On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Luke Woolley wrote:
> Mainly because I normally give landuses a -3 layer and for things that
> sit just above or directly on the ground I give the next layer up.
> Probably doesn't need it, but it will do no harm being there.
Ah, I had wondered why people did that
On 23 February 2010 16:16, Luke Woolley wrote:
> Mainly because I normally give landuses a -3 layer and for things that
> sit just above or directly on the ground I give the next layer up.
> Probably doesn't need it, but it will do no harm being there.
You don't need to do that, mapnik automatica
Mainly because I normally give landuses a -3 layer and for things that
sit just above or directly on the ground I give the next layer up.
Probably doesn't need it, but it will do no harm being there.
On 23/02/2010, at 4:39 PM, John Smith wrote:
> On 23 February 2010 15:35, Luke Woolley wrote:
On 23 February 2010 15:35, Luke Woolley wrote:
> know), access=private and layer=-2. It might make the map look noisy
Why did you use a layer tag?
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
I have already tagged the courts with the most appropriate tags. All
have been tagged with sport=tennis, leisure=pitch (which according to
the wiki is used for all sport playing fields/courts as far as I
know), access=private and layer=-2. It might make the map look noisy
at the moment but once bui
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
>
> ... I don't think it should render on the
> default mapnik. If for no other reason than we want *public* tennis
> courts to be visible, and all those private ones just create a lot of
> noise.
Just add access=private (or access=unknown, if
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 9:31 AM, Nick Hocking wrote:
> "Personally I don't think it's reasonable to map anything on a
> residential property"
>
> What about
>
> 1) The number on the letter box
> 2) A power pole that happens to be present on a private block
> 3) The roofline (as in a building o
Heh, yeah, I assumed it was something like that. It's ok to have the
data in there, I guess, but I don't think it should render on the
default mapnik. If for no other reason than we want *public* tennis
courts to be visible, and all those private ones just create a lot of
noise. Maybe not an urgent
On 23 February 2010 12:50, David Murn wrote:
> Havent you heard the new technique? These days the PR arm of the
> media-terrorists simply have to say 'were planning something at airport
> xyz' and the government machine will kick into action and cause chaos at
> the airport (or stadium or whateve
On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 20:43 +1100, Liz wrote:
>
> I'm concerned about marking what are actual terrorist targets (not the media
> frenzy type terrorists who are at airports)
> telephone exchange, communications tower, power lines
> things not usually well mapped in commercial offerings but which
On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 08:20 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote:
> Personally I don't think it's reasonable to map anything on a
> residential property, particularly not anything that can't be seen
> from the street.
Because, people in the air could be helped by being able to reference
pools, power lines
"Personally I don't think it's reasonable to map anything on a
residential property"
What about
1) The number on the letter box
2) A power pole that happens to be present on a private block
3) The roofline (as in a building object)
4) Standing water - as a help for emergency services or refug
On 23 February 2010 07:20, Steve Bennett wrote:
> Personally I don't think it's reasonable to map anything on a
> residential property, particularly not anything that can't be seen
> from the street. I'm not sure why lakeboy did all this, but my
> preference would be to tag it these private tennis
Well the story is, I just happened to be drawing roads in Portsea one
day and I thought it would be a bit of a laugh to show off how the
rich holidaymakers spend their time! People say Portsea has a tennis
culture, now the map proves it! I am curious to know if Portsea has
the highest concerntratio
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 7:20 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
>
> Personally I don't think it's reasonable to map anything on a
> residential property
I wonder if any lawyer/privacy expert/etc. has written on this subject before...
___
Talk-au mailing list
Tal
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 2:28 PM, David Murn wrote:
> Ive been wondering about the idea of mapping private pools in the same
> way as private tennis courts have been marked, but been worried about
> some issues, particularly privacy. With the mapping of tennis courts
> taking place, is there any r
On 23 February 2010 04:23, James Andrewartha wrote:
> A Perth street map I have has the path of the Dampier-Bunbury gas
> pipeline mapped. Now that's a clear target and isn't even readily
> visible in real life, but there doesn't seem to be a problem with it
> being mapped. So I don't think it's s
On 22 February 2010 17:43, Liz wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, David Murn wrote:
>> No, what Im say(ing) is, Im unsure if theres a privacy issue, and asking
>> for others opinions or if theres any precedents to follow (other than
>> the court cases brought against google for invasion of privacy).
