Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
Hi, Have there been many projects/companies which improved TIGER and released the results as PD? None that I know of; I suppose they have all spent a lot of money to be able to process and improve TIGER and they probably want to recoup that investment through proprietary licensing. Is it relevant to us? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 10:03:20PM +0100, Gervase Markham wrote: Frederik Ramm wrote: None that I know of; I suppose they have all spent a lot of money to be able to process and improve TIGER and they probably want to recoup that investment through proprietary licensing. Is it relevant to us? Surely it's highly relevant to your assertion that we would build a strong community around OSM if it was PD? The fact that none has formed around an existing large body of geodata ripe for improvement doesn't help your case. Perhaps this is true for TIGER, but it seems to me that geonames.org is exactly the opposite: a public domain dataset (vmap0) has been embraced/extended into (in some cases) dozens or more languages per place name, and many many corrections to data. Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt Web Developer ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
Hi, Is it relevant to us? Surely it's highly relevant to your assertion that we would build a strong community around OSM if it was PD? I thought OJW was not talking about communities but about corporations. Which generally have a bad track record of working for free (perhaps because they have no 'spare time'?) The fact that none has formed around an existing large body of geodata ripe for improvement doesn't help your case. I suspect there will be many existing large bodies of geodata without a community, and as many with one, and the reasons behind that very diverse. Thankfully crschmidt has pointed out an example that doesn't help your case. As regards TIGER specifically, my belief is that no community has formed around that because what you get in PD is not the master database but just something compiled by the government, and they have promised periodic re-issues of updated information. Whatever changes your community makes, they will not be contained in the next government release, and you either have to fork off and ignore them, or forever try and try to filter out the new stuff from the next release and merge that with what you have. I think that if the data had been not published PD but actually disowned by the government (as in: this is what we have and we're not going to work with this any more) then the situation would have been wholly different. But that's pure speculation - as is the idea that no community has formed because it was PD rather than copyleft. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Converting Polish/.MP to OSM?
On Fri, 9 May 2008 00:24:11 -0600 Simon Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well I've had a stab at this, probably the worlds worst python script but it does work Cleaned up version added to SVN, browsable here: http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/applications/utils/import/mp2osm/mp2osm_catmp.py Supports POI, POLYLINE and POLYGON. Can parse the CATMP stuff without error, but have not uploaded resultant data to OSM yet. Doesn't do anything with the 'Nod[1..]' bits as I couldn't see how to re-open an element in ElementTree to modify it/add the appropriate tag. Cheers, Mungewell. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-dev] Developers requested to help provide completeness tools
On Monday 12 May 2008, Skywave wrote: Freek recently created this image which shows how much of the AND data is untouched: http://www.vanwal.nl/osm/author_density_nl_20080502_full.png(warning 3 MB image). (Blue is untouched AND, green and red have relatively more changes by the community.) I also did an image showing the number of different (last) authors per area for a large part of Europe (untouched AND is not so interesting outside the Netherlands...): http://www.vanwal.nl/osm/density/europe_1000_080513_num_authors.png (6 MB) (Red is one author for all nodes covered by a pixel, green to blue depict an increasing number of authors, up to around 17.) Central London clearly has the largest number of contributions from different people. Secondly, I thought the average data age might show some interesting patterns (min. data age turned out to give rather noisy pictures). http://www.vanwal.nl/osm/density/western_europe_500_080502_avg_age_value.png (Lava colour map: black = old -- red -- yellow -- white = latest contributions, compare to the dark-red AND import for a reference, this was September 2007. Also note that dark colours have a second meaning: they depict low node density.) Now, London gets quite dark at some spots... More remarkably, this picture shows that data imports dramatically decrease mapping activity (or so it seems): not only the Netherlands show relatively little activity, also Osnabrück looks quiet (compare for example to the Ruhr area or the area between Brussels and Antwerp). Still, in my opinion, these imported areas are far from complete. I think pictures like these can give at least some impression of the current state of affairs, but a human-maintained measure for completeness is still necessary. -- Freek ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] tagging and rendering
elvin ibbotson wrote: Typos in real words are easier to detect than a mistake in entering a number. In the scenario I was suggesting numbers would only replace words for type tags and users would never see the numbers but would just see words (in their own language) mapped to/from numbers in the database by the editor/viewer software. This somewhere between the ID numbers (set purely by software) and latitude/longitude (which users do not enter directly) and all the other tags, most of which (like name=) require user direct input. Some considerable time ago I tried to push the idea of using numeric types for the key map data so that translation is easy and since then I've been reconsidering how it could be done if I was going to run something locally. highway, cycleway, waterway, railway, leisure and the like provide a top level number and the 'approved' values provide sub-numbers. So that 'key' 101 - for example - would be a highway:motorway. Just storing a single number for that data. We can maintain the free format by using 100 to indicate that there IS a string element to go with the tag. All the 'way' tags would be 1xx, so 101 = cycleway, 102 = waterway etc. Leisure/amenity/shop would become a 2xx series and so on. 0xx tags would then be used for additional data such as note, name, description, source ( with sub tags for approved sources ). Reserving say 9xx for private tags that would only be used with perhaps a particular user ID so people could potentially use 900 for private notes . Tools would then simply pick up a language file for their own translations of those numbers and create new tags or edit existing tags based on the list provided in their particular language set. If free form text is added then perhaps a warning could be posted about non-rendered data being added? Or even a switch to prevent free form data if not appropriate. I am still looking at this from an internal storage point of view, and nowadays who actually TYPES the text for the main key entries - you just copy an existing item, or select from the list? The debate really is do we need to maintain a full 'XML' view of the data at all? By switching to a much more compact storage mechanism, data can be output as a full XML extract - perhaps even with a language switch for extracts in the target countries language - if required? But a compact - language agnostic - format would improve performance in a number of areas? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-dev] Developers requested to help providecompleteness tools
Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: This demonstrates that really there is no one method that fits all. I map urban areas out completely in one go, including the cycleways and footways because just about all are accessible by bike. Occasionally I have a footway I have to go back and do on foot but these are few and far between and they nag at me if I leave them for very long. And of cause you have visited all the pubs and restaurants and tested their wares in the name of research so you could log them ;) I think that some secondary means for users ( who do not have the ability to fix a problem themselves ) to report problems? While a 'This looks OK' sounds a good idea - it only looks OK for what the user is looking for. But a 'So and so is missing' would at least provide prompts to help fill in the gaps. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Unknown road classifications
On Mon, 12 May 2008, Alex Mauer wrote: IMO if it's sufficiently unknown that it will have to be revisited anyway for more accurate classification, marking it as a road rather than a complete unknown isn't really going to be helpful to anyone. Sure it is - I know I can drive down a road, I don't know that I can drive down any arbitrary highway feature. I don't think it's a good idea for the highway tag to be used for so many non-road things -- but that's probably a discussion for another time. Yes, I dislike the current overloading of tags, but I don't think that is going to change soon. Andy Allan asked me to put together a wiki page with respect to the namespacing discussion, which I haven't had time to do yet, but overloading tags like highway is one of the things I'd like to address on that page when I get chance. - Steve xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nexusuk.org/ Servatis a periculum, servatis a maleficum - Whisper, Evanescence ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-dev] Developers requested to help providecompleteness tools
Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: Verification is a whole new ballgame. I think throughout this discussion there is tendency to get hung up on the word complete, which has been used as a shorthand but is being interpreted differently. In everyday use it has an implication of perfection and that there is nothing more to be said. I think what we should be talking about is an area being filled in, without implying perfection or immutability. You should expect as high a proportion of mistakes in a filled-in area as in an incomplete one, but fewer omissions. However, if there is a blank space on the map, you can assume that it really is empty in a filled-in area, but you would not know if it was in an incomplete area. Measures of quality and guarantees of correctness require filled-inness, but I think should be regarded as more advanced concepts. I agree with Andy, we should walk before we run - start with an implemention of filled-inness - verification, etc. can come later. Chris ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Tagging bridleways
I've come across a problematic way near me: It is a reasonably wide road, but the signs at each end say it is a bridleway. It has a gate across the east end end so you can't drive along it from the east, but you can drive along it from the west end. The west end has no restrictions other than a sign saying No Though Road. There are a couple of buildings down there, so someone might have legitimate reason for driving along it even though they can't get out at the other end. So I'm a bit unsure how to tag it - any suggestions? Thoughts that spring to mind are either highway=bridleway, motorcar=yes or highway=unclassified. Presumably with a highway=gate, motorcar=no node on the gated end, or maybe highway=gate, horse=yes, foot=yes. - Steve xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nexusuk.org/ Servatis a periculum, servatis a maleficum - Whisper, Evanescence ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging bridleways
Steve Hill wrote: Sent: 13 May 2008 9:47 AM To: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: [OSM-talk] Tagging bridleways I've come across a problematic way near me: It is a reasonably wide road, but the signs at each end say it is a bridleway. It has a gate across the east end end so you can't drive along it from the east, but you can drive along it from the west end. The west end has no restrictions other than a sign saying No Though Road. There are a couple of buildings down there, so someone might have legitimate reason for driving along it even though they can't get out at the other end. So I'm a bit unsure how to tag it - any suggestions? Thoughts that spring to mind are either highway=bridleway, motorcar=yes or highway=unclassified. Presumably with a highway=gate, motorcar=no node on the gated end, or maybe highway=gate, horse=yes, foot=yes. This is an example of confusing the physical space with the legal administrative description. If it's a paved road from the end then unclassified, residential, or service would be the appropriate tag for the physical. On top of that its horse=yes. To add the bridleway specifically I would add bridleway=true as a tag as well. Just because it's a bridleway does not necessarily mean car=no. The landowner will almost certainly have access over the route. Since it's a bridleway however the public probably do not (unless its permissive). Cheers Andy - Steve xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nexusuk.org/ Servatis a periculum, servatis a maleficum - Whisper, Evanescence ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 269.23.16/1430 - Release Date: 13/05/2008 7:31 AM ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] GPSBabel 1.3.5
GPSBabel 1.3.5 was released a few days ago, and for those of you using the popular NaviGPS units I am pleased to be able to say that the new release of GPSBabel includes native support for the NaviGPS. This includes both direct access to stored tracks, routes and waypoints via the USB cable as well as the ability to decode waypoints and tracks copied to the SD card if you are using a recent release of the NaviGPS firmware that supports that. The code has been tested with my GT-11 unit but should work with the BGT-11 as well, and will hopefully work with the new GT-31 and BGT-31 units when they arrive - please let me know if you manage to test with one of those. The name for the new driver is navilink, so to recover waypoints over the USB cable on linux you would do something like: gpsbabel -w -f navilink -i /dev/ttyUSB0 -F gpx -o waypoints.gpx Any problems, give me a shout... Tom -- Tom Hughes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.compton.nu/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-dev] Developers requested to helpprovide completeness tools
Frederik Ramm wrote: Sent: 12 May 2008 10:10 PM To: Jeffrey Martin Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-dev] Developers requested to helpprovide completeness tools Hi, I'm very far from this in Korea, but I would guess in time some parts of the UK will need to be rechecked at some point. How can we make a system for rechecking an area? Maybe the completeness should be retired after a period of time. Once we have a few applications in place that get viewed by *many* people, we could just have a button somewhere along the margin of the page that says: I know the area and what I see here looks correct. That would not give us any safety but if, when looking at a part of the map, you knew that within the last 6 months 178 people had clicked on this looks correct then that would perhaps give you at least a warm fuzzy feeling ;-) The more we can crowdsource the solution to completeness or correctness then the more in tune the process will be with the rest of the project. We all know bits of lots of places. If it looks correct then why do we care if in actuality it's just slightly wrong in some way. Someone with the detailed knowledge about the subtitles of a small area would eventually come along and tweak/correct/improve it anyway. So perhaps we dont need a tool to say how complete an area is, we just need users to say if they think it looks good enough/is good enough for their intended use. Cheers Andy Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 269.23.16/1427 - Release Date: 11/05/2008 1:08 PM ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-dev] Developers requested to help provide completeness tools
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 12:57 AM, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some of us map out an area completely in one go rather than doing it piecemeal. Even if I come across some existing roads in a new area I ignore them and do a new survey so that the whole area makes logical sence to me. That way I can work out where the landuse areas are behind the houses and the extent of school areas etc etc. So for me a reasonable level of completeness is easy to decide and annotate. That's how I work too. So when I mark the area that's complete on the new system, I'll mark everywhere that I did as complete. That's a no-brainer. But let's scale this further, since what you, me and David have done, while interesting, is still a small amount of what's there. I would guess that only a proportion of the mappers will use this system, let's say a similar proportion to those who map in landuse=residential. But the key is that not everyone will use it. So how do we scale the efforts of this subset of people who *do* want to use the completeness system to provide measurements of the rest of the data? How do you, me and David (say) work out which areas of Glasgow and St. Louis are complete? Maybe we can look at the road density and guess. But that could be automated. My original point was that we can look at areas that we don't know particularly well and it's much easier to spot the problems than confirm which bits are done. With the proposed system, it'll take me 15 minutes to mark everywhere I thoroughly mapped, and then I want to do something useful. So I can mark 20-something square kilometres of London as complete (to the 95th percentile of completeness), and *much more* as definitely incomplete (i.e. Dave's renderings of unnamed roads) and much of it 'unassessed' where it could be anything from the 60th to 95th percentile. Anyway, that's just my take on it. Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] GPSBabel 1.3.5
