Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
At 2011-02-03 09:17, Steve Coast wrote: http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2011/02/03/automatically-detect-roads-with-bing-aerial-imagery.aspx This is something that has the potential to greatly increase mapping productivity! A couple of things: 1. When I run the sample http://magicshop.cloudapp.net/DetectRoad.svc/detect/?pt1=47.6274924080735,-122.119339391984&pt2=47.6266897967272,-122.116431877412&bbox=47.628475815791,-122.120927259721,47.6254135470002,-122.114489958085 It produces a road segment that is not very well centered. The imagery for this area is rather good (~0.06m/pel - zoom 21) and it should be a fairly easy case. Can someone look at this? Is it being too sensitive, not sensitive enough, etc.? Can some of the internal parameters be exposed so we can play with them? 2. When I try http://magicshop.cloudapp.net/DetectRoad.svc/detect/?pt1=47.6312440,-122.1126077&pt2=47.6263360,-122.1179483&bbox=47.632,-122.119,47.625,-122.109 it complains "Error Status Code: 'BadRequest' Details: The points are too close together." Even though these points are further apart (~700m) than the ones in the example. -- Alan Mintz ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] 12nm territorial borders - useful or rubbish?
On 14 February 2011 16:52, David Murn wrote: >> Would the UK coastguard have a good laugh when I claim to be in international >> waters at that location? > > If youre more than 12 miles from the coast (which is what is mapped) > then youre in international waters, why would they laugh at that fact? Actually, that's one of the areas where it's often changed. If you are in a bay, and the mouth of the bay closes enough that you can't get in without going through territorial waters, it doesn't matter how big the bay gets afterwards, all the waters inside it a belong to that country also. There's an example here, and it looks like it is displayed correctly, which makes me think this part of the boundary is not auto-generated. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.52&lon=-65.52&zoom=8&layers=M The question would be if that rule applied in that little triangle or not - it's not a bay, but it is impossible to get to without going through territorial waters, so I'm not sure. There's a number of other places were the border has obviously been corrected - not auto-generated. Are we sure any of it was? Stephen ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] 12nm territorial borders - useful or rubbish?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 2011-02-14 03:22, Frederik Ramm skrev: > For example, if I am inside this triangle between Scotland and Ireland, > will my legal status (concerning, say, fishing quotas, or whom I can > marry on board of my vessel, or whatever funny things influcenced by > international borders) be really any different from the status I had if > I moved my vessel 2 miles in either direction? Yes, I'm not sure abo9ut teh Uk or Irish rules in details but in and around sweden if for example you are a small vessel, some of the international shipping rules are not applied for you ship. Such as the need to carry day signals. Outside the water limits these rules don't applie any more and you can be fined. The data in the swedish borders comes form a EU database, not looked deeper into it. http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/maritime-boundaries > Or are we, by using these auto-generated (and perhaps not > human-reviewed?) borders, suggesting a precision that isn't there? Would > the UK coastguard have a good laugh when I claim to be in international > waters at that location? Isn't the legal case same for everything? Hey officer my gps said the was 90 here. Claming anything based on the map i think is wrong. > And my third question is, assuming that there are really good reasons > for having these lines in OSM - who takes care of updating them once the > coastline is modified by a mapper? I think it is a rather unique > situation to have that kind of data-derived-from-other-OSM-data in OSM > itself, and thus this has many of the same problems that an import would > have (i.e. the source data has changed, what now). Who take resopsibilti to update any data, does these lines differ really. The real line i then as well is not just 12nm outside the coast but some kind of simplifactions of that 12 nm, also there are issues when the line overlaps between two contries. > I'd like to hear from people who tell me that yes, these borders are > really useful to have ;) I personally would love OSM to have much more usefull data even at sea. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk1Y0fEACgkQtbR3SXmySrferACeJXyo3VP39fjkSQOfY+7lWZGB TXEAnjdSBHqIHmTfeuZ1fkko6ISvcu7F =KLmX -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] 12nm territorial borders - useful or rubbish?
On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 03:22 +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote: > I've been thinking about the 12nm territorial borders on sea that we > have in many places, notably in Europe. Many of them seem to have been > auto-generated by simply placing a buffer around the coastline. > > My first question is, do they really have legal significance? > For example, if I am inside this triangle between Scotland and Ireland, > will my legal status (concerning, say, fishing quotas, or whom I can > marry on board of my vessel, or whatever funny things influcenced by > international borders) be really any different from the status I had if > I moved my vessel 2 miles in either direction? Try approaching by sea to within 13 miles of China, Iran or Pakistan, then travel another 2 miles across the territorial border and see if the locals think it makes a difference. Im sure I remember reading a linked news story posted on this mailing list about a soldier crossing into enemy country because of incorrect mapping on his GPS. > Would the UK coastguard have a good laugh when I claim to be in international > waters at that location? If youre more than 12 miles from the coast (which is what is mapped) then youre in international waters, why would they laugh at that fact? > My second question is, assuming that indeed there is significance to the > 12 nm boundary - should such auto-generated data be in OSM at all? If > you're out on the sea, should whatever navigational aid you carry not > compute by itself how far you are from the coast, rather than telling > you whether you're to the left or to the right of a previously computed > 12nm line? What happens if the international waters stretch further than 12nm in some areas? The generally accepted rule is that 12nm is the edge of territorial waters, but by treaty/agreement this can be changed. > I'm not saying we should delete them; but whenever I see them on the map > I tend to shrug and say "well, seems like someone was trying out his > PostGIS skillz" A ships captain might look at a neatly laid out park and say 'why bother putting each tree, thats just showing off that you can make pretty patterns', in the same way that a non boating person might fail to see the value in territorial water boundaries. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:42 AM, David Murn wrote: > A program that came out of Microsoft, trying to slightly modify a > defacto file format standard, say it isnt so. Dude. It's 2011. We've moved on. Let's stop attacking Microsoft employees when they come here to do something helpful, because of some grudge from the mid 90s. Thanks, Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] 12nm territorial borders - useful or rubbish?
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > I'm not saying we should delete them; but whenever I see them on the map I > tend to shrug and say "well, seems like someone was trying out his PostGIS > skillz", and somehow I have the suspicion that the 12nm line as depicted on > our maps may be little more than "that's what computer geeks do if you tell > them the border is 12 miles out...". Heh, the same thought has occurred to me. I would add a fourth question: even assuming that we are all agreed that this is valuable, properly computed data - do we want it shown in the main Mapnik view? Is the "international waters" designation important enough to show at that level? Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
Not sure that was helpful. Anyway, I updated the staging servers with a new build that hopefully addresses the issues. Give it a try and let me know if you any issue. - modified osmchange to osmChange - removed the bounds http://3667a17de9b94ccf8fd278f9de62dae4.cloudapp.net/ Thanks, J.M. -Original Message- From: David Murn [mailto:da...@incanberra.com.au] Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2011 4:42 PM To: Chris Browet Cc: John-Michael Wiley; talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with On Sun, 2011-02-13 at 19:52 +0100, Chris Browet wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 19:25, Chris Browet > wrote: > Busy implementing in Merkaartor > > A bug: > you output while it is , with a capital > "C". see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OsmChange > > - Chris - > > And, AFAIK, below is not valid. A program that came out of Microsoft, trying to slightly modify a defacto file format standard, say it isnt so. Next will come .MSO, its just like .OSM but with the subtle MicroSoft Openstreetmap changes to the existing format. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] 12nm territorial borders - useful or rubbish?
Hi, I've been thinking about the 12nm territorial borders on sea that we have in many places, notably in Europe. Many of them seem to have been auto-generated by simply placing a buffer around the coastline. My first question is, do they really have legal significance? They certainly give the impression of high precision, hugging every protruding bit of coastline in a safe distance. For example, if I am inside this triangle between Scotland and Ireland, will my legal status (concerning, say, fishing quotas, or whom I can marry on board of my vessel, or whatever funny things influcenced by international borders) be really any different from the status I had if I moved my vessel 2 miles in either direction? http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=55.065&lon=-5.567&zoom=10&layers=M Or are we, by using these auto-generated (and perhaps not human-reviewed?) borders, suggesting a precision that isn't there? Would the UK coastguard have a good laugh when I claim to be in international waters at that location? My second question is, assuming that indeed there is significance to the 12 nm boundary - should such auto-generated data be in OSM at all? If you're out on the sea, should whatever navigational aid you carry not compute by itself how far you are from the coast, rather than telling you whether you're to the left or to the right of a previously computed 12nm line? And my third question is, assuming that there are really good reasons for having these lines in OSM - who takes care of updating them once the coastline is modified by a mapper? I think it is a rather unique situation to have that kind of data-derived-from-other-OSM-data in OSM itself, and thus this has many of the same problems that an import would have (i.e. the source data has changed, what now). I'm not saying we should delete them; but whenever I see them on the map I tend to shrug and say "well, seems like someone was trying out his PostGIS skillz", and somehow I have the suspicion that the 12nm line as depicted on our maps may be little more than "that's what computer geeks do if you tell them the border is 12 miles out...". I'd like to hear from people who tell me that yes, these borders are really useful to have ;) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Spain needs OSM love
On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 10:44 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote: > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Oscar Orbe > wrote: > hello list, > here is a ranking of the cities/towns in Spain which need the > most OSM love. > click 4 times on the last column to see them sorted: > > > http://bit.ly/eUkBpX > > > > > Wow, what a lot of work. What made you decide to go down the > subjective assessment path, rather than just counting the number of > OSM entities within a given bounding box? Was this done entirely by hand, or did you have some automated process to help with this? Id really like to look at doing something similar for other areas. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Sun, 2011-02-13 at 19:52 +0100, Chris Browet wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 19:25, Chris Browet > wrote: > Busy implementing in Merkaartor > > A bug: > you output while it is , with a capital > "C". see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OsmChange > > - Chris - > > And, AFAIK, below is not valid. A program that came out of Microsoft, trying to slightly modify a defacto file format standard, say it isnt so. Next will come .MSO, its just like .OSM but with the subtle MicroSoft Openstreetmap changes to the existing format. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Spain needs OSM love
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Oscar Orbe wrote: > hello list, > here is a ranking of the cities/towns in Spain which need the most OSM > love. > click 4 times on the last column to see them sorted: > > http://bit.ly/eUkBpX > > Wow, what a lot of work. What made you decide to go down the subjective assessment path, rather than just counting the number of OSM entities within a given bounding box? Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Spain needs OSM love
hello list,here is a ranking of the cities/towns in Spain which need the most OSM love.click 4 times on the last column to see them sorted: http://bit.ly/eUkBpX now you finally have something to do in your spare time.you can legally use this WMS service: http://www.idee.es/wms/pnoa/pnoa? with the tags: source=PNOAsource:date=2009 I myself will start with Cuenca. thanks--oscar Never miss an email again! Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] It's fun while it lasts
On Viernes, 11 de Febrero de 2011 11:30:19 Chris Browet escribió: > >> "Les carottes poussent la nuit"... > Oh yes, I can believe it! It means nothing... > It is a private joke to make fun of people using proverbs too often :-) To that, I can only say: "Quidquid latinum dictum sit, profundus viditur" Best, -- Iván Sánchez Ortega ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 19:25, Chris Browet wrote: > Busy implementing in Merkaartor > > A bug: > you output while it is , with a capital "C". see > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OsmChange > > - Chris - And, AFAIK, below is not valid. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with
Busy implementing in Merkaartor A bug: you output while it is , with a capital "C". see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OsmChange - Chris - On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 15:16, John-Michael Wiley wrote: > The wiki page is not clear about what the version is supposed to be, is > it for the version of OSM that output is written for or the version of the > creator? I can do either, without much trouble. > > > > J.M. > > > > *From:* SteveC [mailto:st...@asklater.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, February 03, 2011 9:16 PM > *To:* John-Michael Wiley > *Cc:* Chris Browet; talk@openstreetmap.org > > *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with > > > > Maybe put the magicshop version number in the creator? > > Steve > > > On Feb 3, 2011, at 9:12 PM, John-Michael Wiley > wrote: > > > > I made the changes, checked in the code and published them to the staging > servers. If someone else wants to take a look at the output and let me know > if you think. Unless I hear complaints I will update the production servers > tomorrow. > > > > http://c5a33f72a0594a6b87931c2e3f984324.cloudapp.net/ > > > > I pasted the new output below. > > > > Thanks, > > J.M. > > > > > > > maxlon="-122.116432"/> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *From:* christian.bro...@gmail.com [mailto:christian.bro...@gmail.com] *On > Behalf Of *Chris Browet > *Sent:* Thursday, February 03, 2011 6:47 PM > *To:* John-Michael Wiley > *Cc:* Steve Coast; talk@openstreetmap.org > *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk] magical road detector to play with > > > > > > I am also wondering if we should switch to osm change as the enclosing > tag although the idea is not to give someone something they submit right to > OSM. In our prototypes we have been adding the detected ways onto the map > for the user to edit and approve. I generate new id’s for the ones passed > back to me so they don’t conflict with current changes the user has already > made. > > > I personally see no advantage for switching to osm change, as all features > are new anyway, but indeed the disadvantage of being too easy to upload > "as-is", without proper review... > > - Chris - > > > > > > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] SotM '11 - Denver - The Map, before
I did some mapping in Denver when I was there for WhereCamp in November. It seems like there are a few areas that are insanely well mapped (houses traced with house numbers) and a lot of areas that haven't been touched since the TIGER import. For anyone wanting to improve the map, one thing to note is that the Bing imagery is at least 5 years old. The newest available imagery is the USGS stuff from 2008. I have noted this along with some URLs on the Colorado wiki page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Colorado Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
