Re: [OSM-talk] level_crossing, leveled
Unless you operate to peculiar safety standards, there'll probably be a stop sign on the track some way either side of the former crossing(probably set for the stopping distance of the heaviest train operating at linespeed, and taking the gradient into account - which could easily be a mile away). So there'll be quite a length of track that's "disused". I'd probably tag the railway as abandoned, and remove the level crossing, if it looks like a permanent situation. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] level_crossing, leveled
On 26 May 2011 18:53, Richard Mann wrote: > Unless you operate to peculiar safety standards, there'll probably be > a stop sign on the track some way either side of the former > crossing(probably set for the stopping distance of the heaviest train > operating at linespeed, and taking the gradient into account - which > could easily be a mile away). So there'll be quite a length of track > that's "disused". I'd probably tag the railway as abandoned, and > remove the level crossing, if it looks like a permanent situation. I hit this when I first started mapping, there is a lot of track about the place, and the crossings are still there, but tarred over, rather than ripped up. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] level_crossing, leveled
Richard Weait wrote:
> Any thoughts or widely accepted customs regarding this?
I'd use a length of either railway=disused or railway=abandoned.
IMX it only takes a year or so for a disused railway, often called OOU in
the UK ("out of use"), to become unsuitable for trains to "turn up and go".
On occasion the problem is just a bit of overgrowth, but more frequently,
there'll be something serious that needs addressing before trains can pass
again: signalling, skewed or stolen rails, washed-out trackbed. A bit of
tarmac across the rails is probably the least of these problems.
So, given that "disused" means "permanent way still largely in place but
some work required to get it back in place", I'd be tempted to stick with
railway=disused even despite the odd bit of tarmac. (The example that
springs to mind most readily in the UK is the Amlwch branch, for those who
know it.)
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/level-crossing-leveled-tp6404088p6406306.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] New Community Updates newsletter
Hi, please find enclosed the next issue of the Community Updates: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Community_Updates/2011-05-16 kind regards Matthias ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Tracks and there place in society
>I wonder that noone, so far, mentioned that we had similar discussions >on talk-de. >Please, do not discuss only in GB. > >The sitiuation is even a bit more complicated because of law (especially >for bikes) and we have foot/bicycle=official, too. > >I stoped using footway or cycleway at all. > >And do not forget emergencies which could use a track but not a path. > >Thanks >colliar Well in a nutshell, this is the debate, and how every ML conversation on the matter ends up: http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g226/ben_robbins_/Tracks-1.png?t=1306366810 It starts in the 'blue' section. It then goes in circles for the best part, or it all ends with the renderer. Either of the 3 points where I have put an exclamation mark (but not the bottom right one) would deal with the problem I think you have described. (Ignore the other one, it was for something else) It's rather amazing the complexity of something so simple! --- So really, going along the lines of 'highway=track; designation=xyz' it just about works, but 3 issues remain. 1) It doesn't render correctly/at all. 2) The assumed access rights of highway=track in a route planner are not clear, and/or a problem as shown in diagram. 3) The need for Highway=byway/bridleway/footway...is there one; again shown in diagram. Any definite answers or advice on these points from anyone? cheers, Ben ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Tracks and there place in society
Ben - you end up with one of three things: highway=track+tracktype=whatever+designation=public_footpath (or whatever) highway=track+tracktype=whatever highway=track+access=private If it's got a simple private / keep out sign, then use access=private. This renders. Anything else, you can probably access with anything except a private car (not because it's banned, just because of the potential damage). Whether you want to probably depends on the tracktype (which renders) and whether it goes anywhere (which renders). If you want to know about the subtle distinction between a Right of Way and a dunno-seems-to-be-ok track, use the designation tag (or umpteen access tags), and look at Free-map, or render it yourself. In summary - access=private is for tracks that declare themselves to be exclusively for private access, not for things that are merely privately-owned. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] level_crossing, leveled
True, but it might well derail a locomotive in the winter. I once saw a locomotive derailed by mud that had flowed across the track, then frozen.. Fortunately, the locomotive was moving slowly enough that it didn't cause a catastrophic accident. Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless -Original message- From: Russ Nelson To: Richard Weait Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Sent: Thu, May 26, 2011 05:04:31 GMT+00:00 Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] level_crossing, leveled Richard Weait writes: > What should be done with a level_crossing, when trains may cross no longer? > > The junction was a level_crossing, but has been repaved and > re-sculpted. The rails are now covered by 0.3 - 0.4 m of asphalt > which appears to have been laid directly over the tracks. So the > railway hardware appears to still be there, but unusable. The rails > continue both directions from the level_crossing. > > To this point, I have left the level_crossing tag in place; it can > still serve as a waypoint, I suppose. 30cm of asphalt on a warm sunny day is no barrier to a 170 ton locomotive. Think of a marshmellow being run over by a car. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ 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] anonymous edits
Hi all, Consider the following application scheme: * a twitter user sends a geo-located tweet containing a specified hashtag, say #addosm and key-value pairs like "amenity:pub;name:Red Devil;smoking:yes" * a twitter scraper picks up the tweet, archives it and posts a new point using the twitter coordinate and the decoded k-v pairs, plus an additional tag source:twitter[@twitteruser] or something like that. This would be an easy way to add POIs on the go, and could be an interface for mobile applications to post new POIs. This would not be totally anonymous but it's close. What do you think, is this acceptable? A similar level of anonymity is reached by WheelMap.org that allows anonymous OSM edits through their web site via the OSM account wheelmap_visitor[2]. [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Anonymous_edits [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/wheelmap_visitor -- Martijn van Exel http://about.me/mvexel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] anonymous edits
On 27 May 2011 03:51, Martijn van Exel wrote: > Hi all, > > Consider the following application scheme: > * a twitter user sends a geo-located tweet containing a specified > hashtag, say #addosm and key-value pairs like "amenity:pub;name:Red > Devil;smoking:yes" > * a twitter scraper picks up the tweet, archives it and posts a new > point using the twitter coordinate and the decoded k-v pairs, plus an > additional tag source:twitter[@twitteruser] or something like that. > This would be an easy way to add POIs on the go, and could be an > interface for mobile applications to post new POIs. This would not be > totally anonymous but it's close. What do you think, is this > acceptable? A similar level of anonymity is reached by WheelMap.org > that allows anonymous OSM edits through their web site via the OSM > account wheelmap_visitor[2]. Not knowing who made edits to the phone directory was one reason given for copyright not to cover phone books in Australia, so anonymous edits have the ability to weaken copyright in some jurisdictions. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] anonymous edits
I think that's a great idea! However I don't believe it should be directly added to the OSM database, since the POI may already exist, or there could be other problems. Instead why not create an .osm file and allow others to add/merge it to OSM using tools like JOSM? An even better idea might be to piggy back on the bug/note concept, and just create a ticket with the proposed changes. A JOSM plugin, Potlatch, or a custom GUI can pull these bugs/notes and present them to a contributor to add to OSM. Great idea though, I'd love to see an implementation of this! -Josh On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: > Hi all, > > Consider the following application scheme: > * a twitter user sends a geo-located tweet containing a specified > hashtag, say #addosm and key-value pairs like "amenity:pub;name:Red > Devil;smoking:yes" > * a twitter scraper picks up the tweet, archives it and posts a new > point using the twitter coordinate and the decoded k-v pairs, plus an > additional tag source:twitter[@twitteruser] or something like that. > This would be an easy way to add POIs on the go, and could be an > interface for mobile applications to post new POIs. This would not be > totally anonymous but it's close. What do you think, is this > acceptable? A similar level of anonymity is reached by WheelMap.org > that allows anonymous OSM edits through their web site via the OSM > account wheelmap_visitor[2]. > > > [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Anonymous_edits > [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/wheelmap_visitor > -- > Martijn van Exel > http://about.me/mvexel > > ___ > 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] anonymous edits
If someone turns out to be a troll, repeatedly and deliberately posting false information, how would they be blocked? Would the Twitter scraper program need to be the step doing the blocking, since all changes to the OSM database would go in under the same user ID? Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless -Original message- From: Martijn van Exel To: Talk Openstreetmap Sent: Thu, May 26, 2011 17:51:07 GMT+00:00 Subject: [OSM-talk] anonymous edits Hi all, Consider the following application scheme: * a twitter user sends a geo-located tweet containing a specified hashtag, say #addosm and key-value pairs like "amenity:pub;name:Red Devil;smoking:yes" * a twitter scraper picks up the tweet, archives it and posts a new point using the twitter coordinate and the decoded k-v pairs, plus an additional tag source:twitter[@twitteruser] or something like that. This would be an easy way to add POIs on the go, and could be an interface for mobile applications to post new POIs. This would not be totally anonymous but it's close. What do you think, is this acceptable? A similar level of anonymity is reached by WheelMap.org that allows anonymous OSM edits through their web site via the OSM account wheelmap_visitor[2]. [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Anonymous_edits [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/wheelmap_visitor -- Martijn van Exel http://about.me/mvexel ___ 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] anonymous edits
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 8:02 PM, John Smith wrote: > On 27 May 2011 03:51, Martijn van Exel wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Consider the following application scheme: >> * a twitter user sends a geo-located tweet containing a specified >> hashtag, say #addosm and key-value pairs like "amenity:pub;name:Red >> Devil;smoking:yes" >> * a twitter scraper picks up the tweet, archives it and posts a new >> point using the twitter coordinate and the decoded k-v pairs, plus an >> additional tag source:twitter[@twitteruser] or something like that. >> This would be an easy way to add POIs on the go, and could be an >> interface for mobile applications to post new POIs. This would not be >> totally anonymous but it's close. What do you think, is this >> acceptable? A similar level of anonymity is reached by WheelMap.org >> that allows anonymous OSM edits through their web site via the OSM >> account wheelmap_visitor[2]. > > Not knowing who made edits to the phone directory was one reason given > for copyright not to cover phone books in Australia, so anonymous > edits have the ability to weaken copyright in some jurisdictions. > Totally anonymous edits existed once in OSM, until 2007. See the first link in my original message (mysteriously not referred to in the message body..hm). They were abandoned for different reasons I believe, the wiki page gives some explanation. -- Martijn van Exel http://about.me/mvexel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] OSM-Import to MySQL Spatial tool?
Hello! After days of surfing in the internet I couldn't find for MySQL any tool similar to osm2pgsql for Postgres. All I want to do is to visualize the OSM data for Germany on GeoServer with MySQL DB. The tools I found like Osmosis and osm2sql save the data in a non-spatial schema, that's why GeoServer can't visualize it. Can anybody make a clear statement, whether such tool for MySQL exists? I know that MySQL support is not well tested on the GeoServer and that Postgres is a preffered DB, but MySQL is a requirement in my case. Would appreciate any help! Thank you! Leonid Khaylov Student Computer Science TU Darmstadt ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] anonymous edits
On 27 May 2011 04:19, Martijn van Exel wrote: > Totally anonymous edits existed once in OSM, until 2007. See the first > link in my original message (mysteriously not referred to in the > message body..hm). They were abandoned for different reasons I > believe, the wiki page gives some explanation. I'm aware, but knowingly allowing it to continue was my point, especially since steps were taken in the past to stop accepting them. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] anonymous edits
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Josh Doe wrote: > I think that's a great idea! However I don't believe it should be > directly added to the OSM database, since the POI may already exist, > or there could be other problems. Instead why not create an .osm file > and allow others to add/merge it to OSM using tools like JOSM? An even > better idea might be to piggy back on the bug/note concept, and just > create a ticket with the proposed changes. A JOSM plugin, Potlatch, or > a custom GUI can pull these bugs/notes and present them to a > contributor to add to OSM. > The problem of existing POIs is a real one and may be captured by the scraper application: * User posts tweet with the magic hashtag * scraper looks up nearby OSM nodes and matches (fuzzily?) * if the POI does not seem to exist, add. * else, reply to user (via twitter) "POI xyz seems to exist already (provide link). An intermediary layer may seem like a safe bet but would require people to invest time in validating, taking away much of the instant gratification of doing something useful for OSM. This may also be rewarded by replying with a tweet linking to a mapnik render of the new POI in a map context. -- Martijn van Exel http://about.me/mvexel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] anonymous edits
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 8:25 PM, John Smith wrote: > On 27 May 2011 04:19, Martijn van Exel wrote: >> Totally anonymous edits existed once in OSM, until 2007. See the first >> link in my original message (mysteriously not referred to in the >> message body..hm). They were abandoned for different reasons I >> believe, the wiki page gives some explanation. > > I'm aware, but knowingly allowing it to continue was my point, > especially since steps were taken in the past to stop accepting them. > That is exactly why I started this thread - to see how (un)acceptable it is to do (semi) anonymous edits. I was surprised to see the wheelmap construct but I'm sure that was discussed here before it was implemented. Was it? -- Martijn van Exel http://about.me/mvexel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] anonymous edits
Hi, Martijn van Exel wrote: That is exactly why I started this thread - to see how (un)acceptable it is to do (semi) anonymous edits. An important reason against anonymous edits is accountability. We want to be able to contact someone and ask them: Why did you add that? What did you mean by it? Etc. In order not to burden the mapper, your twitter bot would somehow have to establish bidirectional communiactions between mappers and twitter-ers. If you think you cannot expect the twitter-er to set up an OSM account, then in the same vein you cannot expect the mapper to set up a twitter account. You must make sure that a message sent by a mapper to your twitter bot actually reaches the twitter-er who is the source of the data. This is probably not easy. I was surprised to see the wheelmap construct but I'm sure that was discussed here before it was implemented. Was it? Don't geht the "wheelmap visitor" thing wrong; the *only* thing that this visitor can do is to set one specific tag to one of three specific values on an already-existing object of a certain type. So, no free-form tagging, no creation of new objects - almost zero risk of vandalism or copyright violation. But even there we have already had problems where an unknown "wheelmap visitor" changed something that others found worthy of discussion. On the whole, I don't think this twitter thing can fly. We don't want your data (only), we want your soul, and if you cannot be bothered to set up an account (which you will need anyway as soon as you want to make edits rather than just dumping POIs onto us) then maybe OSM is not for you. A twitter-to-openstreetbugs interface, that could work. 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] anonymous edits
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > Martijn van Exel wrote: >> >> That is exactly why I started this thread - to see how (un)acceptable >> it is to do (semi) anonymous edits. > > An important reason against anonymous edits is accountability. We want to be > able to contact someone and ask them: Why did you add that? What did you > mean by it? Etc. That was my initial thought when the idea came up. Of course you can trace an edit back to a twitter user, but that's one step away from a community member. It's not 100% anonymous, but at least someone who came to the OpenStreetMap web site and made an account (however little effort that takes) at least had a look at OpenStreetMap. But then consider this. We have 400k+ "community members" of whom, if the ratio has not changed, about 80% never made any edits. Of the 20% remaining, about 80%% is inactive (no editing in the last two months) leaving only about 6% of those 400k+ active mappers. This tells me two things: 1. We need more ways to engage new mappers, to retain them once they show an interest in OSM. The proposed twitter scheme could be one of them. 2. 'Having an OSM account' does not really tell me anything about the involvement of that particular person. Or of their ability to be contacted / held accountable, for that matter. The one thing I do see as a real issue is the legal one. All twitter POI contributions would be added through one account - at least initially, see below. This account has to be made by a real person and that person is legally bound to the license and CT. Will this person or legal entity need permission from the people actually using the twitter scheme to be in conformance with the license / CT? How does Wheelmap.org handle this, if at all? > > In order not to burden the mapper, your twitter bot would somehow have to > establish bidirectional communiactions between mappers and twitter-ers. If > you think you cannot expect the twitter-er to set up an OSM account, then in > the same vein you cannot expect the mapper to set up a twitter account. You > must make sure that a message sent by a mapper to your twitter bot actually > reaches the twitter-er who is the source of the data. This is probably not > easy. I can see that happening. After a few additions, the scraper application may send a tweet encouraging the user to create an account. He would then be pointed to a web site that 1. would associate his twitter account with the application through twitter's oauth; 2. guide the user through the steps of creating an OSM account; 3. associate the OSM account to the application and to the twitter account. >From then on the application could post the POI additions through the user's account, and allow for more edits. And we would have attracted one more user that already showed an interest in making real contributions. > >> I was surprised to see the >> wheelmap construct but I'm sure that was discussed here before it was >> implemented. Was it? > > Don't geht the "wheelmap visitor" thing wrong; the *only* thing that this > visitor can do is to set one specific tag to one of three specific values on > an already-existing object of a certain type. So, no free-form tagging, no > creation of new objects - almost zero risk of vandalism or copyright > violation. But even there we have already had problems where an unknown > "wheelmap visitor" changed something that others found worthy of discussion. Fair enough, that is fairly well constrained. On the other hand, it is also 'more anonymous' in that there is no way the edit can be traced back to a real person, whereas the contributions through the twitter scheme could at least be traced back to a user account. > [...] Best, -- Martijn van Exel http://about.me/mvexel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] anonymous edits
Hi, On 05/27/2011 08:06 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: The one thing I do see as a real issue I don't think that the requirement of being able to contact someone (without first setting up a twitter account) is "not real"! is the legal one. All twitter POI contributions would be added through one account - at least initially, see below. This account has to be made by a real person and that person is legally bound to the license and CT. Will this person or legal entity need permission from the people actually using the twitter scheme to be in conformance with the license / CT? How does Wheelmap.org handle this, if at all? In contrast to your proposed twitter scheme, wheelmap anonymous edits can only be made through their site where I'm sure they will have some sort of statement that says "by submitting your data you agree..."; this is more difficult since you cannot do a "by using the so-and-so hashtag you agree...". I can see that happening. After a few additions, the scraper application may send a tweet encouraging the user to create an account. That sounds like a plan. Personally I'd never bother to try adding POIs through twitter but there might be people who do. Don't geht the "wheelmap visitor" thing wrong; the *only* thing that this visitor can do is to set one specific tag to one of three specific values on [...] Fair enough, that is fairly well constrained. On the other hand, it is also 'more anonymous' in that there is no way the edit can be traced back to a real person, whereas the contributions through the twitter scheme could at least be traced back to a user account. Yes. And I'm not really supportive of the "wheelmap visitor"; if others come along saying "if wheelmap can do that then I can do it too", I'd vote for disallowing any smallest anonymous edit, including wheelmap, rather than seeing this proliferate. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
