Re: [Talk-us] Meetups around the US
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 12:39:03PM -0400, Katie Filbert wrote: > Getting together at a coffeehouse or cafe works too. The local library is > also a good place to meet (they probably have rooms available to reserve for > free + wi-fi). Making it a combo mapping-socializing event works. > > If it's only 7-8 people, then reserving space may not be needed, but I know > some (e.g. not starbucks) may have a back room or space that can be reserved > for meetup groups. > > Make sure they have wi-fi. And, if people go out to map, it helps to have > someone stick around at the coffeehouse (for any stragglers & to keep the > space). In the SF Bay Area, we had the unfortunate experience one weekend of not noticing that the Cafe had a policy of providing wi-fi only during the low-traffic week days, but turned it off for Saturdays and Sundays, so make sure to check that it will be available when you actually need it. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] sotm.us 2010 video uploads begin
FWIW, tweeting each new upload to #sotmus (see mail to -talk). On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 12:40:59PM -0400, Serge Wroclawski wrote: > Yay Dave > > - Serge > > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] sotm.us 2010 video uploads begin
This is taking more processing power and wallclock time than I'd expected, but I'm beginning the editing/encoding/uploading of the 2010 SotM.US videos, to: http://vimeo.com/channels/128913 The small test video gives an idea of the technical challenges faced :) Clearly there are some things we can do better next time to improve the physical space for video recording. The collective size of all the videos may exceed my 5GB weekly Vimeo Plus quota, so expect to wait up to two weeks for all ten videos to appear. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Presentations?
slideshare.net seems to be very popular and where most of the Girona docs seem to have ended up. And a meta question: which website? :) I like the design/concept of the sotm.us website, but I would also like to see the proceedings, such as they are, be discoverable by searching the main wiki. On another note, if anyone has experience with/tips for optimizing video for Vimeo, please contact me at the Reply-To: address above. On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:37:21AM -0400, Serge Wroclawski wrote: > I know I might be asking a silly question, but where are we supposed > to be posting our presentations? > > Once I know, I'll post mine and put a post on the website directing > others to it. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] sotm.us: beer lovers?
I'm told by an ex-local that just across the court from Friday night's outing is the Brick Store Pub, which serves nothing but craft brews. Supposedly very good pub food as well. Right next door, under the same ownership, is a restaurant called Leon's Full service. Although I realize some folks will want to hang around downtown, the above is my nomination for Saturday evening. Will fork if necessary :) ( can't sleep...must still be on CA time ) ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] A Friendly Guide to 'Bots and Imports
On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 10:38:47PM +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Katie, > > your computer thinks it is the year 2000. I see you sent that from > your iPhone. Maybe you had your fingers on the wrong spot so it didn't > get a time signal. Not only that, all of your messages (katie) are being trapped as spam by my provider's system, probably because of the bad date. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] A Friendly Guide to 'Bots and Imports
On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 01:38:36PM -0500, Ian Dees wrote: > I think the NHD "import" is a good example of a well-intentioned importer > (me) gone wrong. I had initially planned to import the whole darn thing in > one swoop, but various technical and life challenges came up before I could > get it going. While I was working on those issues, people started importing > it themselves (sometimes marking so on the wiki, sometimes not). Now that > there are some areas imported, the import of the whole dataset becomes > infinitely harder because we have to match existing data with new OSM-ified > data. And I'll add my own mea-culpa. I created some wiki pages/features to help partition and coordinate NHD import efforts, and then also found that I didn't have the time to follow up. I would agree that the partial imports will have increased the difficulty of a large-scale bulk import, but we already had hydrographic features from TIGER, did we not. And hand-drawn features from aerial traces and actual boots-on-the-ground mapping. Conflation in general is a tough problem, I gather. There are tools, algorithms and heuristics in the GIS world but the OSM data model makes translation between the two models somewhat difficult. For example, something that looks very interesting which I plan to examine is the Java Conflation Suite [1], which looks like it could be used over relatively small areas (probably about the size of the API limit... 0.25 degrees square?). But as a component of the JUMP[2] platform, it operates only on Shapefiles and GML out of the box. (If we could get some Java expertise I think it would be very worthwhile working with the JUMP team to create an OSM driver.) At any rate, while I think we could mitigate a number of problems given some development effort, I also agree that we might want to spend more time thinking about why we want to make the imports--and perhaps publically debate, if only in talking to yourself on the project wiki page, the pros and cons of a particular import. [1] http://www.vividsolutions.com/JCS/ [2] http://www.vividsolutions.com/jump/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] United States Roadway Classification Guidelines
