ben Laenen a écrit : > Lennard wrote: > > Now that the legal issues have been resolved, and the technical setup > > has been mostly performed, the question remains about whether to > > proceed with an actual import? Don't worry about it happening > > overnight, we have plenty of time to discuss and review the steps > > involved. > > +1 for importing from me as well. +1 for me too. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] CORINE Land Cover 2000
Hello Lennard Le dimanche 16 mai 2010 à 21:47, Lennard a écrit : > As some of you may know, last year the French have imported the CORINE > Land Cover 2006 (CLC 2006) dataset. This dataset aims to classify every > bit of surface of the participating countries. It is a project of the > European Environment Agency (EEA) in conjunction with national mapping > agencies. For Belgium, I believe this would be the NGI/IGN. > > While they did get approval to import their CLC 2006 dataset, getting > approval from the NGI/IGN in Belgium would probably be problematic, and > actually getting the data from them even worse. Although, if we don't > ask, we'll never know for sure. (Anyone up for contacting them?) > > However, the CLC 2000 dataset is fully available on the EEA website, and > has usage terms that seem to be very compatible with OSM. > > "Unless otherwise indicated, re-use of content on the EEA website for > commercial or non-commercial purposes is permitted free of charge, > provided that the source is acknowledged." > > On IRC, someone wanted to contact the EEA explicitly to obtain > permission (for Belgium, but why not ask this for the entire dataset?). > I don't see a problem with that, although for me the terms on the EEA > site are clear. Well, there's no harm in asking, but as you say it seems compatible with the actual CC-By-SA (but I have no idea for ODBL). > I have made an overlay which shows the CLC 2000 data on the OSM map: > > http://mijndev.openstreetmap.nl/~ldp/clc2000/ > > This is so you can already enjoy what we may be able to import, and > maybe use it as a backdrop in Potlatch/JOSM or other editors to use. I > don't recommend actually tracing the polygons, as a direct import is > much easier. > > The amount of changes between CLC 2000 and CLC 2006 is on the order of > 0.5% over the entire covered region. The overwhelming amount of polygons > would be unchanged. I think there's not much harm in working with CLC > 2000, even if it is 10+ years old. > > I have received the scripts used for the French CLC 2006 import, and can > adapt and use those for an import of CLC 2000 for any area. I'm going to > test them and prepare an import file for Belgium, which can be imported > later on, if no valid objections are lodged. It seems like a great idea, how does the import work? We have already some data imported in Belgium from the french import, will those regions need manual editing to integrate the two imports? Should we keep the landuse where they already exists in OSM belgium, or is the CORINE data much more accurate and should be preferred? I manual edit/import is required for some regions I can help (for the free time I have) to tidy up the data. France looks great now with all the landuse areas, I hope we can make Belgium look as good :-) -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
[OSM-talk-be] Fwd: [OSM-talk] Server Down Time - 22nd to 23rd August 2009
FYI -- Message transmis -- Sujet : [OSM-talk] Server Down Time - 22nd to 23rd August 2009 Date : vendredi 14 août 2009 De : Grant Slater À : Talk Openstreetmap , osmdev OSM, Next weekend, 22nd/23rd August OpenStreetMap's main servers will be unavailable due to electrical maintenance works at University College London. www.openstreetmap.org [1] and the API will be unavailable during this period from approximately 5am GMT Saturday August 22nd until 10pm GMT Sunday August 23rd. The wiki and mailing lists will continue to be available during this period. Arrangements are under way to keep http://tile.openstreetmap.org/ available, but as yet we are unable to confirm. The sysadmin team are not taking a break; we are using this opportunity to reorganise the server hardware and are installing a large set of hardware upgrades recently approved by the OpenStreetMap Foundation. [2] Please pass this message onto the local OSM lists. 1: www.openstreetmap.org will be replaced by a simple notice website during this period. 2: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Servers/Upgrades/082009 Grant on behalf of OpenStreetMap Sysadmin Team. ___ talk mailing list t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk --- -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Problem in Dison (not Herve)
Le lundi 10 août 2009 à 13:07, Ben Laenen a écrit : > However, since he's copying something, he has to come up with some > explanation soon, or the only option left would be to just delete all his > ways, because we then have to assume that he's copying copyrighted > stuff... If you send another message to him, certainly tell him that. Just had an answer! He was actually copying a map he had scanned and just loaded the image as a layer in JOSM (not rectified). He was not aware of the copyright problem, as he asked me if he could use the maps from his tomtom. I asked him to remove the data that he copied from the map. Should we ask an admin to remove also the nodes/ways history? I also told him to register to this list so we can answer more easily his questions (he doesn't know how to get the traces from his GPS, a tomtom one europe, I don't know personally if it is even possible). -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] OSM Forêt de Soignes / Zoniënwo ud
Le lundi 10 août 2009, Pierre Parmentier a écrit :
> I would like to join my efforts to complete the map of the Forêt de
> Soignes / Zoniënwoud.