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tom Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The name for the new driver is navilink, so to recover waypoints over the USB cable on linux you would do something like: gpsbabel -w -f navilink -i /dev/ttyUSB0 -F gpx -o waypoints.gpx or even: gpsbabel -w -i navilink -f /dev/ttyUSB0 -o gpx -F waypoints.gpx Tom -- Tom Hughes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.compton.nu/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging bridleways
Steve Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sent: 13 May 2008 10:31 AM To: Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: RE: [OSM-talk] Tagging bridleways On Tue, 13 May 2008, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: This is an example of confusing the physical space with the legal administrative description. Yes, but sadly the highway tag is defined in Map Features to encompass that confusing mixture of physical and legal descriptions. :) Yes it is, that's the one thing I wish I had thought of when I produced the original list back when the dinosaurs were still roaming the land ;-) (It is something we should probably try to move away from, but that's another discussion). Just because it's a bridleway does not necessarily mean car=no. The wiki indicates that OSM considers highway=bridleway to be a footpath which horses are permitted on (I would think highway=footway, horse=yes would be better and am in favour of getting rid of highway=bridleway entirely. However, I also want to be consistent with what other people are doing.) The wiki is not very cleverly worded then. Probably because its trying to combine the physical description with the legal access situation. The landowner will almost certainly have access over the route. Since it's a bridleway however the public probably do not (unless its permissive). In this case, I imagine the highway belongs to the National Grid, since it provides access to the Swansea North substation and some of their offices. However, at the west end of the highway there is no private, no cars, etc signs, just a No through road sign (which makes sense since there is a gate at the other end... probably to prevent people rat-running). Also, there are currently some roadworks on the highway, which are signed as you would expect them to be if they were on a public road (the normal red-triangle roadworks and blue-circle-with-white-arrow keep right signs). Maintenance of signs is often slapdash. Often signage is only added if the way is being abused and the landowner wants to put a stop to it. A gate at each end and a padlock usually gets over most issues, but in this case they would need to leave access for bikes/horses/walkers if they did that. Cheers Andy - Steve xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nexusuk.org/ Servatis a periculum, servatis a maleficum - Whisper, Evanescence ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging bridleways
Steve Hill wrote: On Tue, 13 May 2008, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: This is an example of confusing the physical space with the legal administrative description. Yes, but sadly the highway tag is defined in Map Features to encompass that confusing mixture of physical and legal descriptions. :) (It is something we should probably try to move away from, but that's another discussion). Apologies to those who've heard me blether on about this before, but in my mind the highway tag indicates purpose. In other words: what's the way there for? In the UK, at least, the administrative category (M, A-primary, A, B etc.) usually correlates pretty well to the purpose (in fact, one influences the other). But occasionally there's a really glaring discrepancy between purpose and category. In which case, we follow the Oxford High Street Rule: tag for purpose, but make sure the administrative category is still recorded. (The High Street in Oxford is nominally the A420, so we tag ref=A420, but it's no good as a through-route - the bollards are a bit of a giveaway - so we tag highway=tertiary.) Skimming the thread, your road sounds like highway=unclassified; designation=bridleway. Or something - finding a consensus for designation= is left as an exercise for the reader. cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging bridleways
On Tue, 13 May 2008, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: This is an example of confusing the physical space with the legal administrative description. Yes, but sadly the highway tag is defined in Map Features to encompass that confusing mixture of physical and legal descriptions. :) (It is something we should probably try to move away from, but that's another discussion). Just because it's a bridleway does not necessarily mean car=no. The wiki indicates that OSM considers highway=bridleway to be a footpath which horses are permitted on (I would think highway=footway, horse=yes would be better and am in favour of getting rid of highway=bridleway entirely. However, I also want to be consistent with what other people are doing.) The landowner will almost certainly have access over the route. Since it's a bridleway however the public probably do not (unless its permissive). In this case, I imagine the highway belongs to the National Grid, since it provides access to the Swansea North substation and some of their offices. However, at the west end of the highway there is no private, no cars, etc signs, just a No through road sign (which makes sense since there is a gate at the other end... probably to prevent people rat-running). Also, there are currently some roadworks on the highway, which are signed as you would expect them to be if they were on a public road (the normal red-triangle roadworks and blue-circle-with-white-arrow keep right signs). - Steve xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nexusuk.org/ Servatis a periculum, servatis a maleficum - Whisper, Evanescence ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging bridleways
On Tue, 13 May 2008, Richard Fairhurst wrote: (The High Street in Oxford is nominally the A420, so we tag ref=A420, but it's no good as a through-route - the bollards are a bit of a giveaway - so we tag highway=tertiary.) I'm left wondering why they haven't removed the A-road designation if they put bollards in... Anyway, I'm going a bit off topic now. :) Skimming the thread, your road sounds like highway=unclassified; designation=bridleway. Or something - finding a consensus for designation= is left as an exercise for the reader. horse=yes seems as descriptive as designation=bridleway. I think I will settle on highway=unclassified, access=private, foot=yes, horse=yes, bicycle=permissive, motorcar=permissive. I don't actually know the status of bike and car access, but the fact that it has been signed as a bridleway indicates to me that pedestrians and horses have a legal right of way along there. Thanks for the input folks. - Steve xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nexusuk.org/ Servatis a periculum, servatis a maleficum - Whisper, Evanescence ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?
Brian Quinion wrote: island=yes|no I like the idea of marking this, but may I suggest traffic_island or pedestrian_refuge instead? Does this mean any pedestrian refuge in the road, or just those with some other crossing stuff like traffic signals or zebra striping? I'd love to be able to re-use highway=traffic_signals. Does anyone think that we should be deprecating highway=crossing in favour of crossing=*? What are the behaviours of current editor and renderer software when highway=traffic_signals;crossing is used? -- Andrew Chadwick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging bridleways
Steve Hill wrote: I'm left wondering why they haven't removed the A-road designation if they put bollards in... Anyway, I'm going a bit off topic now. :) We had a thread about it on talk-gb which I think concluded it would have been better designated as the WTF420. horse=yes seems as descriptive as designation=bridleway. It's not quite a 1:1 mapping - a UK bridleway also means cycles permitted by right and a whole host of other stuff, so it's a valuable piece of information in itself. By all means tag the individual users (horse=yes, bicycle=yes, etc.), but I'd consider the official bridleway status a useful, taggable fact in itself. cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] [tagging] Crossing access types (was: Road crossings proposal - status?)
Steve Hill wrote: bicycle=yes|no foot=yes|no horse=yes|no Doing this for crossings is not right, IMO. It's a bad usage of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:access , or more specifically its 'helper' tags like foot=yes|no or bicycle=*. Consider: * If two ways cross at a crossing Node, access keys would logically apply to both. Declaring that crossings are somehow special and that access tags on them apply only to the crossing traffic is worse. * The access tag is not documented as being applicable to Nodes. Most crossings will be Nodes. * In some jurisdictions, crossing traffic may have right of way at all times even on button-and-light-controlled crossings. Pushing the button merely stops road traffic and gives a safer period for crossing. So what we're talking about isn't always an access restriction or even an access permission. To keep things simple, and for the sake of the data, I would prefer something more like: crossing_traffic=modes Where modes would be a semicolon-separated list of the tag-names from the [[Key:access]] page. For example: crossing_traffic=foot;bicycle Presence of a value would indicate a) what sort of crossing traffic a motorist may expect, and b) what sorts of crossing traffic may use the crossing. To keep things simple, one would assume a default value of crossing_traffic=foot anywhere there's a crossing=* or a highway=crossing. Does that make sense to you guys? -- Andrew Chadwick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Bridge proposal
At 11:11 AM 13/05/2008, Raphael Studer wrote: I've formally written up my Bridge proposal, as mentioned here a week or two ago: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Bridge Does someone care about this proposal? Regards Rapahel It seems so: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Talk:Proposed_features/Bridge ... or is this a very polite request that the proposer might proceed to voting? ;-) Mike ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Crossing access types (was: Road crossings proposal - status?)
On Tue, 13 May 2008, Andrew Chadwick (email lists) wrote: * If two ways cross at a crossing Node, access keys would logically apply to both. Declaring that crossings are somehow special and that access tags on them apply only to the crossing traffic is worse. Ok, sounds like we would need a relation for this so you can specify which way it applies to. * The access tag is not documented as being applicable to Nodes. Most crossings will be Nodes. It probably should be applicable to nodes so that you can apply it to things like gates - Steve xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nexusuk.org/ Servatis a periculum, servatis a maleficum - Whisper, Evanescence ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] area topology
Please excuse me if this is a FAQ, I just didn't find an answer in the wiki (possibly because it is obvious) ... In topological GISses like grass, borders are shared between adjacent (vector) areas. However, I wonder how adjacent areas should be digitized in OSM (let's say, forests and farmland, or riverbanks and the associated wetlands). Am I right in assuming that OSM ways always belong to one single area? If this is so, do I have to duplicate ways along the common border? JOSM informs about double ways when it validates data so I had the slight impression that they are not really wanted. I see a similar problem with line data (e.g. roads, streams) which may happen to be an area border. From reading http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions#Tagging_Areas I think that using a street as a border of a plaza (or a block of buildings) is not wanted. Does one digitize double ways, leading along the same nodes, or does one make a separate area in a small distance to the existing line (street/stream), which might be topologically incorrect and is more difficult to maintain? Thanks for your advice! Ulf -- Ulf Mehlig[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Crossing access types
Steve Hill wrote: On Tue, 13 May 2008, Andrew Chadwick (email lists) wrote: * If two ways cross at a crossing Node, access keys would logically apply to both. Declaring that crossings are somehow special and that access tags on them apply only to the crossing traffic is worse. Ok, sounds like we would need a relation for this so you can specify which way it applies to. Sometimes you won't have a crossing Way at all. I should probably have been clearer about that. For example the case where the crossing merely goes from one sidewalk of a busy road to the opposite sidewalk. Sidewalks are considered part of the Way in OSM, yet you still might want to declare non-default crossing types. cycleway=track - toucan-style crossing - cycleway=opposite_track is probably the corner case here. A Relation between a) a single crossing and b) the Way(s) it crosses might make more sense. But it might also be too fiddly to apply, and relying on it would not be backwards-compatible. * The access tag is not documented as being applicable to Nodes. Most crossings will be Nodes. It probably should be applicable to nodes so that you can apply it to things like gates I believe it's being talked abut in the Barrier proposal. Barriers/gates don't have the complication of being more applicable to one highway which joins another at them than the other, typically. I think that sentence will parse. -- Andrew Chadwick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] area topology
Ulf Mehlig wrote: I think that using a street as a border of a plaza (or a block of buildings) is not wanted. Does one digitize double ways, leading along the same nodes, or does one make a separate area in a small distance to the existing line (street/stream), which might be topologically incorrect and is more difficult to maintain? There are arguments both ways, and it's come up in discussion locally: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Talk:Oxford#How_much_separation_is_right.3F I subscribe to the view that areas should correspond to the real area on the ground and mostly be kept clear of roadways. Placing an Area's Nodes near the adjacent Way's nodes helps make the map easier to maintain. I will often abut adjacent areas that are separated only by something thin and make their nodes share, however. Rectilinear buildings in particular should be kept rectilinear: there's no excuse for trapezoidal buildings with the new extrusion stuff now in JOSM :) However, rivers are Interesting: quite often an Area whose edge is defined by a river may change over time as the river meanders... In that case, it probably does make sense to abut a Way to an Area. -- Andrew Chadwick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] area topology
On 13 May 2008, at 14:06, Ulf Mehlig wrote: Please excuse me if this is a FAQ, I just didn't find an answer in the wiki (possibly because it is obvious) ... In topological GISses like grass, borders are shared between adjacent (vector) areas. However, I wonder how adjacent areas should be digitized in OSM (let's say, forests and farmland, or riverbanks and the associated wetlands). Am I right in assuming that OSM ways always belong to one single area? If this is so, do I have to duplicate ways along the common border? JOSM informs about double ways when it validates data so I had the slight impression that they are not really wanted. I see a similar problem with line data (e.g. roads, streams) which may happen to be an area border. From reading http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions#Tagging_Areas I think that using a street as a border of a plaza (or a block of buildings) is not wanted. Does one digitize double ways, leading along the same nodes, or does one make a separate area in a small distance to the existing line (street/stream), which might be topologically incorrect and is more difficult to maintain? If you have a road and stream running parallel they would be entered as 2 ways that are parallel. The same happens for the carriageways of a motorway that are separated by a barrier. The way that I look at it, is if there is a barrier, such as a fence of wall, then the node in the way should not be shared. Otherwise the sharing of nodes isn't a problem, and can produce better results, especially for routing. Shaun ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] area topology
Hi, Am I right in assuming that OSM ways always belong to one single area? Yes and no. Normally we don't map the borders between areas - we map tha areas themselves. So you would have one way that encloses the forest, and one way that encloses the adjacent farmland, and they would meet somewhere. There are exceptions to this rule when it comes to very large entities like counties or countries; in these cases we tend to actually map the border line and tag it with something like left: France, right: Germany, and there will be no single polygon named France or Germany. Coastline is another exception. If this is so, do I have to duplicate ways along the common border? JOSM informs about double ways when it validates data so I had the slight impression that they are not really wanted. There is no 100% consensus on how to deal with these things but most people, including me, suggest to duplicate ways (not nodes) along the common border, i.e. you will have two ways sharing the same nodes. The issue is especially contended when it comes to linear features straddling areas, like a road that forms the forest boundary for a bit. I would re-use the same nodes here, but there are people who say that this would indicate the forest stretching up to the road centreline which of course isn't true, and they would rather have the road and the forest boundary run in parallel and use their own nodes. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] API: how to retrieve all tracks of a certain user?
