Re: [OSM-talk] Relation/Routes and Hikes in open Country

[Andy Allan]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 2:56 AM,  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm working on importing another set of tracks, see:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Bob_Spirko
>
> I've done a couple of Relation/Routes and wanted some feedback on whether
> this is the right way, or if not what is
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.5/relation/18321
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.5/relation/18323
>
> Also these hikes are in open country (follow URL link to see pictures of
> very beautiful mountains), so it's unlikely that exactly the same route
> will be followed each time. What is a good rule of thumb for marking
> these?

Wow, I'm totally jealous of the landscape.

However, I don't think marking these as "routes" is appropriate. For
cycle routes we have the rough description that "Cycle routes are
named or numbered or otherwise signed routes, which may go along roads
or dedicated cycle paths. ". I don't see anything objective in some
guy's opinion of a way to get up and down a hill. If any random
collection of paths counts as a personal "route" then I would be able
to create routes all over my neighbourhood along the lines of






... and the whole idea of routes being objective, signed etc flies out
the window. For comparison, the foot routes around London that I've
been rendering are all officially signed. There is a right and a wrong
since there is evidence on the ground, and there is an "operator"
since a local authority is responsible for them. So it's not
subjective in any way.

If you want to mark them in using relations, please find tags other
than type=route, route=foot in order to distinguish them from real
objective routes. And this guy doesn't "operate" them in any sense of
the word, so I'd ask you to avoid that tag also.

Cheers,
Andy

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] short forms of street names

[wer-ist-roger]

>name:sh is not a good idea, because there could be a language whose code 
>is "sh". How about short_name? This could also be localized like 
>short_name:en, short_name:sv etc.

>I'm already using short_name for abbreviations of building names on the 
>Bayreuth university campus.


I don't like the idea of the short_name tag for common names. The rendering 
engine should be configured to shorten abbreviations like road, street, 
vägen, gatan, Straße or what ever by itself. This is much more sufficient 
then adding the tags one by one. That gives everyone the chance to choose for 
them selfs if they like to shorten a name or not. This is especially 
important when you can shorten more then one thing in one name. For example
Sankt Ingbert Straße could be shortened:

St. Ingbert Straße
Sankt Ingbert Str.
St. Ingbert Str.

So which one would be the short name you put in right now? Usually you would 
put in St. Ingbert Straße but this is certainly not the shortest but St. 
Ingbert Str. is an absolutely uncommon used version of the name but maybe 
usefull if the street is very short.

I believe that the rendering engine should be responsible for shorting names

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Wide roads and traffic signals

[Moshe Sayag]

Hi everyone,

I am trying to map my area (that is very sparsely mapped in OSM
currently), so I bought a GPS device and started cycling / driving
around and edit my tracks.
The results so far can be seen at

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.1878&lon=34.8714&zoom=14&layers=B00FT
(Notice that the street names is not shown in Mapnik but only in Osmarender)

My questions:

1. How do I map a wide road with a separation (line of trees) between
the two directions?
Something like:

-->-->-->-->-->-->
-->-->-->-->-->-->
*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *
<--<--<--<--<--<--
<--<--<--<--<--<--

Do I set it as a one two-way road or two one-way roads?

2. If I set it as two separate ways, how do I mark traffic signals
(traffic lights) where two such roads cross each other?

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Wide roads and traffic signals

[Stephen Hope]

If you can't cross from one side to another anywhere, then it should
be marked as two separate ways.

When you have a twoway road connect to one of these,  it will connect
to each side, with a little crossing piece in the middle. When you
have two such roads connect, then it will look like a hash symbol (#)
with four nodes.  Each of these nodes would have a traffic light tag
if there were lights.

Stephen

2008/6/25 Moshe Sayag <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I am trying to map my area (that is very sparsely mapped in OSM
> currently), so I bought a GPS device and started cycling / driving
> around and edit my tracks.
> The results so far can be seen at
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.1878&lon=34.8714&zoom=14&layers=B00FT
> (Notice that the street names is not shown in Mapnik but only in Osmarender)
>
> My questions:
>
> 1. How do I map a wide road with a separation (line of trees) between
> the two directions?
> Something like:
>
> -->-->-->-->-->-->
> -->-->-->-->-->-->
> *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *
> <--<--<--<--<--<--
> <--<--<--<--<--<--
>
> Do I set it as a one two-way road or two one-way roads?
>
> 2. If I set it as two separate ways, how do I mark traffic signals
> (traffic lights) where two such roads cross each other?
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Wide roads and traffic signals

[Rory McCann]

Moshe Sayag wrote:
> 1. How do I map a wide road with a separation (line of trees) between
> the two directions?
> Something like:

I think the OSM way is to map it as 2 separate one-way ways. The rule of 
thumb is if it's physically impossible to change sides (ie something in 
the way down the middle), then it should be 2 ways. If it's nothing more 
than a painted line down the middle, then map it as a single way.

Rory

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] short forms of street names

[Robin Paulson]

2008/6/25 wer-ist-roger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I don't like the idea of the short_name tag for common names. The rendering
> engine should be configured to shorten abbreviations like road, street,
> vägen, gatan, Straße or what ever by itself. This is much more sufficient
> then adding the tags one by one. That gives everyone the chance to choose for
> them selfs if they like to shorten a name or not. This is especially
> important when you can shorten more then one thing in one name. For example
> Sankt Ingbert Straße could be shortened:
..
>
> I believe that the rendering engine should be responsible for shorting names

i think he was referring to the bits that can't be shortened
automatically, for instance shortening "Karangahape Road" (in
auckland) to "K' Road" as it's also known

or shortening "Durham" of "Durham Lane East" (also akl) to "Dur"
(because the street's very short, and we can't fit all the full name
in) by hand, and letting software rules shorten Lane to Ln and East to
E.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Wide roads and traffic signals

[Robin Paulson]

