Re: [OSM-talk] GPS Accuracy under Forest Canopy

[John Smith]

--- On Sun, 9/8/09, Mike N.  wrote:

>    I didn't record PDOP information and
> such, but are there any solutions to
> record decent GPS traces on trails under forest canopy data
> collection other
> than a high end professional GPS datalogger? 

If a phone network and the phone supports it AGPS can help where GPS fails. Not 
all data loggers are the same some have a much higher sensitivity. You might be 
able to use sat overlays to estimate the true path.

It really depends what options you have available and how much time, money, 
effort etc you are willing to spend on it.


  

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] GPS Accuracy under Forest Canopy

[Mike N.]

I'm using netbook with  just your average $30 GPS dongle to collect data.
Today I took a 5 mile out-and back hike under dense forest canopy.   The GPX
traces for the same trail out and back are separated by as much as 100
meters.

   I didn't record PDOP information and such, but are there any solutions to
record decent GPS traces on trails under forest canopy data collection other
than a high end professional GPS datalogger? 


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Building floor plans

[John Smith]

--- On Sun, 9/8/09, noh way jose  wrote:

> Has this been done/suggested yet?

I suggested something similar to the talk-au list, I even mailed the contact 
address on the website of major shopping centre operators but they never 
replied.


  

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Building floor plans

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2009/8/10 noh way jose :
> Issues:
> Multiple, presumably high resolution, maps overlaying the same space. One per
> floor.
> How to get unencumbered by copyright floor plans

Yes, would be great. But why are you unencumbered by copyright?
Usually who drew the plan owns the copyright (at least in Germany but
I guess in many countries). Get the architects to give their plans
(just basic ones would be sufficient, even 1:200) or use old ones
(there is, at least in Europe, a lot of old buildings and the more
interesting they are, the easier it is generally to get the plans
(books, etc.)).

> Opportunities:
> Hospitals, College, Government, public or business buildings

sure, would also be great for complex trainstations / underground
installations, and many other. I'm thinking of getting some detailed
but of-of-copyright surveys of archeologic sites into the main
database (you can find them in old travel-guides, scientific
publications, old books, etc.).

cheers,
Martin

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Building floor plans

[Stefan de Konink]

On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, noh way jose wrote:

> Has this been done/suggested yet?

I know it is been discussed, but it is only limited by your client. A
client should be able to do something like Xapi, selecting only a specific
layer, with dynamic filtering.

This would be great for all other sorts of editing too.


Stefan


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Building floor plans

[noh way jose]

Just an idea. 

Issues:
Multiple, presumably high resolution, maps overlaying the same space. One per 
floor.
How to get unencumbered by copyright floor plans

Opportunities:
Hospitals, College, Government, public or business buildings

Has this been done/suggested yet?

Cheers
-- 
Greg

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Apollinaris Schoell]

On Aug 9, 2009, at 2:23 PM, Liz wrote:

> On Mon, 10 Aug 2009, Nop wrote:
>> Some people mentioned that the default settings of these tools are  
>> very
>> agressive - this is true and a more lenient approach might produce  
>> much
>> better results. But then, I have not seen any options to change  
>> this (in
>> JOSM).
>>
> It was in "advanced preferences". Can't find it right now

simplify-way.max-error

you need to play a bit with the numbers to find the right one for your  
use model


>
>> But on the other hand, there's some areas where you need those tools.
>> During my mapping I have found two areas where the way were hideously
>> over-defined. When ways have 10 or 20 times more nodes than  
>> required to
>> show their none-too-complex form or when nodes are set in 2m  
>> distances
>> it appears that someone has just uploaded raw GPS traces. This makes
>> those areas nearly unusable as even a very modest bounding box will
>> exeed the 50k nodes limit. In these cases, simplify way is your good
>> friend.
>>
> I concur
> I found about 350 -400 km of highway uploaded (twice) with points at  
> one per
> second at 100kmh travel speed
> Once uploaded and made into a way, and then the way deleted without  
> removing
> the points, then uploaded again
> and while we have editors that allow that sort of default behaviour,  
> then we
> need simplifying tools
>

+1
this discussion is pointless. all editors allow deleting ways. why  
should we bother about the power of simplifying a way.