Welcome :-)
> Is there a "Belgian" standard for the various highway tags applicable for
> wooden areas, forests, etc.?
There is no standard at all.
The convention seems to be that natural=wood is for really natural, primal
forests (we don't have those anymore in Europe) and landuse=forest is for
managed forests.
But the subject frequently comes up on the t...@openstreetmap.org and never
comes up with something new.
> I see "track", "pedestrian", "footway", "cycleway" and the rendering
> shows different symbols for the same type of highway!
If they are tagged with footway, pedestrian, ... then they are supposed to
be different types and it is perfectly normal to have them render
differently.
> May I suggest for this particular case:
>
>1. stick to the following keys:
>1. *"*unclassified" + "surface" values ("asphalt" or "concrete" or
> "cobblestone")
unclassified is for low importance roads designed for cars.
> 2. "tracktype" + "grade 1" or "grade 2" values ("3" or "4" values
> in some cases, most tracks have a high grade for forestry engines!)
tracktype is specific to highway=track (and is deprecated by some people who
would prefer some more specific tagging)
> 3. "path" + "restrictions" values (*bicycle=no* or *horse=no*)**
Yes, highway=path is a good choice for ways in forest.
> 4. "bridleway" (a few specific cases)
> 5. "cycleway" (a few specific cases)
> 2. remove "pedestrian" tags as it is more appropriate in urban
> areas
I agree on this one, highway=pedestrian is for large pedestrian roads,
according to the definition on the wiki
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=pedestrian
> 3. suppress "cycleway" when "highway" key is activated
Why?
If a way is a cycleway, why tag it differently?
>4. suppress "footway" and replace it by "path"
Same remark as above, if it is a footway (a way that was built specifically
for pedestrian)
--
Renaud Michel
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Problem in Dison (not Herve)
Le lundi 3 août 2009, Renaud MICHEL a écrit : > Le lundi 3 août 2009, Ben Laenen a écrit : > > I have the impression that you've corrected it already now. But please > > contact Neo and ask him about it, so he can watch out it doesn't happen > > again. You can also immediately ask him to upload his gps tracks. > > Yes, I've never used the messaging system on the OSM site (I prefer > mailing lists). > I'll give it a try. I've sent him a message on the 3 (5 days ago) and another the 5, but had no answer so far. Does the user get a mail notification of the new message, or do we see them only when we log in on the website? The wiki is not very explicit about this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contact#Contact_a_Mapper If it is only on the site he may never see them as he is editing with JOSM. What worries me is that he seems to be copying some map, you can actually see it on the map (the roads are cut at a bounding box) http://osm.org/go/0DVdwhW2- and he even even added a way corresponding to his map http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38566375 It doesn't seem to be correctly positioned, according to already available traces, load for example this region in JOSM or potlatch with GPS traces http://osm.org/go/0dv...@j That's probably the reason he moved the motorway. I explained it in my second message. More important is that we cannot know if there are no copyright problems. I am doing some edits in this area, and I am afraid those might be lost if there is some copyright violation and the work has to be removed :-( I did not find any corresponding user on the wiki (not surprising, I registered on the wiki more than a month after on the main site and not even with exactly the same user name). Do you know of any other mean to contact him? Cheers -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Problem in Herve