Hi, i'm new in this list (i write in the italian mailing list) but i thought it would be better to write my doubts here. I'm having a look at OSM APIs and i'm not able to find out how to download all my gpx traces i've uploaded so far. I can only find how to retrieve all trackpoints in a bounding box [1] or how to retrieve a track by its id [2]. Isn't there a way i can download all the tracks belonging to me, or at least, download only my trackpoints in a bounding box? Otherwise, how could i find out the whole list of gpx tracks belonging to me? I thought the rss feed would list me all of my traces... but it only shows me the last 20 i've uploaded so far. I googled for a while, but didn't find much of interest. Moreover, i'm wondering if [3] is the best place where to get infos about API v0.5, or if there's a better (and more complete) place on the net. I hope i'm not posting a useless messege ;) Ciao, Danilo [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/OSM_Protocol_Version_0.5#Retrieving_GPS_tracks [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/OSM_Protocol_Version_0.5#Methods_for_GPX_Traces [3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/OSM_Protocol_Version_0.5 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] API: how to retrieve all tracks of a certain user?
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Danilo Abbate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i'm new in this list (i write in the italian mailing list) but i thought it would be better to write my doubts here. I'm having a look at OSM APIs and i'm not able to find out how to download all my gpx traces i've uploaded so far. I can only find how to retrieve all trackpoints in a bounding box [1] or how to retrieve a track by its id [2]. Isn't there a way i can download all the tracks belonging to me, or at least, download only my trackpoints in a bounding box? Otherwise, how could i find out the whole list of gpx tracks belonging to me? I thought the rss feed would list me all of my traces... but it only shows me the last 20 i've uploaded so far. To put it simply, no, there is currently no way to do this. Tom -- Tom Hughes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.compton.nu/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] area topology
Shaun McDonald wrote: If you have a road and stream running parallel they would be entered as 2 ways that are parallel. The same happens for the carriageways of a motorway that are separated by a barrier. Well, let's say that this is also controversial and we had that discussion before. Personally I use sharing nodes when I have a forest that borders on a motorway, for example. So, there might not be the one solution for all. Either parallel ways that are next to each other or share nodes... spaetz ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-dev] Developers requested to help provide completeness tools
Frederik Ramm wrote: Once we have a few applications in place that get viewed by *many* people, we could just have a button somewhere along the margin of the page that says: I know the area and what I see here looks correct. Given that this will be the default very soon ( :-) ), I'd rather have the notes API where people can click and say: there are streets missing here, I know that. No warm fuzzy feeling, but more helpful in identifying weak spots. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Attempt to make a map of a building floorplan
Hello! I'm trying to accomplish something and I was hoping someone could assist me on this. Basically I have created an isometric 3d render of the floor plan of my company's building. I would like to make a map with multiple layers on which users can identify key points, like the big conference rooms and bathrooms, etc. I have this openlayers map set up here - http://gtproductions.net/solidworks/TileCache-2.0/ I would like to make it so that I can split the 4096 x 4096 png (rendered out from a 3d package) into small blocks so that the map doesn't have to load all the images at once. I was reading here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Deploying_your_own_Slippy_Map that you can use mapnik to do this, but I'm having trouble doing it. I am using Windows XP and have tried going through the Creating tiles using Mapnik and generate_tiles.py section but am getting stuck. I installed postgreSQL and PostGIS in windows using their installers and have set up databases. I'm not sure if they're working because I can't get a test started. One line says When everything works, use generate_tiles.py to create 1000s of tiles in a special hierarchy of folders but it is very vague and I keep getting errors in my generate_tiles.py , for example this one: C:\mapnik-0_5_1\demo\pythonc:\Python25\python.exe generate_tiles.py Traceback (most recent call last): File generate_tiles.py, line 108, in module home = os.environ['C:/map'] File C:\Python25\lib\os.py, line 435, in __getitem__ return self.data[key.upper()] KeyError: 'C:/MAP' I have tried using C:\map and C:/map and there are basically no tutorials on how to get this thing going in Windows. I won't lie, I'm an artist and not a programmer at all, so this is all pretty daunting to me. I would like to just get this thing up and running, but would like some advice on how to go about it. I have looked into tilecache, openlayers, mapnik, and have gotten mapnik to build and run on this windows machine here, but am stuck on how to make it split my image up. If you can offer any assistance or hand-holding, I would greatly appreciate it. -Alex ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Mapping China
After text, pictures, and videos, China starts regulating Internet map publishing (here is the google translation.) The government believes that Internet maps can represent the state's sovereignty and its political and diplomatic positions in the international community . and consequently, inaccurate maps could harm national interests and dignity, produce bad political influences, reveal national secrets and harm national security, in addition to harming consumer interests. See http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/05/13/1320233, is this news or just the old stuff? /Jonas S ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] area topology
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 02:31:32PM +0100, Andrew Chadwick (email lists) wrote: I subscribe to the view that areas should correspond to the real area on the ground and mostly be kept clear of roadways. Placing an Area's Nodes near the adjacent Way's nodes helps make the map easier to maintain. I will often abut adjacent areas that are separated only by something thin and make their nodes share, however. Putting the other side of the argument, as Andrew I'm sure knew I would: A road is represented by a single way. Although the way has zero width in the database, it represents the whole width of the carriageway (pavement) and well as the pavement (sidewalk). If a minor road meets a more important way at a T-junction, we do not put the last node where the minor road ends, instead we extend it to the centre of the more important one. In the same way, if an area comes right up to the edge of a road (including its pavement, etc), we should extend the area to use the same defining nodes. If we do not do this, we have an undefined space between the area and the road. This undefined space is of variable width and, without knowing how every renderer is going to treat the highway, there is no way of knowing if it will appear or not, unless it is arterially small (aka 0!). There is some merit to the argument that seperation would help with routing. We could have a convention that if an area is accessible from any point on the highway they should share segments, but if that's not the case (there's a fence between, for example) they should be seperated. While I can see how this would work, it feels like an ugly hack. It's not my itch, but there's got to be a better way of expressing the boundary between highway and area - I guess with a relation. Rectilinear buildings in particular should be kept rectilinear: there's no excuse for trapezoidal buildings with the new extrusion stuff now in JOSM :) I agree with that as a potential stumbling block, and was concerned about this until I actually started mapping buildings. In practice, the resolution of accuracy in OSM is such that you can make a fair representation of the shape of the building and still share nodes with the highway it abuts. However, rivers are Interesting: quite often an Area whose edge is defined by a river may change over time as the river meanders... In that case, it probably does make sense to abut a Way to an Area. It should be noted that roads also change position sometimes, affecting the areas that are defined by them!. s ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Attempt to make a map of a building floorplan
You will probably have more luck with the following application, which does the tile cutting you need: http://www.casa.ucl.ac.uk/software/googlemapimagecutter.asp Mapnik is not meant as a tile cutter, but renders data from a XML file, so I think it wouldnt be off much use for you. Cheers Patrick Alexander Schwartz wrote: Hello! I’m trying to accomplish something and I was hoping someone could assist me on this. Basically I have created an isometric 3d render of the floor plan of my company’s building. I would like to make a map with multiple layers on which users can identify key points, like the big conference rooms and bathrooms, etc. I have this openlayers map set up here - http://gtproductions.net/solidworks/TileCache-2.0/ I would like to make it so that I can split the 4096 x 4096 png (rendered out from a 3d package) into small blocks so that the map doesn’t have to load all the images at once. I was reading here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Deploying_your_own_Slippy_Map that you can use mapnik to do this, but I’m having trouble doing it. I am using Windows XP and have tried going through the *“Creating tiles using Mapnik and generate_tiles.py” *section but am getting stuck. I installed postgreSQL and PostGIS in windows using their installers and have set up databases. I’m not sure if they’re working because I can’t get a test started. One line says “When everything works, use generate_tiles.py to create 1000s of tiles in a special hierarchy of folders” but it is very vague and I keep getting errors in my generate_tiles.py , for example this one: C:\mapnik-0_5_1\demo\pythonc:\Python25\python.exe generate_tiles.py Traceback (most recent call last): File generate_tiles.py, line 108, in module home = os.environ['C:/map'] File C:\Python25\lib\os.py, line 435, in __getitem__ return self.data[key.upper()] KeyError: 'C:/MAP' I have tried using C:\map and C:/map and there are basically no tutorials on how to get this thing going in Windows. I won’t lie, I’m an artist and not a programmer at all, so this is all pretty daunting to me. I would like to just get this thing up and running, but would like some advice on how to go about it. I have looked into tilecache, openlayers, mapnik, and have gotten mapnik to build and run on this windows machine here, but am stuck on how to make it split my image up. If you can offer any assistance or hand-holding, I would greatly appreciate it. -Alex ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk begin:vcard fn:Patrick Weber n:Weber;Patrick org:University College London adr:;;Gower Street;London;;WC1E 6BT;United Kingdom email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Engineering Doctorate Student tel;work:02077185430 tel;cell:07854840450 url:http://www.ucl.ac.uk/cemi version:2.1 end:vcard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-dev] Developers requested to help provide completeness tools
On 13/05/2008 15:35, Sebastian Spaeth wrote: Frederik Ramm wrote: Once we have a few applications in place that get viewed by *many* people, we could just have a button somewhere along the margin of the page that says: I know the area and what I see here looks correct. Given that this will be the default very soon ( :-) ), I'd rather have the notes API where people can click and say: there are streets missing here, I know that. No warm fuzzy feeling, but more helpful in identifying weak spots. My main motivation in wanting this kind of facility is not so much to help _us_ identify what areas need attention, rather to help our _consumers_ know whether they can have any confidence in what they are looking at. That's why I think there needs to be a very straightforward, not overly onerous, but useful, metric, even if this has more levels accessible to those in the know. It also means that wiki solutions just don't cut it (I've been updating completeness pages for the areas I;ve been doing since I started, but it doesn't help someone looking at the map). Often anyone of reasonable intelligence can tell somewhere is not complete because only the main streets are there, but I have come across quite a number of places where a reasonable number of apparently random residential streets have been done, and whose density would suggest to someone who doesn't know the area that it is os plausible, when in fact it may only be 30% complete (for roads and names) or less. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] GPSBabel 1.3.5
Great !! On Dienstag 13 Mai 2008, Tom Hughes wrote: GPSBabel 1.3.5 was released a few days ago, and for those of you using the popular NaviGPS units I am pleased to be able to say that the new release of GPSBabel includes native support for the NaviGPS. This includes both direct access to stored tracks, routes and waypoints via the USB cable as well as the ability to decode waypoints and tracks copied to the SD card if you are using a recent release of the NaviGPS firmware that supports that. The code has been tested with my GT-11 unit but should work with the BGT-11 as well, and will hopefully work with the new GT-31 and BGT-31 units when they arrive - please let me know if you manage to test with one of those. The name for the new driver is navilink, so to recover waypoints over the USB cable on linux you would do something like: gpsbabel -w -f navilink -i /dev/ttyUSB0 -F gpx -o waypoints.gpx Any problems, give me a shout... Tom -- Jörg (Germany, Tettnang) http://www.ostertag.name/ irc://irc.oftc.net/#osm Tel.: +49 89 420950304 Skype: JoergOstertag ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-dev] Developers requested to help provide completeness tools
David Earl wrote: Sent: 13 May 2008 6:48 PM To: Sebastian Spaeth Cc: OSM Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-dev] Developers requested to help provide completeness tools On 13/05/2008 15:35, Sebastian Spaeth wrote: Frederik Ramm wrote: Once we have a few applications in place that get viewed by *many* people, we could just have a button somewhere along the margin of the page that says: I know the area and what I see here looks correct. Given that this will be the default very soon ( :-) ), I'd rather have the notes API where people can click and say: there are streets missing here, I know that. No warm fuzzy feeling, but more helpful in identifying weak spots. My main motivation in wanting this kind of facility is not so much to help _us_ identify what areas need attention, rather to help our _consumers_ know whether they can have any confidence in what they are looking at. That's why I think there needs to be a very straightforward, not overly onerous, but useful, metric, even if this has more levels accessible to those in the know. It also means that wiki solutions just don't cut it (I've been updating completeness pages for the areas I;ve been doing since I started, but it doesn't help someone looking at the map). Often anyone of reasonable intelligence can tell somewhere is not complete because only the main streets are there, but I have come across quite a number of places where a reasonable number of apparently random residential streets have been done, and whose density would suggest to someone who doesn't know the area that it is os plausible, when in fact it may only be 30% complete (for roads and names) or less. I get this same view. All too often I look at a place and think wow, that looks complete, but when I drum down into the data a bit it its clear that there are general gaps and the density of streets is not what you would expect. That's why I was testing out a completeness metrics method. But I agree with you, what we are really after hear is a simple way to convey a level of map usefulness and relevance to the user. Cheers Andy David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 269.23.16/1430 - Release Date: 13/05/2008 7:31 AM ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] area topology
Hi, The issue is especially contended when it comes to linear features straddling areas, like a road that forms the forest boundary for a bit. I would re-use the same nodes here, but there are people who say that this would indicate the forest stretching up to the road centreline which of course isn't true, and they would rather have the road and the forest boundary run in parallel and use their own nodes. the main issue might be that it's very difficult to maintain/edit such roads. Best regards, ce ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Converting Polish/.MP to OSM?
