On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Dave F via Tagging <
tagg...@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> On 22/11/2020 11:24, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>
>
> I sincerely hope "I'm in favor of fixing" translates as "I'm planning to
> fix", though I fear I may be disappointed.
>
> More broadly, we need to nip this
I posted this on the Slack but I figured I should put this on the mailing
list to make sure it reaches everybody:
Many long-distance Amtrak trains have route relations with 1000+ members.
If I split one way that happens to be a member of one of these routes, I
end up with a changeset with a
Everyone knows who you're talking about at this point, and nobody cares.
Use the remaining day or so of your temporary ban to work on some hobbies
outside of OpenStreetMap.
And be careful about who you say isn't local. I'm moving to Northern
Indiana next week and I'll certainly get the chance to
For those who aren't following, the DWG recently decided on a two-day ban
for the person who posted this, for the exact behavior they're exhibiting
right now: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3850
jdd 3, please take a break. You have better things to do.
I look forward to when you
Do you have a more authoritative source for municipal boundaries than the
US Census Bureau?
If you don't, it'll be hard for you to convince everyone here that the US
Census data is wrong.
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 5:03 PM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us <
talk-us@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> FYI;
>
>
I think it's helpful. Looks like these would go in the railway:ref=* tag of
railway=yard nodes.
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 4:28 PM Natfoot wrote:
> Hello to the list,
> Quick question
> Would location codes be helpful? Would they be helpful to list on the NA
> railway wiki?
>
>
To be clear, you mean that everyone is mapping incorrectly if they are not
local? That's an absurd premise—lots of mappers do valuable remote work
without having to be on the ground and see what they're mapping in person.
Of course, disputes arise between local mappers and remote mappers, and
it's
Not sure what it is you're trying to point out here. Have you started a
conversation with the person who made that edit?
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 9:11 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us <
talk-us@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> Added a service road.
>
> Edited about hours ago by
>
> Version #1 ·
If I'm not mistaken, the examples you've given are instances of
railway:track_ref=*, not ref=*.
Throwing my two cents in here—that coincides with the way I personally use
railway:track_ref=*. My understanding is that this uniquely identifies
tracks within a line, station or yard, and is not
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 9:24 AM <80hnhtv4a...@bk.ru> wrote:
> as you say stop talking about my troubles so i sent this to you alone, but
> in a revenge mode he when’t after
> that days edits.
> he sent me a change-set discussion telling me he was right and to stop
> editing.
>
Yes, I've looked
Have you tried talking to this mapper about his criticisms and finding some
common ground? I'm certain you can find an agreeable way to map the things
you want to map.
The mailing list is not the place to air your interpersonal disputes. If
you don't want to draw scrutiny and criticism to your
Hi all,
Lately I've been tasking myself with mapping underground railway tracks
across the US, adding features like parallel tracks, crossovers, and
platforms wherever I can. My work includes the Market Street Subway in
downtown San Francisco and various lines in Philadelphia. I recently began
y not have a platform, trains may only stop on request."
>> The presence of points/switches is only significant in Germany.
>>
>> I would recommend reverting to railway=station for any which have
>> platforms and are regularly scheduled places for the train to stop.
&
Hi all,
Over the last few months, I've been doing some systematic improvements to
the passenger railway network across North America. Much of this has been
filling out public_transport=stop_area relations for every railway station,
including stop positions and platforms, as well as verifying the
There is a MapRoulette task out for downgrading short sections of highways
that had been mistakenly upgraded to motorways. I had been contributing to
this task, and then today I got a foul message from a local contributor.
They subsequently went through my recent edits and undid them, calling them
That is in fact on the list, and it's actually the changeset that I
reverted.
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 3:20 PM Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com wrote:
On Mon, 2015-05-18 at 22:51 +, Clay Smalley wrote:
[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Cam4rd98
[2] http://www.cs.utexas.edu
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 1:11 AM Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com wrote:
If we were able to look at his
changeset comments and see withdraw additions tainted by Google data
or similar, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion right now.
I disagree. In this group of changesets, he has
Hi all,
Last winter, I drove around a bunch of neighborhoods with my GPS and
manually added them into OSM. I wanted to add a few more neighborhoods
today, so I opened up OSM and went to that area, and a significant chunk of
my additions were mysteriously deleted.
I investigated a little, and it
I'm doing an internship at Square this summer. In fact, I'm in the office
right now - do you want me to go bring this up to anyone?