2008/6/25 Moshe Sayag <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.1878&lon=34.8714&zoom=14&layers=B00FT
> (Notice that the street names is not shown in Mapnik but only in Osmarender)
>
> My questions:
>
> 1. How do I map a wide road with a separation (line of trees) between
> the two directions?
> Something like:
>
> -->-->-->-->-->-->
> -->-->-->-->-->-->
> *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *
> <--<--<--<--<--<--
> <--<--<--<--<--<--
>
> Do I set it as a one two-way road or two one-way roads?

two one way roads is the generally accepted method

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:highway

has lots of info on tagging roads

there's also a relations proposal being discussed to use on
dual-carriageway roads like this, to enable the opposite carriageways
to be "connected" in a meaningful way:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Dual_carriageways

> 2. If I set it as two separate ways, how do I mark traffic signals
> (traffic lights) where two such roads cross each other?

i think there's a relation for this; it came up a week or two back

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Wide roads and traffic signals

[Robin Paulson]

2008/6/25 Robin Paulson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> 2. If I set it as two separate ways, how do I mark traffic signals
>> (traffic lights) where two such roads cross each other?
>
> i think there's a relation for this; it came up a week or two back
>

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Junctions

is where it's discussed

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Relation/Routes and Hikes in open Country

[Nick Whitelegg]

>Wow, I'm totally jealous of the landscape.

>However, I don't think marking these as "routes" is appropriate. For
>cycle routes we have the rough description that "Cycle routes are
>named or numbered or otherwise signed routes, which may go along roads
>or dedicated cycle paths. ". I don't see anything objective in some
>guy's opinion of a way to get up and down a hill. If any random
>collection of paths counts as a personal "route" then I would be able
>to create routes all over my neighbourhood along the lines of

>
>
>
>

>... and the whole idea of routes being objective, signed etc flies out
>the window. For comparison, the foot routes around London that I've
>been rendering are all officially signed. There is a right and a wrong
>since there is evidence on the ground, and there is an "operator"
>since a local authority is responsible for them. So it's not
>subjective in any way.

>If you want to mark them in using relations, please find tags other
>than type=route, route=foot in order to distinguish them from real
>objective routes. And this guy doesn't "operate" them in any sense of
>the word, so I'd ask you to avoid that tag also.

I guess this comes down as to whether things like walking routes should be 
stored in OSM itself or put in a different project. I guess we don't want 
to overload OSM with walking routes; however Freemap does aim to overlay 
walking routes on top of the OSM base map.

Nick

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker

[Nick Whitelegg]

>I'm using gmail. The way I read my user agreement google
>pretty much has the right to do anything they want with
>any information I give them. For that reason I'm careful
>not to put anything really important in my emails.

I find that very hard to believe, that a mail service operator would have 
the right to "steal" confidential
info in your email. Is there not a law against unauthorised reading of 
emails?
Or am I missing something?

Nick

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Relation/Routes and Hikes in open Country

[Nick Whitelegg]

>On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Nick Whitelegg
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> I guess this comes down as to whether things like walking routes should 
be
>> stored in OSM itself or put in a different project. I guess we don't 
want
>> to overload OSM with walking routes; however Freemap does aim to 
overlay
>> walking routes on top of the OSM base map.

>I'd define it slightly differently - its do we want *subjective*
>routes in OSM? I don't think anyone is arguing that notable
>*objective* routes, like the Pennine Way in the UK or the Appalachian
>Way in the US can certainly be included as a route.

Sorry, what I meant by "walking route" was "I did this random route 
somewhere in Hampshire last weekend, thought it was really nice and would 
like to share it with other people".

Nick


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Trails (paths) with no individual names

[Victor Snesarev]

Should I use the name tag when mapping a system of connected trails that has
a name, but where individual trail branches do not have names?

For a specific example take a look at the Kildaire Farms Trail system I
started mapping here:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=35.75814&lon=-78.79265&zoom=16&layers=0B0FT

I named the small branch going North from the trail junction with the same
name as the main trail. There are other branches, some of which are quite
short, that will probably clutter the map with "Kildaire Farms Trail"
labels. I am thinking of keeping the name on the longest way and not naming
the branches. What would you do?

Thanks,
Victor
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Relation/Routes and Hikes in open Country

[Andy Allan]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Nick Whitelegg
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I guess this comes down as to whether things like walking routes should be
> stored in OSM itself or put in a different project. I guess we don't want
> to overload OSM with walking routes; however Freemap does aim to overlay
> walking routes on top of the OSM base map.

I'd define it slightly differently - its do we want *subjective*
routes in OSM? I don't think anyone is arguing that notable
*objective* routes, like the Pennine Way in the UK or the Appalachian
Way in the US can certainly be included as a route.

Cheers,
Andy

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker

[Dave Stubbs]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:16 PM, Nick Whitelegg
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>I'm using gmail. The way I read my user agreement google
>>pretty much has the right to do anything they want with
>>any information I give them. For that reason I'm careful
>>not to put anything really important in my emails.
>
> I find that very hard to believe, that a mail service operator would have
> the right to "steal" confidential
> info in your email. Is there not a law against unauthorised reading of
> emails?
> Or am I missing something?
>


Well, their Gmail T&C goes, "We will not use any of your content for
any purpose except to provide you with the Service".  I think you can
expect that none of your content should show up elsewhere, and their
privacy policy will apply to most stuff which essentially limits them
to "aggregated non-personal information". You probably have a pile of
rights beyond this, but don't expect Google to admit it.

Some people get very paranoid (not without some justification -- in
the general T&Cs it says uploading content to Google gives them a
non-exclusive right to do just about anything they want with it), but
there's a fair bit of FUD flying around as well.

Dave

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Relation/Routes and Hikes in open Country

[Richard Fairhurst]

Andy Allan wrote:

> I'd define it slightly differently - its do we want *subjective*
> routes in OSM? I don't think anyone is arguing that notable
> *objective* routes, like the Pennine Way in the UK or the Appalachian
> Way in the US can certainly be included as a route.

(...or the entire National Cycle Network :) )

That's a good rule - agreed completely. As ever, we map what's on the ground.