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 12:08 AM, Simon Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 9 May 2008 00:24:11 -0600 Simon Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well I've had a stab at this, probably the worlds worst python script but it does work Cleaned up version added to SVN, browsable here: http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/applications/utils/import/mp2osm/mp2osm_catmp.py Supports POI, POLYLINE and POLYGON. Can parse the CATMP stuff without error, but have not uploaded resultant data to OSM yet. Doesn't do anything with the 'Nod[1..]' bits as I couldn't see how to re-open an element in ElementTree to modify it/add the appropriate tag. Cheers, Mungewell. Hey, I haven't had a chance to look at this yet, but I just opened up the input file in a text editor and saw: Copyright=THIS MAP CANNOT BE SOLD I think this is incompatible with our license (commercial use is okay). Is the author/maintainer that gave you permission aware of this? The Nod[1...] bits define the routing nodes--i.e., which points in the Data0 linestring connect to other ways. The first and last points of a way always have these, and more if there are any intersecting points in the middle. For this map, though, it's probably safe to say if the points are at the same spot, they're routing nodes (i.e., it should be represented by only one node in OSM, shared between the intersecting ways). Karl ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] area topology
Christoph Eckert wrote: Hi, The issue is especially contended when it comes to linear features straddling areas, like a road that forms the forest boundary for a bit. I would re-use the same nodes here, but there are people who say that this would indicate the forest stretching up to the road centreline which of course isn't true, and they would rather have the road and the forest boundary run in parallel and use their own nodes. the main issue might be that it's very difficult to maintain/edit such roads. Best regards, the boundary of the forrest run in parallel to the road is actually the correct way to do it. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Aware, the state of the current pheromones
Thanks Tim for your feedback, I appreciate. Concerning World Wind it looks like you can visualize KML with placemarks since version 1.3.4. I just had a quick try, it seems to work fine for placemarks (but it doesn't seem to show the extrusion for lines in my v2 KMLs, just the top): http://flickr.com/photos/frenchy/2490757820/ I've also heard Microsft's Virtual Earth supports KMLs now (but haven't tried it). It looks like KMLs are now spreading quickly since its 'Open Standard' adoption: The KML 2.2 specification has been submitted to the Open Geospatial Consortium to assure its status as an open standard for all geobrowsers. As of November 2007, the OGC has a new KML 2.2 Standards Working Group. Comments were sought on the proposed standard until January 4, 2008,[1] and it became an industry standard on April 14, 2008.[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keyhole_Markup_Language That said I could try other formats like GeoRss and GML. as an overlay over existing osm maps? Yes that certainly would be nice :) I'll look at it when I'll have some time for it (OpenLayers, SlippyMap,...) Thanks francois On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 1:13 AM, tim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, just thought this was a lovely, brilliant visualisation of osm usage. Well done, good work! Would love to see some of this in non-kml formats, somehow (google earth doesn't work well for me). Or on the web. (GeoRSS? GML? Worldwind? etc) as an overlay over existing osm maps? tim ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Converting Polish/.MP to OSM?
Hey, I haven't had a chance to look at this yet, but I just opened up the input file in a text editor and saw: Copyright=THIS MAP CANNOT BE SOLD I think this is incompatible with our license (commercial use is okay). Is the author/maintainer that gave you permission aware of this? I did make it clear that the OSM stuff is CC-SA which allows commerical reproduction, he was happy enough to give permission. Full email exchange is here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/User:Catmp Simon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] area topology
Says who? The boundary of the forest IS the road. :) This is one of religious discussions - both sides KNOW they are right, and no amount of discussion is going to change things. Unless we have a central decision making force of some sort lay down the law, (in OSM - hah!) you'll continue to see things mapped both ways. Stephen 2008/5/14 Raphaël Jacquot [EMAIL PROTECTED]: the boundary of the forrest run in parallel to the road is actually the correct way to do it. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Converting Polish/.MP to OSM?
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 5:36 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey, I haven't had a chance to look at this yet, but I just opened up the input file in a text editor and saw: Copyright=THIS MAP CANNOT BE SOLD I think this is incompatible with our license (commercial use is okay). Is the author/maintainer that gave you permission aware of this? I did make it clear that the OSM stuff is CC-SA which allows commerical reproduction, he was happy enough to give permission. Full email exchange is here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/User:Catmp Simon Cool, glad you checked that. I assume the maintainer you're working with goes by the user name Ibycus on the Groundspeak forums (I try to do my part to promote OSM there). Or maybe it's Red90? Anyway, I hope I can get my OSM-to-Routable Garmin map converter going soon so we can get these guys to put their efforts into OSM instead! (Geocachers are crazy about free maps.) I'll try to take a look at your file to see if anything else can be added to round it out. Karl ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk-nl] bruggen
Hallo, Kan iemand me vertellen hoe ik een brug aanmaak in JOSM? Het gaat om de situatie - straat A - brug met naam B - straat C Ik snap niet helemaal hoe ik dat stuk in 3 aaneensluitende nodes met telkens een verschillende naam kan splitsen. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:bridge heb ik gelezen, daar staat: In most cases you'll have to break a way into three ways, one before the bridge, one for the bridge itself and one for the part after the bridge. Hoe doe ik dat in JOSM? Alvast bedankt voor de hulp! -- Met vriendelijke groeten, Dieter Homepage: http://www.student.ru.nl/dieter.vanuytvanck/ ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] bruggen
Hallo Dieter, Het opsplitsen van een way gaat in JOSM als volgt: - selecteer de way en de node waar je de opsplitsing wilt maken. - kies uit het menu Tools Split way Je hebt nu de geselecteerde way opgedeeld in twee verschillende. Uiteraard kun je ook meerdere nodes selecteren. In dat geval wordt de way in meerdere delen opgesplitst. Gr, Henk H. Dieter Van Uytvanck schreef: Hallo, Kan iemand me vertellen hoe ik een brug aanmaak in JOSM? Het gaat om de situatie - straat A - brug met naam B - straat C Ik snap niet helemaal hoe ik dat stuk in 3 aaneensluitende nodes met telkens een verschillende naam kan splitsen. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:bridge heb ik gelezen, daar staat: In most cases you'll have to break a way into three ways, one before the bridge, one for the bridge itself and one for the part after the bridge. Hoe doe ik dat in JOSM? Alvast bedankt voor de hulp! ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] bruggen
Met het keyboard gaat dat nog handiger: Plaats een node: A-U-A-U-A-U 3 nodes geplaatst, met de muis mikken natuurlijk (alleen waar nodig natuurlijk) Splitsen : U - S - ctrl klik - klik (2 nodes geselecteerd) - P A= selecteer draw mode U= Unselect S= Selectie mode P= split road Probeer zoveel mogelijk codes uit het hoofd te leren Dat gaat veel sneller dan met de muis het menu af te lopen. Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Namens Dieter Van Uytvanck Verzonden: dinsdag 13 mei 2008 23:06 Aan: OpenStreetMap NL discussion... Onderwerp: [OSM-talk-nl] bruggen Hallo, Kan iemand me vertellen hoe ik een brug aanmaak in JOSM? Het gaat om de situatie - straat A - brug met naam B - straat C Ik snap niet helemaal hoe ik dat stuk in 3 aaneensluitende nodes met telkens een verschillende naam kan splitsen. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:bridge heb ik gelezen, daar staat: In most cases you'll have to break a way into three ways, one before the bridge, one for the bridge itself and one for the part after the bridge. Hoe doe ik dat in JOSM? Alvast bedankt voor de hulp! -- Met vriendelijke groeten, Dieter Homepage: http://www.student.ru.nl/dieter.vanuytvanck/ ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-nl ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-nl
[talk-au] facts
In relation to our copyright discussions, the following might be of interest: http://sciencecommons.org/weblog/archives/2008/05/12/how-to-free-your-facts/ attribution stacking is an interesting concept... jim -- _ Jim Croft [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't know why we are here, but I'm pretty sure that it is not in order to enjoy ourselves. - Ludwig Wittgenstein, philosopher (1889-1951) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [Talk-de] Yahoo Bilder in Josm anzeigen
Ich habs gerade mal getestet und bisher sieht es sehr gut aus. Abestürzt ist bisher nichts. Allerdings ist es immer noch extrem ruckelig. Ich bekomme geschätzt max. 1 FPS. Könnte man die FPS nicht noch unten einblenden, da wo die Winkel etc schon sind? Ok, ich schau ob ich das über Mittag hin krieg. Grüsse Raphael ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Schul-Mapping-Aktion und Vortrag in Kö ln
Nächste Woche Montag und Dienstag (19./20.5.) mache ich eine Mapping-Aktion mit Schülern des Elisabeth-von-Thüringen-Gymnasiums in Köln. Am Dienstag abend gibt es dann dort einen öffentlichen Vortrag zu OSM von mir und die Schüler stellen vor, was sie in den beiden Tagen erreicht haben. Mehr Info und Anmeldung unter http://www.guug.de/lokal/west/index.html . Würde mich freuen, dort einige lokale OSMler zu treffen. Jochen -- Jochen Topf [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.remote.org/jochen/ +49-721-388298 ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] FYI: Yahoo! Internet Location Platform
Nicht direkt OSM, aber sicher auch interessant: http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/readwriteweb/~3/289027884/yahoo_geolocation_api.php -- Gruß Steffen http://kaffeeringe.de - Internet Kreativität ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Layer
Hallo, mir fiel gerade mal wieder eine Straßenlücke bei [EMAIL PROTECTED] auf. in JOSM sah ich dann, daß dort ein Straßentunnel war, dummerweise mit layer -1 in einem landuse=residential ohne layer (also 0). Mapnik zeichnet den Tunnel, richtig. Kann man [EMAIL PROTECTED] auch mal beibringen, daß eine Fläche keine ways überdecken sollte. Es geht um: http://www.informationfreeway.org/?lat=50.76538406404275lon=6.232522554304 245zoom=16layers=F0B0F Ich habe dem landuse jetzt ein layer=-5 verabreicht. Dimitri ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] luftseilbahn taggen
hallo allesamt, welchen tag hat eine luftseilbahn? im wiki sah ich cable car. dies wäre jedoch eher eine standseilbahn und nicht die variante in der luft. was schlagt ihr mir vo zu nehmen? ich würde gerne meinen ausflug von gestern auf der karte erfassen. grüsse mariner ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] luftseilbahn taggen
welchen tag hat eine luftseilbahn? im wiki sah ich cable car. dies wäre jedoch eher eine standseilbahn und nicht die variante in der luft. was schlagt ihr mir vo zu nehmen? ich würde gerne meinen ausflug von gestern auf der karte erfassen. aerialway=cable_car ist schon das richtige Tag für die Luftseilbahn. Wird sogar gerendert. Grüsse Raphael ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Fahrrad-Brücke / Fußgängerbrücke wird über Fluß nicht korrekt gerendert.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 | kann mal jemand einen Blick auf klar | http://www.informationfreeway.org/?lat=52.40245457787084lon=9.630160076313922zoom=17layers=B000F000F | werfen? | Was stimmt da mit der Fußgänger-Brücke nicht? also unter mapnik hat er es gerendert. Ich habe jetzt einfach mal aus layer=+1 layer=1 gemacht. Evtl hilft das ja schon, dachte eigentlich das wäre OK habe aber nix anderes komisches gesehen. Zusätzlich habe ich noch das highway tag auf cycleway gesetzt, damit es auch zu den angrenzenden besser passt und dann bicycle=yes rausgenommen, da ein highway=cycleway automatisch bicycle=yes aussagt. Gilt auch so für highway=footway das foot=yes automatisch gilt, nur weil das jetzt halt immer explizit angegeben war. Muss nicht sein :) Grüße, Fabian -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32) iEYEARECAAYFAkgpbVUACgkQ8pTXCZH6O1/BzACgr98GVjw2Y32NE6hK+EhSHr2w JmAAnj7t7IDhaCBpebh6CwmKk9sFilYZ =9jEi -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] luftseilbahn taggen
Raphael Studer wrote: aerialway=cable_car ist schon das richtige Tag für die Luftseilbahn. Jepp, die Luft steckt da schon im Tag. Allerdings frage ich mich, warum es railway=cable_car nicht gibt laut Features-Seite... cu Henry ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Layer
Dimitri Junker wrote: ich dann, daß dort ein Straßentunnel war, dummerweise mit layer -1 in einem richtig. Kann man [EMAIL PROTECTED] auch mal beibringen, daß eine Fläche keine ways überdecken sollte. Mmmmh, eher andersrum. Tunnel sollten über alles (außer Icons und Beschriftungen) gerendert werden. Immerhin werden sie ja gestrichelt, was alleine schon Röntgenblick anzeigt. Wenn man sie stur in ihrem Layer rendert, bräuchte man sie auch nicht stricheln. cu Henry ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Problem mit GPS-Tuner, Waypoints in OSM
Die drei Zeichen am Anfang sind der erste Fehlergrund weil nach den XML-Spezifikationen vor dem ?xml version=1.0? nichts anderes erlaubt ist und der verwendete XML-Parser eine Content-Prüfung macht. Das sagt auch die Fehlermeldung aus (Content is not allowed in prolog). Am 10.05.2008 um 20:05 schrieb Raphael Mack: Am Dienstag, 6. Mai 2008 schrieb Andreas Jacob: Am Dienstag, 6. Mai 2008 14:57:46 schrieb Frederik Ramm: Allerdings auch mit komischen Ergebnissen, weil in der Datei ueberall sowas wie ![CDATA ... ]] drinsteht... Soweit meine bescheidenen XML Kentnisse richtig sind, wird CDATA dann verwendetm wenn man das Auftreten von, im Sinne von XML, Sonderzeichen wie z.B. die eckigen Klammern im Text zulassen will. Sozusagen ein Quoting. Ja genau da ist der Haken. Gpx ist halt ein XML-Format und JOSM verwendet keinen XML-Parser um es zu lesen. Darum können wir auch mit solchen ?tollen? XML-Features nicht umgehen... Wenn sowas von mehreren Gpx-Quellen produziert wird, müsste man das ggf. mal umstellen... JOSM verwendet zum Importieren der GPX-Daten einen SAX-Parser. Der wertet ![CDATA[ ]] natürlich auch richtig aus, soll heißen in den resultierenden Strings ist das ![CDATA[ ]] nicht mehr drin. Daran liegt die komische Anzeige nicht begründet. In den einzelnen Wegpunkten sind aber Link-Tags drin, die JOSM speichert (ohne Inhalt, da leer) und später versucht aufzulösen, was nicht geht, da leer. Viele Grüße, Christian ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] OSM Präsentationen in Hamburg
Hallo Christian, schön dass Du Dich gemeldet hast. :-) Das Meeting ist ein Kennenlernen anderer Hamburger Kollegen, welche Inhalte unter freien/ freieren Lizenzen veröffentlichen. Das heißt, es muss dort nicht erst die Reihe an Vorteilen der Nutzungsrechte erklärt werden. Wir kommen alle von unterschiedlichen Projekten, siehe Link, auch Wikipedia nahe stehende Organisationen, wie Wikisource. Das Meeting soll nicht all zu sehr fachlastig sein. Aber ich kann, falls Fragen zur SW-Struktur kommen keine Antworten geben, andererseits geht es auch mehr um Inhalte und die Infos an was andere in der Region so anstellen und wo sich Synergien ergeben können. Aber wenn Du möchtest kannst Du vielleicht in einem Lightning Talk für alle Gäste unsere Werkzeuge erläutern. Diejenigen, die dann wirklich noch mehr wissen möchten, können wir dann versorgen, wenn wir bei Lehmann's gerade eine fette Schwarte grillen. Obwohl mir dass noch nicht so eindrücklich klar ist wie, das rußt doch sicher ganz schön in einer Buchhandlung. Gruß, Stephan. http://linuxwiki.de/Communities/MeetingHamburg2008 An dem Part hätte ich Interesse. Worum gehts denn genau? Viele Grüße, Christian ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Wie mappe ich, ohne unangenehm aufzufallen?