>
>> Eventually, in an anarchic open source society like OSM you can't  
>> take
>> away a tool anyway, so don't even try. But it is definitely worth
>> refining and pointing out proper and improper uses.
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2009/8/9 Liz :
> I concur
> I found about 350 -400 km of highway uploaded (twice) with points at one per
> second at 100kmh travel speed
> Once uploaded and made into a way, and then the way deleted without removing
> the points, then uploaded again
> and while we have editors that allow that sort of default behaviour, then we
> need simplifying tools

not sure. If someone left a real mess (like here leaving thousands of
useless nodes behind), maybe it's better to undo his action and start
from scratch.

cheers,
Martin

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2009/8/9 John Smith :
> --- On Sun, 9/8/09, Stefan de Konink  wrote:
>> Already saw an OSM editor supporting realigning Yahoo
>> Imagery based on
>> existing points?
>
> Not automatically, but JOSM can shift the yahoo image to align it to known 
> points then you just move nodes/ways as needed.

AFAIK potlatch can do this as well, it is much better than nothing but
it doesn't do a full job if the image needs warping (instead of
moving). Without the original imagery you will also get worse results
because yahoo already manipulated the images, now you do it again, in
the end the details that normally could have been on the limit of
visibility will disappear.

cheers,
Martin

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

> Some people mentioned that the default settings of these tools are very
> agressive - this is true and a more lenient approach might produce much
> better results. But then, I have not seen any options to change this (in
> JOSM).

I think you can change the presets in Einstein-mode.

cheers,
Martin

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automa tic simplification of geometry

[Liz]

On Mon, 10 Aug 2009, Nop wrote:
> Some people mentioned that the default settings of these tools are very
> agressive - this is true and a more lenient approach might produce much
> better results. But then, I have not seen any options to change this (in
> JOSM).
>
It was in "advanced preferences". Can't find it right now

> But on the other hand, there's some areas where you need those tools.
> During my mapping I have found two areas where the way were hideously
> over-defined. When ways have 10 or 20 times more nodes than required to
> show their none-too-complex form or when nodes are set in 2m distances
> it appears that someone has just uploaded raw GPS traces. This makes
> those areas nearly unusable as even a very modest bounding box will
> exeed the 50k nodes limit. In these cases, simplify way is your good
> friend.
>
I concur
I found about 350 -400 km of highway uploaded (twice) with points at one per 
second at 100kmh travel speed
Once uploaded and made into a way, and then the way deleted without removing 
the points, then uploaded again
and while we have editors that allow that sort of default behaviour, then we 
need simplifying tools


> Eventually, in an anarchic open source society like OSM you can't take
> away a tool anyway, so don't even try. But it is definitely worth
> refining and pointing out proper and improper uses.



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Nop]

Hi!

Martin Koppenhoefer schrieb:
> I want to point attention to the potlatch-funtion tidy-points (similar
> to JOSM simplify way). I encourage everybody not to use these
> functions (at least not on data someone else entered) as it harms
> severly the data.

First of all, I agree with you that these function can seriously harm 
data, at least when carelessly applied to data that is already 
well-designed.

Some people mentioned that the default settings of these tools are very 
agressive - this is true and a more lenient approach might produce much 
better results. But then, I have not seen any options to change this (in 
JOSM).

But on the other hand, there's some areas where you need those tools. 
During my mapping I have found two areas where the way were hideously 
over-defined. When ways have 10 or 20 times more nodes than required to 
show their none-too-complex form or when nodes are set in 2m distances 
it appears that someone has just uploaded raw GPS traces. This makes 
those areas nearly unusable as even a very modest bounding box will 
exeed the 50k nodes limit. In these cases, simplify way is your good friend.

Eventually, in an anarchic open source society like OSM you can't take 
away a tool anyway, so don't even try. But it is definitely worth 
refining and pointing out proper and improper uses.

bye
Nop

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] radioactivity

[Liz]

On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, Cartinus wrote:
> > What about Uranium mining areas?
> >
> > Australia just announced they were going to let 2 more mines start.
>
> landuse=surface_mining
> mining_resource=uranium
> name=*
> operator=*
>
> and a bit further out
>
> barrier=fence
>
> Since you are probably not allowed to go inside that fence, you can't know
> where the radioactive areas are.


surface_mining? that's an assumption
and how does one tag an underground mine - I found myself caught trying to map 
these in one mining town