Something I keep toying with is the idea of facilitating mashups (did  
I really just say that?) by giving masher-uppers a way to tie their  
routes to OSM IDs.

If you plot a favourite walk on a Google Map, you're effectively just  
drawing lines and points on a flat map. There's no tie-up with the  
underlying data. You might as well do it on a paper map.

What we can offer, theoretically, is the ability to say "this walk is  
along OSM ways 197687345, 197687343, 29587031". This is really good,  
because it means the mashup site can actually use the data: the  
footpath quality, where the gates and stiles are, how many miles to  
the next pub/station, etc.

You can do that right now, but it requires downloading a planet  
excerpt and some heavy hacking, which is beyond the capabilities of  
most masher-uppers. The aim, I guess, would be to make it as easy as  
using the Google API - a nice piece of reliable JavaScript to handle  
the API calls for all the common stuff. (There's also the issue of  
changing IDs, of course.)

cheers
Richard


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Relation/Routes and Hikes in open Country

[spaetz]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:31:37PM +0100, Nick Whitelegg wrote:

> >I'd define it slightly differently - its do we want *subjective*
> >routes in OSM? I don't think anyone is arguing that notable
> >*objective* routes, like the Pennine Way in the UK or the Appalachian
> >Way in the US can certainly be included as a route.
> 
> Sorry, what I meant by "walking route" was "I did this random route 
> somewhere in Hampshire last weekend, thought it was really nice and would 
> like to share it with other people".

I see why this could be on a different server, but personally, I wouldn't mind 
if this were tagged as
route=nice_hike

There is a slippery slope (pun intended) to where to stop though, in the 
extreme Andy's nice "shopping trail to the grocery" would count as valid too.

spaetz

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker

[Michael Collinson]

[Off original topic!]

Google certainly do "access" the information sent to gmail accounts 
in order to deliver targeted ads in the account holders web email 
browser. So the original post had me rushing to read the fine 
print.  I had to read it pretty carefully but access is limited to 
the following broad categories and I didn't see any obvious loopholes:

formatting and delivering email; delivering advertisements and 
related links; preventing unsolicited bulk email (spam); to satisfy 
applicable law, regulation, legal process or enforceable governmental 
request; violation of Terms of Service; protect against imminent harm 
to the rights, property or safety of Google, its users or the public 
as required or permitted by law.

The last two *could* perhaps be used in a heavy-handed fashion perhaps.

Mike

http://www.google.com/a/help/intl/en-GB/users/terms.html
http://www.google.com/privacypolicy.html Google General Privacy Notice
http://mail.google.com/mail/help/intl/en_GB/privacy.html   Google 
Mail Privacy Notice




At 01:16 PM 6/25/2008, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
> >I'm using gmail. The way I read my user agreement google
> >pretty much has the right to do anything they want with
> >any information I give them. For that reason I'm careful
> >not to put anything really important in my emails.
>
>I find that very hard to believe, that a mail service operator would have
>the right to "steal" confidential
>info in your email. Is there not a law against unauthorised reading of
>emails?
>Or am I missing something?
>
>Nick


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] M(')appare Milano (aka three-month mapping campaign in Milan)- closing event - Jul 2

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

Some facts:

1- The event will be hosted by the Faculty of Architecture of the Politecnico 
di Milano, and more specifically by the Department of Architecture and Planning.

2- The event will be have FM radio coverage (that wouldn't be news, as the 
Mente Locale radio show took up the story since mid-March)...probably with a 
live report/interview (this wouldn't be news either, as in Jan 08 we had a live 
interview on one of the main national radio channels for the Arezzo mapping 
party)...anyway: it's happening.

3- the event will see audience possibly coming from various locations in 
Northern Italy (as through GFOSS.it, the Italian OSGEO Chapter) we have tried 
to do a consistent work in maintaining a coordinated communication plan about 
this and other events

4- the event will summarise key results from the campaign, interesting people 
and stories recorded, testimonials, etc.


5- the event will also be a interesting venue to present the activities which 
GFOSS.it has planned for the coming months, in terms of awareness raising on 
free geographic information systems. OSM has proven to be an extremely 
interesting project in this respect, and we will continue to support it - at 
the same time, this will also be an excellent opportunity to explain ho street 
data relate to other data "floating" around us.

6- if you have friends or colleagues with conversational knowledge of Italian 
who may be around Milano in that date, we will be glad to meet the at the 
Politecnico (please write directly to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for logistic 
assistance).

for all the others, we'll be posting a summary of the event by mid-July.

Regards,

andrea giacomelli
vice president GFOSS.it - Italian OSGEO Chapter - http://www.gfoss.it
http://www.pibinko.org - ideas and projects
http://pibinko.splinder.com - news
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Relation/Routes and Hikes in open Country

[Nick Whitelegg]

>Something I keep toying with is the idea of facilitating mashups (did 
>I really just say that?) by giving masher-uppers a way to tie their 
>routes to OSM IDs.

>If you plot a favourite walk on a Google Map, you're effectively just 
>drawing lines and points on a flat map. There's no tie-up with the 
>underlying data. You might as well do it on a paper map.

>What we can offer, theoretically, is the ability to say "this walk is 
>along OSM ways 197687345, 197687343, 29587031". This is really good, 
>because it means the mashup site can actually use the data: the 
>footpath quality, where the gates and stiles are, how many miles to 
>the next pub/station, etc.

>You can do that right now, but it requires downloading a planet 
>excerpt and some heavy hacking, which is beyond the capabilities of 
>most masher-uppers. The aim, I guess, would be to make it as easy as 
>using the Google API - a nice piece of reliable JavaScript to handle 
>the API calls for all the common stuff. (There's also the issue of 
>changing IDs, of course.)

>cheers
>Richard

I've kind-of played around with this in the past: one version of Freemap 
(no longer current, but the code can be
resurrected) allowed a user to click on a right of way and annotate it 
(e.g. this path is badly overgrown): the data would then be forwarded to 
OSM via adding a "description" tag to the way.