Moin, On Tue, 06 May 2008 22:05:40 +0200 Dirk-Lüder Kreie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Moin, [...] Auch beim Mappen der Wege eines Friedhofs bin ich misstrauisch beäugt worden. Ein netter Gruß hat die meisten Situationen sofort in das totale Gegenteil verkehrt. Die Leute waren sofort neugierig, oder zumindest deutlich weniger misstrauisch. Dann ein Flyer und eine kurze Erklärung über OSM und die Leute sind vollends beruhigt. (schlimstenfalls halten sie einen dann für einen harmlosen altruistischen Spinner). wie gut funktioniert das Berühigen eigentlich in Ghettos? Also ich meine so Siedlungen mit großen Blocks, die den Eindruck erwecken, als wenn sie nur von ausländischen Mitbürgern bewohnt werden und auch nur orientalisch wirkende Personen zu sehen sind und man da von vornerein wie ein Fremdkörper wirkt und es nicht so einfach klar ist, wie gut man den Leuten etwas erklären kann, weil sie vielleicht für derartige Dinge die Sprache nicht genug beherrschen. Das sind jedenfalls die Gegenden in denen ich bisher am schiefsten angeschaut wurde. MfG Andreas signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Fahrrad-Brücke / Fußgängerbrücke wird über Fluß nicht korrekt gerendert.
Fabian -Patzi- Patzke schrieb: Zusätzlich habe ich noch das highway tag auf cycleway gesetzt, damit es auch zu den angrenzenden besser passt und dann bicycle=yes rausgenommen, da ein highway=cycleway automatisch bicycle=yes aussagt. Gilt auch so für highway=footway das foot=yes automatisch gilt, nur weil das jetzt halt immer explizit angegeben war. Muss nicht sein :) Im prinzip ja, praktisch schaden aber gewisse redundanzen nichts. Ganz im gegenteil. Es kann schnell passieren, dass die highway-typen durchrotiert werden (cycleway - track - footway), und schon wäre es gut, wenn da noch ein bicycle=yes mitgeschleppt worden wäre. -- Karl Eichwalder ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Layer
Hallo Mmmmh, eher andersrum. Tunnel sollten über alles (außer Icons und Beschriftungen) gerendert werden Und was wäre wenn die Straße nicht durch einen Tunnel führt, sondern einfach durch ein Tal und darüber eine Brücke führt? Gibt man dann der unteren Straße layer -1 und der oberen 0, so würde die untere auch nicht gezeichnet. Allgemein kann ich mir nicht vorstellen, wo eine Fläche einen Weg oder einen einzelnen Node verdecken soll. Eine einfache Lösung wäre, daß Flächen ohne layer-Angabe wie layer-5 behandelt werden. Für die wenigen Sonderfälle kan man ja dann was anderes setzen. Gruß Dimitri ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Layer
Dimitri Junker wrote: Und was wäre wenn die Straße nicht durch einen Tunnel führt, sondern einfach durch ein Tal und darüber eine Brücke führt? Gibt man dann der unteren Straße layer -1 und der oberen 0, so würde die untere auch nicht gezeichnet. Das wird jetzt auch nicht richtig gerendert, schon ohne Fläche nicht. Allgemein kann ich mir nicht vorstellen, wo eine Fläche einen Weg oder einen einzelnen Node verdecken soll. Eine einfache Lösung wäre, daß Flächen ohne Ich kenne da ein paar Gebäude, die das tun, z.B. das neue Parkhaus der Messe Stuttgart. layer-Angabe wie layer-5 behandelt werden. Für die wenigen Sonderfälle kan man ja dann was anderes setzen. Schadet nicht. cu Henry ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-it] [Soci.gfoss] da GFOSS.it - M(')appare un pezzetto di Verona....e poi ci si va a giocare
andrea giacomelli wrote: 2. su http://www.pibinko.org/out/proposta_tocati.png ho riportato la mappa che mi hanno dato loro come zona che sarebbe da coprire. chi è più veronologo di me saprà se lì c'è poca o tanta roba. ...ho provato a inserire la figura sul wiki OSM nella sezione delle città, ma mi dice qualcosa circa diritti di accesso di gruppo... ... Per avere un'idea del lavoro da fare si può guardare qui: http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=16lat=45.44387lon=11.00255layers=BTFFF direi che non è poco e, anche se non conosco verona, mi sembra che ci sia una zona di centro storico di quelle piene di canion urbani tutt'altro che facili da mappare. Comunque se si organizza un mapping day in un weekend da giugno in poi io forse riuscirò ad esserci e con un paio di gps al seguito. ciao, Marco. ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-it
[Talk-it] M(')appare Milano - 25 maggio
Salve a tutti, io sarò assente anche questa volta, ma conto negli altri. Pensavo si potrebbe mappare Sesto San Giovanni o Bresso. Che ne dite? Conoscete locali aperti di domenica che abbiano connessione Internet? Edoardo -- Edoardo Marascalchi ICT Consultant website: http://www.edoardomarascalchi.it skype: My status skype:asca_edom?call ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] [Soci.gfoss] da GFOSS.it - M(')appare un pezzetto di Verona....e poi ci si va a giocare
Cercherò anche io di fare il possibile per partecipare basta che non sia per domenica 8. Già la domenica successiva sarebbe ottima. Edoardo -- Edoardo Marascalchi ICT Consultant website: http://www.edoardomarascalchi.it skype: My status skype:asca_edom?call ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] [Soci.gfoss] da GFOSS.it - M(')appare un pezzetto di Verona....e poi ci si va a giocare
Il giorno mar, 13/05/2008 alle 18.09 +0200, Bighi ha scritto: Uso questo post anche per presentarmi, sono nuovo qui e non nemmeno se funziona cosi' la scrittura di messaggi nella talk list: speriamo sia arrivato. Arrivato senza problemi! Sono di Verona, diciamo per precisione che lo ero visto che ora mi son spostato un pelo fuori dopo essermi sposato. Cmq la zona non che sia cosi' vasta e difficile da mappare, potrebbe quasi essere mappata anche senza andare sul luogo per un residente, guardando la mappa di yahoo, l'unica cosa sono i sensi unici e qualche tunnel, ma son 2 o 3. Poi non so il livello di dettaglio e quale informazioni si vuole aggiungere. Hai già dato un'occhiata alle informazioni che si possono trovare sul Wiki? Per incominciare mi sembra che le migliori pagine siano queste: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Beginners%27_Guide http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/It:Beginners%27_Guide Un'altra pagine importantissima (tra i miei bookmark) è: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Map_features Non ho idea di quale sia la risoluzione delle mappe di Yahoo! sopra Verone, ma se è sufficiente non c'è nessun problema a lavorare su quelle. Purtroppo a Pisa non è così, per cui io mi devo mettere sotto ed andare a mappare armato di GPS! Io purtroppo non posso dare la mia disponibilita' fisica, visto che son appena diventato padre, ma se serve tirare qualche via potrei pure farlo gia'. Complimenti ed auguri! Non importa come, ogni contributo è sempre gradito, in qualsiasi modo ed in qualsiasi quantità! Ciaociao, Giovanni. -- Giovanni Mascellani [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pisa, Italy Web: http://giomasce.altervista.org SIP: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 0x5F1FBF70 (FP: 1EB6 3D43 E201 4DDF 67BD 003F FCB0 BB5C 5F1F BF70) signature.asc Description: Questa è una parte del messaggio firmata digitalmente ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-it
[Talk-es] abutters y landuse
Hola a todos! pregunta fácil (para quien lo sepa): cuándo usar abutters y cuando landuse? saludos! Rummidge ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-es
Re: [Talk-es] abutters y landuse
Hola, pues tal como yo lo entiendo es esto: Imagínate que vas de viaje por una carretera que no conoces con tu GPS y al pasar cierto cruce, empiezas a atravesar una zona industrial que es desconocida para ti y te apuntas en la libreta: al salir a la N-XXX, empieza zona industrial y dura 2 kilómetros. Después cuando vas a editar con JOSM por ejemplo, tú no sabes cuál es la anchura de esa zona industrial, solo sabes que esa carretera atraviesa zona industrial o es el límite de zona industrial, así que no puedes trazar un polígono en el que poner landuse=industrial, sino que pondrás abutters=industrial en ese tramo de la carretera, es decir, abutters tiene el sentido de atraviesa una zona de tipo... o bien colinda con una zona de tipo... Saludos, Lucas De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] en nombre de Pablo Gómez Enviado el: mar 13/05/2008 17:05 Para: Talk-es@openstreetmap.org Asunto: [Talk-es] abutters y landuse Hola a todos! pregunta fácil (para quien lo sepa): cuándo usar abutters y cuando landuse? saludos! Rummidge ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-es ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-es
Re: [Talk-es] abutters y landuse
El ejemplo de landuse=forest también está hecho igual, y un bosque no suele ocupar una manzana. Esos ejemplitos los han hecho en serie sin pensar mucho. Yo creo que muchos landuse como por ejemplo industrial, residential, commercial, retail y forest están pensados para ser usados en zonas amplias que no tienen un límite preciso, sirve más bien para describir un ambiente y no habría que ir con muchos miramientos para decidir su frontera exacta. Lo de los bares o restaurantes en zona industrial, pues depende del caso... Si es un restaurante grande que ocupa su propia manzana... pues yo lo dejaría fuera del landuse=industrial. Si está encajado entre dos naves, pues quizá no. Lucas De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] en nombre de Nacho Blanco Enviado el: mar 13/05/2008 17:55 Para: Discusi#243, n en Espa#241,ol de OpenStreetMap Asunto: Re: [Talk-es] abutters y landuse Hummm... entonces, ¿aplicaríais landuse=industrial a un polígono que recoja toda el área industrial de un pueblo/ciudad, a pesar de que no sólo haya talleres, fábricas y almacenes, como dice en [1], sino oficinas, restaurantes, etc.? Además, por el dibujo de la misma página parece que se aplicara a edificios o manzanas. [1]: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:landuse 2008/5/13 Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hola, pues tal como yo lo entiendo es esto: Imagínate que vas de viaje por una carretera que no conoces con tu GPS y al pasar cierto cruce, empiezas a atravesar una zona industrial que es desconocida para ti y te apuntas en la libreta: al salir a la N-XXX, empieza zona industrial y dura 2 kilómetros. Después cuando vas a editar con JOSM por ejemplo, tú no sabes cuál es la anchura de esa zona industrial, solo sabes que esa carretera atraviesa zona industrial o es el límite de zona industrial, así que no puedes trazar un polígono en el que poner landuse=industrial, sino que pondrás abutters=industrial en ese tramo de la carretera, es decir, abutters tiene el sentido de atraviesa una zona de tipo... o bien colinda con una zona de tipo... Saludos, Lucas De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] en nombre de Pablo Gómez Enviado el: mar 13/05/2008 17:05 Para: Talk-es@openstreetmap.org Asunto: [Talk-es] abutters y landuse Hola a todos! pregunta fácil (para quien lo sepa): cuándo usar abutters y cuando landuse? saludos! Rummidge ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-es ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-es -- P.D.: REENVIAR MI DIRECCIÓN DE FORMA VISIBLE ES DELITO: http://delitosinformaticos.com/delitos/correo4.shtml Nacho. --¿Has visto mi página web renovada?-- www.nachoblanco.tk http://www.nachoblanco.tk/ ¿Que no hay alternativa? devolucion.org http://devolucion.org/ www.partidopirata.es http://www.partidopirata.es/ www.ubuntu.com http://www.ubuntu.com/ es.openoffice.org http://es.openoffice.org/ winmail.dat___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-es
Re: [Talk-cz] Turisticke znacky a relace