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Parking and Access

[Peter Körner]

Roy Wallace schrieb:
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 5:48 AM, Kev wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> While trying (and failing miserably) to find a parking space in Birmingham
>> (UK) the other day (terrible sign age - talk about leaving it to the last
>> minute - AND to top it all I must have parked in the one multi-story not
>> already mapped on OSM in Brimingham) it got me thinking about the parking
>> access restrictions - on the Wiki there is no consensus of how these should
>> be tagged properly - has there been any general consensus on this in the
>> past?
>>
>> In my experience there are three different types of parking:-
>>
>> Private car parks - limited to those with valid permits or employees and
>> authorised visitors of the site (this may also be a small section of a
>> larger car park - i.e. Staff Only).
>> IMHO: access=private
>> IMHO You would only want to route to these if you specifically select them.
>>
>> Private car parks open to the public - limited to those using the sites
>> facilities - e.g. a Leisure Centre car park, one on a retail park, one at a
>> supermarket
>> IMHO: access=destination
>> IMHO You would only want to route to these if you specifically select them
>> or the related businesses (are there any relations to say these car parks
>> are related to the shops surrounding them?)
>>
>> Public car parks - Open to anyone for any (legal) usage, sometimes on
>> payment of a fee - e.g. your typical council run multi-story
>> IMHO: access=yes
>> IMHO these would be routable whenever you want to find parking nearby...
>>
>> It would also be useful if the wiki page included the "operator" key to
>> encourage it's usage- this would make it easy for a Sat Nav device to enable
>> the user to search for "Car Parks operated by NCP near here" or similar (for
>> when you have a discount card / account enabling you to park cheaper /
>> pre-paid at an operators various sites.
>>
>> It would also be useful for showing the (primary) payment method (for none
>> contract users*):-
>> e.g.
>>
>> Pay on return (I.e. you pay at a machine when you return to the car park,
>> but before returning to you vehicle)
>> Pay at exit (i.e. you pay at the exit barrier)
>> Pay and Display (i.e. you park, pay, go shopping, return to vehicle, go)
>> Free
>>
>> (Some places also have free periods - e.g. 00:00 - 07:00; 18:00 - 24:00 Mon
>> - Sat; Some are free if you have your receipt validated; Some are free if
>> you use them for less than 30 minutes etc,,,)
>>
>> Alongside the available payment methods
>> e.g.
>> Cash
>> Cash (Exact Change Only)
>> Visa
>> Mastercard
>> Mastro
>> Mobile_Phone
>>
>> When visiting an unfamiliar city I (personally) would like to be able to set
>> my sat nav destination to a car park near Corporation Street, Birmingham
>> which meats my selected preferences.
>> My preferences may then be
>> Payment Type : Free OR pay on exit OR pay on return
>> Car Park Type: multi-story
>> Payment Methods : Cash OR Mastercard
>> Operated by : NCP or "Euro Car Parks" or "Nottingham City Council"
>> Obviously any decent routing software would realise that there may be a
>> nearer car park that doesn't match everything and could suggest that to you
>> to.
>>
>> As a small side issue, when it comes to rendering the car parks I think it
>> would be benifical to show multi-story car parks differently - some people
>> like to avoid them as they feel "unsafe", while other prefer them as you
>> know there are usually going to be some sensible rules on usage reducing the
>> risk of clamping.- e.g the "P" with a border or some sort of 3D effect?
> 
> All sounds good to me.
> 

Me to, maybe you'd like to make a proposal of this?

Peter


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Silly me

[OJ W]

they must have known - living in a place like that you soon get used
to explaining "no, your address lookup won't work" or "don't bother
asking me for my postcode, you won't find it" whenever someone asks
for your address.

I seem to remember some banks won't let you open accounts if your road
isn't in their map..  good incentive for someone to map their street!



On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 6:43 PM, Ed Loach wrote:
> I had to pick up an eBay purchase in Haverhill (Suffolk, UK) today and relied 
> on my Suffolk street atlas to get me there. Unfortunately the place the 
> seller lived wasn't listed. They lived in ** Walk, and being a "Walk" 
> this generally leads between two streets that cars can access. So their 
> address wasn't in the index of the street atlas.
>
> I was tracking my journey though, so looked at the OSM data when I got home. 
> Their address was already in there. I should have thought to look before 
> setting off.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Silly me

[Ed Loach]

I had to pick up an eBay purchase in Haverhill (Suffolk, UK) today and relied 
on my Suffolk street atlas to get me there. Unfortunately the place the seller 
lived wasn't listed. They lived in ** Walk, and being a "Walk" this 
generally leads between two streets that cars can access. So their address 
wasn't in the index of the street atlas.