But it would be relatively easy (now I've done much of the code) to add 
the ability to link a walking route to OSM ways, and indeed not too 
difficult to develop a JS API for this.

Nick

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker

[Steve Hill]

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008, Nick Whitelegg wrote:

> Is there not a law against unauthorised reading of
> emails?

It isn't exactly unauthorised if you agreed to the contract when you 
signed up for the service...  Whether they can read _inbound_ emails is a 
quite different question though, since the sender did not agree to the 
contract.

  - 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] OpenStreetBugs, now with IE

[X]

OpenStreetBugs is now working with Internet Explorer too.
A future "image of the week" ? ;-)

Xav.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Trails (paths) with no individual names

[Michael Collinson]

If there is clearly a "main" trail and the rest are feeders (i.e. how 
to get on/off the trail) or stubs to viewpoints or other features, 
then yes I would just name the main trail. I think that is what your 
example is showing, even though it is actually quite short through a 
local suburb.


As a general rule, I try to stop and imagine what would be most 
useful to the person actually looking at the map - obvious, but I (we 
all?) forget sometimes.  Here I'd try to decide whether I want to 
emphasize that there is a trail that one can walk end to end, or here 
is an interesting network of trails that one can wander around on.


Just my personal views!
Mike


At 01:32 PM 6/25/2008, Victor Snesarev wrote:
Should I use the name tag when mapping a system of connected trails 
that has a name, but where individual trail branches do not have names?


For a specific example take a look at the Kildaire Farms Trail 
system I started mapping here:


http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=35.75814&lon=-78.79265&zoom=16&layers=0B0FT

I named the small branch going North from the trail junction with 
the same name as the main trail. There are other branches, some of 
which are quite short, that will probably clutter the map with 
"Kildaire Farms Trail" labels. I am thinking of keeping the name on 
the longest way and not naming the branches. What would you do?


Thanks,
Victor
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] short forms of street names

[Karl Newman]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 3:37 AM, Robin Paulson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> 2008/6/25 wer-ist-roger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I don't like the idea of the short_name tag for common names. The
> rendering
> > engine should be configured to shorten abbreviations like road, street,
> > vägen, gatan, Straße or what ever by itself. This is much more sufficient
> > then adding the tags one by one. That gives everyone the chance to choose
> for
> > them selfs if they like to shorten a name or not. This is especially
> > important when you can shorten more then one thing in one name. For
> example
> > Sankt Ingbert Straße could be shortened:
> ..
> >
> > I believe that the rendering engine should be responsible for shorting
> names
>
> i think he was referring to the bits that can't be shortened
> automatically, for instance shortening "Karangahape Road" (in
> auckland) to "K' Road" as it's also known
>
> or shortening "Durham" of "Durham Lane East" (also akl) to "Dur"
> (because the street's very short, and we can't fit all the full name
> in) by hand, and letting software rules shorten Lane to Ln and East to
> E.
>

The other problem is that shortening rules which work for one street (or
region) won't necessarily work in another. As "wer-ist-roger" mentioned,
Straße could be shortened to Str., which might be okay in some areas (or for
certain streets) but not for others. Without a hint, the renderers (or other
data consumers) won't know if a given shortening rule is okay to apply.

Karl
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker

[Steven Le Roux]

2008/6/25 Richard Fairhurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Steven Le Roux wrote:
>
>  d'un point de vue strictement technique, il faut reconnaitre que
>> l'approche de map maker est meilleure que potlatch qui lui n'est pas
>> utilisable sur une machine légere sous linux. (merci flash)
>>
>
> Mais si vous detestez Flash, OpenStreetMap a un API, alors vous pouvez
> utiliser un editeur non-Flash (ex. JOSM ou Merkaartor). Google Map Maker n'a
> pas d'API - si vous n'avez pas de browser moderne, vous ne pouvez pas
> utiliser GMM.
>
> amities
> Richard
>
> p.s. talk-fr is that way >


Sorry for this cross post... actually gmail has buggued with this thread,
and has mixed all the post from all list whatsoever...

I use JOSM :) no pb for this side ;)


What I don't understand is why google don't provide this tool but interfaced
with OSM, with a special rendering to get it compliant with graphical usage
from google maps.

Why is it important for google to not provide datas ?


-- 
Steven Le Roux
Jabber-ID : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
0x39494CCB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2FF7 226B 552E 4709 03F0 6281 72D7 A010 3949 4CCB
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker

[cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)]

On 2008-06-25, Michael Collinson wrote:
> [Off original topic!]
>
> Google certainly do "access" the information sent to gmail accounts
> in order to deliver targeted ads in the account holders web email
> browser. So the original post had me rushing to read the fine
> print.  I had to read it pretty carefully but access is limited to
> the following broad categories and I didn't see any obvious loopholes:
>
> formatting and delivering email; delivering advertisements and
> related links; preventing unsolicited bulk email (spam); to satisfy
> applicable law, regulation, legal process or enforceable governmental
> request; violation of Terms of Service; protect against imminent harm
> to the rights, property or safety of Google, its users or the public
> as required or permitted by law.
>
> The last two *could* perhaps be used in a heavy-handed fashion perhaps.

could? That goes for any governmental request, from any goverment (as google 
operates worldwide). Plus at this point it's already 'has' not 'could' (see 
e.g. [1]). 

I come across stories of yet another innocent finally clearing his name 
after years of legal battles and having their entire life ruined every 
couple of months (e.g. [2], [3]).

Add to that the blatant power grabbing by police and intelligence agencies 
worldwide under the banner of either or both of the two current whitchhunt 
labels: terrorism and child pornography (watch it, all reason just went out 
the window)

Not to mention things like western, supposedly democratic, governments 
abandoning legal principles like habeas corpus (US), or 'anybody is equal in 
the eyes of the law' (UK, ASBO's), or 'innocent until proven guilty' 
(western governments all over in their threatment of e.g. copyright law, 
wiretapping, and  the latest 'let's track of everybody' laws)

Personally my faith in western judicial systems and political has taken a 
extremely deep dive in the last 7 years or so, we're sliding down the 
slippery slope and I see no signs of it stopping any time soon.

[1] http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/yahoo-helps-china-jail-
dissidents/story.aspx?guid={AF751D08-EE8D-4375-9206-8F9785B37973}
[2] 
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9098598
[3] http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TAQRFJOQP26UUVESM
-- 
Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] The completeness of OpenStreetMap

[Edward Johnson]

I'm compiling some research into ways in which we can think of a map as 
complete and how complete OSM is. I was just wondering if anyone had any 
thoughts on the topic. My initial ideas have been posted on my blog 
http://edwardmjohnson.wordpress.com/ and I will continue to update this until 
I'm satisfied I know everything there is to know about the completeness of the 
map!

One of the most interesting parts is how can we quote completeness of the map? 
My first thought was a stage system as quoted below

* Preliminary stage - GPS tracks gathered or area has yahoo imagery.

* Stage 1 - Nodes and ways mapped onto OSM using GPS track or aerial imagery.

* Stage 2 - All roads named and roughly categorised

* Stage 3 - Map good enough for satellite navigation. All one-way streets, and 
restrictions tagged along with accurate street categorisation.

* Stage 4 - All POIs (i.e. post boxes, bus stops, pubs, restaurants, 
supermarkets etc.) tagged.

These stages may or may not occur in sequential order and each stage can be 
quoted complete in terms of percentages. For example we might say that London 
is 100% complete for Preliminary and stages 1 and 2, but only 60% stage 3 
complete and 20% stage 4 complete. The hard question is how do we accurately 
measure these percentages.

What are other people's ideas?

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The completeness of OpenStreetMap

[Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)]

Edward Johnson
>Sent: 25 June 2008 4:04 PM
>To: talk@openstreetmap.org
>Subject: [OSM-talk] The completeness of OpenStreetMap
>
>I'm compiling some research into ways in which we can think of a map as
>complete and how complete OSM is. I was just wondering if anyone had any
>thoughts on the topic. My initial ideas have been posted on my blog
>http://edwardmjohnson.wordpress.com/ and I will continue to update this
>until I'm satisfied I know everything there is to know about the
>completeness of the map!
>
>One of the most interesting parts is how can we quote completeness of the
>map? My first thought was a stage system as quoted below
>
>* Preliminary stage - GPS tracks gathered or area has yahoo imagery.
>
>* Stage 1 - Nodes and ways mapped onto OSM using GPS track or aerial
>imagery.
>
>* Stage 2 - All roads named and roughly categorised
>
>* Stage 3 - Map good enough for satellite navigation. All one-way streets,
>and restrictions tagged along with accurate street categorisation.
>
>* Stage 4 - All POIs (i.e. post boxes, bus stops, pubs, restaurants,
>supermarkets etc.) tagged.
>
>These stages may or may not occur in sequential order and each stage can be
>quoted complete in terms of percentages. For example we might say that
>London is 100% complete for Preliminary and stages 1 and 2, but only 60%
>stage 3 complete and 20% stage 4 complete. The hard question is how do we
>accurately measure these percentages.
>
>What are other people's ideas?


Unfortunately it doesn't really work like that. We might have a very small
part of a city that is stage 4 and then next door in the same city it might
not even have reached stage 1. That's why I had a stab at looking at it a
little differently and came up with
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Completeness_Metrics  but its not
that scientific and is only intended as a guide to help focus mapping
effort.

Cheers

Andy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Good example of OSM coverage - Sofija, Bulgaria

[Ted Mielczarek]

On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Ralf Zimmermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to share a good example of OSM coverage with you.
>
> It is the city of Sofija in Bulgaria.
> A friend of mine is travelling there and asked me if OSM has good maps
> of that area as Google does not show much. I converted OSM maps for him
> to use on his PDA. Now he is well equipped for his trip.
>
> Here is the direct comparison:
> http://geo.topf.org/comparison/index.html?mt0=googlemap&mt1=mapnik&lon=23.332386&lat=42.6927823&z=12
>
> This makes me smile. This is why I have so much fun mapping the world
> with OSM.

Only somewhat related, but anyone know why there are so many hospitals
on that map? Is that just some unusual tagging?

-Ted

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] SOTM weekend accommodation?

[Barnett, Phillip]

I can give you an authoritative answer to this one because I flew
Ryanair from Stansted to Dublin last week with an expired passport.
I hadn't noticed that my passport was one week out of date - neither did
the check-in lady to whom I showed it, neither did the Security check
just before airside. Only as I handed my boarding card to the stewardess
did she take a closer look and balked. 'You do know your passport has
expired?'

Luckily, they DO accept drivers licenses, even, in my case, provisional
licenses (I really must get round to taking a test) - and she was
perfectly happy about it. As were Dublin check-in staff and security on
the reverse journey.

So no, you don't need a passport to fly Ryanair from UK to ROI.

Weirdly, on the way back, after disembarking at Stansted, and before
customs/passport control, an officious looking woman was inspecting
_boarding_ cards. She was backed up by half a dozen serious looking men,
so she meant business. I have no idea what that was about, but luckily
I'd kept mine. It's not beyond possibility that I'd have thrown mine
away at some point, as I'd never thought I'd have to produce one AFTER a
flight.

Any ideas?


 
 



PHILLIP BARNETT
SERVER MANAGER

200 GRAY'S INN ROAD
LONDON
WC1X 8XZ
UNITED KINGDOM
T +44 (0)20 7430 4474
F 
E [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW.ITN.CO.UK

P  Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email?
-Original Message-

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Renaud Martinet
Sent: 24 June 2008 18:29
To: Martijn van Oosterhout
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org; Nick Whitelegg
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] SOTM weekend accommodation?

They surely do accept european ID cards as I always used that at the
immigration in Heathrow coming from France and going up to Scotland.

In fact you could go through immigration in London only with your
thick French accent, happened to me like 3 years ago. It was just
after the bombings in London and I had lost all my IDs some time ago.
Hopefully they were not too picky and let me board my flight to
Aberdeen. I guess it's just a matter of really looking like who you're
pretending to be :)


Renaud.




On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 11:26 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 8:54 AM, Renaud Martinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> Probably any European ID proving your nationality would do but better
>> to check. Usually they give advice when you book the flight.
>
> AIUI within the EU you only need to carry *some* kind of (probably
> official looking) photo identification, it doesn't have to be a
> passport (though that has the advantage of being recognised everywhere
> in the world). Between schengen countries you're not required to show
> it at the border.
>
> If you arrive at a londen airport it even says that ID cards are
> acceptable for EU citizens.
>
> Have a nice day,
> --
> Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://svana.org/kleptog/
>

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Please Note:

 

Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily 
represent 
those of Independent Television News Limited unless specifically stated. 
This email and any files attached are confidential and intended solely for the 
use of the individual
or entity to which they are addressed. 
If you have received this email in error, please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of our 
clients and business,
we may monitor and read messages sent to and from our systems.

Thank You.



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Relation/Routes and Hikes in open Country

[simon]

> I'd define it slightly differently - its do we want *subjective*
> routes in OSM? I don't think anyone is arguing that notable
> *objective* routes, like the Pennine Way in the UK or the Appalachian
> Way in the US can certainly be included as a route.
>

Hi all,
I'm going to be a bit provocative here, please bear with me

1) At what point does a route change from being 'subjective' to 'objective'?
2) 'Open Street Map is a map of everything'.
3) 'Your map, your way'.


I understand the concern that we don't want the official map to be
saturated with additional non-official (whatever that means) routes,
however I don't think that it is a reason to prevent people/organisations
adding there own relation/routes to the data base.

At present the offical map does not render the relation/routes, when it
does it can limit the ones it shows by using the operator and/or network
tags.

In the case of Bob Spirko, there is a huge resource of write-up and photos
on his website. I believe that it is a benefit to add this information to
the OSM database and (in my opinion) relation routes are the best way to
do this. The first batch of trails are actually based around those
published in a book, does this make them 'objective'?

For OSM this get us additional ways on the ground, showing footpaths and
tracks on the ground. The use of relations removes the surplus naming of
ways (ie. a footpath would not have to be tagged 'Anderson Peak Trail' for
example) and other marking of non-physical things.

For Bob Spirko (or whomever) it gives the ability to render maps showing
his routes (which can be done offline with osmarender or some other
scheme) or to make GPS compilations for navigation.


Just my thoughts.
Cheers,
Mungewell.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] SOTM weekend accommodation?

[SteveC]

On 25 Jun 2008, at 08:46, Barnett, Phillip wrote:
> Weirdly, on the way back, after disembarking at Stansted, and before
> customs/passport control, an officious looking woman was inspecting
> _boarding_ cards. She was backed up by half a dozen serious looking  
> men,
> so she meant business. I have no idea what that was about, but luckily
> I'd kept mine. It's not beyond possibility that I'd have thrown mine
> away at some point, as I'd never thought I'd have to produce one  
> AFTER a
> flight.
>
> Any ideas?

They were looking for illegal immigrants and specific individuals.  
I've had that a few times landing with EZ flights and the cabin crew  
warned us before leaving the aircraft.

Best

Steve


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Relation/Routes and Hikes in open Country

[simon]

> Something I keep toying with is the idea of facilitating mashups (did
> I really just say that?) by giving masher-uppers a way to tie their
> routes to OSM IDs.

I may have a mis-understand of OpenLayers, but is it possible to achieve
this with overlays and minimal infrastructure (from the personal point of
view).

If there was 'pre-render' facility which would spit out a '.zip' of a
directory tree of overlay tiles, is it possible to place this on a
webserver and point a OpenLayers map at it.

The overlay would only need cover the minimal area required (ie. just the
specific route) at all possible zoom levels.


Cheers,
Mungewell.



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Relation/Routes and Hikes in open Country

[Dave Stubbs]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 4:52 PM,  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I'd define it slightly differently - its do we want *subjective*
>> routes in OSM? I don't think anyone is arguing that notable
>> *objective* routes, like the Pennine Way in the UK or the Appalachian
>> Way in the US can certainly be included as a route.
>>
>
> Hi all,
> I'm going to be a bit provocative here, please bear with me
>
> 1) At what point does a route change from being 'subjective' to 'objective'?
> 2) 'Open Street Map is a map of everything'.
> 3) 'Your map, your way'.
>
>
> I understand the concern that we don't want the official map to be
> saturated with additional non-official (whatever that means) routes,
> however I don't think that it is a reason to prevent people/organisations
> adding there own relation/routes to the data base.
>
> At present the offical map does not render the relation/routes, when it
> does it can limit the ones it shows by using the operator and/or network
> tags.
>
> In the case of Bob Spirko, there is a huge resource of write-up and photos
> on his website. I believe that it is a benefit to add this information to
> the OSM database and (in my opinion) relation routes are the best way to
> do this. The first batch of trails are actually based around those
> published in a book, does this make them 'objective'?
>
> For OSM this get us additional ways on the ground, showing footpaths and
> tracks on the ground. The use of relations removes the surplus naming of
> ways (ie. a footpath would not have to be tagged 'Anderson Peak Trail' for
> example) and other marking of non-physical things.
>
> For Bob Spirko (or whomever) it gives the ability to render maps showing
> his routes (which can be done offline with osmarender or some other
> scheme) or to make GPS compilations for navigation.
>


I've not got much problem with "notable" subjective routes being
stored in the database. Obviously "notable" is a vague moving target,
but what I mean here is that it's not a completely arbitrary
concoction that no-one else has ever heard of. If we have a well known
person writing books on walks etc then I see no problem in adding
these to the DB.

The problem is how you add them.

A route relation, as in type=route, route=foot, has so far implied a
signed, "official" route. This is what is being referred to as an
objective route -- the key feature is generally that it is maintained
by someone (the operator). For the subjective routes where someone has
gone and looked for a nice walk, wrote it down and published it, this
probably isn't the case. I'd rather the former weren't diluted by the
latter, with no easy way to distinguish them.