Ahoj, jako napad se mi to libi. Prosim, napis to jako navrh namisto soucasne stranky na wiki do proposed features. Porad ale zustava otazka, jak to renderovat, protoze soucasna jedina pouzitelna relace je multipolygon a ta se do DB uklada jako polygon. Jak ulozit do databaze nepodporujici relace znacku nevim - ulozit ji jako dalsi cestu? To je potreba vyresit, protoze je hezke znacit veci nejak, ale pokud se to nebude dat vyrenderovat, je to na nic... K Tomáš Tichý napsal(a): Ahoj, vzhledem k tomu, ze podpora relaci v editorech se pomalu dostava do pouzitelneho stavu, myslim, ze je cas oprasit myslenku mapovani turistickych znacek pomoci relaci. Navrhuji pouzit podobne schema tagu, jako u cyklotras, tedy: relation = route route = marked_trail (nebo marked_hiking_trail ?) network = kct color = red | blue | green | yellow symbol = stripe | learn | local | ruin | peak | spring | interest (nepovinne, default je stripe) name = ... ( jen u pojmenovanych) ref = ... (nepovinne, da se zjistit z rozcestniku) int_ref = ... (jen mezinarodni) Prosim o pripominky, kdyztak to potom hodim na wiki. Dalsi vec, co jsem nikde nenasel je jak tagovat turisticke rozcestniky. Kolikrat jsou to vyznamne orientacni body a jsou casto pojmenovane ( vzdalenost je udavana vzdy k dalsimu rozcestniku). V nekterych papirovych turistickych mapach jsou znacene, tak si myslim, ze by nebylo spatne je mit i v OSM - chceme prece byt lepsi nez nesvobodne mapy :-). A jeste jeden dotaz, renderuji se uz nekde turisticke trasy (neco jako freemap.sk) ? =TT= ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Turisticke znacky a relace
Odvolavam, co jsem odvolal a slibuji, co jsem slibil - podle wiki je vse uz jinak - zustal jsem s informacemi nekde pred pul rokem :] Ano - navrh se mi libi :] K Tomáš Tichý napsal(a): Ahoj, vzhledem k tomu, ze podpora relaci v editorech se pomalu dostava do pouzitelneho stavu, myslim, ze je cas oprasit myslenku mapovani turistickych znacek pomoci relaci. Navrhuji pouzit podobne schema tagu, jako u cyklotras, tedy: relation = route route = marked_trail (nebo marked_hiking_trail ?) network = kct color = red | blue | green | yellow symbol = stripe | learn | local | ruin | peak | spring | interest (nepovinne, default je stripe) name = ... ( jen u pojmenovanych) ref = ... (nepovinne, da se zjistit z rozcestniku) int_ref = ... (jen mezinarodni) Prosim o pripominky, kdyztak to potom hodim na wiki. Dalsi vec, co jsem nikde nenasel je jak tagovat turisticke rozcestniky. Kolikrat jsou to vyznamne orientacni body a jsou casto pojmenovane ( vzdalenost je udavana vzdy k dalsimu rozcestniku). V nekterych papirovych turistickych mapach jsou znacene, tak si myslim, ze by nebylo spatne je mit i v OSM - chceme prece byt lepsi nez nesvobodne mapy :-). A jeste jeden dotaz, renderuji se uz nekde turisticke trasy (neco jako freemap.sk) ? =TT= ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Turisticke znacky a relace
Ahoj! vzhledem k tomu, ze podpora relaci v editorech se pomalu dostava do pouzitelneho stavu, myslim, ze je cas oprasit myslenku mapovani turistickych znacek pomoci relaci. Navrhuji pouzit podobne schema tagu, jako u cyklotras, tedy: relation = route route = marked_trail (nebo marked_hiking_trail ?) network = kct color = red | blue | green | yellow symbol = stripe | learn | local | ruin | peak | spring | interest (nepovinne, default je stripe) name = ... ( jen u pojmenovanych) ref = ... (nepovinne, da se zjistit z rozcestniku) int_ref = ... (jen mezinarodni) Prosim o pripominky, kdyztak to potom hodim na wiki. Jake to ma vyhody proti existujicimu znaceni? Treti druh znaceni (markedtrail=red, kcd_red=major, ted tohle) mi neprijde jako uplne skvely napad... Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Turisticke znacky a relace
Ma to vsechny vyhody relace :-) Tedy nezapleveluji se cesty dalsimi tagy a nemusi se resit duplicitni tagy (jako treba ref) obskurnimi pseudonamespacy a podobnymi zverstvy. Neni problem s vice relacemi nad jednou cestou. Navrh je konzistentni se soucasnym znacenim cyklotras. Navic relace je absolutne nekonflikni se soucasnym resenim, takze neni problem nejaky cas pouzivat oba zpusoby. Vyrenderovat to urcite nejak pujde, protoze stejnym zpusobem se renderuji relace pro cyklotrasy na http://www.gravitystorm.co.uk/osm/ Az budu mit trochu vic casu, zkusim zapatrat jak to maji delane. =TT= Jake to ma vyhody proti existujicimu znaceni? Treti druh znaceni (markedtrail=red, kcd_red=major, ted tohle) mi neprijde jako uplne skvely napad... Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Turisticke znacky a relace
Ahoj, no to teda tak neni - s cyklotrasami. Muzes je renderovat pres relation, ale normalne se znaci pres ncn_ref a podobne. Vasek On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 1:14 PM, Tomáš Tichý [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ma to vsechny vyhody relace :-) Tedy nezapleveluji se cesty dalsimi tagy a nemusi se resit duplicitni tagy (jako treba ref) obskurnimi pseudonamespacy a podobnymi zverstvy. Neni problem s vice relacemi nad jednou cestou. Navrh je konzistentni se soucasnym znacenim cyklotras. Navic relace je absolutne nekonflikni se soucasnym resenim, takze neni problem nejaky cas pouzivat oba zpusoby. Vyrenderovat to urcite nejak pujde, protoze stejnym zpusobem se renderuji relace pro cyklotrasy na http://www.gravitystorm.co.uk/osm/ Az budu mit trochu vic casu, zkusim zapatrat jak to maji delane. =TT= Jake to ma vyhody proti existujicimu znaceni? Treti druh znaceni (markedtrail=red, kcd_red=major, ted tohle) mi neprijde jako uplne skvely napad... Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachekhttp://www.livejournal.com/%7Epavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.htmlhttp://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/%7Epavel/picture/horses/blog.html ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Turisticke znacky a relace
Dosud byl problem s tim, ze relace nebyly moc podporovany a spatne se s nimi pracovalo. Pokud se tohle zmeni, tak i semanticky je to spravnejsi zpusob... K Tomáš Tichý napsal(a): Asi jsem se spatne vyjadril, prave cyklotrasy je krasny priklad koexistence obou zpusobu znaceni - pres tagy cest a pres relace. Rozhodne nechci rusit stavajici zpusob. Osobne si sice myslim, ze vsechny nefyzicke veci by se mely resit pokud mozno pres relace, protoze jinak to IMHO celkem zneprehlednuje databazi a komplikuje renderovani a nejake slozitejsi dotazy do DB. A taky je to vic prace s tagovanim - u relace vyplnite ty tagy jednou a pak uz jen prirazujete. Ale to je muj osobni nazor a nikomu to nevnucuji. Jen jsem chtel navrhnout, jak to delat pres relace. =TT= On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Vaclav Stepan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ahoj, no to teda tak neni - s cyklotrasami. Muzes je renderovat pres relation, ale normalne se znaci pres ncn_ref a podobne. Vasek On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 1:14 PM, Tomáš Tichý [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ma to vsechny vyhody relace :-) Tedy nezapleveluji se cesty dalsimi tagy a nemusi se resit duplicitni tagy (jako treba ref) obskurnimi pseudonamespacy a podobnymi zverstvy. Neni problem s vice relacemi nad jednou cestou. Navrh je konzistentni se soucasnym znacenim cyklotras. Navic relace je absolutne nekonflikni se soucasnym resenim, takze neni problem nejaky cas pouzivat oba zpusoby. Vyrenderovat to urcite nejak pujde, protoze stejnym zpusobem se renderuji relace pro cyklotrasy na http://www.gravitystorm.co.uk/osm/ Az budu mit trochu vic casu, zkusim zapatrat jak to maji delane. =TT= ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
[Talk-cz] Cyklostezky v Praze a prahounakole.cz
Ahoj, minuly tyden jsem si povidal s Vratou Fillerem, z valne casti autorem obsahu mapy na Prahounakole. Co z toho vypadlo zajimaveho o mape: - mapa je realizovana jako vicevrstva bitmapa - je mapovy podklad, ten je Shocartu, nad tim jsou cyklostezky coby cary a pismenka a jeste nad tim jsou znacky/ikonky typu semafory, nebezpecne misto, schody a podobne. Znacky jsou v databazi v nejakych lokalnich souradnicich vuci bitmapovym vrstvam. Jsou nicmene obcas posunute tak, aby to dobre vypadalo. - v mape jsou dve skupiny cyklostezek - C/Z/X a oficialni A* a podobne. C/Z/X jsou navrzene a projete lidmi kolem prahounakole, A* jsou magistratni. V obou pripadech je ale zakresleni v mape vysledkem studia terenu pripadne u A* take magistratnich dokumentu a nikoliv obkreslenim nejake oficialni mapy, procez zacleneni do OSM by melo byt legalni. = muzeme pouzit prinejmensim ty dve horni vrstvy jako overlay pro kresleni a obecne jako datovy zdroj Vaclav Stepan ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Cyklostezky v Praze a prahounakole.cz
Super, to je skvělá zpráva, ale potřebovali bychom teda ty dvě samotné vrstvy :-) Na webu to je všechno sloučené a georeferencované, ale vzhledem k vrstvě Shocartu není košer podle toho kreslit. Dalsi otazka je, jak tagovat ty neoficialni cyklotrasy a cyklozajimave POI, IMHO to bude potrebovat vymyslet par novych tagu, protoze je tam spousta zajimavych informaci. Na neoficialni cyklotrasy navrhuji pouzit moje oblibene relace ;-) a nejaky zvlastni tag, trebas network=ucn (unofficial cycle network). Navrh mapovani tagu: cesty - highway (klasicky) cyklostezka - highway=cycleway cyklistický pruh - ?, debatovalo se to nedávno v talku, ale nejak bez vysledku chodnik - highway=footway stezka pro chodce a cyklisty - highway=cycleway, foot=yes (nebo naopak, podle uvazeni lokalni situace) jizda v tramvajovych kolejich - railway=tram bicycle=yes ? Kvalitní povrch - surface=paved Nerovný povrch - surface=cobblestone Nezpevněný povrch - surface=unpaved Zpomalovací práh - barrier=speed_bump Obrubník - ? Schody - highway=steps vodící lištu řešit dodatečným tagem, třebas bicycle=guide_rail? Stoupání, klesání - incline=... Přechod pro chodce - highway=crossing , obrubníky řešit nějakými dodatečnými tagy ? POI ještě musím promyslet, kdyžtak to později hodím na wiki. =TT= 2008/5/13 Vaclav Stepan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ahoj, minuly tyden jsem si povidal s Vratou Fillerem, z valne casti autorem obsahu mapy na Prahounakole. Co z toho vypadlo zajimaveho o mape: - mapa je realizovana jako vicevrstva bitmapa - je mapovy podklad, ten je Shocartu, nad tim jsou cyklostezky coby cary a pismenka a jeste nad tim jsou znacky/ikonky typu semafory, nebezpecne misto, schody a podobne. Znacky jsou v databazi v nejakych lokalnich souradnicich vuci bitmapovym vrstvam. Jsou nicmene obcas posunute tak, aby to dobre vypadalo. - v mape jsou dve skupiny cyklostezek - C/Z/X a oficialni A* a podobne. C/Z/X jsou navrzene a projete lidmi kolem prahounakole, A* jsou magistratni. V obou pripadech je ale zakresleni v mape vysledkem studia terenu pripadne u A* take magistratnich dokumentu a nikoliv obkreslenim nejake oficialni mapy, procez zacleneni do OSM by melo byt legalni. = muzeme pouzit prinejmensim ty dve horni vrstvy jako overlay pro kresleni a obecne jako datovy zdroj Vaclav Stepan ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Cyklostezky v Praze a prahounakole.cz