Le lundi 3 août 2009, Ben Laenen a écrit : > I have the impression that you've corrected it already now. But please > contact Neo and ask him about it, so he can watch out it doesn't happen > again. You can also immediately ask him to upload his gps tracks. Yes, I've never used the messaging system on the OSM site (I prefer mailing lists). I'll give it a try. > There's a script available here that should be able to revert changesets: > http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/applications/utils/revert > > Of course, it would also delete all the new roads in that changeset, but > in case we get some vandalism or some serious mistake by a mapper which > is too big to fix manually, it's good to have something. The new roads he added seemed legitimate, so I didn't want to remove all of it. And I've never used those revert scripts, so I am not very comfortable using them as I might make a bigger mess if I do something wrong. -- Renaud Michel pgp: 0x630E6AC4 (fingerprint: E051 75D0 0E02 4D7B 0384 5D8F 2A70 C289 630E 6AC4) ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Problem in Dison (not Herve)
Le vendredi 31 juillet 2009 à 21:04, Renaud MICHEL a écrit : > It looks like there has been a big mess near Herve, where many roads have > been shifted north-west. Small mistake, that's Dison, not Herve, the permalink was correct. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
[OSM-talk-be] Problem in Herve
Hello It looks like there has been a big mess near Herve, where many roads have been shifted north-west. See http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.618&lon=5.847&zoom=14&layers=B000FTFTT Seems to be from changeset http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/1975665 by user Neo who has already made other modifications on the same area, so the changeset cannot be reverted (even if we could, cf recent thread on talk). I will try to correct as best as I can, but Neo has added many roads and I don't know if I should shift them too, as there are no corresponding traces. I think I'm going to shift them all and hope someone else go map there and upload his traces. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Hello
Le samedi 18 juillet 2009 à 12:31, Alain Empain a écrit : > Hello, > > I am a new member of the talk-be list. Hello Alain, nice to see you join in ;-) > I live near Liège (Nandrin, Condroz). > My interest : mapping the Condroz scenery roads and its cycling-friendy > paths. > > My first uploads concern Nandrin-Engis-Villers le > Temple-Soheit-Fraiture-Berleur-Neupré. Great! Liège is still so poorly mapped (even in the center many road names/oneways are missing), the more mappers the better it will soon be. > This region is crossed by a regional cycling path, and I wonder how to > proceed to correctly enter all the required the tags (and which tags). > > To learn and to progress into potlatch, I gave priority to the cycling > path, but now I must adjust the tags to their correct values concerning a > mixture of road of different kind and cycling path. > > I read the discussions about cycling, but it is not yet clear for me > (perhaps too much freedom ?). > > Is there a frozen guideline for beginners : > > 1/ set current a segment > 2/ click-left on ... (for ex.) > etc. You can also have a look at JOSM which has many advanced features and useful plugins. see http://josm.openstreetmap.de/ and it works fine with openJDK :-) cheers -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] New member
Le mercredi 10 juin 2009 à 21:49, Sam Pastuer a écrit : > I'm Sam, when in Belgium I'm spending most of my time between > Molenstede/Diest and Blauberg/Herselt. I just bought myself a Garmin Edge > 705 for road cycling and mountainbiking. I'm quite new to the whole > mapping thing, but have some experience with engineering/scientific > software and 'computers' in general, so as long as I find the time it > should work out. I've always been a fan of Open and Community based > projects/software, so I'll do my best to contribute to the still less > developed eastern flemish-brabant area. Hello, and welcome to OSM! It is always good to see new volunteers joining the community. Did you already register on the wiki? There is a specific subproject for belgium, whose entry page is here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium I wish you lots of fun building with us a free world map :-) -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
