Re: [OSM-talk] Permalink with marker

[Manfred A. Reiter]

Hi Andrew,

2013/5/23 Andrew Errington 

> Hello,
>
> On the main map at osm.org there is a 'permalink' hyperlink, which
> generates a URL encoding the current view of the map.  It is easy to change
> this into a marker link by editing the URL and changing "lat" and "lon" to
> "mlat" and "mlon".
>
> Would it be beneficial to add another hyperlink which will do this
> automagically?  Maybe called "markerlink", which produces a URL containing
> "mlat" and "mlon".
>
> I know it means work for someone, but if it's a good idea then hopefully
> it can be implemented easily.  I don't know if it's been suggested before,
> but if such a feature were available I would use it a lot.  I often make my
> own OSM marker links to send to people by editing the permalink URL, so I'd
> appreciate a one-click function to do this.
>

sounds great ...
meanwhile I have solution, which I use always for such a task:
(well, not as easy to use, but very powerful!
- and only for those who know about keys and values :) )

1. http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/
2. on the upper right you put your key: example - amenity
3. search
4. klick the amenity
5. choose a value: example school
6. right of JOSM you see the "TURBO" symbol -> klick
7. on the map ZOOM to the area you have in mind
8. RUN
9. press Share ...
10. copy the link

HTH

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Permalink with marker

[Andrew Errington]

Hi,

I think that's slightly different to what I had in mind.  My suggestion was
to make a very simple way to make a map marker.  For example, if a friend
asks me where a restaurant is, or a park, I want to go to the map and
quickly create a link with a marker to send to my friend. I can paste the
link into email, or Facebook, or any chat program.

I can do this right now, but I need to edit the long permalink (or add "?m"
to the short permalink).  I'd like to skip this step.

Thanks,

Andrew



On 23 May 2013 15:40, christian.pietz...@googlemail.com <
christian.pietz...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi
> this would be really great. Another good thing would be if you could
> generate a permalink for searched areas.for example: if you search vor 
> Berlin
> and click on the first entrance the border Berlin city will be shown on the
> map
> Maybe it would be possible to have a small Link symbol next to the search
> results.
>
> greetings
> Christian
>
>
> 2013/5/23 sabas88 
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/5/23 Andrew Errington 
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> On the main map at osm.org there is a 'permalink' hyperlink, which
>>> generates a URL encoding the current view of the map.  It is easy to change
>>> this into a marker link by editing the URL and changing "lat" and "lon" to
>>> "mlat" and "mlon".
>>>
>>> Would it be beneficial to add another hyperlink which will do this
>>> automagically?  Maybe called "markerlink", which produces a URL containing
>>> "mlat" and "mlon".
>>>
>>> I know it means work for someone, but if it's a good idea then hopefully
>>> it can be implemented easily.  I don't know if it's been suggested before,
>>> but if such a feature were available I would use it a lot.  I often make my
>>> own OSM marker links to send to people by editing the permalink URL, so I'd
>>> appreciate a one-click function to do this.
>>>
>>> Comments please.  If it's a good idea I will submit it to OSM trac.
>>>
>>>
>> I like it, but should be considered also into the url shortening part
>> (now if you add marker via mlon and mlat and  make a shorturl it transforms
>> it in lon and lat..)
>>
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Stefano
>>
>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Permalink with marker

[Richard Mann]

Easiest of all would probably be to include the marker by default, and let
people edit it out if they don't want it.