Ahoj, zkusim za chvilku delsi odpoved - zkousim shrnout do Wiki znaceni. Vasek 2008/5/13 Tomáš Tichý [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Super, to je skvělá zpráva, ale potřebovali bychom teda ty dvě samotné vrstvy :-) Na webu to je všechno sloučené a georeferencované, ale vzhledem k vrstvě Shocartu není košer podle toho kreslit. Dalsi otazka je, jak tagovat ty neoficialni cyklotrasy a cyklozajimave POI, IMHO to bude potrebovat vymyslet par novych tagu, protoze je tam spousta zajimavych informaci. Na neoficialni cyklotrasy navrhuji pouzit moje oblibene relace ;-) a nejaky zvlastni tag, trebas network=ucn (unofficial cycle network). Navrh mapovani tagu: cesty - highway (klasicky) cyklostezka - highway=cycleway cyklistický pruh - ?, debatovalo se to nedávno v talku, ale nejak bez vysledku chodnik - highway=footway stezka pro chodce a cyklisty - highway=cycleway, foot=yes (nebo naopak, podle uvazeni lokalni situace) jizda v tramvajovych kolejich - railway=tram bicycle=yes ? Kvalitní povrch - surface=paved Nerovný povrch - surface=cobblestone Nezpevněný povrch - surface=unpaved Zpomalovací práh - barrier=speed_bump Obrubník - ? Schody - highway=steps vodící lištu řešit dodatečným tagem, třebas bicycle=guide_rail? Stoupání, klesání - incline=... Přechod pro chodce - highway=crossing , obrubníky řešit nějakými dodatečnými tagy ? POI ještě musím promyslet, kdyžtak to později hodím na wiki. =TT= 2008/5/13 Vaclav Stepan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ahoj, minuly tyden jsem si povidal s Vratou Fillerem, z valne casti autorem obsahu mapy na Prahounakole. Co z toho vypadlo zajimaveho o mape: - mapa je realizovana jako vicevrstva bitmapa - je mapovy podklad, ten je Shocartu, nad tim jsou cyklostezky coby cary a pismenka a jeste nad tim jsou znacky/ikonky typu semafory, nebezpecne misto, schody a podobne. Znacky jsou v databazi v nejakych lokalnich souradnicich vuci bitmapovym vrstvam. Jsou nicmene obcas posunute tak, aby to dobre vypadalo. - v mape jsou dve skupiny cyklostezek - C/Z/X a oficialni A* a podobne. C/Z/X jsou navrzene a projete lidmi kolem prahounakole, A* jsou magistratni. V obou pripadech je ale zakresleni v mape vysledkem studia terenu pripadne u A* take magistratnich dokumentu a nikoliv obkreslenim nejake oficialni mapy, procez zacleneni do OSM by melo byt legalni. = muzeme pouzit prinejmensim ty dve horni vrstvy jako overlay pro kresleni a obecne jako datovy zdroj Vaclav Stepan ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Turisticke znacky a relace
Relace jsou super ale ani mapnik ani osmarender je nepodporuje krome der v polygonech, takze resit je momentalne nema smysl. Ovsem myslim ze nikomu nic nebrani kct_* cpat do mapy jako relaci. Hlavne aby casem nas renderer (nebot osm osmarender ani mapnik v blizke dobe nase stezky renderova nebudou) umel oboji. Hlavne v mape nejdriv nejake stezky musi byt:). -- Michal Grézl http://walley.org ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Cyklostezky v Praze a prahounakole.cz
Ahoj, jo, o samostatne vrstvy jsem uz poprosil. K tagum - navrhuju zkusit to shrnout do Wiki do tabulky, uvidime, co chybi. Vasek 2008/5/13 Tomáš Tichý [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Super, to je skvělá zpráva, ale potřebovali bychom teda ty dvě samotné vrstvy :-) Na webu to je všechno sloučené a georeferencované, ale vzhledem k vrstvě Shocartu není košer podle toho kreslit. Dalsi otazka je, jak tagovat ty neoficialni cyklotrasy a cyklozajimave POI, IMHO to bude potrebovat vymyslet par novych tagu, protoze je tam spousta zajimavych informaci. Na neoficialni cyklotrasy navrhuji pouzit moje oblibene relace ;-) a nejaky zvlastni tag, trebas network=ucn (unofficial cycle network). Navrh mapovani tagu: cesty - highway (klasicky) cyklostezka - highway=cycleway cyklistický pruh - ?, debatovalo se to nedávno v talku, ale nejak bez vysledku chodnik - highway=footway stezka pro chodce a cyklisty - highway=cycleway, foot=yes (nebo naopak, podle uvazeni lokalni situace) jizda v tramvajovych kolejich - railway=tram bicycle=yes ? Kvalitní povrch - surface=paved Nerovný povrch - surface=cobblestone Nezpevněný povrch - surface=unpaved Zpomalovací práh - barrier=speed_bump Obrubník - ? Schody - highway=steps vodící lištu řešit dodatečným tagem, třebas bicycle=guide_rail? Stoupání, klesání - incline=... Přechod pro chodce - highway=crossing , obrubníky řešit nějakými dodatečnými tagy ? POI ještě musím promyslet, kdyžtak to později hodím na wiki. =TT= 2008/5/13 Vaclav Stepan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ahoj, minuly tyden jsem si povidal s Vratou Fillerem, z valne casti autorem obsahu mapy na Prahounakole. Co z toho vypadlo zajimaveho o mape: - mapa je realizovana jako vicevrstva bitmapa - je mapovy podklad, ten je Shocartu, nad tim jsou cyklostezky coby cary a pismenka a jeste nad tim jsou znacky/ikonky typu semafory, nebezpecne misto, schody a podobne. Znacky jsou v databazi v nejakych lokalnich souradnicich vuci bitmapovym vrstvam. Jsou nicmene obcas posunute tak, aby to dobre vypadalo. - v mape jsou dve skupiny cyklostezek - C/Z/X a oficialni A* a podobne. C/Z/X jsou navrzene a projete lidmi kolem prahounakole, A* jsou magistratni. V obou pripadech je ale zakresleni v mape vysledkem studia terenu pripadne u A* take magistratnich dokumentu a nikoliv obkreslenim nejake oficialni mapy, procez zacleneni do OSM by melo byt legalni. = muzeme pouzit prinejmensim ty dve horni vrstvy jako overlay pro kresleni a obecne jako datovy zdroj Vaclav Stepan ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Cyklostezky v Praze a prahounakole.cz
OK, chvilku strpeni a hodim to na wiki. =TT= 2008/5/13 Vaclav Stepan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ahoj, jo, o samostatne vrstvy jsem uz poprosil. K tagum - navrhuju zkusit to shrnout do Wiki do tabulky, uvidime, co chybi. Vasek 2008/5/13 Tomáš Tichý [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Super, to je skvělá zpráva, ale potřebovali bychom teda ty dvě samotné vrstvy :-) Na webu to je všechno sloučené a georeferencované, ale vzhledem k vrstvě Shocartu není košer podle toho kreslit. Dalsi otazka je, jak tagovat ty neoficialni cyklotrasy a cyklozajimave POI, IMHO to bude potrebovat vymyslet par novych tagu, protoze je tam spousta zajimavych informaci. Na neoficialni cyklotrasy navrhuji pouzit moje oblibene relace ;-) a nejaky zvlastni tag, trebas network=ucn (unofficial cycle network). Navrh mapovani tagu: cesty - highway (klasicky) cyklostezka - highway=cycleway cyklistický pruh - ?, debatovalo se to nedávno v talku, ale nejak bez vysledku chodnik - highway=footway stezka pro chodce a cyklisty - highway=cycleway, foot=yes (nebo naopak, podle uvazeni lokalni situace) jizda v tramvajovych kolejich - railway=tram bicycle=yes ? Kvalitní povrch - surface=paved Nerovný povrch - surface=cobblestone Nezpevněný povrch - surface=unpaved Zpomalovací práh - barrier=speed_bump Obrubník - ? Schody - highway=steps vodící lištu řešit dodatečným tagem, třebas bicycle=guide_rail? Stoupání, klesání - incline=... Přechod pro chodce - highway=crossing , obrubníky řešit nějakými dodatečnými tagy ? POI ještě musím promyslet, kdyžtak to později hodím na wiki. =TT= 2008/5/13 Vaclav Stepan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ahoj, minuly tyden jsem si povidal s Vratou Fillerem, z valne casti autorem obsahu mapy na Prahounakole. Co z toho vypadlo zajimaveho o mape: - mapa je realizovana jako vicevrstva bitmapa - je mapovy podklad, ten je Shocartu, nad tim jsou cyklostezky coby cary a pismenka a jeste nad tim jsou znacky/ikonky typu semafory, nebezpecne misto, schody a podobne. Znacky jsou v databazi v nejakych lokalnich souradnicich vuci bitmapovym vrstvam. Jsou nicmene obcas posunute tak, aby to dobre vypadalo. - v mape jsou dve skupiny cyklostezek - C/Z/X a oficialni A* a podobne. C/Z/X jsou navrzene a projete lidmi kolem prahounakole, A* jsou magistratni. V obou pripadech je ale zakresleni v mape vysledkem studia terenu pripadne u A* take magistratnich dokumentu a nikoliv obkreslenim nejake oficialni mapy, procez zacleneni do OSM by melo byt legalni. = muzeme pouzit prinejmensim ty dve horni vrstvy jako overlay pro kresleni a obecne jako datovy zdroj Vaclav Stepan ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
[Talk-cz] Tagování cyklostezek v Praze - náv rh
Ahoj, zkusil jsem shrnout současné značení sítí v Praze na Wiki, je to tu: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/WikiProjekt_Czechia/cycle_ways Na stránku je link z Czechia editing rules. Je to OK, nebo s tím mám počkat, kdyby byly protesty (vaše :-))? Přemýšlel jsem nad značením cyklotras. Navrhuji následující, prosím o komentáře: ncn_ a rcn_ = páteřní a zhušťovací trasy Prahou na kole. lcn_ = spojky Prahou na kole a magistrátní trasy, přičemž magistrátní trasy si zachovají své značení (A-číslo) Pokud jde více tras po stejné ulici, použije se pro tu druhou (magistrátní) relation. Širší zdůvodnění: V Praze fakticky existují dvě sítě cyklostezek - ta oficiální magistrátní a pak neoficiální mapa na prahounakole.cz. Magistrát má dvě třídy cyklostezek (v současném systému) - páteřní (I. třída, A1-99) a hlavní (II. třída A100+). Trasy jsou značené v terénu, ale síť tvoří nepropojené kousky, je řídká a popisuje pouze oficiální existující cyklostezky. Prahounakole.cz má tři třídy cyklostezek - páteřní, zhušťovací a ostatní (C/Z/X). Trasy v terénu značené nejsou, ale někdy se kryjí s oficiálními. Síť výborně kryje celou Prahu, je projetá a především popisuje kudy se dá jet a jak dobře a ne jestli tam jsou značky. Z hlediska OSM i cyklisty je IMHO přínosnější to druhé - mapa hodnotí i průjezdnost normálních ulic, půjde z ní dobře dělat samostatná routovatelná mapa pro kolo, máme k ní zdroje a lidé, kteří na ní pracují, jsou otevřeni OSM. Navíc prahounakole.cz zahrnuje i magistrátní trasy. K logické otázce, co když bude jednou magistrátní síť k něčemu, či bude-li někdo chtít náhled pouze magistrátní sítě. Náhled půjde vygenerovat i tak - z názvu trasy jasně plyne, jestli je I. či II. třídy. Stejně tak to půjde překlopit tam/zpět... Tak. Co vy na to? Vašek ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Tagování cyklostezek v Praze - náv rh
Neosuhlasím s návrhem, hlavní rozdíl mezi oficiálními a neoficiálními trasami je právě to značení v terénu, takže to může vést ke zmatení, protože se to vyrenderuje na cyklomapě stejně jako oficiální trasy. Rozhodně bych nemíchal značené a neznačené trasy. Značená a neznačená trasa musí být na první pohled vizuálně odlišitelná. Mapa Prahou na kole je vynikající, ale právě tohle míchání považuji za její největší nedostatek, protože pak se často v terénu musím dívat, jestli mám jet po šipkách, nebo podle mapy. Je potřeba se na to podívat taky z celorepublikového hlediska. Neoficiální trasy jsou zatím jen v Praze, kde je značení zatím slabší, ale to neznamená, že časem nemůžou vznikat i jinde a pak by v tom byl strašný guláš. Ostatně je potřeba vyřešit jednotně pro ČR i značení ostatních cyklotras mimo prahu, takže návrhy: Protinávrh I - lépe respektuje sémantiku pojmu network: ncn - síť KČT, rozlišit dalším tagem třídu rcn - v ČR asi neexistuje lcn - pražská síť, další lokální sítě, rozlišit dalším tagem třídu ucn - neoficiální trasy, rozlišit dalším tagem třídu Protinávrh II - lépe se vyrenderuje v současném rendereru: ncn - síť KČT 1. a 2. třída, magistrátní trasy Ax rcn - síť KČT 3. třída, magistrátní trasy Axx lcn - síť KČT 4. třída, magistrátní trasy Axxx, ostatní lokální značení ucn - neoficiální trasy Osobně si myslím, že nedostatky rendererů se nemají řešit znásilňováním tagování , takže hlasuji pro I. =TT= 2008/5/13 Vaclav Stepan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ahoj, zkusil jsem shrnout současné značení sítí v Praze na Wiki, je to tu: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/WikiProjekt_Czechia/cycle_ways Na stránku je link z Czechia editing rules. Je to OK, nebo s tím mám počkat, kdyby byly protesty (vaše :-))? Přemýšlel jsem nad značením cyklotras. Navrhuji následující, prosím o komentáře: ncn_ a rcn_ = páteřní a zhušťovací trasy Prahou na kole. lcn_ = spojky Prahou na kole a magistrátní trasy, přičemž magistrátní trasy si zachovají své značení (A-číslo) Pokud jde více tras po stejné ulici, použije se pro tu druhou (magistrátní) relation. Širší zdůvodnění: V Praze fakticky existují dvě sítě cyklostezek - ta oficiální magistrátní a pak neoficiální mapa na prahounakole.cz. Magistrát má dvě třídy cyklostezek (v současném systému) - páteřní (I. třída, A1-99) a hlavní (II. třída A100+). Trasy jsou značené v terénu, ale síť tvoří nepropojené kousky, je řídká a popisuje pouze oficiální existující cyklostezky. Prahounakole.cz má tři třídy cyklostezek - páteřní, zhušťovací a ostatní (C/Z/X). Trasy v terénu značené nejsou, ale někdy se kryjí s oficiálními. Síť výborně kryje celou Prahu, je projetá a především popisuje kudy se dá jet a jak dobře a ne jestli tam jsou značky. Z hlediska OSM i cyklisty je IMHO přínosnější to druhé - mapa hodnotí i průjezdnost normálních ulic, půjde z ní dobře dělat samostatná routovatelná mapa pro kolo, máme k ní zdroje a lidé, kteří na ní pracují, jsou otevřeni OSM. Navíc prahounakole.cz zahrnuje i magistrátní trasy. K logické otázce, co když bude jednou magistrátní síť k něčemu, či bude-li někdo chtít náhled pouze magistrátní sítě. Náhled půjde vygenerovat i tak - z názvu trasy jasně plyne, jestli je I. či II. třídy. Stejně tak to půjde překlopit tam/zpět... Tak. Co vy na to? Vašek ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Cyklostezky v Praze a prahounakole.cz
