Re: [OSM-talk] maori/english search oddities for nz towns

[Maarten Deen]

On Wed, 7 Jul 2010 14:40:28 +1000, Stephen Hope 
wrote:
> Chrome - Pahia, New Zealand
> Firefox 3.6.6 - Pahia, New Zealand
> IE 8.0 - Pahia, Aotearoa
> 
> Weird.  Checking my language options in IE, the only language listed
> is English, Australian.

Seems to be a general problem. I get the same results for IE and
Firefox (mine is IE 7 and FF 3.6.6).

And I'm in the Netherlands with English versions of the programs, and
the only language in IE is Dutch.

Maarten


> On 7 July 2010 12:40, Robin Paulson  wrote:
>> well, here's an odd thing:
>>
>> if i search for pahia from firefox 3.6, it returns 'Pahia, New Zealand'
>> if i search from IE7, it returns 'Pahia, Aotearoa' . Aotearoa is the
>> Maori name for New Zealand. or rather, new Zealand is the English name
>> for Aotearoa
>>
>> any suggestions why?
>>
>> can someone else try this, and see what happens
>>
>> ___
>> 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] ArcGIS Editor for OpenStreetMap.

[Sam Vekemans]

Hi,
Does others want to help make a wiki page for this?
It's on my todo list, but is important to show the developers that it exists.
Many of us dont use $archGIS, but for those who do, its worth sharing
as much info as we can find about it :)

Also, discussion about this misterous product can be on the wiki too.
As, collectivelly, we have enough 2 cents to buy a licence for it :-)
Sam

On 7/6/10, Micah  wrote:
>
> If you use ArcGIS
> they now have plugin Editor for OpenStreetMap.
>
> See:
> http://martenhogeweg.blogspot.com/2010/07/announcing-arcgis-editor-for.html
>
> Also:
> http://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=b834a68d7a484c5fb473d4ba90d35e71
>
> http://www.arcgis.com/
>
> http://www.esri.com/
>
> I myself don't use ArcGIS for OSM.
> I use JOSM at home.
> http://josm.openstreetmap.de/
> which meet my OSM needs.
>
> regards,
>
> Micah B
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/%2520Bunny
> --
> http://j12.org/sb/
> --
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 
Twitter: @Acrosscanada
Blogs: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/
http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans
Skype: samvekemans
IRC: irc://irc.oftc.net #osm-ca Canadian OSM channel (an open chat room)
@Acrosscanadatrails

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

Re: [OSM-talk] maori/english search oddities for nz towns

[Stephen Hope]

Chrome - Pahia, New Zealand
Firefox 3.6.6 - Pahia, New Zealand
IE 8.0 - Pahia, Aotearoa

Weird.  Checking my language options in IE, the only language listed
is English, Australian.

Stephen

On 7 July 2010 12:40, Robin Paulson  wrote:
> well, here's an odd thing:
>
> if i search for pahia from firefox 3.6, it returns 'Pahia, New Zealand'
> if i search from IE7, it returns 'Pahia, Aotearoa' . Aotearoa is the
> Maori name for New Zealand. or rather, new Zealand is the English name
> for Aotearoa
>
> any suggestions why?
>
> can someone else try this, and see what happens
>
> ___
> 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] maori/english search oddities for nz towns

[Andrew Errington]

On Wed, July 7, 2010 11:40, Robin Paulson wrote:
> well, here's an odd thing:

> can someone else try this, and see what happens

Spooky!

Could be a language/region setting in your browser.  I am in Korea and
Internet Explorer returns "Hawaii" in Hangul (Korean language), but
Firefox returns "Hawaii".  I think I changed my Firefox settings to
accept/prefer English language, but I didn't make any such changes to IE
(because I never use it).

Here are my results:

Firefox 3.5.10:

Results from OpenStreetMap Nominatim
Town Pahia, New Zealand
Residential Paehia, Honolulu County, Hawaii, United States of America
More results

Results from GeoNames
Pahia Point, New Zealand
Pahia Hill, New Zealand
Pahia, New Zealand
Pahia, New Zealand
Mont Pahia, French Polynesia


IE 6.0.2900

Results from OpenStreetMap Nominatim
Town Pahia, Aotearoa
Residential Paehia, Honolulu County, 하와이, United
States of America
More results

Results from GeoNames
Pahia Point, New Zealand
Pahia Hill, New Zealand
Pahia, New Zealand
Pahia, New Zealand
Mont Pahia, French Polynesia


HTH,

Andrew


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

[OSM-talk] maori/english search oddities for nz towns

[Robin Paulson]

well, here's an odd thing:

if i search for pahia from firefox 3.6, it returns 'Pahia, New Zealand'
if i search from IE7, it returns 'Pahia, Aotearoa' . Aotearoa is the
Maori name for New Zealand. or rather, new Zealand is the English name
for Aotearoa

any suggestions why?

can someone else try this, and see what happens

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Area-type objects and ways along its boundaries

[John F. Eldredge]

So, what happens in your region if the road planners decide to alter the 
position of part of a road, such as making a curve more gentle?  Are the 
municipal borders then shifted so that they still match the roadway, or so they 
now differ from the road's location?

-- 
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to 
think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria

-Original Message-
From: Pieren 
Sender: talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 17:18:13 
To: OSM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Area-type objects and ways along its boundaries

___
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] sotm2010 video stream?

[Floris Looijesteijn]

John Smith wrote:
> On 6 July 2010 23:07, Floris Looijesteijn  wrote:
>> We are actually planning to do this again, but no guarantees, that's why
>> it's not mentioned yet :)
>
> If they can't be streamed live, are they still going to be recorded?
>

yes, both tracks will be recorded.

greetings,
floris


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Why quality is more important than routing speed

[Anthony]

On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 6:13 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:

> 2010/7/5 Anthony :
>
> > Okay.  How do you use speed limit tags when only 8% of the roads are
> tagged
> > with them?
>
> Actually it doesn't matter at all, how many percents of the planet are
> tagged with a certain tag, it is sufficient that the tags are present
> in the area you are interested in ;-).


Quite true.  But to use an anecdote, I've recently returned from road trip
where I was relying heavily on Android's navigation software, and I've found
that Google tends to greatly overestimate the actual speed of the less
traveled roads I decided to travel on.  I'm not sure if it's because they
don't have the speed limits for these roads at all and are using an overly
high estimate, because they're not adequately factoring in traffic lights,
or something else.

I'd say this is a great opportunity for OSM, actually.  The ability for me
to easily correct silly routes (and get instant gratification on those
corrections) is something I'm looking forward to.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] ArcGIS Editor for OpenStreetMap.

[Micah]

If you use ArcGIS 
they now have plugin Editor for OpenStreetMap.

See:
http://martenhogeweg.blogspot.com/2010/07/announcing-arcgis-editor-for.html 

Also:
http://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=b834a68d7a484c5fb473d4ba90d35e71

http://www.arcgis.com/

http://www.esri.com/

I myself don't use ArcGIS for OSM. 
I use JOSM at home.
http://josm.openstreetmap.de/
which meet my OSM needs.

regards,

Micah B
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/%2520Bunny
-- 
http://j12.org/sb/
--


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Why quality is more important than routing speed

[Anthony]

I wasn't whining, nor was I suggesting that the project has no potential.

In fact, I think there are lots of good answers to the question "how do you
use speed limit tags when only 8% of the roads are tagged with them?"  But I
don't think "think longer-term" is one of them.

On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 5:24 AM, Lambertus  wrote:

> Did it prevent me from mapping when I discovered back in 2007 that the map
> was almost blank? Did I think that the project had no potential, could not
> become anywhere near suitable for routing? No, on the contrary. And look at
> where we're now, only three years later!
>
> Reasoning in half empty instead of half full won't lead us anywhere. Stop
> whining, be constructive.
>
>
> 2007On 2010-07-05 01:44, Anthony wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Roy Wallace > > wrote:
>>
>>On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Anthony >> wrote:
>> >
>> > How do you use speed limit tags when
>> > only 5% of the roads are tagged with them?
>>
>>Think longer-term.
>>
>>
>> Okay.  How do you use speed limit tags when only 8% of the roads are
>> tagged with them?
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Area-type objects and ways along its boundaries

[Pieren]

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 11:21 PM, Liz  wrote:

> The southern bank of the Murray River is the border between 2 states.
> Where the river has been flooded by building a dam the southern bank has
> moved. (Yarrawonga-Mulwala region)
> Legal answer for this boundary - the boundary did not move.
>
>
Then I will explain differenty : in my country, a feature like a road or
river used for boundaries doesn't move so often like in yours. It happens
but it's the exception. So, for my country, I would not recommend for
today's contributors a harder edition work to make an easier work for the
next century contributors and for potential changes. I know that some
contributors like to make their life more complicated than necessary.
Unfortunatelly, we hear too much of them on this list.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Area-type objects and ways along its boundaries

[Liz]

On Wed, 7 Jul 2010, Pieren wrote:
> > You missunderstood : the definition of the border IS the middle of the
> > road
> 
> or river. If we find a legal source for the admin boundary, it is most of
> the time less accurate then a GPS trace following the feature irl.
there is no misunderstanding
the legally defined admin boundary is at a particular place
but the question is 
does it move when the feature (road, railway, river) moves
or is staying at the original place until the law moves it?

Exact example:
The southern bank of the Murray River is the border between 2 states.
Where the river has been flooded by building a dam the southern bank has 
moved. (Yarrawonga-Mulwala region)
Legal answer for this boundary - the boundary did not move.



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Area-type objects and ways along its boundaries

[Alan Mintz]

At 2010-07-06 13:43, Nathan Edgars II wrote:

Pieren wrote:
>You missunderstood : the definition of the border IS the middle of the road
It may be the middle of the road *as it existed when the border was
defined*. It's usually not the middle of the road as it exists now,
unless there have been no changes, however slight, to the road
alignment. Pages 28 and 31 of
http://web.archive.org/web/20031206194418/http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/refdata/sldiag/viewindx.pdf
illustrate this rather well.


Cool. Located here: 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.820144&lon=-75.162305&zoom=18&layers=B000FTF


We don't know from this alone whether the boundary is defined to follow the 
road centerline, offset a certain distance from it, or exactly at the 
position shown, without regard for where the road is. That would be no 
different if it happened to coincide with the centerline of the road.


--
Alan Mintz 


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Area-type objects and ways along its boundaries

[Pieren]

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:43 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:

> It may be the middle of the road *as it existed when the border was
> defined*. It's usually not the middle of the road as it exists now,
> unless there have been no changes, however slight, to the road
> alignment. Pages 28 and 31 of
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20031206194418/http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/refdata/sldiag/viewindx.pdf
> illustrate this rather well.
>
>
Yes, I know. Even in my country, the feature might change but not the
boundary. This will not change my previous arguments:
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2010-July/051550.html

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Area-type objects and ways along its boundaries

[Alan Mintz]

At 2010-07-06 13:21, Pieren wrote:
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:07 PM,
Alan Mintz

wrote:
It's exactly because they are added
from different sources that it is incorrect to merge them. If you adjust
a border from a "more accurate" source, you should adjust that
border, not everything else that is glued to it (other than that of it's
neighbor siblings). The source you use for the border is correct for the
border alone. It may happen to coincide in places with the physical
centerline of a feature, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are the
same thing.You missunderstood : the definition of the border
IS the middle of the road or river. If we find a legal source for the
admin boundary, it is most of the time less accurate then a GPS trace
following the feature irl. 
I didn't mis-understand. My point is that the legal source for the admin
boundary is, by definition, accurate, regardless of whether it actually
coincides with anything else. Can you point to an example?

--
Alan Mintz 



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

[OSM-talk] Area-type objects and ways along its boundaries

[Nathan Edgars II]

Pieren wrote:
>You missunderstood : the definition of the border IS the middle of the road
It may be the middle of the road *as it existed when the border was
defined*. It's usually not the middle of the road as it exists now,
unless there have been no changes, however slight, to the road
alignment. Pages 28 and 31 of
http://web.archive.org/web/20031206194418/http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/refdata/sldiag/viewindx.pdf
illustrate this rather well.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Area-type objects and ways along its boundaries

[Pieren]

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Alan Mintz

> wrote:

> It's exactly because they are added from different sources that it is
> incorrect to merge them. If you adjust a border from a "more accurate"
> source, you should adjust that border, not everything else that is glued to
> it (other than that of it's neighbor siblings). The source you use for the
> border is correct for the border alone. It may happen to coincide in places
> with the physical centerline of a feature, but that doesn't necessarily mean
> they are the same thing.
>
> --
> Alan Mintz 
>
>
> You missunderstood : the definition of the border IS the middle of the road
or river. If we find a legal source for the admin boundary, it is most of
the time less accurate then a GPS trace following the feature irl.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Area-type objects and ways along its boundaries

[Pieren]

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 9:51 PM, Nakor  wrote:

> If the river/road/... is the actual boundary, shouldn't the same way be
> used for both instead of having duplicate ways? I've seen this done in some
> places (Ohio IIRC)
>
>
We had a lot of discussions about that. Finally, the answer (in my country)
depends on the length of the common feature/boundary. If it's a long shared
way (river, road, track), you might better split the way (at the beginning
and end of the boundary sharing the feature), add the boundary tags on the
single way and put this on the boundary relation. If the feature is followed
on a short distance, we find easier to just glue the nodes then we don't
have to split the feature for a short segment. Just make your life of
contributor easier as possible.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Area-type objects and ways along its boundaries

[Alan Mintz]

At 2010-07-06 08:18, Pieren wrote:
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 4:07 PM,
M∡rtin Koppenhoefer

wrote:

Also it makes border far more complicated (and thus even false) 
when
glued to features: roads need to have more nodes than just for the
position (maxspeed, turnrestrictions, crossing streets, ...) while
borders are defined by a couple of border-points (usually less than
our roads have).


Again, this depends on the region you are contributing. In my region,
most of the municipality borders are in fact glued to the middle of
features like roads, tracks or rivers. 
It depends on what you mean by "glued" and "middle",
though.
Borders are usually defined legally by a survey. The centerlines of roads
and other features are usually defined by a different (and probably more
frequent) survey. If a road is widened asymmetrically, such that the
centerline moves, it does not necessarily follow that the border moves,
too. It might move eventually, but it is likely a separate issue from the
road construction, requiring legislative change.
Even the apparent centerline from satellite imagery may be in a different
place than that considered as the centerline for boundary purposes. In
particular, asymmetrical sidewalk, horse trail, turn lanes, etc. can all
cause an OSM mapper to move a road centerline - something that is
entirely reasonable. It should, however, not result in moving a boundary
that is legally defined.
Also, considering imports, for the reasons above, it is likely that
boundaries are updated from sources that are different than those used to
update road features (TIGER being a notable exception, and one that is
not likely to be used again). If you import an accurate, legally defined
shapefile for a city boundary, and it does not follow a street centerline
exactly, it is only correct to have the street centerline and the
boundary be two separate ways, not to merge the two into the position of
the boundary, the position of the centerline, or somewhere in
between.
Those features can be added in OSM
from different sources (imagery, GPS, land registry). So adjusting the
border with a more accurate source requires to adjust two ways and many
duplicated nodes when it is far easier if the nodes are shared. This is
IMHO also a good reason to glue the boundary with the
feature.
It's exactly because they are added from different sources that it is
incorrect to merge them. If you adjust a border from a "more
accurate" source, you should adjust that border, not everything else
that is glued to it (other than that of it's neighbor siblings). The
source you use for the border is correct for the border alone. It may
happen to coincide in places with the physical centerline of a feature,
but that doesn't necessarily mean they are the same thing.

--
Alan Mintz 



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Area-type objects and ways along its boundaries

[John Smith]

On 7 July 2010 05:51, Nakor  wrote:
> If the river/road/... is the actual boundary, shouldn't the same way be used
> for both instead of having duplicate ways? I've seen this done in some
> places (Ohio IIRC)

The boundary might be similar to other features, but unless you like
reading a lot of legal documents there is no way to definitively know
if a boundary is the other feature.

It also makes things more difficult to edit in future if things
diverge, but the boundary doesn't move.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Candidacy] AGM Foundation 2010 - Girona

[Oliver (skobbler)]

>Does that mean we should not import trees in towns like Girona? (
http://osm.org/go/xu1ff...@- )

I would appreciate to find my hotel in Girona: Joan Maragall, 10 - 17002
Girona

BTW (@Emilie): I like your post.

Regards,
Oliver
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Candidacy-AGM-Foundation-2010-Girona-tp522p5262182.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Area-type objects and ways along its boundaries

[Nakor]

 On 7/6/2010 11:18 AM, Pieren wrote:



Again, this depends on the region you are contributing. In my region, 
most of the municipality borders are in fact glued to the middle of 
features like roads, tracks or rivers. Those features can be added in 
OSM from different sources (imagery, GPS, land registry). So adjusting 
the border with a more accurate source requires to adjust two ways and 
many duplicated nodes when it is far easier if the nodes are shared. 
This is IMHO also a good reason to glue the boundary with the feature.


Pieren


If the river/road/... is the actual boundary, shouldn't the same way be 
used for both instead of having duplicate ways? I've seen this done in 
some places (Ohio IIRC)


 Thanks,

N.

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

[OSM-talk] That license change link

[Mike Collinson]

You may have seen a new link at the top of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org about 
the forthcoming license change and seen it growing in size. It will soon appear 
on the http://wiki.openstreetmap.org login page too. We'd like to reach as many 
contributors as possible with something that is short, clear and fair to all 
viewpoints. We've asked legal-talk to look at it and now appreciate any general 
feedback and comment.  You can comment directly on the Discussion page or email 
the License Working Group le...@osmfoundation.org . Translations into other 
languages are also greatly welcome. 

The License Working Group will be holding an open forum at SOTM 2010 on Sunday 
and we also welcome any questions and comments there.


Where are we now?

New contributors to OpenStreetMap have been "dual licensing" since May 12th and 
we are just about to start asking existing contributors to do the same. Asking 
folks to agree to both the CC-BY-SA and ODbL allows a transition period with 
fail-safe.

OpenStreetMap has NOT yet moved to the new license.  To do this, we need a 
critical mass of EXISTING contributors to agree to re-license existing 
contributions. 

I will avoid giving any specific dates as we continue to move ahead cautiously 
after allowing any reactions to be heard and discussed, but here are more 
details 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Implementation_Plan#Current
 and the general plan: 

- Right now, CC-BY-SA carries on as usual.  The Foundation has the right to 
license a tiny amount of new contributions under ODbL, but will not do so.

- Existing contributors will shortly be asked if they will agree to re-license 
their data under ODbL.  CC-BY-SA carries on as usual. Contributors will be able 
to go on editing whether or not they accept or decline.

- When enough contributors have agreed, we cut over to licensing the current 
database under ODbL, (And a static snapshot of the database is also made 
forever under CC-BY-SA).  If for some reason this event never happens, the fail 
safe is that licensing of all contributions under CC-BY-SA simply continues.



Mike
License Working Group
le...@osmfoundation.org
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Groups


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

Re: [OSM-talk] sotm2010 video stream?

[John Smith]

On 6 July 2010 23:07, Floris Looijesteijn  wrote:
> We are actually planning to do this again, but no guarantees, that's why
> it's not mentioned yet :)

If they can't be streamed live, are they still going to be recorded?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Area-type objects and ways along its boundaries

[Pieren]

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 4:07 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:

> Also it makes border far more complicated (and thus even false) when
> glued to features: roads need to have more nodes than just for the
> position (maxspeed, turnrestrictions, crossing streets, ...) while
> borders are defined by a couple of border-points (usually less than
> our roads have).
>
>
Again, this depends on the region you are contributing. In my region, most
of the municipality borders are in fact glued to the middle of features like
roads, tracks or rivers. Those features can be added in OSM from different
sources (imagery, GPS, land registry). So adjusting the border with a more
accurate source requires to adjust two ways and many duplicated nodes when
it is far easier if the nodes are shared. This is IMHO also a good reason to
glue the boundary with the feature.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Candidacy] AGM Foundation 2010 - Girona

[Phil! Gold]

* David Earl  [2010-07-05 10:38 +0100]:
> Addresses are a bit different because its a whole different level of
> detail. But because you don't think its fun doesn't mean others
> don't enjoy it (or even do it because it is enjoyable). I did my
> village to see what it would take, but in general I took the view
> that I wanted to get complete street level / poi coverage for the
> area reasonably within my reach before I started on the next level
> of detail down.

Interestingly, I don't gather a lot of POIs when surveying, because I'm
usually not going to be returning to the survey areas to keep the POIs up
to date.  On the other hand, I try to scrupulously record all addresses,
because in my opinion those have longer lifetimes than, say, your average
strip mall shop.

(This, of course, only reinforces the recurring theme of "OSM is different
things to different people".  As does the fact that I've been taking a
break from surveying by mapping all the power lines in my state.)

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
/me pats his two indy's lovingly, don't listen to those nasty sun
enthuasists boys, their machines are a dull nasty grey, not a nice pretty
blue colour like you two.
   -- Greg McCarroll
 --- --

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Area-type objects and ways along its boundaries

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/7/5 Pieren :
> So you ask people to not join the nodes just because you make the assumption
> that this person is contributing in US and that a majority of US boundaries
> have errors...
> I could also say that if the boundary is really following the road, then
> there is no harm to join the nodes.


Actually I also came to the conclusion that is makes mapping much
easier if you don't connect roads to borders but keep them separate.

While it may be legally right in cases where the middle of the road is
also the border, there are also many cases where the road belongs to
one side of the border (and thus it would be wrong to join the nodes).

Usually you (maybe not you but the average mapper) don't know exactly
the position of the borders, that's why it makes editing roads
connected to borders a pain: in order to not change the border when
adjusting the road (or any other feature) you will have to unglue it.
Less experienced users might also change the border without even being
conscious about it, when they want to refine something.

Also it makes border far more complicated (and thus even false) when
glued to features: roads need to have more nodes than just for the
position (maxspeed, turnrestrictions, crossing streets, ...) while
borders are defined by a couple of border-points (usually less than
our roads have).

All these are IMHO good reasons not to glue them together. The only
situation where I believe attaching a border to another object is
sensefull is in the case of a river, that is defined as the border.

Cheers,
Martin

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

Re: [OSM-talk] sotm2010 video stream?

[Floris Looijesteijn]

Hey,

We are actually planning to do this again, but no guarantees, that's why
it's not mentioned yet :)

There are cameras in both rooms and we will be recording everything for
viewing after the conference. We'll be testing the streaming in the
following days.

For now: keep your eye on www.stateofthemap.org !

If you are going to the SotM and want to volunteer to help out with
videostreaming for a few hours, please let me know!

Greets,
Floris Looijesteijn
SotM 2010 Organizing Committee

Sam Vekemans wrote:
> A donated netbook that is sitting in a chair and pointed to the
> speaker podeum, with Ustream.tv running and capturing everything that
> is going on is EASY to set up.
> It just needs to be checked every so often to make sure its still
> recording & airing live.
>
> You could even stick a nametag on it as 'Iama Mapper'.
>
> Cheers,
> Sam
>
>
>
> On 7/6/10, maning sambale  wrote:
>> Are there plans to do this? Nothing was mentioned in the website
>>
>> (from someone who would love to attend but can't)
>> --
>> cheers,
>> maning
>> --
>> "Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden
>> wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/
>> blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/
>> --
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>
>
> --
> Twitter: @Acrosscanada
> Blogs: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/
> http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans
> Skype: samvekemans
> IRC: irc://irc.oftc.net #osm-ca Canadian OSM channel (an open chat room)
> @Acrosscanadatrails
>
> ___
> 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] sotm2010 video stream?

[Sam Vekemans]

A donated netbook that is sitting in a chair and pointed to the
speaker podeum, with Ustream.tv running and capturing everything that
is going on is EASY to set up.
It just needs to be checked every so often to make sure its still
recording & airing live.

You could even stick a nametag on it as 'Iama Mapper'.

Cheers,
Sam



On 7/6/10, maning sambale  wrote:
> Are there plans to do this? Nothing was mentioned in the website
>
> (from someone who would love to attend but can't)
> --
> cheers,
> maning
> --
> "Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden
> wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/
> blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/
> --
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 
Twitter: @Acrosscanada
Blogs: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/
http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans
Skype: samvekemans
IRC: irc://irc.oftc.net #osm-ca Canadian OSM channel (an open chat room)
@Acrosscanadatrails

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

[OSM-talk] sotm2010 video stream?

[maning sambale]

Are there plans to do this? Nothing was mentioned in the website

(from someone who would love to attend but can't)
-- 
cheers,
maning
--
"Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden
wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/
blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/
--

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Candidacy] AGM Foundation 2010 - Girona

[Emilie Laffray]

On 6 July 2010 09:48, Oliver (skobbler)  wrote:

>
> >As I said in my email it's
> >straightforward to make plans for the future without needing a "goal".
> >These plans can, and should, be based on what's happening, and
> >therefore what we plan/expect will happen in the future.
>
> Absolutely in regards to plans, I just said that it should be triggered and
> facilitated by the board to coordinate with other activities like funding,
> for which a certain level of planning is a prerequisite rather sooner than
> later.
>
> I do not agree that there doesn't need to be goal or vision. If I interpret
> your recent mail to sourceforge correctly you see OpenStreetMap as "host
> for
> mapping projects". In this case the goal or vision would be something like
> to "facilitate and encourage the creation maps for what purposes
> whatsoever". Something like this would give people an umbrella and a better
> understanding of what OpenStreetMap is about - and especially to
> communicate
> the project to the outside world. If you would ask ten people today what
> openstreetmap is about you would get ten different answers, that is what
> you
> can also see from this thread.
>

Hello,
That's actually one of the biggest strength of the OSM community to have 10
different visions of what OpenStreetMap is. The way OpenStreetMap has moved
so far has been very beneficial to the vast ecosystems that we are now
catering for.
Everyone is seeing something different from the "map" as a map is something
very personal and can be used in so many ways.
Does that mean we should stop people doing orienteering map under the
pretense that it is adding to much "useless" data? (
http://www.oobrien.com/oom/ )
Does that mean we should not import trees in towns like Girona? (
http://osm.org/go/xu1ff...@- )
Does that mean we have to stop mapping zoos, arboretum,  ?
Does that mean we have to stop doing humanitarian work too?
Should we focus only on streets, streets details, etc... ?
Each use of OSM is perfectly valid and no priority over another one. I think
we are past the time where streets were the only thing that mattered.
While I agree about the need of better communication, I think we should
instead show everything we can do with OSM, whether routing, reverse
geocoding, geocoding, specialized map rendering (Bikes, Roads, map for the
blind, orienteering maps, etc...). OSM isn't just a replacement for
TeleAtlas or Navteq. It is something in its own class now. I can understand
why we might want to have the world covered in roads and have perfect
addressing, but a crowded sourced project doesn't work that way. You can get
a software open source project relatively focused (that will never stop
people from adding non expected features), but this is not possible in OSM.
You can of course try to do Week of France, where you get people to map a
specific area, giving thematic for all those hungry mappers wanting to do
something; you just can't direct them to do something in particular. Haiti
is such an example: not everyone started mapping Haiti suddenly.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Candidacy] AGM Foundation 2010 - Girona

[John Smith]

On 6 July 2010 18:48, Oliver (skobbler)  wrote:
> the project to the outside world. If you would ask ten people today what
> openstreetmap is about you would get ten different answers, that is what you
> can also see from this thread.

If you asked those same 10 people what they want from a map, you'd
probably still get 10 different answers.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Candidacy] AGM Foundation 2010 - Girona

[Oliver (skobbler)]

>As I said in my email it's
>straightforward to make plans for the future without needing a "goal".
>These plans can, and should, be based on what's happening, and
>therefore what we plan/expect will happen in the future.

Absolutely in regards to plans, I just said that it should be triggered and
facilitated by the board to coordinate with other activities like funding,
for which a certain level of planning is a prerequisite rather sooner than
later.

I do not agree that there doesn't need to be goal or vision. If I interpret
your recent mail to sourceforge correctly you see OpenStreetMap as "host for
mapping projects". In this case the goal or vision would be something like
to "facilitate and encourage the creation maps for what purposes
whatsoever". Something like this would give people an umbrella and a better
understanding of what OpenStreetMap is about - and especially to communicate
the project to the outside world. If you would ask ten people today what
openstreetmap is about you would get ten different answers, that is what you
can also see from this thread.

Regards,
Oliver
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Candidacy-AGM-Foundation-2010-Girona-tp522p5259421.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Candidacy] AGM Foundation 2010 - Girona

[Andy Allan]

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 8:22 AM, Oliver (skobbler)
 wrote:
> We have no idea what our financial needs are in the next year
> because we haven't set any goals for next year.

That's a complete non-sequitur. As I said in my email it's
straightforward to make plans for the future without needing a "goal".
These plans can, and should, be based on what's happening, and
therefore what we plan/expect will happen in the future. The sysadmins
can and do plan for when we need to purchase new hardware, and what it
needs to be, to accommodate our projected growth. None of which needs
some goal of the "we want to be the leading provider of whatnot" type.

> But please give us money as
> we might need some."?

If that's how you are characterising the OSMF - if it doesn't have
your "stategic goals" - then bear in mind you're insulting a lot of
people who have successfully run OpenStreetMap for the last few years.

Now don't take it from what I've said that having a goal would be
somehow a bad thing, but your suggestions that we *need* a goal and we
can't be successful or do planning or anything else without one is
simply wrong.

Cheers,
Andy

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Adding a relation to a relation in Potlatch

[Richard Fairhurst]

Maarten Deen wrote:
> Is it possible to add a relation to a relation in Potlatch? I've
> tried some things but haven't found a way yet.

No, not currently in Potlatch 1. You can in Potlatch 2.

cheers
Richard
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Adding-a-relation-to-a-relation-in-Potlatch-tp5259160p5259280.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Candidacy] AGM Foundation 2010 - Girona

[John Smith]

On 6 July 2010 17:22, Oliver (skobbler)  wrote:
> I understand that is was decided by the OSMF board that funding is supposed
> to become a more structured activity. What would you say to someone
> interested in funding? "OpenStreetMap doesn't have a strategic goal; it's
> never had one. We have no idea what our financial needs are in the next year
> because we haven't set any goals for next year. But please give us money as
> we might need some."? Or would you say that funding is supposed to be
> postponed?

Why do you think the only strategic planning that can be done is that
which you are trying to coerce people into supporting based on what
you'd like to see mapped?

How about instead focusing on supporting mappers, rather than trying
to direct their activities, for example does servers need to be
upgraded or does capacity increased to support other actives like the
routing Nic is doing...

Are there more cool things OSM could be show casing if there was more
hardware available?

That sort of thing...

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Candidacy] AGM Foundation 2010 - Girona

[Oliver (skobbler)]

>That's not to say the Foundation shouldn't be planning ahead, but
>there's a big difference between that and trying to come up with a
>"vision". If we need a vision, a plan or anything like that (and
>that's debatable anyway) then it's best for it to appear from the
>bowels of the community, not be thrashed out at a OSMF board weekend
>retreat. 

I understand that is was decided by the OSMF board that funding is supposed
to become a more structured activity. What would you say to someone
interested in funding? "OpenStreetMap doesn't have a strategic goal; it's
never had one. We have no idea what our financial needs are in the next year
because we haven't set any goals for next year. But please give us money as
we might need some."? Or would you say that funding is supposed to be
postponed?

Regards,
Oliver


-- 
View this message in context: 
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Candidacy-AGM-Foundation-2010-Girona-tp522p5259163.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

[OSM-talk] Adding a relation to a relation in Potlatch

[Maarten Deen]

Is it possible to add a relation to a relation in Potlatch? I've tried 
some things but haven't found a way yet.


Regards,
Maarten


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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Candidacy] AGM Foundation 2010 - Girona

[Oliver (skobbler)]

>Would you stand for the sourceforge.net board and suggest that they
>need to focus their efforts on only a few selective open-source
>projects? 

I am quite surprised by this comparison: 

(a) sourcefourge is a tool that has nothing to do with the projects
themselves
(b) the projects are all independent while OpenStreetMap projects are all
build on a common core and are derivatives of this core - much more like
there is a linux for servers, mobile devices, embedded software etc. If the
core isn't any good then the derivatives are no good. 
(c) the projects on sourceforge do not have to share development tools,
infrastructure, funding, a license or communication. 
(d) if a project owner doesn't like sourceforge anymore he moves on.

Regards,
Oliver
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Candidacy-AGM-Foundation-2010-Girona-tp522p5259131.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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