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 11:11:03AM -0400, Anthony wrote: > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Ian Dees wrote: > > My point is that there should be no tagging for renderers of any kind: > > "correct" or "incorrect". > > Huh? What does that mean? Who/what are you supposed to tag for if > not for renderers of any kind? In my opinion, "we" should have started with indisputable, objective, physical attributes/descriptions first: width/lanes, separated/two-way, grade-separated/no; on/off-ramps or intersections, etc. Then you add in government classifications, if they exist, which include membership in national/regional/local networks/routes, etc. After that, you add in a "hint" that codifies local opinion/convention about the usage of the road. The penultimate step, if we have the resources, is to have the DB server execute some heuristic algorithm that does a localized network analysis to "weight" the segments based on the weight of the connecting roads. Then renderer/stylesheet authors can make a choice between algorithmic/objective or subjective classification. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] SOTM US Schedule Up
Are there any plans for a get-together on Friday evening? On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 12:55:30AM -0700, Kate Chapman wrote: > Hi All, > > The schedule for SOTM US is up. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Cloudmade california.osm: dups or osmosis bug?
Is it the dataset or osmosis that is giving me a single 2-node duplicate for each postGIS table created by osmosis? Or PEBCAK? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Gov't/military firing ranges --- not "sport"
On Sat, May 08, 2010 at 10:39:37AM -0400, Richard Welty wrote: > On 5/8/10 9:40 AM, David Carmean wrote: > > I'm reluctant to tag civil/military gov't firing ranges as "sport". I'd > > consider them > > more as hazardous areas to mark/avoid, but I don't know how to tag them as > > such. Ideas? > > > landuse=military > military=danger_area > > and > > landuse=military > military=range > > are both documented in the wiki: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Military > > i should think you would use danger_area even for inactive ranges, due > to the potential for > unexploded munitions. Ah, ok; I think I made my question too generic; I actually want to map civil government (i.e. police) ranges 90% of the time. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Gov't/military firing ranges --- not "sport"
I'm reluctant to tag civil/military gov't firing ranges as "sport". I'd consider them more as hazardous areas to mark/avoid, but I don't know how to tag them as such. Ideas? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Another "how would you...?"
There are a number of wildlife preservation areas established in the marshlands around the San Francisco Bay, and those which are not designated as Wilderness areas usually have pedestrian access (SF Bay Trail, etc.). In a number of locations there are dedicated observation decks built as part of a system of boardwalks over the marshes. Sometimes they have benches and even picnic tables, often they have descriptive signs, etc. Others have none of these features. How should I tag such an observation deck? They are certainly not blinds/hides (though there are hundreds of waterfowl hunting hides in the area as well). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] How would you tag this? (nested land-use/ownership)
Driving around yesterday, I found the following unmapped feature: A private dog training facility (Schutzhund club), with a building and training yard... ...in the middle of a mostly vacant field in an industrial area, which ...is diked, former marshland, which... ...is owned by a salt mining company, and.. ...had been designated/zoned at some point as landfill and tagged as such in a bulk import (which I've since removed). Of course I'd like it to be rendered in Mapnik and/or Osmarender so that Jane Q. Public can find it but, what are the "correct" tags here? * It should have a boundary of some kind but the true physical boundaries are rather vague; two sides have an old fence but the others have levies with gaps to open fields. * It's not really a "dog park" but rather a private entity with dog training facilities. * None of the "landuse:" tags really seem to fit, especially for a single entity like this. Could I call it a "pitch" for "sport:schutzhund"?:) ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] NHD Data in CO
On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 11:03:03AM -0600, Ian Dees wrote: > On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:59 AM, SteveC wrote: > > > Are the NHD import people on this list? > > > > > Yes. I am one of them, but it appears that we're distributing the work load > of uploading, so I'm not sure who is taking that section. If no one else is > doing it, I would be happy to start uploading it. And I'm back, at least for now.Not much new activity on the signup wiki pages I set up a while ago. But I've been worried about collisions; for example another local has been doing his own TIGER 2009 imports in our area, and it's overlaid some of my hand edits. Thus my earlier post seeking heuristics for conflict resolution; hopefully we can automate some or most of that. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] NHD: conflict resolution heuristic?
I've got a bit of time to start working on the NHD import again, and after importing both OSM and NHD data into my GIS app, I'm not quite sure what to do with it; that is, I don't really have a procedure for resolving conflicts visually/manually, let alone automating the process. Would like to start a discussion with the NHD contributors about creating some guidelines (and documenting those in the wiki), beginning with what you are doing so far. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] San Francisco / Bay area projects
Is there a particular reason that the Bay Area list was deleted? On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 07:10:09AM -0800, Sarah Manley wrote: > Paul, > > Your in luck: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Gilroy_Mapping_Party ; > http://www.meetup.com/Bay-Area-OpenStreetMappers/ > > Now that the bay area list was deleted the meetup is really the best place > to fine events (although I do make sure its on the wiki as well). This is in > conjunction with a local sierra club group. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] NHD: python or java?
Which tool is most used, at the moment, for importing NHD data? Chris's python stuff or Ian's java stuff? :) For those using Ian's stuff, who's developed the most complete rules file? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] California GIS data is public domain?
On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 07:25:21AM -0700, Apollinaris Schoell wrote: [snip] > Which data do you have in mind? which data sources? is there anything > better available compared to http://atlas.ca.gov/download.html That looks to be a new version or another interface to CASIL, which I've used often. A lot of that data are excerpts from federal data. > Let's try to align activities if possible. right now there is so much > garbage from older imports that any activity should be well planned. > > I was considering to import some data but still try to figure out what > data is useful and accurate. right now county borders and city borders I don't really have any plans for mass imports; I was mostly trying to get a reading from the community. In general I'm just interested in small areas, nothing larger than, say, the greater San Francisco Bay Area. Nothing causing more conflicts than what I could easily resolve by hand using JOSM in a week or so. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] California GIS data is public domain?
[ OK, I see that this was posted to the list back in February, but I don't find any further discussion about it... is there a way to search just the legal-talk archive? ] Just found this article about an appeals-court decision on the Santa Clara County GIS brouhaha: http://gis.lacounty.gov/eGIS/?p=696 In particular, the analysis of item III of the decision seems to indicate that the court believes that government-produced data cannot be copyrighted: III. A. There is no statutory basis either for copyrighting the GIS basemap or for conditioning its release on a licensing agreement. The decision can be found here: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/H031658.PDF The question is: has the Foundation considered this? Can we begin to import California GIS data? :) -- Dave C, 2nd St. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] tiger:separated
What is the intent of the tiger:separated tag? Was it to indicate that a single way actually represents a set of two or more parallel ways? What should we do when we modify a single TIGER way to represent the true divided nature of a street/road? For example, when I copy the entire way and paste a copy offset by a few meters to form the other direction of the road? Should tiger:separated be considered immutable and left alone? Or deleted? Or changed to 'yes'? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] [SF Bay Area] Sunnyvale/Santa Clara mapping party....
Anybody planning/schedule to attend the SF South Bay mapping days this weekend, please contact me via direct email. Thanks. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] TIGER corrections: tagging for source of corrected data?
Is there any talk of/conventions/tags for identifying the source of data used to correct TIGER errors? For example, my own GPS track/survey, somebody else's GPS track, USGS Urban Area, DLG, etc? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Bay Area trailer parks: "hamlet" ? Also neighborhoods & cities
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 12:13:43PM -0800, Michal Migurski wrote: > Hi, > > There are a large number of mobile home / trailer parks mapped in San > Jose, Santa Clara, and other parts of the South Bay. They're tagged > place=hamlet, and I'm wondering if there's a better way to identify > them? Beej71, if you're on this list I think a lot of these came from > you. [snip] What we're looking at appears to be the result of a mass import of US Board on Geographic Names GNIS data. This data has only one feature class for populated places, Populated Place. (Interestingly, I see that some trailer parks are listed as Locales, which is supposed to be a place without a permanent human population.) The feature classes are listed here: http://geonames.usgs.gov/domestic/feature_class.htm I can't find anything in the wiki/mailing list archives that Google searches about this GNIS import. In my mind, "hamlet" describes a tiny populated place that is outside other city, town, or village boundaries. I'd call a trailer park within a city a subdivision, where: State > County > Metro Area > City > District > Neighborhood > Subdivision On the other hand, a trailer park within a small town might very well constitute an entire Neighborhood. I don't know how to reconcile this particular "L10n" with the needs of "i18n". ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Tagging and Rendering Cycle Ways
On a semi-related note, once again today I found myself down a trail which was open and unsigned at one end, but a dead-end at the other, requiring me to scale a fence to get back onto the street. I'm not sure how to tag these, as they may have some value for an out-and-back spur ride, but the access permissions are unclear to me. In California, if there isn't a gate or a sign leading from public property, is the default to assume that access is permitted until the owner asks you to leave? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Tagging and Rendering Cycle Ways
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 05:27:44PM -0800, Scott Atwood wrote:
...
> Multi-Use Paths (a.k.a. Class I). This one is also pretty easy. I tag
> these as {highway=cycleway, cycleway=track, foot=yes}. However, one wrinkle
> is that these MUPs sometimes have have sections with an on-street alignment.
> In that case, I added a relation to the entire MUP, both the off-street
> trail portions, and the on-street alignments, that was tagged like
> {route=bicycle, type=route, name=_name_of_the_MUP_}. I intentionally left
> off the network tag from the relation, since this isn't part of a formal
> route network per se, but if anything, it would be {network=lcn}
How did you decide upon this scheme? I've been working on sections of the
SF Bay Trail, some of which even allow horses. I've been tagging these
primarily as {highway=path|track, foot=yes, bicycle=yes, horse=yes|no,
surface=paved|gravel|dirt}. The choice of "path" or "track" has been a little
imprecise.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Bay Area Mailing List created
A good middle point might be just to voluntarily add an ad-hoc tag to the subject line, something like "SFBAY". On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 01:52:57PM -0800, Sarah Manley wrote: > I am glad to hear this feedback. I started the Bay Area mailing list > because I am working to increase participation in the Bay Area by > coordinating mapping parties/speaking engagements, and encouraging > others here to do the same. I thought it would be helpful to have a > separate list for people based here so mapping party attendees could > reconnect post event to plan new events, suggest other groups to > contact, as well as discuss areas to focus on. I agree that it is > helpful to have questions sent out to the entire US list and we should > encourage anyone who has questions non-specific to the Bay Area to > share them with Talk-us. But I thought it would be helpful to have a > localized list that doesn't crowd talk-us with city specific details. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] mixed-use roads (was Re: Track or path?)
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 03:41:28PM -0500, Russ Nelson wrote: > David Carmean writes: > > For the moment I'm ignoring the portions of the "trail" that are > > overlayed on public roads with car traffic. [snip] > But your "ignoring" part brings up a question for me about > rail-trails. I have a database of NYS railroad rights of way. Quite > often the rail-trail is exactly that: a trail on the railroad. But a > few short sections are inaccessible and follow the highway. CLEARLY > there is value in having the route of the trail in the database. > > Should the trail have its own way which shares the bulk of its nodes > and path with the railroad way? Or should the railroad and highway > portions of the trail be marked with ... something? And how to carry > the name of the trail the entire length even though it travels on the > railroad, highway, and a purpose-built section? I've spent a few minutes looking at the Osmarender rules, and a few looking at the Mapnik rules (which I don't yet understand), and it doesn't look like anything above highway=path does anything with "bicycle", "horse", or "foot" keys. I think the Routing people would have opinions. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Track or path?
I need help figuring out how to tag some local multi-use recreational trails, and the current discussion on osm-talk isn't making it any easier :) What I'm trying to do is map the San Francisco Bay Trail and connecting trails. For the moment I'm ignoring the portions of the "trail" that are overlayed on public roads with car traffic. Here's an example: a large portion of the trails are on top of levees around salt evaporation ponds around the Bay. Some of these segments are gravel roads that are 3 or 4 meters wide, where a passenger car could easily drive 50 kph if legally permitted. In fact service vehicles (government, landowner) do use these roads from time to time, but primarily they're used for foot, bicycle, and/or horse travel. Are these "tracks" or "paths"? I need to account for the fact that in places, these roads are gated, and access changes from public to private. On the private sections, it doesn't make much sense to me to tag them for bicycle/foot/horse traffic, but I need something that will still render. This may be the wrong thing to do, but in many cases I rely on the Osmarender templates to infer which of several choices is likely the most popular method. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Are you mapping private/closed roads/trails?
I'm wondering if many people are mapping roads/tracks/paths that might be on government-held land but are not accessible to the public, either due to locked gates or signage prohibiting passage? I like the idea of having information on options in an "emergency" (say you're out hiking bicycling and get caught in a storm and need to get back to shelter as quickly as possible). I also just like the idea of mapping most of what I see while I'm out exploring, whether I can get to it or not. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] MASSGis legal question
If anyone involved in the MASSGis import sees this and has time, would you be willing/able to discuss your process of working through the legal considerations of importing this data? FWIW, I spent a week in the Boston area last week and used the MASSGis viewer (not OSM) to pre-scout photography locations. I'm quite impressed by the application and data. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Hydrography rendering (was: NHD status?)
How do we work with the people responsible for the Mapnik configuration on the main map interface, to get these HND features rendered nicely? For example, as far as I can tell, natural=marsh only shows up with Osmarender. There are a lot of natural=water features in my area which do a good job of approximating the nature of the edges of the bay, which will disappear from the current Mapnik rendering when we "correct" their tagging. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] NHD status?
On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 09:57:34AM -0500, Ian Dees wrote: > On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 9:51 AM, Doug Morrison-Cleary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > Nooo. I live in northern MN and all we have around here are lakes! > > I really want them in yesterday . Please :-) > > > Ok I suppose I should have been more explicit. The lakes and river areas > seem to be the easiest to tag in OSM. They are bodies of water. The sticky > parts are the marshes and canals/drainage ditches. > > Perhaps we could just start an import with tags that make sense for these > things (e.g. natural=marsh). Either that or we only import the FCode/FTypes > that have an obvious OSM tagging scheme right now and import the other stuff > later. Here's a draft of what I've got so far: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/User:Davetoo/NHD/FCODES Might not be the best format, but gives you an idea of what I've found so far. I think we need to be careful about the flowlines and in particular the artificial paths; I'm not yet convinced that any of the flowlines should be depicted on the map. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] NHD status?
On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 06:19:09PM -0500, Ian Dees wrote: > On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 6:08 PM, David Carmean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think the mapping of FCode to OSM features is going to be very sparse, > > and > > I'm currently wishing we had an entire new set of "hydrology=something" > > feature > > tags :) > > > There really are only a few features I'd like to see put into OSM: > - rivers > - lakes > - swamp areas > - drainage ditches > - reservoirs > > All of these things have descriptions in NHD, but not all of them have > descriptions in OSM. Perhaps we should make some tagging proposals, get them > approved/discussed, then continue with the import. I've extracted the FCode table from the dataset for my area, and am mapping those to existing and proposed map features/tags as found on the wiki. We can add some selection criteria later. I can upload it to a wiki page when I'm finished. I think we need a new key, which will be of use in other scopes as well: "existence". In particular, for hydrographic features it could have the values "perennial", "intermittent", or "ephemeral". In other contexts, "seasonal", "event", etc. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] NHD status?
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 07:52:38AM -0500, Ian Dees wrote: > I think it might be a good idea to standardize on FCode -> tag mappings Is Matthew Perry still working on this as well? I think the mapping of FCode to OSM features is going to be very sparse, and I'm currently wishing we had an entire new set of "hydrology=something" feature tags :) ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] NHD status?
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 07:52:38AM -0500, Ian Dees wrote: > On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 10:40 PM, David Carmean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > If I begin to manually import some NHD shapefiles for my area, will I be > > wasting my time/others' time? How is the bulk import work progressing? > > How do you effect a "freeze" so we don't end up with duplicates? > > > I think it might be a good idea to standardize on FCode -> tag mappings > first. What are you using the import the data? > > Also, I've got a very robust SHP -> OSM (Now with Multipolygons!) converter > written in Java coming soon. Currently it converts the geometries in the > shapefile to OSM primitives and relations and applies the tags from the > shapefile attributes. The OSM-specific tagging will have to be added with > JOSM. I'm trying to think about a nice way to let the user apply OSM tags > based on SHP attributes and the context that you're in (multipolygon inner, > outer, linestring, etc.) > > Anyway, to answer your question, I think we first need to: > 1) Standardize on FCode -> Tags > 2) Keep track of which HUC codes are imported and by whom. (I can start > working on this as a wiki page) I'm still experimenting. I've been looking at a commercial tool (ExpertGPS) to convert shp to gpx, and then GPSBabel to convert to OSM for use in JOSM. I'm also using commercial GIS software (Manifold) to work with the shapefiles at the beginning of the process. I get the advantage of being able to graphically select/edit features, but I don't yet have any way to translate shapefile attributes to osm tags. Should we start a new wiki page to document the NHD FCode <--> OSM Tag mapping? I've just begun looking at the NHD technical instructions. I think we might want to do some use-case analysis to help decide what to include and exclude. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] NHD status?
If I begin to manually import some NHD shapefiles for my area, will I be wasting my time/others' time? How is the bulk import work progressing? How do you effect a "freeze" so we don't end up with duplicates? A brief look shows the NHD high-res data for my area to be really quite well aligned with features on the USGS Urban photos. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] good examples of foot/bike/horse trails in North America?
Is there an area in the US or Canada with exceptionally good coverage of multi-purpose recreational trails? Looking for best current tagging practices for same. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] US local government data: negotiating license?
[ sorry for the crosspost ] Have any of you persuaded a local (US) government to release data under a license compatible with OSM? I've been sent a shapefile for a network of recreational trails by a local government association (represents nine counties). I explained my plans on the telephone to the official who sent me the files, and she gave me crediting info, but she did not specify that the data must in fact be credited, nor did she specify any other terms of use in writing. Should I call their legal department? Or might there be a better way to guide them into giving us what we need? :) Thanks. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] highway: tertiary?
Alan, I live in the Bay Area and in fact will probably be augmenting some of your work down around Alviso and Sunnyvale; do you have any examples where you've actually chosen to use highway=tertiary? On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 09:57:52AM -0700, Alan Brown wrote: > I noticed the following suggested definitions for California for different > road classes: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/California > > > For tertiary, they suggested > > > highway=tertiary > Lower traffic volumes on wide streets, or higher on narrow ones. > > > Kinda' vague and I'm not sure I'm in agreement with these definitions, > personally. I'd be even more vague :) . Here's what I think as someone who > worked in a map data company for a decade: > > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] highway: tertiary?
Hi, I'm not sure if this question is within scope of this list, but I thought it might be sufficiently country-specific: when is it appropriate to use "highway: tertiary" in the US? Thanks. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