Tak jsem na wiki dal návrh konvezní tabulky PNK-OSM, zatím do talku, prosím doplňujte a komentujte. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Talk:WikiProjekt_Czechia/cycle_ways =TT= 2008/5/13 Vaclav Stepan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ahoj, jo, o samostatne vrstvy jsem uz poprosil. K tagum - navrhuju zkusit to shrnout do Wiki do tabulky, uvidime, co chybi. Vasek ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Tagování cyklostezek v Praze - náv rh
Ahoj, díky za připomínky. Rozběhneš renderer, nebo protlačíš úpravu mapniku, aby se to taky dalo zobrazovat? Vašek 2008/5/13 Tomáš Tichý [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Neosuhlasím s návrhem, hlavní rozdíl mezi oficiálními a neoficiálními trasami je právě to značení v terénu, takže to může vést ke zmatení, protože se to vyrenderuje na cyklomapě stejně jako oficiální trasy. Rozhodně bych nemíchal značené a neznačené trasy. Značená a neznačená trasa musí být na první pohled vizuálně odlišitelná. Mapa Prahou na kole je vynikající, ale právě tohle míchání považuji za její největší nedostatek, protože pak se často v terénu musím dívat, jestli mám jet po šipkách, nebo podle mapy. Je potřeba se na to podívat taky z celorepublikového hlediska. Neoficiální trasy jsou zatím jen v Praze, kde je značení zatím slabší, ale to neznamená, že časem nemůžou vznikat i jinde a pak by v tom byl strašný guláš. Ostatně je potřeba vyřešit jednotně pro ČR i značení ostatních cyklotras mimo prahu, takže návrhy: Protinávrh I - lépe respektuje sémantiku pojmu network: ncn - síť KČT, rozlišit dalším tagem třídu rcn - v ČR asi neexistuje lcn - pražská síť, další lokální sítě, rozlišit dalším tagem třídu ucn - neoficiální trasy, rozlišit dalším tagem třídu Protinávrh II - lépe se vyrenderuje v současném rendereru: ncn - síť KČT 1. a 2. třída, magistrátní trasy Ax rcn - síť KČT 3. třída, magistrátní trasy Axx lcn - síť KČT 4. třída, magistrátní trasy Axxx, ostatní lokální značení ucn - neoficiální trasy Osobně si myslím, že nedostatky rendererů se nemají řešit znásilňováním tagování , takže hlasuji pro I. =TT= 2008/5/13 Vaclav Stepan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ahoj, zkusil jsem shrnout současné značení sítí v Praze na Wiki, je to tu: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/WikiProjekt_Czechia/cycle_ways Na stránku je link z Czechia editing rules. Je to OK, nebo s tím mám počkat, kdyby byly protesty (vaše :-))? Přemýšlel jsem nad značením cyklotras. Navrhuji následující, prosím o komentáře: ncn_ a rcn_ = páteřní a zhušťovací trasy Prahou na kole. lcn_ = spojky Prahou na kole a magistrátní trasy, přičemž magistrátní trasy si zachovají své značení (A-číslo) Pokud jde více tras po stejné ulici, použije se pro tu druhou (magistrátní) relation. Širší zdůvodnění: V Praze fakticky existují dvě sítě cyklostezek - ta oficiální magistrátní a pak neoficiální mapa na prahounakole.cz. Magistrát má dvě třídy cyklostezek (v současném systému) - páteřní (I. třída, A1-99) a hlavní (II. třída A100+). Trasy jsou značené v terénu, ale síť tvoří nepropojené kousky, je řídká a popisuje pouze oficiální existující cyklostezky. Prahounakole.cz má tři třídy cyklostezek - páteřní, zhušťovací a ostatní (C/Z/X). Trasy v terénu značené nejsou, ale někdy se kryjí s oficiálními. Síť výborně kryje celou Prahu, je projetá a především popisuje kudy se dá jet a jak dobře a ne jestli tam jsou značky. Z hlediska OSM i cyklisty je IMHO přínosnější to druhé - mapa hodnotí i průjezdnost normálních ulic, půjde z ní dobře dělat samostatná routovatelná mapa pro kolo, máme k ní zdroje a lidé, kteří na ní pracují, jsou otevřeni OSM. Navíc prahounakole.cz zahrnuje i magistrátní trasy. K logické otázce, co když bude jednou magistrátní síť k něčemu, či bude-li někdo chtít náhled pouze magistrátní sítě. Náhled půjde vygenerovat i tak - z názvu trasy jasně plyne, jestli je I. či II. třídy. Stejně tak to půjde překlopit tam/zpět... Tak. Co vy na to? Vašek ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Cyklostezky v Praze a prahounakole.cz
Cyklistický pruh je popsaný tu: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:cycleway v tom moc nejasnosti nejsou, ne? Vašek 2008/5/13 Tomáš Tichý [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Tak jsem na wiki dal návrh konvezní tabulky PNK-OSM, zatím do talku, prosím doplňujte a komentujte. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Talk:WikiProjekt_Czechia/cycle_ways =TT= 2008/5/13 Vaclav Stepan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ahoj, jo, o samostatne vrstvy jsem uz poprosil. K tagum - navrhuju zkusit to shrnout do Wiki do tabulky, uvidime, co chybi. Vasek ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Cyklostezky v Praze a prahounakole.cz
Ok, doplněno pár značek, přehodil jsem tam poznámky k sítím v Praze. K network přístupu - souhlasím, že rozlišit značené a neznačené trasy by bylo dobré a je to dobrá abstrakce. Otázka ale je, jak v dohledné době zajistit, aby z toho byla i nějaká mapa a navíc zohledňující páteřní a nepáteřní trasy. Což, pokud to dobře chápu, znamená buď zajistit, aby to dělal přímo mapnik či osmarender na OSM, nebo rozběhnout něco lokálně s tím, že se to případně použije pro různé náhledy. Přijde mi, že zatím by bylo užitečné mít možnost kreslit a vidět... Vašek 2008/5/13 Vaclav Stepan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Cyklistický pruh je popsaný tu: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:cycleway v tom moc nejasnosti nejsou, ne? Vašek 2008/5/13 Tomáš Tichý [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Tak jsem na wiki dal návrh konvezní tabulky PNK-OSM, zatím do talku, prosím doplňujte a komentujte. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Talk:WikiProjekt_Czechia/cycle_ways =TT= 2008/5/13 Vaclav Stepan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ahoj, jo, o samostatne vrstvy jsem uz poprosil. K tagum - navrhuju zkusit to shrnout do Wiki do tabulky, uvidime, co chybi. Vasek ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
[Talk-cz] UHUL mapy a Merkaartor
Zdravim Pouziva nekdo UHUL mapy v Merkaartoru? Popripadne jake jine mapy jsou v Merkaartoru pouzitelne pro CR, kraj jihomoravsky. Diky ToMik ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] UHUL mapy a Merkaartor
Merkaartor nepouzivam, ale dotaz mi pripomel, ze bych mel zkontrolovat jestli uz bezi UHUL ortofoto - ukazalo se, ze opet funguje. Nova url je: http://geoportal2.uhul.cz/cgi-bin/oprl.asp?SERVICE=WMSVERSION=1.1.1REQUEST=GetMapSRS=EPSG:4326LAYERS=Ortofoto_cbSTYLES=defaultFORMAT=image/jpegTRANSPARENT=TRUE On 5/13/08, Tomáš Mika [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Zdravim Pouziva nekdo UHUL mapy v Merkaartoru? Popripadne jake jine mapy jsou v Merkaartoru pouzitelne pro CR, kraj jihomoravsky. Diky ToMik ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] UHUL mapy a Merkaartor
Skvělé, díky! Hlavně, že jak trouba, každý den pingám tu starou IP adresu :-) Jiří Jiri Klement wrote: Merkaartor nepouzivam, ale dotaz mi pripomel, ze bych mel zkontrolovat jestli uz bezi UHUL ortofoto - ukazalo se, ze opet funguje. Nova url je: http://geoportal2.uhul.cz/cgi-bin/oprl.asp?SERVICE=WMSVERSION=1.1.1REQUEST=GetMapSRS=EPSG:4326LAYERS=Ortofoto_cbSTYLES=defaultFORMAT=image/jpegTRANSPARENT=TRUE On 5/13/08, Tomáš Mika [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Zdravim Pouziva nekdo UHUL mapy v Merkaartoru? Popripadne jake jine mapy jsou v Merkaartoru pouzitelne pro CR, kraj jihomoravsky. Diky ToMik ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
[Talk-cz] problem s UHUL
http://geoportal2.uhul.cz/cgi-bin/oprl.asp?SERVICE=WMSVERSION=1.1.1REQUEST=GetMapSRS=EPSG:4326LAYERS=Ortofoto_cbSTYLES=defaultFORMAT=image/jpegTRANSPARENT=TRUE Kde delam chybu ze zadne orthofoto v JOSM nevidim ? Vytvori se vrstva ale je prazdna, zadny timeout jako kdybych mel spatne adresu. Data z landsatu vidim, plugin funguje. Diky ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] UHUL mapy a Merkaartor
Ahoj! Merkaartor nepouzivam, ale dotaz mi pripomel, ze bych mel zkontrolovat jestli uz bezi UHUL ortofoto - ukazalo se, ze opet funguje. Nova url je: http://geoportal2.uhul.cz/cgi-bin/oprl.asp?SERVICE=WMSVERSION=1.1.1REQUEST=GetMapSRS=EPSG:4326LAYERS=Ortofoto_cbSTYLES=defaultFORMAT=image/jpegTRANSPARENT=TRUE Dik, openaerialmap jede. -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-cz
[OSM-talk-fr] une nouvelle page d'accueil sur le wiki ?
A tous, Je travaille depuis quelques temps déjà sur un prototype de nouvelle page d'accueil francophone sur le wiki. La 1ere réunion IRC francophone avait montré que beaucoup de gens étaient frustrés par le manque d'organisation du wiki aussi ais-je pensé qu'une page d'accueil avec d'avantages de liens et organisé par thèmes pourrait améliorer les choses. Donc, ma proposition serait de remplacer la page actuelle: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Fr:Main_Page par celle-ci: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/User:Pieren/sandbox Bien sûr, j'attend vos commentaires, suggestions, etc.. avec un retour de vos propres expériences passées, surtout à vos débuts (par exemple, quelles pages mettre en avant, celles qui peuvent restées en dehors de la page d'accueil, d'autres qui manquent, etc..) Pieren ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] une nouvelle page d'accueil sur le wiki ?
2008/5/13 Pieren Pieren [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Donc, ma proposition serait de remplacer la page actuelle: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Fr:Main_Page par celle-ci: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/User:Pieren/sandbox Super cool :) c'est beaucoup mieux que l'actuel -- Julien ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] une nouvelle page d'accueil sur le wiki ?
Je vote pour X 100, Super idée et belle réalisation. Jean-Yves 2008/5/13 Julien Langlois [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 2008/5/13 Pieren Pieren [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Donc, ma proposition serait de remplacer la page actuelle: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Fr:Main_Page par celle-ci: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/User:Pieren/sandbox Super cool :) c'est beaucoup mieux que l'actuel -- Julien ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-fr ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] une nouvelle page d'accueil sur le wiki ?
j'aime beaucoup. Bon travail ! Axel A tous, Je travaille depuis quelques temps déjà sur un prototype de nouvelle page d'accueil francophone sur le wiki. La 1ere réunion IRC francophone avait montré que beaucoup de gens étaient frustrés par le manque d'organisation du wiki aussi ais-je pensé qu'une page d'accueil avec d'avantages de liens et organisé par thèmes pourrait améliorer les choses. Donc, ma proposition serait de remplacer la page actuelle: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Fr:Main_Page par celle-ci: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/User:Pieren/sandbox Bien sûr, j'attend vos commentaires, suggestions, etc.. avec un retour de vos propres expériences passées, surtout à vos débuts (par exemple, quelles pages mettre en avant, celles qui peuvent restées en dehors de la page d'accueil, d'autres qui manquent, etc..) Pieren ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-fr ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-fr
