Re: [OSM-talk] Older planet files (from 2007)?
2009/10/16 Ciprian Talaba : > Hello, > > Is there a place where we can download old planet files, from 2007 for > example? I would like to create an animation with the development of a > Romanian city, but the extracts I have started in November 2007, and I would > like to start with an (almost) empty canvas (if possible). ITO does this kind of thing if you ask nicely... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Older planet files (from 2007)?
Hello, Is there a place where we can download old planet files, from 2007 for example? I would like to create an animation with the development of a Romanian city, but the extracts I have started in November 2007, and I would like to start with an (almost) empty canvas (if possible). Thanks, Ciprian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (boundary=military)
Pieren writes: > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Russ Nelson wrote: > > Why wait? Tag boldly and document what you did in the wiki. > > No, no and no. If you are unsure or unhappy with existing tags, then > document, suggest and discuss before putting crap in OSM ! Why? If it's documented, in what way is it crap? If you see something, and tag it with foo=bar, and then write a page at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:foo=bar describing why the foo key is set to the value bar, then 1) mappers who think to use the same tag can use it the same way you did, and 2) anybody who's looking at the map data can look at your documentation to understand what foo=bar means. The only problem with tagging foo=bar is that it's not likely that anybody else will choose the same key, value pair. Okay, so solve that problem by tagging it with boundary=military. The only remaining problem that I can see is that somebody might look for Tag:boundary=military, not find it (which is actually currently the case) and create their own definition for it. But that's an argument for tagging boldly to which you've already objected. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (boundary=military)
Liz writes: > On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Russ Nelson wrote: > > > or a simple reason why your tag is not good. > > > > Could you list some simple reasons, please? I don't understand what > > you mean by "not good". > simple example > I tagged shop=lawyer > On this list someone said that they didn't think that lawyer belonged in shop > but office=legal. I saw that. Simply because someone else offered a different idea doesn't make your idea "not good". If I suggested that it should be tagged "shop=office" AND "office=legal", would that be a better idea? Neither one is documented in the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:office=legal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=lawyer (A note to anybody who thinks the wiki shouldn't be the be-all and end-all: do you think that tags should all be documented? Do you think they should be documented in one place? Then if not the wiki, where? -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (boundary=military)
2009/10/16 Russ Nelson : > Liz writes: > > On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Shaun McDonald wrote: > > > Before you propose a tag, you should be using it. > > > > Why? > > To show people how you're using it. http://osm.org/ Just because you use something, doesn't mean you picked the right combination of a key/value pair and that someone else couldn't suggest something better before you waste your time doing something that will only need to be re-done. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] osm2pgsql usage
> The data file comes from XAPI ( > http://www.informationfreeway.org/api/0.6/map?bbox=-83.56,42.17,-83.01,42.71 > ) and works fine for other purposes like generating a map for my GPS > using mkgmap. Have you tried loading a even smaller part from api? This could sort out problems with the xapi extensions.. Peter ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] osm2pgsql usage
Hello, I asked that question on the mapnik mailing list but was told that the OSM mailing list would have more knowledgeable people on this issue: I was in the process of setting up Mapnik and as a start I was using an OSM file from around my area to test with "small" data. I get stuck with an error message in osm2pgsql: osm2pgsql SVN version 0.67-18179 Using projection SRS 900913 (Spherical Mercator) Setting up table: planet_osm_point Setting up table: planet_osm_line Setting up table: planet_osm_polygon Setting up table: planet_osm_roads Mid: Ram, scale=100 Reading in file: ../maps/Detroit_091010.osm Processing: Node(434k) Way(50k) Relation(0k)osm2pgsql: osm2pgsql.c:262: StartElement: Assertion `xrole' failed. I searched the web a bit but did not find much, except from some memories issues. I monitored the memory during the process and had at least 1Gb free, so I guess this is not the issue. The data file comes from XAPI ( http://www.informationfreeway.org/api/0.6/map?bbox=-83.56,42.17,-83.01,42.71) and works fine for other purposes like generating a map for my GPS using mkgmap. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, N. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (boundary=military)
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Russ Nelson wrote: > > or a simple reason why your tag is not good. > > Could you list some simple reasons, please? I don't understand what > you mean by "not good". simple example I tagged shop=lawyer On this list someone said that they didn't think that lawyer belonged in shop but office=legal. Within the last month, I'd say, it you want to search for it. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (boundary=military)
Liz writes: > On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Shaun McDonald wrote: > > Before you propose a tag, you should be using it. > > Why? To show people how you're using it. http://osm.org/ > Doesn't it make sense to ask around before using something - > someone may come up with a good example they are already using, If I want to use key=value, and key=value isn't defined yet, then *by definition* anybody else's example isn't good. If it was good, then it would capture all the key=values that have the same meaning. For example, if you think it should be boundary=military/service=army rather than boundary=army, then you should put in a redirect from Tag:boundary=army to Tag:boundary=military#army . If somebody disagrees with you, they can edit that page away from being a simple redirect, insert their reasoning and include Tag:boundary=military#army as a link to "other people have different opinions". > or a simple reason why your tag is not good. Could you list some simple reasons, please? I don't understand what you mean by "not good". -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (boundary=military)
Liz writes: > On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Russ Nelson wrote: > > Map it, tag it, and document it. Worry less about making a misteak, > > and map more. > could we make "research other tags in similar use" be part of this list > and make the search process easier? This google search has always worked for me: site:wiki.openstreetmap.org landuse orchard -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Mobile Oxford
I think the official launch is soon, but Oxford University's new Mobile Oxford website is looking pretty good and makes extensive use of the OSM data we've collected for the city. I think it rocks (and I'm not involved, except for having given a ton of feedback!) The site's at http://m.ox.ac.uk/ with a news article at http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/news_stories/2009/091012.html As the article says, it's still a work in progress (it's still not ideal on any of the browsers I have on my Windows phone), but it's really nice to see our hard work gathering local data getting built on to produce something really useful! s ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Feature Proposal - Opinion poll - landuse orchard
Hi, please join the opinion poll about the landuse=orchard proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/orchard Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] RR8 editing Iceland (again)
Hi, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > As for what he's done in Iceland: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2784196 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2784236 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2784583 [...] > Frederik: Can you please revert his edits with woodpeck_repair (again). Done. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] RR8 editing Iceland (again)
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Richard Bullock wrote: >> > Just a further heads up that this user appears to have posted to SABRE >> asking for a way to edit OSM privately. Any suggestions I should pass on >> to him? It should keep him from vandalising live data if it was possible. >> > Just a bit of a heads up really. > > I've just spotted some random changing of road classificaions from old > friend RR8 again. Some are definitely wrong. > > Can people check local edits to check to see if anything has been > incorrectly changed? As for what he's done in Iceland: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2784196 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2784236 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2784583 His latest sport seems to be adding new landuse=residential/* areas and tagging existing place=* areas as landuse=residential. Here are some new ones: Adding new landuse=residential: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/42212921 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/42212961 Adding new landuse=industrial: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/42212686 Those areas aren't visible on landsat so either he's been manually surveying Icelandic suburbia or he's copying these from Google Maps or something similar. Since he's tagging obscure towns in Norway too in a similar fashion I'd bet on the latter. Then he's adding landuse=residential to existing place=* areas: All of Hafnafjörður (a ~20k town). This includes landuse=industrial, amenity=school, landuse=commercial etc etc and not just landuse=residential: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/22561148 And in this changeset he's doing the same for various suburbs in the Reykjavík area. Which also have mixed landuse: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2784583 I added most of those place=suburb areas in Reykjavík initially and intentionally didn't give them a landuse=* because I haven't been there personally to survey them. I don't think it's adding value to the map to add landuse to an existing place=* area when they landuse you're adding is inaccurate for a large part of that area. It's better to just leave it untagged and survey it properly later in my opinion. But aside from that. Can we please block this person from editing already? He's using Potlatch so he must have seen the avalanche of messages in his inbox but AFAIK hasn't replied to any of them. He's wasting everyone's time by making fiddly edits to large areas which he's probably not familiar with, has made no attempt to work with contributors maintaining those areas and as his only new contributions are adding landuse areas which aren't visible in any free aerial imagery, so he's probably deriving his edits from non-free sources. Perhaps we should tag places=* in Iceland with fuzzy-landuse. But we can do that ourselves without chasing after this person wondering what he's doing. Frederik: Can you please revert his edits with woodpeck_repair (again). ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (boundary=military)
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Russ Nelson wrote: > Map it, tag it, and document it. Worry less about making a misteak, > and map more. could we make "research other tags in similar use" be part of this list and make the search process easier? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