Richard


On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Andrew Errington wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I think that's slightly different to what I had in mind.  My suggestion
> was to make a very simple way to make a map marker.  For example, if a
> friend asks me where a restaurant is, or a park, I want to go to the map
> and quickly create a link with a marker to send to my friend. I can paste
> the link into email, or Facebook, or any chat program.
>
> I can do this right now, but I need to edit the long permalink (or add
> "?m" to the short permalink).  I'd like to skip this step.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
> On 23 May 2013 15:40, christian.pietz...@googlemail.com <
> christian.pietz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>> this would be really great. Another good thing would be if you could
>> generate a permalink for searched areas.for example: if you search
>> vor Berlin and click on the first entrance the border Berlin city will
>> be shown on the map
>> Maybe it would be possible to have a small Link symbol next to the search
>> results.
>>
>> greetings
>> Christian
>>
>>
>> 2013/5/23 sabas88 
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/5/23 Andrew Errington 
>>>
 Hello,

 On the main map at osm.org there is a 'permalink' hyperlink, which
 generates a URL encoding the current view of the map.  It is easy to change
 this into a marker link by editing the URL and changing "lat" and "lon" to
 "mlat" and "mlon".

 Would it be beneficial to add another hyperlink which will do this
 automagically?  Maybe called "markerlink", which produces a URL containing
 "mlat" and "mlon".

 I know it means work for someone, but if it's a good idea then
 hopefully it can be implemented easily.  I don't know if it's been
 suggested before, but if such a feature were available I would use it a
 lot.  I often make my own OSM marker links to send to people by editing the
 permalink URL, so I'd appreciate a one-click function to do this.

 Comments please.  If it's a good idea I will submit it to OSM trac.


>>> I like it, but should be considered also into the url shortening part
>>> (now if you add marker via mlon and mlat and  make a shorturl it transforms
>>> it in lon and lat..)
>>>
>>>
 Thanks,

 Andrew

>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Stefano
>>>
>>>

 ___
 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
>>
>>
>
> ___
> 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] Re : Permalink with marker

[yve...@gmail.com]

Good idea, but not with the default openlayer marker :)

- Reply message -
De : "Richard Mann" 
Pour : "Andrew Errington" 
Cc : "Talk Openstreetmap" 
Objet : [OSM-talk] Permalink with marker
Date : jeu., mai 23, 2013 11:03
Easiest of all would probably be to include the marker by default, and let 
people edit it out if they don't want it. Richard


On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Andrew Errington  wrote:

Hi,

I think that's slightly different to what I had in mind.  My suggestion was to 
make a very simple way to make a map marker.  For example, if a friend asks me 
where a restaurant is, or a park, I want to go to the map and quickly create a 
link with a marker to send to my friend. I can paste the link into email, or 
Facebook, or any chat program.



I can do this right now, but I need to edit the long permalink (or add "?m" to 
the short permalink).  I'd like to skip this step.

Thanks,

Andrew





On 23 May 2013 15:40, christian.pietz...@googlemail.com 
 wrote:


Hithis would be really great. Another good thing would be if you could generate 
a permalink for searched areas.for example: if you search vor Berlin and 
click on the first entrance the border Berlin city will be shown on the map



Maybe it would be possible to have a small Link symbol next to the search 
results.
greetings Christian




2013/5/23 sabas88 







2013/5/23 Andrew Errington 






Hello,

On the main map at osm.org there is a 'permalink' hyperlink, which generates a 
URL encoding the current view of the map.  It is easy to change this into a 
marker link by editing the URL and changing "lat" and "lon" to "mlat" and 
"mlon".








Would it be beneficial to add another hyperlink which will do this 
automagically?  Maybe called "markerlink", which produces a URL containing 
"mlat" and "mlon".

I know it means work for someone, but if it's a good idea then hopefully it can 
be implemented easily.  I don't know if it's been suggested before, but if such 
a feature were available I would use it a lot.  I often make my own OSM marker 
links to send to people by editing the permalink URL, so I'd appreciate a 
one-click function to do this.








Comments please.  If it's a good idea I will submit it to OSM trac.


I like it, but should be considered also into the url shortening part (now if 
you add marker via mlon and mlat and  make a shorturl it transforms it in lon 
and lat..)





 Thanks,


Andrew



Regards,Stefano 


___

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





___

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] Permalink with marker

[Andrew Errington]

I don't think it's any easier for the end user.  Instead, it causes the same 
problem for people who *don't* want a marker, plus the 'permalink' feature is 
already well-established.

Best wishes,

Andrew

On Thu, 23 May 2013 18:03:54 Richard Mann wrote:
> Easiest of all would probably be to include the marker by default, and let
> people edit it out if they don't want it.
>
> Richard
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Andrew Errington 
wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think that's slightly different to what I had in mind.  My suggestion
> > was to make a very simple way to make a map marker.  For example, if a
> > friend asks me where a restaurant is, or a park, I want to go to the map
> > and quickly create a link with a marker to send to my friend. I can paste
> > the link into email, or Facebook, or any chat program.
> >
> > I can do this right now, but I need to edit the long permalink (or add
> > "?m" to the short permalink).  I'd like to skip this step.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> >
> >
> > On 23 May 2013 15:40, christian.pietz...@googlemail.com <
> >
> > christian.pietz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi
> >> this would be really great. Another good thing would be if you could
> >> generate a permalink for searched areas.for example: if you search
> >> vor Berlin and click on the first entrance the border Berlin city will
> >> be shown on the map
> >> Maybe it would be possible to have a small Link symbol next to the
> >> search results.
> >>
> >> greetings
> >> Christian
> >>
> >>
> >> 2013/5/23 sabas88 
> >>
> >>> 2013/5/23 Andrew Errington 
> >>>
>  Hello,
> 
>  On the main map at osm.org there is a 'permalink' hyperlink, which
>  generates a URL encoding the current view of the map.  It is easy to
>  change this into a marker link by editing the URL and changing "lat"
>  and "lon" to "mlat" and "mlon".
> 
>  Would it be beneficial to add another hyperlink which will do this
>  automagically?  Maybe called "markerlink", which produces a URL
>  containing "mlat" and "mlon".
> 
>  I know it means work for someone, but if it's a good idea then
>  hopefully it can be implemented easily.  I don't know if it's been
>  suggested before, but if such a feature were available I would use it
>  a lot.  I often make my own OSM marker links to send to people by
>  editing the permalink URL, so I'd appreciate a one-click function to
>  do this.
> 
>  Comments please.  If it's a good idea I will submit it to OSM trac.
> >>>
> >>> I like it, but should be considered also into the url shortening part
> >>> (now if you add marker via mlon and mlat and  make a shorturl it
> >>> transforms it in lon and lat..)
> >>>
>  Thanks,
> 
>  Andrew
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Stefano
> >>>
>  ___
>  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
> >
> > ___
> > 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] Use of terms similar to "GEOCODE"

[Simon Poole]

 
As I promised in February I investigated with our North American counsel
what they would consider acceptable use of terms similar to the GEOCODE
trademark, they came back with  examples that they all considered OK.
I've created a wiki page for future reference
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Geocode_Trademark

I apologize for the delay, I was waiting for some closure on the matter,
however the company in question has not responded to our correspondence.
Personally I don't expect to hear from them again since it now must be
clear that there is no money in it for them.

Simon



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Use of terms similar to "GEOCODE"

[Maarten Deen]

On 2013-05-23 14:38, Simon Poole wrote:

As I promised in February I investigated with our North American
counsel what they would consider acceptable use of terms similar to
the GEOCODE trademark, they came back with examples that they all
considered OK. I've created a wiki page for future reference
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Geocode_Trademark [1]


The lawyers didn't look at the use of geocode in the URLs of Google 
maps? Is that or is that not legal to use? Or better: are we or are we 
not allowed place such an URL in the wiki? Since that was what all the 
hubbub was about, the removal of all these links.


Maarten

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Use of terms similar to "GEOCODE"

[Simon Poole]

Maarten, there is no need to start the discussion at square one again.
We did what our counsel recommended in February as reported then (so you
can safely assume that counsel saw a certain potential for trouble in
such usage). The list they provided is simply to illustrate usage that
is unproblematic.

Simon


Am 23.05.2013 14:57, schrieb Maarten Deen:
> On 2013-05-23 14:38, Simon Poole wrote:
>> As I promised in February I investigated with our North American
>> counsel what they would consider acceptable use of terms similar to
>> the GEOCODE trademark, they came back with examples that they all
>> considered OK. I've created a wiki page for future reference
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Geocode_Trademark [1]
>
> The lawyers didn't look at the use of geocode in the URLs of Google
> maps? Is that or is that not legal to use? Or better: are we or are we
> not allowed place such an URL in the wiki? Since that was what all the
> hubbub was about, the removal of all these links.
>
> Maarten
>
> ___
> 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] Permalink with marker

[Tobias Knerr]

On 23.05.2013 08:01, Andrew Errington wrote:
> On the main map at osm.org  there is a 'permalink'
> hyperlink, which generates a URL encoding the current view of the map. 
> It is easy to change this into a marker link by editing the URL and
> changing "lat" and "lon" to "mlat" and "mlon".

I fully agree that we need a better solution; I often have to explain
how it is done (the last time was on Tuesday) and it's not user-friendly
at all.

However, I think that it may be a better idea to combine this with the
upcoming implementation for clickable POI. As the prototype at [1] would
allow the user to click anywhere on the map (not just on "POI"), we
could add a "share this location" link at the bottom of that balloon.
This could then produce a permalink with marker at the click location.

I think that such a solution would make it easer to "aim" the marker and
would also generally integrate better with these upcoming features.

Tobias

[1] http://overpass.apis.dev.openstreetmap.org/

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

[OSM-talk] iD, exclusive use of tags

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

I just discovered that iD presumes that some tags are exclusive, e.g. you
can't add (at least not via preset) on the same way (line) more than one of
these tags: highway, railway, power but afaik it is common practice to use
railway=tram on the same way as highway=* (in certain circumstances).

Right now when you click on "other" in this menu, the other tag that is
considered "principal" by iD gets silently removed (e.g. if you click on a
highway on "other", the highway-tag is removed).

I'd consider both of these bugs, but would like to open a discussion what
others think about "exclusive" tags.

cheers,
Martin

PS: Even if this might look like, I don't want to "bash" iD, I think it is
a great piece of software, it simply needs some fine tuning.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] iD, exclusive use of tags

[Kathleen Danielson]

Hi Martin-- if I'm understanding you correctly, I actually took out a bug
about this, and got a response. Looks like this is a known issue-- you can
find it here: https://github.com/systemed/iD/issues/1408


On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

> I just discovered that iD presumes that some tags are exclusive, e.g. you
> can't add (at least not via preset) on the same way (line) more than one of
> these tags: highway, railway, power but afaik it is common practice to use
> railway=tram on the same way as highway=* (in certain circumstances).
>
> Right now when you click on "other" in this menu, the other tag that is
> considered "principal" by iD gets silently removed (e.g. if you click on a
> highway on "other", the highway-tag is removed).
>
> I'd consider both of these bugs, but would like to open a discussion what
> others think about "exclusive" tags.
>
> cheers,
> Martin
>
> PS: Even if this might look like, I don't want to "bash" iD, I think it is
> a great piece of software, it simply needs some fine tuning.
>
> ___
> 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] Use of terms similar to "GEOCODE"

[Maarten Deen]

On 2013-05-23 15:10, Simon Poole wrote:

Maarten, there is no need to start the discussion at square one again.
We did what our counsel recommended in February as reported then (so 
you

can safely assume that counsel saw a certain potential for trouble in
such usage). The list they provided is simply to illustrate usage that
is unproblematic.


That's why I ask. I certainly do not want to start the discussion about 
the removal again, but some specific steps were taken and counsel did 
not see it fit to give that an example that usage of such links is 
unproblematic. I find that strange and almost a sign that the usage of 
GEOCODE in URLs _is_ problematic (however unlikely I find that, but 
IANAL).


Nevertheless, I take your answer as an "there is no problem entering a 
URL with the word GEOCODE into the OSM wiki" because that is what I 
would have liked to hear. Do correct me if I understand it wrong.


Regards,
Maarten


Am 23.05.2013 14:57, schrieb Maarten Deen:

On 2013-05-23 14:38, Simon Poole wrote:

As I promised in February I investigated with our North American
counsel what they would consider acceptable use of terms similar to
the GEOCODE trademark, they came back with examples that they all
considered OK. I've created a wiki page for future reference
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Geocode_Trademark [1]


The lawyers didn't look at the use of geocode in the URLs of Google
maps? Is that or is that not legal to use? Or better: are we or are 
we
not allowed place such an URL in the wiki? Since that was what all 
the

hubbub was about, the removal of all these links.

Maarten

___
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] iD, exclusive use of tags

[Paul Johnson]

On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:17 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

> I just discovered that iD presumes that some tags are exclusive, e.g. you
> can't add (at least not via preset) on the same way (line) more than one of
> these tags: highway, railway, power but afaik it is common practice to use
> railway=tram on the same way as highway=* (in certain circumstances).
>

The tram and the highway should be separate ways unless the tram is a
single track dead-center on the highway.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Use of terms similar to "GEOCODE"

[Simon Poole]

Am 23.05.2013 15:35, schrieb Maarten Deen:
> On 2013-05-23 15:10, Simon Poole wrote:
>> Maarten, there is no need to start the discussion at square one again.
>> We did what our counsel recommended in February as reported then (so you
>> can safely assume that counsel saw a certain potential for trouble in
>> such usage). The list they provided is simply to illustrate usage that
>> is unproblematic.
>
> That's why I ask. I certainly do not want to start the discussion
> about the removal again, but some specific steps were taken and
> counsel did not see it fit to give that an example that usage of such
> links is unproblematic. I find that strange and almost a sign that the
> usage of GEOCODE in URLs _is_ problematic (however unlikely I find
> that, but IANAL).
>
> Nevertheless, I take your answer as an "there is no problem entering a
> URL with the word GEOCODE into the OSM wiki" because that is what I
> would have liked to hear. Do correct me if I understand it wrong.
I obviously didn't say anything of the sort. Please simply don't do it,
as requested in February.

Again it is not about right or wrong, or if we could potentially prevail
in a legal dispute or not. It is all about avoiding having to defend
ourselves in the US in the first place. 

Simon


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Permalink with marker

[Janko Mihelić]

One solution could be to have a little marker symbol on the lower right of
the map. If the user drags it over the map, it becomes permanent, and when
you click the permalink, it takes it into consideration. That way you could
drag several markers over the map.

Janko


2013/5/23 Tobias Knerr 

> On 23.05.2013 08:01, Andrew Errington wrote:
> > On the main map at osm.org  there is a 'permalink'
> > hyperlink, which generates a URL encoding the current view of the map.
> > It is easy to change this into a marker link by editing the URL and
> > changing "lat" and "lon" to "mlat" and "mlon".
>
> I fully agree that we need a better solution; I often have to explain
> how it is done (the last time was on Tuesday) and it's not user-friendly
> at all.
>
> However, I think that it may be a better idea to combine this with the
> upcoming implementation for clickable POI. As the prototype at [1] would
> allow the user to click anywhere on the map (not just on "POI"), we
> could add a "share this location" link at the bottom of that balloon.
> This could then produce a permalink with marker at the click location.
>
> I think that such a solution would make it easer to "aim" the marker and
> would also generally integrate better with these upcoming features.
>
> Tobias
>
> [1] http://overpass.apis.dev.openstreetmap.org/
>
> ___
> 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] iD, exclusive use of tags

[Tobias Knerr]

On 23.05.2013 15:54, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:17 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
> mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> I just discovered that iD presumes that some tags are exclusive,
> e.g. you can't add (at least not via preset) on the same way (line)
> more than one of these tags: highway, railway, power but afaik it is
> common practice to use railway=tram on the same way as highway=* (in
> certain circumstances). 
> 
> 
> The tram and the highway should be separate ways unless the tram is a
> single track dead-center on the highway.

Even then they should be separate ways that share nodes, imo.

Tobias

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

Re: [OSM-talk] iD, exclusive use of tags

[John F. Eldredge]

Paul Johnson  wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:17 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
>  > wrote:
> 
> > I just discovered that iD presumes that some tags are exclusive,
> e.g. you
> > can't add (at least not via preset) on the same way (line) more than
> one of
> > these tags: highway, railway, power but afaik it is common practice
> to use
> > railway=tram on the same way as highway=* (in certain
> circumstances).
> >
> 
> The tram and the highway should be separate ways unless the tram is a
> single track dead-center on the highway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

So, you are saying that if the tram tracks are located in the highway, but 
off-center, then the map should not reflect the ground truth?  I have seen 
numerous streets where there are tram tracks in both directions, and the tracks 
are located in the driving lanes, not in a separate section down the middle of 
the street.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Use of terms similar to "GEOCODE"

[Andreas Labres]

Simon,

Thank you. IMO a good example of descriptive usage is also:

"OpenRouteService including POI search, geocoding and reverse geocoding,
pedestrian, bicycle and car routing etc."
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/University_of_Heidelberg_GIScience_(Geoinformatics)_Research_Group


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

Re: [OSM-talk] iD, exclusive use of tags

[Paul Johnson]

On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:30 AM, John F. Eldredge wrote:

> So, you are saying that if the tram tracks are located in the highway, but
> off-center, then the map should not reflect the ground truth? I have seen
> numerous streets where there are tram tracks in both directions, and the
> tracks are located in the driving lanes, not in a separate section down the
> middle of the street.


As with any other railway, one way for each track, centered between the
rails.  That's the ground truth for railways.  Remember, we have
landuse=highway to disambiguate the situation if you want to highlight that
the rails are in the highway area.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Use of terms similar to "GEOCODE"

[Maarten Deen]

On 2013-05-23 16:00, Simon Poole wrote:

Am 23.05.2013 15:35, schrieb Maarten Deen:

On 2013-05-23 15:10, Simon Poole wrote:
Maarten, there is no need to start the discussion at square one 
again.
We did what our counsel recommended in February as reported then (so 
you
can safely assume that counsel saw a certain potential for trouble 
in
such usage). The list they provided is simply to illustrate usage 
that

is unproblematic.


That's why I ask. I certainly do not want to start the discussion
about the removal again, but some specific steps were taken and
counsel did not see it fit to give that an example that usage of such
links is unproblematic. I find that strange and almost a sign that 
the

usage of GEOCODE in URLs _is_ problematic (however unlikely I find
that, but IANAL).

Nevertheless, I take your answer as an "there is no problem entering 
a

URL with the word GEOCODE into the OSM wiki" because that is what I
would have liked to hear. Do correct me if I understand it wrong.
I obviously didn't say anything of the sort. Please simply don't do 
it,

as requested in February.


Again, that is why I asked. Was it so hard to give this answer the 
first time I asked? I really do not want to go to this kind of 
nitpicking, but if people can not give straight answers to simple 
questions than apparently you have to start being pedantic to get them. 
Sorry for that.
But please do not be evasive about this issue. It is uncomfortable and 
tiresome as it is trying to tiptoe around actions in the past without 
blaming people, but being unclear about what is and is not possible 
makes it only worse.


Maarten

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

Re: [OSM-talk] iD, exclusive use of tags

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2013/5/23 Paul Johnson 

>
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:30 AM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
>
>> So, you are saying that if the tram tracks are located in the highway,
>> but off-center, then the map should not reflect the ground truth? I have
>> seen numerous streets where there are tram tracks in both directions, and
>> the tracks are located in the driving lanes, not in a separate section down
>> the middle of the street.
>
>
> As with any other railway, one way for each track, centered between the
> rails.  That's the ground truth for railways.  Remember, we have
> landuse=highway to disambiguate the situation if you want to highlight that
> the rails are in the highway area.
>


+0.9, actually landuse=highway is often interpreted as the right of way
(the area that the street legally occupies, not all of it will necessarily
be asphalt or even "street", it might include a ditch or strip of grass,
areas to keep clear of other stuff, etc.). The currently suggested key (as
far as I know) is area:highway
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=area%3Ahighway

To get the semantics right of trams in the street I guess you would for
many cases need to use a lanes model which can then tell you in which lane
the tram rails are (or between which lanes). Still in crossings stuff gets
more complicated as tram lines tend to cross lanes because of different
curve radiuses.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] iD, exclusive use of tags

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 23.05.2013 15:17, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

Right now when you click on "other" in this menu, the other tag that is
considered "principal" by iD gets silently removed (e.g. if you click on
a highway on "other", the highway-tag is removed).


The idea that of all the tags an object has, one should be "primary" or 
"character giving" is something that many people come up when they try 
to sort through the chaos that is OSM tagging.


It mostly works - most objects indeed have one defining tag.

But there's no rule that it always must be so; your example of something 
being a highway=tertiary and a railway=tram at the same time is 
perfectly valid; or something could be an abandoned railway and a 
cycleway at the same time.


I think it is a legitimate design decision for an editor to not allow 
its users to create such objects, as long as care is taken that the 
editor does not silently alter the definitions of such objects that 
already exist.


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] iD, exclusive use of tags

[Martin Koppenhöfer]

Am 23/mag/2013 um 23:17 schrieb Frederik Ramm :

> I think it is a legitimate design decision for an editor to not allow its 
> users to create such objects, as long as care is taken that the editor does 
> not silently alter the definitions of such objects that already exist.


I agree if we talk about "an editor", but if we talk about the default standard 
main principal editor which iD will probably become I am not so sure (as this 
editor will somehow dictate a standard similar to how the main mapnik style 
does).

For ways there might be few actual examples, and the railway=abandoned tag 
might maybe be better tagged differently, but for areas there are more cases 
where several orthogonal tags are the standard, e.g. amenity, man_made, 
building, landuse, landcover, natural, shop, tourism, leisure,  
(practically all keys have some values that might make sense to combine on the 
same area or point object). I agree that the biggest problem is that tags get 
silently removed, this could be solved by a dialogue where the user is asked 
what to do with the existing tags.

In other cases there should be different objects for the same place, and it 
might make sense to create an relation to avoid duplication of geometry, e.g. 
if a user attempts to add a shop tag to a building, a multipolygon-relation 
could be created for the shop as there are good arguments not to mix shops and 
buildings on the same object (it would become ambiguous which object the 
attributes belong to, think of name, start_date, operator, even "architect" 
might belong to a shop...).
Similar cases are tags intended for linear ways (e.g. barrier=fence) that get 
added to areas (e.g. amenity or landuse) where a MP relation sorts stuff out.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] iD, exclusive use of tags

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 24.05.2013 00:40, Martin Koppenhöfer wrote:

In other cases there should be different objects for the same place,
and it might make sense to create an relation to avoid duplication of
geometry, e.g. if a user attempts to add a shop tag to a building,


Objects with both "shop" and "building" tags are fairly common (more 
than 180k occurrences in OSM). You're right, it would be possible to 
separate both uses of the same geometry via relations but I don't see 
this happening unless someone actually wanted to do something like tag 
different operators for the shop and the building.


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] Permalink with marker

[Christian Quest]

2013/5/23 Janko Mihelić :
> One solution could be to have a little marker symbol on the lower right of
> the map. If the user drags it over the map, it becomes permanent, and when
> you click the permalink, it takes it into consideration. That way you could
> drag several markers over the map.
>
> Janko
>

That's what uMap is made for... http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/

Add markers, polylines, polygons over your choice of base layer + get
short link or embeddable HTML

Exemple: http://u.osmfr.org/m/4


-- 
Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
Un nouveau serveur pour OSM... http://donate.osm.org/server2013/

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