I was tracking my journey though, so looked at the OSM data when I got home. 
Their address was already in there. I should have thought to look before 
setting off.

Ed



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Status of the Local Chapter working group

[Jochen Topf]

Hi!

On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 05:29:23PM +0200, Michael Kugelmann wrote:
> looking at the foundation web site and the wiki, there is very few 
> information on the local chapter working group - only a draft of the 
> federation agreement is linked withought an information on the version 
> or date it was created! Additionally there are no meeting minutes 
> available at all. (or at least I didn't find iformation and minutes).
> On the Saturday eving at the SOTM09 there was a meeting relatetd to to 
> local chapters.
> 
> So please could:
> A) somebody from the working group give the current status (and maybe 
> add a version information to the draft!)
> B) somebody joining the SOTM meeting provide information what was 
> discussed and potential results
> C) somebody from the working group providing information on next steps...

I am not a member of the working group, but to get the ball rolling again
I have brought the wiki page at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters up to date
and added all the stuff that I remember from our meeting at SOTM.

I have tried to bring in all the issues that were raised in a form that
they can be discussed easily. I think the creation of a legal document
as the formal agreement between OSMF and a local chapter is only the second
step. The first is that we as a community have to agree roughly on how
the relationship between OSMF and the local chapters should be shaped and
how they fit into the larger context of the OSM community and the other
work of OSMF.

Because this is probably an issue of interest to more than current OSM
members, I would encourage you to discuss things on the talk list and on
the wiki.

Jochen
-- 
Jochen Topf  joc...@remote.org  http://www.remote.org/jochen/  +49-721-388298


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] radioactivity

[OJ W]

isn't the issue here that radioactivity is like height, i.e. a
smoothly-varying value that exists everywhere and is typically
represented as gridded data (which gets converted to contours for
display).

with height, people said that the grid data was unsuitable for going
into OSM because OSM is point/line/area, and that it would be
confusing if you had huge grids of nodes for each sample of
height/noise/radioactivity/ground colour.

(the location of radioactive sources OTOH would be fine (similar to
television towers in the radio spectrum), as would 'areas marked with
warning signs' (similar to danger areas, as mentioned already))

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] radioactivity

[John Smith]

--- On Sun, 9/8/09, Nic Roets  wrote:

> The crowd sourcing model does not apply to radiation
> measurements and testing soil samples for toxins. It is has
> too many statistical biases i.e. mappers not looking in the
> right places. Rather let a trained scientist design a
> coordinated testing plan.

If some guy can build a cruise missile in his garage I'm sure it wouldn't be 
too hard for someone to knock up a home made Geiger counter :)

http://www.ncbuy.com/news/2003-06-04/1006999.html

How to make your own Geiger counter:

http://www.imagesco.com/articles/geiger/01.html


  

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] radioactivity

[Nic Roets]

On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 4:45 PM, John Smith  wrote:

>
> I wasn't asking about tagging but the difference with radiological waste is
> half lives in the hundreds of years of years, fireworks just go boom once
> and that person don't make the same mistake twice.
>

Actually conversation, and your question, concerns uranium, with a halflife
in excess of 1 billion years. In fact the decay of uranium is quite slow
and, as Stefan points out, the alpha particles are very easy to contain. So
the US is finding it hard, if not impossible to detect a uranium based
nuclear weapon being smuggled across its border :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_scanning

The crowd sourcing model does not apply to radiation measurements and
testing soil samples for toxins. It is has too many statistical biases i.e.
mappers not looking in the right places. Rather let a trained scientist
design a coordinated testing plan.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] radioactivity

[John Smith]

--- On Sun, 9/8/09, Cartinus  wrote:
> The reasoning stays the same. Dangerous industrial/mining
> activity tends to be 
> fenced in to prevent accidents. I don't see why
> radioactivity needs any 
> special handling compared to other dangerous activities
> like:

I wasn't asking about tagging but the difference with radiological waste is 
half lives in the hundreds of years of years, fireworks just go boom once and 
that person don't make the same mistake twice.


