I am very new to OSM (2 weeks!) and I have now switched to JOSM and I use
that exclusively now as it is SOOO much better. Having said that, deleting
stuff by accident is not particular to iD. I have deleted by accident with
JOSM by having something selected which I am not aware of. Fortunately I
di
Tom Chance wrote:
I've seen two new users accidentally delete residential landuse areas near me in
the past fortnight:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/17695130
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/17505646
Could this be a problem with the iD editor? Has anyone else notice
I've seen two new users accidentally delete residential landuse areas near
me in the past fortnight:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/17695130
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/17505646
Could this be a problem with the iD editor? Has anyone else noticed it?
Tom
--
http
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote:
In practice, there is only one renderer for general users
That's a statement that could provoke some discussion, I suspect.
If you have a look at the questions on help.osm.org you'll see lots of
"why doesn't X do Y" type questions, but it isn't always immediately
ob
Sent from my android device so the quoting is crap!
-Original Message-
From: OpenStreetmap HADW
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Sat, 07 Sep 2013 15:07
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Urban Mixed Access Ways and Barriers (restricted to
motor vehicles, open to foot)
On 7 September 2013 14:46,
Long time discussion but the data is not the map. If a detail is need, such as
adding a way to show the pedestrian route around an object, then it should be
mapped. Not mapping it leaves gaps in the data. Now replacing the obstruction
with a short length of 'footpath' may be an alternative, but
On Sat, Sep 07, 2013 at 02:45:51PM +0100, OpenStreetmap HADW wrote:
> Is there a mechanism for getting requests onto the wish list for the
> Open Street Map Mapnk style sheets?
>
> The particular issue is that now that people can trace quite small
> features, some areas are getting overloaded with
On 7 September 2013 14:36, wrote:
> Sent from my android device so the quoting is crapp!
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: OpenStreetmap HADW
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Sent: Sat, 07 Sep 2013 13:44
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Urban Mixed Access Ways and Barriers (restricted to
> motor
On 7 September 2013 14:46, Philip Barnes wrote:
>
> Streetmaps do tend to be abstractions of the real world, and
> openstreetmap ceased to be be a mere streetmap several years ago, and is
> a far far better map than a mere streetmap can ever be. The word
> streetmap implies urban, cities.
OS ma
On Sat, 2013-09-07 at 13:43 +0100, OpenStreetmap HADW wrote:
> On 7 September 2013 12:15, SomeoneElse wrote:
>
> >
> > In that instance isn't there effectively a short footway that runs parallel
> > to the short piece of road that has the barrier on it?
> >
> Micro-mapping tends to clutter the re
Is there a mechanism for getting requests onto the wish list for the
Open Street Map Mapnk style sheets?
The particular issue is that now that people can trace quite small
features, some areas are getting overloaded with private foot paths
and private car parks (not to mention alleys and driveways
Sent from my android device so the quoting is crapp!
-Original Message-
From: OpenStreetmap HADW
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Sat, 07 Sep 2013 13:44
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Urban Mixed Access Ways and Barriers (restricted to
motor vehicles, open to foot)
On 7 September 2013 12:15,
On 7 September 2013 12:15, SomeoneElse wrote:
>
> In that instance isn't there effectively a short footway that runs parallel
> to the short piece of road that has the barrier on it?
>
Micro-mapping tends to clutter the rendered map. In any case, street
maps are abstractions of the real world an
Sent from my android device so the quoting is crap!
-Original Message-
From: SomeoneElse
To: "talk-gb@openstreetmap.org"
Sent: Sat, 07 Sep 2013 12:16
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Urban Mixed Access Ways and Barriers (restricted to
motor vehicles, open to foot)
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote:
> I k
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote:
I keep coming across cases where marking the access to a way based on
primary category will imply that the way is not suitable for use on
foot. That becomes particularly interesting with barriers, as in
those cases, the sidewalk may bypass the barrier.
In that instan
I keep coming across cases where marking the access to a way based on
primary category will imply that the way is not suitable for use on
foot. That becomes particularly interesting with barriers, as in
those cases, the sidewalk may bypass the barrier.
For concrete examples, I'll use Northwick Pa
16 matches
Mail list logo