What I'd suggest is that you just change some of the tag names:
   type=suggested_route
   route=foot
   suggested_by=Bob Spirko

Then everyone knows where they stand, and what this represents.
I'm sure there are people convinced this is a bad idea... and if the
goal is to avoid conversations about what is considered "notable" then
I'd probably take their point.

Dave

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The completeness of OpenStreetMap

[Iván Sánchez Ortega]

El Miércoles, 25 de Junio de 2008, Edward Johnson escribió:
> One of the most interesting parts is how can we quote completeness of the
> map?

IMHO, the problem with any metric is that you cannot get an accurate number 
for "all". 

However, you can get a metric from a datasource considered "complete", and 
compare the numbers. You can suppose OSM is "complete" when the OSM metrics 
are equal or better than the other datasource's metrics.

Case in hand: Here in Spain, the OSM community has a very good relationship 
with the national mapping agency (IGN), so we can ask them for some numbers. 
Currently we've got some numbers regarding the total lenght of the road 
network. Also, the gazeteer for the electoral census (containing *all* street 
names) is near-public domain, so we could match how many street names OSM has 
got, compared to the official number of street names.

I'll get you the lies, the damn lies, and the statistics in the State of the 
Map, though. ;-)


Cheers,
-- 
--
Iván Sánchez Ortega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

FORTUNE PROVIDES QUESTIONS FOR THE GREAT ANSWERS: #31
A:  Chicken Teriyaki.
Q:  What is the name of the world's oldest kamikaze pilot?


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] SOTM2008 Conference - The Almost Official Limerick limerick

[Mike Collinson]

OpenStreetMap's State Of The Map 2008 Conference is in Limerick, Ireland 
Sat-Sun July 12th and 13th 2008 http://www.stateofthemap.org/registration/. See 
you there? 

It took my mother to point out that we really could not have a conference in 
Limerick without writing a limerick for it.  So I asked her to write one and 
have set up a wiki page for any more entries.

A limerick is a five-line poem with a strict form:  A-A-B-B-A rhyme with two 
long, two short, one long sentence. Probably a peculiarly British obsession.

A GPS mapper named Mike,
Covered 62 miles on his bike,
But was rueful to find,
At the end of the grind,
That the said GPS was on strike.

See if you can do any better.  
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/State_Of_The_Map_2008/LimerickPoemCompetition

In the event of an overwhelming number of entries, there'll be three categories:

1) Limerick's you would show your mother and that she just might understand.

2) Dubious limericks that you certainly would not show your mother.

3) Obscure jargon-ridden limericks that no-one except hard core OSM mappers 
would understand.

Mike ___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Relation/Routes and Hikes in open Country

[simon]

>
>> Something I keep toying with is the idea of facilitating mashups (did
>> I really just say that?) by giving masher-uppers a way to tie their
>> routes to OSM IDs.
>

There is an example on OpenLayers showing how to superimpose an OSM file
on top of a slippy map.
http://openlayers.org/dev/examples/osm-layer.html

The overlay looks like it is just a normal osm file
(http://openlayers.org/dev/examples/osm/sutton_coldfield.osm). I wonder if
this would work with a 'full' relation file (ie.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.5/relation/18321/full).

Cool...
Mungewell.



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Wide roads and traffic signals

[Jon Burgess]

On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 13:06 +0300, Moshe Sayag wrote:
> 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.1878&lon=34.8714&zoom=14&layers=B00FT
> (Notice that the street names is not shown in Mapnik but only in
> Osmarender)
> 

Unfortunately the Mapnik layer is poor at font handling. The code can
only use a single font to render all the names and the current one
(DejaVu) is lacking many foreign characters. 

Jon



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] SOTM2008 Conference - The Almost Official Limerick limerick

[Dermot McNally]

2008/6/25 Mike Collinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> 3) Obscure jargon-ridden limericks that no-one except hard core OSM mappers
> would understand.

My entry for category 3:

Letztes Jahr als in Limerick ich war
Völlig ohne Mapdaten sogar,
Hollte ich mein Ding raus,
Maß dort gut jedes Haus
Und erholte mich dann an der Bar



-- 
--
Iren sind menschlich

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] SOTM2008 Conference - The Almost Official Limerick limerick

[Dermot McNally]

2008/6/25 Mike Collinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> 1) Limerick's you would show your mother and that she just might understand.
>
> 2) Dubious limericks that you certainly would not show your mother.

This is category 1 (since my mother is from Dublin, so she won't take
umbrage at the "bogger" reference):

On the eve of the State Of The Map
If the data we have is still crap
Then crack open your logger
Enlist help from some bogger
And enjoy having feather in cap



-- 
--
Iren sind menschlich

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] SOTM2008 Conference - The Almost Official Limerick limerick

[Iván Sánchez Ortega]

2008/6/25 Mike Collinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 3) Obscure jargon-ridden limericks that no-one except hard core OSM
> mappers would understand.

Back home, my Navi in bad weather
I launched the JOSM updater,
ready to grind,
only to find
"API 500 - try again later"

-- 
--
Iván Sánchez Ortega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Caution: breathing may be hazardous to your health.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Relation/Routes and Hikes in open Country

[Christopher Schmidt]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 02:21:10PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >> Something I keep toying with is the idea of facilitating mashups (did
> >> I really just say that?) by giving masher-uppers a way to tie their
> >> routes to OSM IDs.
> >
> 
> There is an example on OpenLayers showing how to superimpose an OSM file
> on top of a slippy map.
> http://openlayers.org/dev/examples/osm-layer.html
> 
> The overlay looks like it is just a normal osm file
> (http://openlayers.org/dev/examples/osm/sutton_coldfield.osm). I wonder if
> this would work with a 'full' relation file (ie.
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.5/relation/18321/full).