>>
On 22 February 2010 19:43, Liz wrote:
> I'm concerned about marking what are actual terrorist targets (not the media
> frenzy type terrorists who are at airports)
> telephone exchange, communications tower, power lines
> things not usually well mapped in commercial offerings but which if destroyed
On 22 February 2010 19:31, David Murn wrote:
> No, what Im say(ing) is, Im unsure if theres a privacy issue, and asking
> for others opinions or if theres any precedents to follow (other than
> the court cases brought against google for invasion of privacy).
I really can't see a privacy issue her
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, David Murn wrote:
> No, what Im say(ing) is, Im unsure if theres a privacy issue, and asking
> for others opinions or if theres any precedents to follow (other than
> the court cases brought against google for invasion of privacy).
>
> If I was saying we shouldnt be doing stre
On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 19:10 +1000, John Smith wrote:
> On 22 February 2010 19:07, David Murn wrote:
> > A water supply company could be interested to know how many pools are in
> > an area to know what areas might have higher demand during filling
> > season. But, a pool cleaning business in the
On 22 February 2010 19:07, David Murn wrote:
> A water supply company could be interested to know how many pools are in
> an area to know what areas might have higher demand during filling
> season. But, a pool cleaning business in the future might search on the
> map to find areas with potential
On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 18:20 +1000, John Smith wrote:
> On 22 February 2010 17:56, Roy Wallace wrote:
> > I'm not sure but being traced and annotated makes it much
> > *easier* for people to retrieve information about your private
> > property (e.g. through an API call).
>
> Yes, I can rea
On 22 February 2010 17:56, Roy Wallace wrote:
> I'm not sure but being traced and annotated makes it much
> *easier* for people to retrieve information about your private
> property (e.g. through an API call).
Yes, I can really see that happening...
> You could thus argue that making it
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 4:45 PM, John Smith wrote:
>
> How are there any privacy issues when you can see those same pools on
> aerial imagery?
I'm not sure but being traced and annotated makes it much
*easier* for people to retrieve information about your private
property (e.g. through an
On 22 February 2010 13:41, Jim Croft wrote:
> It could be argued that the location of pools, even if private, would
> be a valuable knowledgebase in fire and other emergencies.
+1
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstre
On 22 February 2010 13:28, David Murn wrote:
> Ive been wondering about the idea of mapping private pools in the same
> way as private tennis courts have been marked, but been worried about
> some issues, particularly privacy. With the mapping of tennis courts
How are there any privacy issues wh
It could be argued that the location of pools, even if private, would
be a valuable knowledgebase in fire and other emergencies.
You are not saying whose pool it is, or who has a pool, only that
there is a pool at this location. But I would nevertheless be
interested in the privacy implications,
On Sun, 2010-02-21 at 20:43 +1100, Liz wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Feb 2010, John Smith wrote:
> > On 21 February 2010 18:53, Craig Feuerherdt
> wrote:
> > > Things like this make me wonder about society. Once upon a time we would
> > > have shared our resources or better still gone down to the local ten
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010, John Smith wrote:
> On 21 February 2010 18:53, Craig Feuerherdt
wrote:
> > Things like this make me wonder about society. Once upon a time we would
> > have shared our resources or better still gone down to the local tennis
> > club for a bash.
>
> I was listening to some ta
On 21 February 2010 18:53, Craig Feuerherdt wrote:
> Things like this make me wonder about society. Once upon a time we would
> have shared our resources or better still gone down to the local tennis club
> for a bash.
I was listening to some talk back radio show a while back and they
were trying
Things like this make me wonder about society. Once upon a time we would
have shared our resources or better still gone down to the local tennis club
for a bash.
There is a similar situation along the Calder Highway in Taylors Lake (and
probably countless other places).
Check it out:
> http://osm.
come the revolution, comrades!
:)
jim
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 11:24 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> Check it out:
> http://osm.org/go/uGm91mHAN-
>
> I cracked up when I saw it. We can blame lakeboy for this one...
>
> Steve
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> T
Check it out:
http://osm.org/go/uGm91mHAN-
I cracked up when I saw it. We can blame lakeboy for this one...
Steve
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
35 matches
Mail list logo