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote:
It looks like Square is using OSM from MapBox in receipt emails without
attribution on the
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Saikrishna Arcot saiarcot...@gmail.comwrote:
I vote for keeping this check in place (i.e. an exact match of the street
name), because there are some places (in California, I think) where the
prefix/suffix changes from North to West as you are driving down the
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.comwrote:
Weird is a matter of opinion, but I only know of Farm Road (FM), Ranch
Road (RM or RR), Park Road (PR), the one-off NASA Road 1 (which I can
concede is a bit unusual), the semi-standard Spur and Loop, and normal
state
Cam4rd98 is an interesting character, I'll say that. He's new and
enthusiastic about mapping, but doesn't quite understand the conventions of
OSM. I haven't had to talk to him recently, but previously he's been
unresponsive to messages.
In this case, I'd say send him a message and delete the
it's
relatively pertinent to the discussion, but lets not make it any more
personal here on the mailing list.
Thanks,
Your friendly talk-us moderator
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 8:15 PM, Clay Smalley claysmal...@gmail.comwrote:
Cam4rd98 is an interesting character, I'll say that. He's new
So Black Rock City is mapped on OpenStreetMap... twice. And both are old
versions (the city as it was in 2008 and 2009). Anyone know why this is?
Should the two old cities be deleted and replaced with the 2013 city?
I have a feeling that this could be a fun publicity opportunity for OSM, if
we're
Most shields that have black backgrounds have them removed. It seems like a
stylistic thing, and I think it looks good.
On Jul 28, 2013 8:59 PM, Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013, at 10:38 PM, Toby Murray wrote:
We finally managed to get Phil's highway shield
I remember this specific issue being brought up multiple times before. It's
been my understanding that this is the consensus: the pieces of I-10 and
I-40 in West Texas should be trunk wherever they have at-grade
intersections, because they have multiple at-grade intersections and not a
single rare
I think it makes perfect sense to separate it into name=* and bridge:name=*
tags. The bridge:name=* currently isn't rendered, but theoretically, it
could be rendered differently and in a more appropriate/eye-catching way
than name=*. This leaves the case though, what if a bridge doesn't carry a
I make an effort to welcome new mappers when I see them, but it's
unrealistic to ensure every new mapper is onboarded this way. There needs
to be a more formal process, and I like a lot of the ideas that have been
presented.
On Jun 26, 2013 12:54 PM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote:
**
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/16078863
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/16080822
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/16495595
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/16497029
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/16540719
I've tried to be civil
, Clay Smalley claysmal...@gmail.comwrote:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/16078863
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/16080822
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/16495595
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/16497029
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse
I agree that OSM needs to be more noob-proof than Wikipedia. Erroneously
changing one thing on Wikipedia won't make much of a difference, whereas
erroneously changing one thing on OSM could throw off a lot of software
that depends on the data being correct. There's only so far OpenStreetMap
can go
wrote:
Check the Farm-to-market page on Wikipedia.
On Jun 19, 2013 11:00 PM, Clay Smalley claysmal...@gmail.com wrote:
Does the Wikipedia bit have a cited source? I can understand that being
true; I just want to verify. The Texas Highway Designation Files list them
as two separate types.
On Jun
Also, even if it were the case that they were the same network, it makes
sense to keep them separate because that is how the shield renderer
determines which shield to put on the road.
Tagging for the renderer, grumble grumble.
On Jun 20, 2013 9:23 AM, Clay Smalley claysmal...@gmail.com wrote
Fortunately most of Texas has been done, but unfortunately the FM/RM roads
haven't been completed and there are quite a lot of them. I made a Mapcraft
to help add relations to them all: http://mapcraft.nanodesu.ru/pie/269
I've made a little progress in the Texas Panhandle but we definitely need
, 2013 12:52 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Curious if the network for RM and FM is consistently US:TX:FM for both,
since they're both part of the same network.
On Jun 19, 2013 10:52 AM, Clay Smalley claysmal...@gmail.com wrote:
Fortunately most of Texas has been done
confusing
aspects of the Texas highway system, sort of like the nebulous distinction
between Park Roads and Rec Roads.
On Jun 19, 2013 5:22 PM, Clay Smalley claysmal...@gmail.com wrote:
It's US:TX:FM for FM roads, and US:TX:RM for RM roads. There may be
little to no overlap between RM and FM
I support this. Go to Google Maps and search for SoMa, South Beach, and
Rincon Hill. The office I am sitting in right now is in all of those
polygons.
Some cities formally define their neighborhoods, and OSM could use that
data. Some neighborhoods are more informal, and those may make sense as
I've had to clean up his edits before. What bothers me is that he's
unresponsive and never leaves any comments on his edits. I've brought him
up before to DWG but nothing's been done.
On May 31, 2013 9:59 PM, James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.com wrote:
This user has been brought to my attention
On May 19, 2013 4:31 PM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
(which, I suspect, is why
NYC is currently mapped as admin_level=5).
Well, that's what's in the specification in the wiki. But NYC is currently
mapped as level 8 in OSM.
Although now that I think about it, NYC does seem more
In the entry for the United States in this wiki article:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative
Admin levels are listed like this:
Cities: 8
Counties: 6
New York City: 5
In the OSM database as I write this, this is not the case, as New York City
is on level 8 with
Working fine on ATT.
On Mar 29, 2013 2:57 PM, Roland Olbricht roland.olbri...@gmx.de wrote:
Dear all,
a user of the OSM readonly mirror Overpass API has complained about getting
always the HTTP error code 504 instead of a valid response with HTTP 200.
After we have excluded all potential
If I weren't confined to my phone right now, I'd check it myself, but are
there any GPS tracks along the new interchange?
On Feb 20, 2013 9:58 PM, James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.com wrote:
I just happened to spot a place where there is a possible coping from
Google Maps.
I think it's a little ridiculous that this dispute is going so far that
anyone even consulted an expert. Obviously NE2 is wrong; we get it. This
dead horse hasn't just been beaten; it's been liquefied. Let's just let the
OSM gods deal with it, and go on with our lives.
On Feb 11, 2013 10:35 AM,
The SR and SH designations were mostly put in by NE2, IIRC. Go figure.
I'm personally okay with this mass edit, but expect a lot of hate mail from
NE2.
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 11:36 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Someone with local knowledge might want to look over the ref=* tags in
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Chris Lawrence lordsu...@gmail.com wrote:
He does reiterate the point it would lead to long ref tags that would
conflict with Mapnik's limitations. He also argues that it would make
the Mapnik rendering erroneous
Tagging for the renderer.
As far as the blade
You. You have the ground truth. He has no right deleting useful data from
OSM.
I think it's a general rule that when NE2 fights with other OSM
contributors, he loses.
On Feb 8, 2013 2:59 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
NE2 is going on the World according to NE2 bender again, need a
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 5:38 PM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote:
**
For example, a particular residential house in Carmel might be assigned as
an address node tag:
addr:housename=Casanova Street, East side, third house south of 9th
I think that's better fit for the key addr:full=*.
In Texas, every business route has a unique letter attached to it. In this
image from TxDOT, there are a few examples:
http://onlinemanuals.txdot.gov/txdotmanuals/fsh/images/Figure%204-2.gif
These are what show on the vast majority of highway signs. They are useful
for navigation, and and
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On Friday, December 21, 2012, Clay Smalley wrote:
What sayest thou, community? I'm honestly tired of edit wars and
pointless bickering, and would rather just get this question out of the way.
Sounds like yet another
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Just so I'm on the same page...are we adding modifiers to ref=* or
seperately in modifier=* in the relations?
The ref=* tags of the ways were originally e.g. US 377 Business and I'm
changing them to US 377-A Business.
I'm not Martijn, but I'm going to guess he may have pulled GIS data of a
few selected cities in Utah and used a GIS application to create the
Thiessen polygons. I did just that for the Operation Cowboy - Texas map
(with a few liberties taken).
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:00 PM, Brian DeRocher
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
--
Clay Smalley
University of Texas at Austin, Class of 2015
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo
large amounts of data has
shown that a few number of people can have a large impact.
Sam Iacullo
San Antonio, TX
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
--
Clay Smalley
On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 6:05 PM, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
I would not tag something as
motorway when it's only sometimes motorway unless it's ~10 miles long.
Going off this: I remember a discussion earlier about this sort of
thing. Someone (I forgot who) said that the Is this a
It was mainly NE2 that went around changing everything to SR and SH. I'm
pretty sure the consensus has always been the postal abbreviation.
On Sep 12, 2012 8:31 PM, Kristian M Zoerhoff k...@lavabit.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
I know there is some disagreement about road classification,
especially when it comes to trunk but I'm pretty sure most people
would agree that this is incorrect. Thoughts?
I've been told you should use highway=trunk,
I like this idea. That would encourage more people to TIGER-review streets,
as highway=road shows up pretty ugly on Mapnik, and people like getting rid
of ugly. What would be the drawbacks of doing this? It seems like there
would be some but I can't think of any.
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 8:29 AM,
57 matches
Mail list logo