  

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] radioactivity

[Cartinus]

On Sunday 09 August 2009 14:57:46 John Smith wrote:
> --- On Sun, 9/8/09, Cartinus  wrote:
> > Since you are probably not allowed to go inside that fence,
> > you can't know
> > where the radioactive areas are.
>
> Don't know if the mining area would be much higher than background, but the
> mined ore is transported to a processing facility, at the point it probably
> would be much higher :)

man_made=works
product=uranium 
name=*
operator=*

and a bit further out

barrier=fence

The reasoning stays the same. Dangerous industrial/mining activity tends to be 
fenced in to prevent accidents. I don't see why radioactivity needs any 
special handling compared to other dangerous activities like:
production of volatile poisons

storage of fireworks

etc.

-- 
m.v.g.,
Cartinus

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[John Smith]

--- On Sun, 9/8/09, Stefan de Konink  wrote:

> Already saw an OSM editor supporting realigning Yahoo
> Imagery based on
> existing points?

Not automatically, but JOSM can shift the yahoo image to align it to known 
points then you just move nodes/ways as needed.


  

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Stefan de Konink]

On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, John Smith wrote:

> You get 4 or more points on the ground by GPS and you align to that, I
> meant suburb level, not an entire city or states or countries.

Already saw an OSM editor supporting realigning Yahoo Imagery based on
existing points?


Stefan


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] radioactivity

[John Smith]

--- On Sun, 9/8/09, Cartinus  wrote:

> Since you are probably not allowed to go inside that fence,
> you can't know 
> where the radioactive areas are.

Don't know if the mining area would be much higher than background, but the 
mined ore is transported to a processing facility, at the point it probably 
would be much higher :)


  

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] radioactivity

[Cartinus]

On Sunday 09 August 2009 01:29:27 John Smith wrote:
> What about Uranium mining areas?
>
> Australia just announced they were going to let 2 more mines start.

landuse=surface_mining
mining_resource=uranium 
name=*
operator=*

and a bit further out

barrier=fence

Since you are probably not allowed to go inside that fence, you can't know 
where the radioactive areas are.

-- 
m.v.g.,
Cartinus

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2009/8/9 John Smith :
> Assuming that yahoo is wrong, at least it will be consistently wrong and it's 
> trivially to mass move ways when you do get reference points to re-align the 
> data to.

no, unfortunately according to my gps-traces and knowledge of the
actual situation in my city, it is sometimes misaligned and distorted,
sometimes it seems OK. There is no general rule about this (seems to
depend on rectifiying and stiching of the original fotos / on their
tiling). There is also often a "curvy" distortion, where perfectly
straight buildings and streets are curved in yahoo.

cheers,
Martin

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Introductions, and Icons?:

[Brian Quinion]

On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Austin Martin wrote:
>> Also, does OSM need a collective icon set, because by looking at
>> this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features. It seems
>> like just a random mishmash of icons, but maybe I'm wrong on this.

There are various icon sets.  I'd suggest you have a further look at
what is available, if only for inspiration:

http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/share/map-icons/
http://www.sjjb.co.uk/mapicons/SJJBMapIconsv0.03/recoloured/
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Icon

There is also an icons set used by Potlatch and cloudmade which I
believe has an svg base (although I've only ever seen png renderings -
does anyone have a link to a source?)

If you want to create a nice consistent set of icons I'm sure it would
be welcome but as Richard said it is up to each developer to decide
what they want to use for their application.

--
 Brian

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2009/8/9 Richard Fairhurst :

> As I've said several times to Martin, once I have a spare minute I'll
> add some sort of confirmation dialogue if you try to straighten a
> street with more than n metres divergence. But for now, I'm off on
> holiday.

Actually those confirmation dialogues are a bit annoying (if I imagine
someone cleaning big aeras of TIGER-data), but what about a keyboard
shortcut (preferably with modifier like "shift" or "ctrl") instead of
an Icon? For mappers aware of what they are doing it's completely OK
to use this functions in a responsible manner. Actually I wasn't aware
myself that it just straightens (thought it would simplify, blame on
me). Maybe there could be added the word "straighten" to the function
name "tidy points" in some way.

In my area (and probably not only here) there's lots of registrees
that actually haven't performed a single edit, and other's that think
potlatch is an online painting programm (drawing motorways wildly
across the city-center) when you write to them, they apologize and say
they didn't know they were actually modifying the public database, so
my concern is more about people incidently harming data, not about
"real vandalism".

anyway: have a nice holiday!

cheers,
Martin

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[John Smith]

--- On Sun, 9/8/09, Stefan de Konink  wrote:

> Moving stuff in GIS is never trivial. You don't know why it
> is wrong, and
> even if it looks 'locally' shifted it could be even
> misrectified causing
> it to be shifted and streched possibly rotated.

You get 4 or more points on the ground by GPS and you align to that, I meant 
suburb level, not an entire city or states or countries.


  

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Marc Schütz]

Am Samstag 08 August 2009 14:42:43 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
> An example from the result of the current tidy-points-function here:
> http://trac.openstreetmap.org/attachment/ticket/2148/090808_potlatch_tidy-p
>oints_.png
>

In this case it looks more like an error of the tidy-function, or at least it 
having wrong parameters. Most of the nodes in the back of the linkway are 
indeed collinear and can probably be removed without loss of precision.

Personally, I almost never use this function. There were a few cases where 
someone seems to have converted a GPX track, or where it was clear that the 
excessive amount of nodes was wrong, because I knew the concerning area.

Regards, Marc


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

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Stefan de Konink]

On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, Shaun McDonald wrote:

> How does your town compare to Yahoo?

It seems to have an offset in both X and Y. But I can only see that
locally. I don't know if there is a more global problem.

> I have only heard of trival shifts in the rectification being a problem.

I think it could be fixed to just measure some points in on the ground and
hook them up to a pixel then transform it. Maybe we could work /with/
Yahoo on this.


Stefan


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Shaun McDonald]

On 9 Aug 2009, at 12:10, Stefan de Konink wrote:

> On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, John Smith wrote:
>
>> Assuming that yahoo is wrong, at least it will be consistently wrong
>> and it's trivially to mass move ways when you do get reference  
>> points to
>> re-align the data to.
>
> Moving stuff in GIS is never trivial. You don't know why it is  
> wrong, and
> even if it looks 'locally' shifted it could be even misrectified  
> causing
> it to be shifted and streched possibly rotated.
>
> My own town is in this situation. And most AND data imported in NL has
> also a very strange offset to what several GPX traces show as 'this  
> is the
> road'.
>

How does your town compare to Yahoo?

I have only heard of trival shifts in the rectification being a problem.

Shaun


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Stefan de Konink]

On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, John Smith wrote:

> Assuming that yahoo is wrong, at least it will be consistently wrong
> and it's trivially to mass move ways when you do get reference points to
> re-align the data to.

Moving stuff in GIS is never trivial. You don't know why it is wrong, and
even if it looks 'locally' shifted it could be even misrectified causing
it to be shifted and streched possibly rotated.

My own town is in this situation. And most AND data imported in NL has
also a very strange offset to what several GPX traces show as 'this is the
road'.


Stefan


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[John Smith]

--- On Sun, 9/8/09, Stefan de Konink  wrote:
> Most likely this is true because the TIGER dataset was
> actually traced
> from/for a much lower precision map, hence wavy because you
> are plotting
> it on a far higher resolution then it was created for. With
> respect to
> TIGER you might say: TIGER is *so* bad, Yahoo will always
> be better. My
> point is, unless Yahoo is actualy validated where you are
> tracing it
> gives poor output too, no matter how bad you think TIGER
> is.

Assuming that yahoo is wrong, at least it will be consistently wrong and it's 
trivially to mass move ways when you do get reference points to re-align the 
data to.


  

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Dave Stubbs]

On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>
>> Stefan de Konink wrote:
>>
>> > And then you realise that the alignment of Yahoo Imagery is wrong
>> > on most
>> > places, and you have killed good vector material. Great job :)
>>
>> "Good vector material"? Tell me, have you ever _seen_ TIGER?
>
> Yes, and I have also _seen_ Yahoo been wrong on more places than it was
> right. So I am still skeptical people tracing Yahoo and claiming they are
> better than [insert source here] mainly because except that source they
> have 0 ground reference.
>
>> Seriously, you're kidding me. Yahoo may be out-of-alignment here and
>> there but by and large if the street looks straight in Yahoo, it is
>> straight. And US city streets generally are. TIGER streets are
>> bonkers mad wavy.
>
> Most likely this is true because the TIGER dataset was actually traced
> from/for a much lower precision map, hence wavy because you are plotting
> it on a far higher resolution then it was created for. With respect to
> TIGER you might say: TIGER is *so* bad, Yahoo will always be better. My
> point is, unless Yahoo is actualy validated where you are tracing it
> gives poor output too, no matter how bad you think TIGER is.
>

Um, no. It'll be potentially misaligned, potentially outdated, and
potentially misinterpreted.

So potentially poor, but it's entirely possible (and actually quite
likely) that it's fine and you get pretty good data out.
And it's definitely better than most tiger data I've ever seen.

So choosing between potentially poor, and very horrible isn't really
so hard is it.
Hopefully someone on the ground will eventually verify it -- they can
fix it if it's still broken.

Dave

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Richard Fairhurst]

Tobias Knerr wrote:

> But maybe "in those parts of the world where streets are not perfectly
> straight, it is of no use and even dangerous in the hands of newbies"
> should be extrapolated to "it should not be included by default but
> provided by a plugin/option"?

Hm. I can think of plenty of towns where one part of town has grid- 
like streets, another a few metres away is all curly housing estate  
roads.

As I've said several times to Martin, once I have a spare minute I'll  
add some sort of confirmation dialogue if you try to straighten a  
street with more than n metres divergence. But for now, I'm off on  
holiday.

cheers
Richard

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Stefan de Konink]

On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

> Stefan de Konink wrote:
>
> > And then you realise that the alignment of Yahoo Imagery is wrong
> > on most
> > places, and you have killed good vector material. Great job :)
>
> "Good vector material"? Tell me, have you ever _seen_ TIGER?

Yes, and I have also _seen_ Yahoo been wrong on more places than it was
right. So I am still skeptical people tracing Yahoo and claiming they are
better than [insert source here] mainly because except that source they
have 0 ground reference.

> Seriously, you're kidding me. Yahoo may be out-of-alignment here and
> there but by and large if the street looks straight in Yahoo, it is
> straight. And US city streets generally are. TIGER streets are
> bonkers mad wavy.

Most likely this is true because the TIGER dataset was actually traced
from/for a much lower precision map, hence wavy because you are plotting
it on a far higher resolution then it was created for. With respect to
TIGER you might say: TIGER is *so* bad, Yahoo will always be better. My
point is, unless Yahoo is actualy validated where you are tracing it
gives poor output too, no matter how bad you think TIGER is.



Stefan


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Tobias Knerr]

Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> _That_ is why this function is here: to simplify the work of one of the most
> tedious parts of TIGER fixup. As always, "it's of no use for my mapping"
> should not be extrapolated to "it's of no use and should be banned".

But maybe "in those parts of the world where streets are not perfectly
straight, it is of no use and even dangerous in the hands of newbies"
should be extrapolated to "it should not be included by default but
provided by a plugin/option"?

Tobias Knerr

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Richard Fairhurst]

Stefan de Konink wrote:

> And then you realise that the alignment of Yahoo Imagery is wrong  
> on most
> places, and you have killed good vector material. Great job :)

"Good vector material"? Tell me, have you ever _seen_ TIGER?

Seriously, you're kidding me. Yahoo may be out-of-alignment here and  
there but by and large if the street looks straight in Yahoo, it is  
straight. And US city streets generally are. TIGER streets are  
bonkers mad wavy.

I can't believe I'm having to explain this to people who could  
actually go and see for themselves with two clicks of the mouse. Ah,  
the joys of mailing lists. :(

cheers
Richard

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Crazy routing in OpenRouteService

[Liz]

On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, Steve Hill wrote:
> Moving the destination slightly closer to another road
> causes sanity to be resumed.
I misread sanity as salinity
and wondered which ocean he was visiting next


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Crazy routing in OpenRouteService

[Steve Hill]

A recent purchase of an Android phone has lead me to play with AndNav2 and 
OpenRouteService.  However, in some cases I get some unexpectedly crazy 
routes.

OpenRouteService doesn't seem to understand the highway=road tag.  So 
presumably if your destination is on a highway=road, it should be 
projected onto another nearest road.  However, plotting a route from 
Swansea to -4.119322,53.145316 (North Wales) ends up routing via Calais, 
Rotterdam, way out into the North Sea and then directly to the 
destination.  Moving the destination slightly closer to another road 
causes sanity to be resumed.

-- 

  - Steve
xmpp:st...@nexusuk.org   sip:st...@nexusuk.org   http://www.nexusuk.org/

  Servatis a periculum, servatis a maleficum - Whisper, Evanescence


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Stefan de Konink]

On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

> Turn on the Yahoo imagery, align the start and end points of the way, and
> select the 'Tidy' function. Hey presto, the street is now correctly aligned
> to the grid. You could have done this manually, but it would have taken 10
> times as long and wouldn't be as precise.

And then you realise that the alignment of Yahoo Imagery is wrong on most
places, and you have killed good vector material. Great job :)


Stefan


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Introductions, and Icons?:

[Richard Fairhurst]

Austin Martin wrote:
> Also, does OSM need a collective icon set, because by looking at 
> this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features. It seems 
> like just a random mishmash of icons, but maybe I'm wrong on this.

OSM is about the data, it's up to individual clients to decide what icons
they want to use.

The Map_Features icons, as a set, aren't actually used by anything AFAIK.
Certainly they wouldn't be used by anyone with a ounce of cartographic
self-respect. ;)

cheers
Richard
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Introductions%2C-and-Icons-%3A-tp24873449p24885520.html
Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] to all potlatch and JOSM users - automatic simplification of geometry

[Richard Fairhurst]

Martin and I have had this conversation on private e-mail too, but one point
bears repeating:

> I know that some people like this tidy-points-function to 
> work on TIGER-Data, but I tell you: if the TIGER-Data is 
> not good/precise, it won't get better using this function ;-)

That is evidently not true.

Find a grid system - almost any US city will do. Look at the TIGER data. It
weaves and waves all over the place.

Turn on the Yahoo imagery, align the start and end points of the way, and
select the 'Tidy' function. Hey presto, the street is now correctly aligned
to the grid. You could have done this manually, but it would have taken 10
times as long and wouldn't be as precise.

_That_ is why this function is here: to simplify the work of one of the most
tedious parts of TIGER fixup. As always, "it's of no use for my mapping"
should not be extrapolated to "it's of no use and should be banned".

cheers
Richard
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/to-all-potlatch-and-JOSM-users---automatic-simplification-of-geometry-tp24877882p24885509.html
Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Odd rendering at 0,0

[Shaun McDonald]

This has been discussed before on this list.

See thread:
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-June/037891.html
And the dev list:
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/dev/2009-May/015566.html

Shaun

On 9 Aug 2009, at 09:57, Steve Hill wrote:

>
> I noticed that there seems to be something odd with the rendering at
> lat=0, lon=0:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=0&lon=0&zoom=14&layers=B000FTF
>
> At zoom 14 it tells me that it is the North Pole... Zoom in a bit  
> mnore
> and you get a bunch of parking spaces.  Both Mapnik and Osmarender  
> seem to
> be affected - I had assumed that some editor software had got a bug  
> and
> actually uploaded objects at 0,0 but the API seems to think there's
> nothing there...
>
> -- 
>
>  - Steve
>xmpp:st...@nexusuk.org   sip:st...@nexusuk.org   http://www.nexusuk.org/
>
>  Servatis a periculum, servatis a maleficum - Whisper, Evanescence
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Odd rendering at 0,0

[Steve Hill]

I noticed that there seems to be something odd with the rendering at 
lat=0, lon=0:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=0&lon=0&zoom=14&layers=B000FTF

At zoom 14 it tells me that it is the North Pole... Zoom in a bit mnore 
and you get a bunch of parking spaces.  Both Mapnik and Osmarender seem to 
be affected - I had assumed that some editor software had got a bug and 
actually uploaded objects at 0,0 but the API seems to think there's 
nothing there...

-- 

  - Steve
xmpp:st...@nexusuk.org   sip:st...@nexusuk.org   http://www.nexusuk.org/

  Servatis a periculum, servatis a maleficum - Whisper, Evanescence


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk