This tool has helped me to spot a threat to life as we know it!
Behold, the zombies are upon us!
http://i.imgur.com/rmmQD.jpg
And apparently they are hanging out over Haiti. Did I just find
patient zero of the cholera outbreak?
I'm sure it will re-render shortly but here is the perma link:
http:
2011/2/7 Peter Wendorff :
> Hi ant.
> The tool is great, but it would be even greater to have the specific zoom
> level availlable instead of "14 or more".
> 14 may be a threshold of useability in many areas, but for other purposes
> even 17, 18 or 19 may be the treshold (e.g. mapping of sidewalks,
On 07.02.2011 17:36, Peter Wendorff wrote:
Hi ant.
The tool is great, but it would be even greater to have the specific
zoom level availlable instead of "14 or more".
That seems to be what most people wish to see. I'll work on that.
cheers
ant
___
t
Hi ant.
The tool is great, but it would be even greater to have the specific
zoom level availlable instead of "14 or more".
14 may be a threshold of useability in many areas, but for other
purposes even 17, 18 or 19 may be the treshold (e.g. mapping of
sidewalks, mapping of street lanterns ;) (
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 10:02 AM, ant wrote:
> Can you give an example of a zoom 20 region? I'd like to have a look.
http://ant.dev.openstreetmap.org/bingimageanalyzer/?lat=39.294169460227224&lon=-94.71799114942492&zoom=20
___
talk mailing list
talk@ope
2011/2/7 ant :
> Can you give an example of a zoom 20 region? I'd like to have a look.
http://ant.dev.openstreetmap.org/bingimageanalyzer/?lat=41.8901512469295&lon=12.492339797131855&zoom=20
cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
2011/2/7 Toby Murray :
> Well the jump from 13 to 14 is a pretty big milestone for aerial
> imagery. You go from rough blobs to distinguishable features. So that
> does make sense.
>
> But yeah, all of the US is just going to be solid green with this
> definition. Maybe a red/yellow/green scheme? R
On 07.02.2011 16:48, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Yes, I agree that more colours could clarify this. Currently, all
areas in Italy seem to be green, where some of the ones I checked
offer resolutions up to zoom 17 (not quite the very best imagery
imaginable) and others up to 20 (absolutely sufficie
Well the jump from 13 to 14 is a pretty big milestone for aerial
imagery. You go from rough blobs to distinguishable features. So that
does make sense.
But yeah, all of the US is just going to be solid green with this
definition. Maybe a red/yellow/green scheme? Red means http://lists.openstreetma
2011/2/7 ant :
>> What is your definition of "hires"?
> the definition of "hires" used in this application is "imagery is available
> at zoom level 14 or more". If you compare coverage areas linked to on the
> wiki page, you'll see that almost all of them correspond to that definition.
>
> I'm awar
Hi Toby,
On 07.02.2011 16:21, Toby Murray wrote:
What is your definition of "hires"? Zooming in on my city shows green
where I would consider the imagery to be decent but nothing
spectacular. (I think it is mostly just USGS ~1m imagery reused by
Bing)
the definition of "hires" used in this app
What is your definition of "hires"? Zooming in on my city shows green
where I would consider the imagery to be decent but nothing
spectacular. (I think it is mostly just USGS ~1m imagery reused by
Bing)
Nice bit of code though.
Toby
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 8:41 AM, ant wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have n
Hi,
I have noticed mappers make various attempts to map coverage of Bing
high resolution imagery. Some drawed areas around the imagery and
stuffed them into relations, others created xml files etc. etc. (see the
wiki page [1])
I thought that a world coverage map wasn't feasible with those meth
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Floris Looijesteijn wrote:
> Don't have the time to check right now but I think this was not permitted
> with the license provided.
> Greets,
> Floris
Oh, too bad. That would be nice addition to OSM home page.
___
talk
Don't have the time to check right now but I think this was not permitted
with the license provided.
Greets,
Floris
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Claudius wrote:
> I just contacted the admin of http://sautter.com/map/ to add Bing as Base
> layer there. I think this would be your service.
>
>
I just contacted the admin of http://sautter.com/map/ to add Bing as
Base layer there. I think this would be your service.
Claudius
Am 18.01.2011 11:53, valent.turko...@gmail.com:
Replace potlach with mapnik in previous email ;) Lapsus calami.
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:44 AM, valent.turko...
Replace potlach with mapnik in previous email ;) Lapsus calami.
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:44 AM, valent.turko...@gmail.com
wrote:
> Hi,
> are there any plans to add Bing satellite imagery as additional
> Potlach layer in view (not edit) mode?
>
> This could be nice for quick review and checking
Hi,
are there any plans to add Bing satellite imagery as additional
Potlach layer in view (not edit) mode?
This could be nice for quick review and checking if there are any
errors by switching between OSM and Bing layer.
Cheers,
Valent.
--
pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt
blog:
On 24 December 2010 02:10, Steve Bennett wrote:
> That service looks very useful if it were ever implemented. I'd note
> that it probably needs to know about the date of the imagery too.
> Can't say I'm thrilled about the idea of storing the offset data in
> the main OSM db though.
The service i
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 1:23 AM, wrote:
> Would application of notions described in
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/True_Offset_Process (i.e. recording of
> offsets in a formal manner) be practical and useful here? I have not
> reviewed all messages in this thread, so I do not know if th
s is misplaced (Jaak Laineste)
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 15:26:33 +0200
>From: Jaak Laineste
>To: OSM
>Subject: [OSM-talk] Bing maps is misplaced
>Message-ID:
>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> It is good news that Bing aerials
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 1:18 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
> I took your description of what you were doing at face value. Being a
> borderline-Asperger's type, I am sometimes a bit too literal-minded.
Oh I see. That makes sense - will bear in mind for the future.
Steve
I took your description of what you were doing at face value. Being a
borderline-Asperger's type, I am sometimes a bit too literal-minded.
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] Bing maps is misplaced
>From :mailto:stevag...@gmail.com
Date :Wed Dec 22 20:02:12 America
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 12:19 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
> If you can map a street in just five seconds, using just three clicks and a
> keypress, this implies that you are mapping just the end points, with just a
> calculated line between them. Very few streets in the world are absolutely
>
On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 15:46:36 +
Craig Wallace wrote:
> On 22/12/2010 09:02, Elizabeth Dodd wrote:
>
> > I would also point out that in the time of the Cold War the USSR
> > completely mapped the UK from orthophotos, with a little ground
> > work by the spy network.
> > http://www.dailymail.co
On 22/12/2010 09:02, Elizabeth Dodd wrote:
I would also point out that in the time of the Cold War the USSR
completely mapped the UK from orthophotos, with a little ground work by
the spy network.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1209137/The-Soviet-road-map-shows-USSR-planned-invade-Manch
On Tue, 21 Dec 2010 20:27:08 +0100
M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> A very good map
> can't be done just from orthophotos.
it is quite a legitimate way of producing maps for remote areas, and a
quick web search for orthocadastral map will lead you to scholarly
articles on the use.
My problem is th
x27;t bothering to
join streets at intersections, so none of the streets you map will be routable.
Plus, from what you say, you aren't creating any tags on the roads you map.
Most of the rest of us try to do a better job of mapping than that.
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [OSM-
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 6:27 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> yes, in you example you would have 100 wrong streets. I'm not
> believing your numbers btw.: I doubt that you can only visit and map
> 10 streets with the effort you have to put 1000 streets from
> orthofotos (1%). Even if this ratio wa
2010/12/19 Steve Bennett :
> On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 11:04 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>> This discussion is simply about the quality level: are you satisfied
>> with probable information derived from an aerial photo depicting the
>> situation some years ago, or do you want to insert only inf
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 8:36 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
> Of course. You can see details on signs and on walls on aerial imagery.
*Doh!* that was supposed to have been "You *can't* see details..."
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http:/
rom visiting the
> site in person that you wouldn't be able to detect from an aerial view, plus
> you would be able to tell if the road had been modified since the aerial
> photo had been taken.
>
> ---Original Email-------
> Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] Bing maps is mis
erial
> photo had been taken.
>
> ---Original Email---
> Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] Bing maps is misplaced
> From :mailto:sea...@gmail.com
> Date :Sun Dec 19 18:00:21 America/Chicago 2010
>
>
> For *that* particular imagery, yes.
>
> My point is that blindly saying that
[OSM-talk] Bing maps is misplaced
From :mailto:sea...@gmail.com
Date :Sun Dec 19 18:00:21 America/Chicago 2010
For *that* particular imagery, yes.
My point is that blindly saying that you shouldn't trace from imagery
if you haven't visited the place is not a hard rule. The
; So, you are saying that you feel OpenStreetMap should reflect the status of
> the road when the aerial photo was made, rather than the current status?
>
> ---Original Email-------
> Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] Bing maps is misplaced
> From :mailto:sea...@gmail.com
> Date :Sun
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 11:04 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> This discussion is simply about the quality level: are you satisfied
> with probable information derived from an aerial photo depicting the
> situation some years ago, or do you want to insert only information
> you verified on the gro
Yes, but seav80 was saying that he or she prefers data made from the aerial
view (up to 3 months old, and without some details observable only from the
ground) to data recorded by someone going now to the location on the ground.
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] Bing maps is
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 19:19:03 +
"John F. Eldredge" wrote:
> So, you are saying that you feel OpenStreetMap should reflect the
> status of the road when the aerial photo was made, rather than the
> current status?
The road in question in the original post was on nearmap imagery which
is updat
So, you are saying that you feel OpenStreetMap should reflect the status of the
road when the aerial photo was made, rather than the current status?
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] Bing maps is misplaced
From :mailto:sea...@gmail.com
Date :Sun Dec 19 10:17:51 America
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 8:04 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2010/12/15 Steve Bennett :
>> I'm sorry, but no. This is not common practice, nor is it desirable.
>> Could we please not give advice which only reflects personal
>> preferences?
>>
>> Fwiw, highway=road is for when you know *nothing* a
2010/12/15 Steve Bennett :
> I'm sorry, but no. This is not common practice, nor is it desirable.
> Could we please not give advice which only reflects personal
> preferences?
>
> Fwiw, highway=road is for when you know *nothing* about a road. Can
> you tell me, hand on heart, that you would not ta
On 15/12/2010 11:16, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Please tag roads derived from aerial imagery as
highway=road
No real need. From Bing you can deduce whether it's residential or
service etc.
Dave F.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
htt
No, the range does not appear to get smaller when you zoom in. --ceyockey
-Original Message-
>From: Peter Körner
>Sent: Dec 15, 2010 5:43 AM
>
>This information is sent from Bing as-is, it's only displayed by the
>analyzer, not interpreted. Does the range get smaller when you zoom in?
>
On Wed, 15 Dec 2010 22:45:56 +1100, Steve Bennett
wrote:
> Fwiw, highway=road is for when you know *nothing* about a road. Can
> you tell me, hand on heart, that you would not tag this road:
>
> http://www.nearmap.com/?ll=-38.107325,145.15275&z=20&t=k&nmd=20101020
>
> as highway=residential, ma
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 10:16 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> +1, and you can't see restrictions, surface quality and material,
> oneways, etc. on them. That's why there is highway=road. You should
> avoid to tag highway=specific-highway-class if you don't know the
> location from being on the gr
Quite a lot of car parks and other roads have one way arrows visible on the
bing imagry, often the position of speedlimits are available too, although
this might just be a uk only tendancy. Certainly helps in completing places
I have visited without a gps and pen/paper. Then again I have only bee
2010/12/9 Ulf Lamping :
> What the whole discussion here seems to be missing: You can't read street
> names from bing (or Yahoo) imagery.
+1, and you can't see restrictions, surface quality and material,
oneways, etc. on them. That's why there is highway=road. You should
avoid to tag highway=spec
Am 15.12.2010 02:29, schrieb dies38...@mypacks.net:
I'm looking at imagery over Cali, Colombia and see a date displayed as
"Dec/2000-Jun/2006". This seems quite a large range; could you explain how we
should interpret this date information? Thanks.
This information is sent from Bing as-is,
Martijn,
I'm looking at imagery over Cali, Colombia and see a date displayed as
"Dec/2000-Jun/2006". This seems quite a large range; could you explain how we
should interpret this date information? Thanks.
ceyockey
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ceyockey
> 7. Re: new version of Bi
On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 23:34 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote:
> Excellent. Finally a rational argument against tracing in certain
> situations. We could even begin to formulate policy:
>
> "Tracing imagery in areas where there are active local mappers using
> ground survey methods can kill enthusiasm an
Am 09.12.2010 12:42, schrieb Richard Fairhurst:
Ulf Lamping wrote:
Am 09.12.2010 02:49, schrieb Kenneth Gonsalves:
what I object to is mapping a place one has no intention of visiting
Fine, seems you don't like the wiki principle ...
I think you're getting confused with the Wikipedia Princi
Steve,
On 12/09/10 13:34, Steve Bennett wrote:
Excellent. Finally a rational argument against tracing in certain
situations. We could even begin to formulate policy:
You say "policy" which, for me, is acceptable only for very few fields
in OSM and certainly not for how and what someone maps;
Joseph Reeves wrote:
> Sorry, but I find this to be a really negative attitude; there's loads
> of people that want to draw a line on the map for the first time, but
> less who want to tidy existing streets, or "just" add POIs. What would
> be wrong, for example, with collecting the first GPS tra
Steve Bennett wrote:
> Speaking for myself, I actually really enjoy aerial tracing. Asking me
> not to do it would be endangering *my* enthusiasm :) I enjoy going
> outside as well, but I tend to find going out of my way to collect GPS
> traces gets inconvenient, quickly. And I have issues with dri
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 11:50 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> But _intensive_ tracing can and does kill people's motivation. Doesn't
> matter whether you think the people are misguided or pompous, it happens.
> I've seen it in Worcester, in the East Midlands, in Northern Ireland.
>
> The result is t
Ulf Lamping wrote:
> Am 09.12.2010 02:49, schrieb Kenneth Gonsalves:
> > what I object to is mapping a place one has no intention of visiting
> Fine, seems you don't like the wiki principle ...
I think you're getting confused with the Wikipedia Principle: "you have a
right to contribute and edit,
On 08/12/2010 14:35, Maarten Deen wrote:
I have never heard of this before and have never seen it documented
anywhere or seen discussed before. The only mention of "do not trace
from aerial maps" is when it is off Google's maps because we cannot
legaly use them.
Never before have I seen a menti
On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 03:16 +0100, Ulf Lamping wrote:
> >
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=13.03175&lon=77.56565&zoom=17&layers=M
> >
> > before the conference I did a rough sketch from satellite imagery.
> On
> > arrival at the spot I found that the ground reality was totally at
> > variance wi
At 2010-12-08 14:46, davespod wrote:
I have cancelled a trip to survey some lonely country lanes after someone else
remotely traced them. Had I gone, the map would have gained POIs instead of
just a line. But it scarcely seemed worth the trip for what might have been
a couple of postboxes and pub
At 2010-12-08 04:53, Joseph Reeves wrote:
OpenStreetMap is still a wiki though? So if I find a future travel
destination missing from OSM, but covered by Bing, where's the harm in
tracing it? In many parts of the world there is no such thing as
"local mappers" and even if I did trace a load of cr
Am 09.12.2010 02:49, schrieb Kenneth Gonsalves:
On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 08:59 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote:
(Personally, I would be arguing against it. "Don't do X because the
result would be less accurate than if you did Y" is an unhelpful kind
of perfectionism. The line makes the point that accura
On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 08:59 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote:
> (Personally, I would be arguing against it. "Don't do X because the
> result would be less accurate than if you did Y" is an unhelpful kind
> of perfectionism. The line makes the point that accuracy is important.
> Well, coverage is also imp
On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 12:53 +, Joseph Reeves wrote:
> "local mappers" and even if I did trace a load of crap into the
> database, anyone else can come along and, providing they've got a
> better data source than I, fix it.
please keep off India
--
regards
Kenneth Gonsalves
___
Am 08.12.2010 23:46, schrieb davespod:
By the way, I don't think the intention is to suggest that it is not ok to
trace an area and then visit it to correct errors and add detail. It is when
you are not going to do that, it is frowned upon. I can understand why. I
have cancelled a trip to survey
Joseph Reeves wrote:
> An example from my recent past: We display OSM imagery on our
> website to show people where our offices are. We have one office
> that was in a town poorly covered by OSM. When the OS Open
> imagery became available I traced chunks of the town into OSM
Why not just disp
have added a few minor
roads that were built too recently to be in the TIGER data, plus mapping the
zoo and a couple of small cemeteries.
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] Bing maps is misplaced
>From :mailto:li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk
Date :Wed Dec 08 18:15:39 America
On 08/12/2010 21:59, Steve Bennett wrote:
So the question arises: does the community support this view?
Unlike the Life of Brian, here everyone does seem to be an individual -
I suspect that you'll get as many answers as there are mappers.
Speaking entirely personally, I do mostly only map pla
> By the way, I don't think the intention is to suggest that it is not ok to
> trace an area and then visit it to correct errors and add detail. It is when
> you are not going to do that, it is frowned upon. I can understand why. I
> have cancelled a trip to survey some lonely country lanes after s
Richard Mann wrote:
> I wouldn't recommend remote tracing, but if you do it with due care,
> or maybe to supplement stuff you have surveyed (or maybe even just
> seen out of the window when passing),
I completely agree that supplementing stuff you have surveyed or even
tracing something you have
Hi,
Ulf Lamping wrote:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Beginners_Guide_1.1
See item 3.*
So the question arises: does the community support this view?
No.
I've changed the wording, trying to still say that tracing is *better*
if you have local knowledge, but local knowledge is not *re
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 10:46 PM, davespod wrote:
> I have cancelled a trip to survey some lonely country lanes after someone else
> remotely traced them.
A flying trip is only partway up the scale of desirability. What you
want is someone who really knows the area. They're most likely to get
invo
Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 8:33 AM, davespod
> wrote:
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Beginners_Guide_1.1
> >
> > See item 3.*
>
> Very interesting. That line was added by "Ben" in January 2009, and
> that sentence hasn't been touched since.
Bah! You're right! I'm sure
Am 08.12.2010 22:59, schrieb Steve Bennett:
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 8:33 AM, davespod wrote:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Beginners_Guide_1.1
See item 3.*
Very interesting. That line was added by "Ben" in January 2009, and
that sentence hasn't been touched since.
So the question arises
I have seen a similar error in google sat for the area of brod, in
kosovo. Bing is not even worth looking at for kosovo
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Jaak Laineste wrote:
> It is good news that Bing aerials are available. The bad news is that
> Bing has made exactly the same mistake as Goo
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 8:33 AM, davespod wrote:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Beginners_Guide_1.1
>
> See item 3.*
Very interesting. That line was added by "Ben" in January 2009, and
that sentence hasn't been touched since.
So the question arises: does the community support this view? And
Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves
> wrote:
> > you should not map from any imagery area you know nothing more about.
> If there's consensus for this view, get it documented on the wiki, and
> call it policy.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Beginners_G
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 10:01:45PM +1100, Steve Bennett wrote:
> > You should not map from the Bing imagery area you know nothing more
> > about.
>
> Why do people such make bold, absolutist statements like this with no
> policy to back them up?
Absolutist? 'Should not' is not 'must not'. And ha
Matt Williams wrote:
On 8 December 2010 13:18, Steve Bennett wrote:
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
you should not map from any imagery area you know nothing more about.
If there's consensus for this view, get it documented on the wiki, and
call it policy.
I have
OpenStreetMap is still a wiki though? So if I find a future travel
destination missing from OSM, but covered by Bing, where's the harm in
tracing it? In many parts of the world there is no such thing as
"local mappers" and even if I did trace a load of crap into the
database, anyone else can come a
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 11:18 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> I mean, am I the only one that thinks inventing commandments and
> yelling them at each other is pointless?
I should apologise here for picking on two innocent individuals. I was
trying to offer a criticism of the culture of the mailing list
On 8 December 2010 13:18, Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
>> you should not map from any imagery area you know nothing more about.
>
> If there's consensus for this view, get it documented on the wiki, and
> call it policy.
I have been under the i
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
> you should not map from any imagery area you know nothing more about.
If there's consensus for this view, get it documented on the wiki, and
call it policy.
Otherwise, it's just yet another round of pointless "You must do
this." on the
On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 22:37 +1100, Elizabeth Dodd wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Dec 2010 16:35:31 +0530
> Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
>
> > you should not map from any imagery area you know nothing more
> about.
> > Period.
>
> So how about Haiti? Colombia?
exceptional circumstances sometimes need to break
On Wed, 08 Dec 2010 16:35:31 +0530
Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
> you should not map from any imagery area you know nothing more about.
> Period.
So how about Haiti? Colombia?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/lis
On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 12:10 +0100, Raphaël Pinson wrote:
> > you should not map from any imagery area you know nothing more
> about.
> > Period.
> >
>
>
> So, just to make that clear: when aerial imagery of, say, Pakistan, is
> made
> available to help mapping, I should not trace anything unless
On 8 December 2010 11:05, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
> you should not map from any imagery area you know nothing more about.
> Period.
People should be nicer to their parents. Period
Dermot
--
--
Igaühel on siin oma laul
ja ma oma ei leiagi üles
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 22:01 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote:
> > > You should not map from the Bing imagery area you know nothing more
> > > about.
> >
> > Why do people such make bold, absolutist statements like this with no
> > policy to bac
On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 22:01 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote:
> > You should not map from the Bing imagery area you know nothing more
> > about.
>
> Why do people such make bold, absolutist statements like this with no
> policy to back them up? There is no policy that says anything of the
> sort. The ab
> You should not map from the Bing imagery area you know nothing more
> about.
Why do people such make bold, absolutist statements like this with no
policy to back them up? There is no policy that says anything of the
sort. The above sentence is one author's opinion. It would be a very
good thing
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 11:32:39AM +1100, Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 4:51 AM, Jo wrote:
> > Jaak, do you know that you can change the offset in most editors? Potlatch2
> > and JOSM. I suppose in Merkaartor too, but I don't know for sure.
>
> But how do you know which direction
On 08/12/10 08:32, Steve Bennett wrote:
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 4:51 AM, Jo wrote:
Jaak, do you know that you can change the offset in most editors? Potlatch2
and JOSM. I suppose in Merkaartor too, but I don't know for sure.
But how do you know which direction to offset and by how much? Is the
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 4:51 AM, Jo wrote:
> Jaak, do you know that you can change the offset in most editors? Potlatch2
> and JOSM. I suppose in Merkaartor too, but I don't know for sure.
But how do you know which direction to offset and by how much? Is the
Bing imagery really offset so uniformly
On Tue, 7 Dec 2010 18:51:13 +0100
Jo wrote:
[..]
> Jaak, do you know that you can change the offset in most editors?
> Potlatch2 and JOSM. I suppose in Merkaartor too, but I don't know for
> sure.
Currently Merkaartor does not support this.
Regards,
Daniel
Jaak, do you know that you can change the offset in most editors? Potlatch2
and JOSM. I suppose in Merkaartor too, but I don't know for sure.
2010/12/7 Jaak Laineste
> 2010/12/7 Jean-Marc Liotier :
> > Others have noticed it. Among them :
> >
> http://blog.samat.org/p/Bing-Imagery-Misaligned-at-
2010/12/7 Jean-Marc Liotier :
> Others have noticed it. Among them :
> http://blog.samat.org/p/Bing-Imagery-Misaligned-at-Lower-Zooms#comment-17501
> and http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/halfd/diary/12471
In our case it is not even better in higher zooms.
It seems really depend on specific area,
Jaak Laineste wrote:
It is good news that Bing aerials are available. The bad news is that
Bing has made exactly the same mistake as Google, who has managed to
misplace aerials in some areas in the beginning of September 2009.
They are shifted about 20-25 meters, which makes them quite unusable
It is good news that Bing aerials are available. The bad news is that
Bing has made exactly the same mistake as Google, who has managed to
misplace aerials in some areas in the beginning of September 2009.
They are shifted about 20-25 meters, which makes them quite unusable
for tracing.anything mo
Bing is not supported by wmsplugin. It's currently supported either by
slippymap plugin or by imagery plugin which is combination of wmsplugin and
slippymap.
2010/12/2 Kenneth Gonsalves
> hi,
>
> I have downloaded the josm-tested and josm-latest. In bing wms I get
> this error: 'bing:bing' for t
"Kenneth Gonsalves" law...@au-kbc.org wrote on 02/12/2010 at 22:53:31 +1100
subject "[OSM-talk] bing error in josm" :
> I have downloaded the josm-tested and josm-latest. In bing wms I get
> this error: 'bing:bing' for this WMS layer does neither end in a
hi,
I have downloaded the josm-tested and josm-latest. In bing wms I get
this error: 'bing:bing' for this WMS layer does neither end in a '&' nor
with a '?'. If I choose 'fetch images' I get an exception.
--
regards
Kenneth Gonsalves
___
talk mailing
101 - 200 of 251 matches
Mail list logo