The OpenLayers parser doesn't do anything with relations themselves --
it wouldn't group the bits together into a single feature -- but it
would take the ways and nodes and draw them into the map.

Regards,
-- 
Christopher Schmidt
MetaCarta

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] SOTM2008 Conference - The Almost Official Limerick limerick

[Nick Black]

Ok - everyone who posts a Limerick has to recite it on Sunday morning
before the talks start ;-)  We'll skype you in if you're not there.

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 9:42 PM, Iván Sánchez Ortega
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/6/25 Mike Collinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> 3) Obscure jargon-ridden limericks that no-one except hard core OSM
>> mappers would understand.
>
> Back home, my Navi in bad weather
> I launched the JOSM updater,
> ready to grind,
> only to find
> "API 500 - try again later"
>
> --
> --
> Iván Sánchez Ortega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Caution: breathing may be hazardous to your health.
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
>



-- 
Nick Black

http://www.blacksworld.net

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Google Map Maker - press release

[Richard Fairhurst]

Hi all,

We've put together a press release with OSM (strictly speaking OSMF)'s  
reaction to Google Map Maker.

You can get it in PDF or RTF format at:
http://svn.openstreetmap.org/misc/pr_material/releases/

The OSMF board is sending it to a few of the big tech blogs, but in  
true OSM fashion, we'd like to crowdsource the distribution. After  
all, the OSM community has had amazing success in getting publicity  
recently.

So please do:

- download the release
- translate it into your language
- add any useful local statistics (e.g. 1000 roads in Nether Yvebosch  
mapped by one man)
- add your contact details, if you're happy to be a media spokesperson
- and send it to media who you think may appreciate it!

To avoid a recipient getting the release from three mappers at once, I  
suggest we co-ordinate here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Press/Release_distribution

As ever, any questions, just yell.

cheers
Richard
for OSMF

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker - press release

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

> We've put together a press release with OSM (strictly speaking OSMF)'s  
> reaction to Google Map Maker.

I know that dealing with the press requires a certain amount of dumbing
down, but I do object to the phrase:

"Volunteers for OpenStreetMap, the Wikipedia-like website which is
mapping the world, say ..."

We are not "a website".

(I'll put the release up on the .de web site but I'll write of a
project, not a web site.)

Bye
Frederik


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Google Map Maker - press release

[Richard Fairhurst]

Frederik Ramm wrote:

> I know that dealing with the press requires a certain amount of  
> dumbing
> down, but I do object to the phrase:
>
> "Volunteers for OpenStreetMap, the Wikipedia-like website which is
> mapping the world, say ..."
>
> We are not "a website".

Sure. It depends who you're sending the release to, really. If it's a  
tech site then "project" is good. If it's a national paper then  
"website" helps them file it with the right correspondent.

cheers
Richard

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] When mental models go wrong: OpenStreetMap

[Lauri Hahne]

First, I must admit that the subject of this message is a little bit
outre but don't let that bother. *

I'm trying to summarise a few things I've been thinking lately. I
think none of these issues is major or something that should actually
be worked on. I have no suggestions what-so-ever what could fix the
issues but don't let that bother. I just want some feedback and to
know whether anybody agrees with me.

1. Ways

- There are one kind of ways in the database. Ways can have attributes
(tags) but aren't required.
- The tagging scheme suggest there are many kinds of ways (highway,
cycleway, aeroway...)
- Potlatch and JOSM's preset (and mappaint?) system allow you to pick
a type for way.
- We have questions such as "how can I turn this way into a bridge" or
"how can I create a "bridge-way" at #osm once in a while.

This leads me to think that do Tagging Scheme, Wiki, Potlatch, and
JOSM (in that order - ordered by "severity") give wring kind of hints
what's actually in the database. This is because it has become pretty
obvious to me that there are people (likely not much?) who think the
that we have different kind of ways. These people need to be told that
we don't have different kind of ways but way which have attributes. I
can see why these people think like this because especially wiki does
list different kind of ways in the Map Features page.

2. Nodes

Apparently Potlatch tris to keep nodes and POIs separate even though
these are the same thing again. This works really well in Potlatch but
yet again it's against our data model and might lead to some
confusion. I haven't seen any examples of this so this is very
theoretical for now.



As I wrote earlier, I have no suggestions about "fixing" these issues.
IMHO the current data model is great but I think it should be made
obvious to newbies. One way to do this would be to introduce OSM as
trace-nodes-way-tags instead of the traditional trace-nodes-way which
is quite prevalent in slides etc. It would also be a nice idea to
write an introduction to our data model and put it in the beginning of
the Beginner's Guide in Wiki. I'm volunteering to write this if
somebody promises to proof-read it.


Ps. As the beginning of this mail suggests, I had no purpose to write
the paragraph about suggestions but it became imminent that this post
needed something in addition to just listing some weird stuff.


* 
http://www.crc.ensmp.fr/~besnard/Publications/Besnard-Greathead-Baxter-2004.pdf

-- 
Lauri Hahne

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] SOTM2008 Conference - The Almost Official Limerick limerick

[Iván Sánchez Ortega]

El Miércoles, 25 de Junio de 2008, Nick Black escribió:
> Ok - everyone who posts a Limerick has to recite it on Sunday morning
> before the talks start ;-)

Even the bad ones? Ow, cm'on!


They had announced it with glee:
"I've got a map editor for thee,
with Google MapMaker
we'll do maps neater"
But they forgot that OSM maps are free


-- 
--
Iván Sánchez Ortega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Los tontos entran precipitadamente...y consiguen los mejores asientos.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Relation/Routes and Hikes in open Country

[Simon Wood]

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:01:40 -0400
Christopher Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The OpenLayers parser doesn't do anything with relations themselves --
> it wouldn't group the bits together into a single feature -- but it
> would take the ways and nodes and draw them into the map.
> 

I spent the evening trying to get this to work. I get the underlying map OK, 
but no matter what I try I can't get the OSM data overlaid on it :-(

Best I can make out is that it is failing (siliently) to load the data.

Attached is my attempt...
Simon
  
  

  

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk