Re: [OSM-talk] THIS is the kind of enthusiasm some would reject
On 14/09/2015, EthnicFood IsGreat wrote: > I guess we're asking that an exception to the "verifiable features only" rule > be made for these features. IMHO the exception that you are asking for is not to the "verifyable only" rule but to the "presently existing" rule. All the abandoned/dismantled railroads I've seen in OSM were verifyably "previously existing" but also (where the conflict arrises as far as I'm concerned) verifyably "no longer present". This is not a rejection of your plea, just trying to make sure of what we are talking about. > Simply confining abandoned railroad > features to OHM is not a good solution, because without being able to > view them in the context of existing features, they lose a lot of > their value. Agreed, OHM is currently not very usable. I've suggested that early on, and again in my latest reply to Russ : I think that maping the past in OSM would be acceptable, if done properly. Some kind of "OHM done right". Doing things really right might require a modification of the data model, a cross-db synbchronisation tool, or some other cool technology... But that's just too far off, too hypothetical. The next best thing is a tagging system for the past. If it wasn't clear already, railway=dismantled, end_date, or any system that mixes past and present in the same namespace is IMHO not acceptable. Consumers, editors and tools should be able to filter out historical data with a simple rule. I've suggested using "past:" as a key prefix, with an optional " @ date - range" as a value suffix. Didn't see any reply, what do people think ? As for opening the floodgates of historical mapping, I do not like it from a very personal POV, but I can recognise that there is a need, that OSM might be the best tool to fill that need, and that it might ultimately strengthen the poject. I just hope (and believe and work to make it true) that it won't be too much of a nuisance to my usecase. And if we do open up to maping the past, I don't think that it should be reserved to railroads. I've argued against maping no-longer existing railroads in way too many emails at this stage, but I suggested this escape route early on. Nobody picked it up but I think that's the only thing that currently stands a chance of reaching consensus. EthnicFoodIsGreat, can you see the working compromise that Russ cannot ? That's it for me, bye bye railroad thread, I hope. Of course I'm only one contributor, not a highly prolific or influential one, not an authority, just a voice. Others have been less noisy but more dogmatic than me on the subject. The community as a whole must decide wether "we map the present" is still a hard OSM rule. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Portal for end users
Hi, On 09/14/2015 08:25 PM, Daniel Koć wrote: > This made me wonder if we care only for having portal for mappers and > don't like to have some useful features just because they are addressed > rather for data consumers? A portal for data consumers would be most welcome, just not run by OSMF and our volunteers (our manpower and money is sufficient to run a portal for mappers but not one for end users too). You must be aware that if you target end users, you'll have to answer questions like "where is your aerial imagery", "why don't you have feature that has", etc. - this is going to be a whole new project to its own, with its own support staff, its own help site, its own developers, its own servers, its own admins. I think setting up such a site is not a bad idea, if someone can think of a way to raise the money needed and how to finance it long-term. It could be done by anyone (and if it existed, we could send anyone who comes to OSM complaining about lack of user friendliness there), but it hasn't been done yet. OSMF lacks the resources to do it but it is not something that OSMF has to do because it doesn't require any kind of privileged access to the web site. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wikimedia Maps (beta)
Thanks for the share! On Sep 14, 2015 6:25 AM, "Daniel Koć" wrote: > Wikimedia is working with their own maps based on OSM data (currently > still beta): > > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Maps > > This style is quite simple (even less data than MapQuest Open) and I've > heard it's based on OSM Bright. Interesting features: > > Starting with this tile: > > https://maps.wikimedia.org/osm-intl/10/511/340.png > > you can see JSON-formatted vector data for visible elements (unfortunately > it means there's not too much of them): > > https://maps.wikimedia.org/osm-intl/10/511/340.json > > and also some higher-DPI versions: > > https://maps.wikimedia.org/osm-intl/10/511/3...@1.3x.png > https://maps.wikimedia.org/osm-intl/10/511/3...@2x.png > > -- > "The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags > down" [A. Cohen] > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Portal for end users
I had an idea to add UMap functionality to OSM.org website and I discovered Mateusz Konieczny lately wanted to add a dynamic layer with opening hours (and some more data), which I think would be also useful for users: https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1038 https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1056 However the response we got is that all the features on our website are there because they help mappers. While I'm sure overlay showing opening hours falls into this category easily, map personalization is primary a feature for end users (of course mappers may use it too, but it may not have direct impact on OSM data). This made me wonder if we care only for having portal for mappers and don't like to have some useful features just because they are addressed rather for data consumers? In most of the cases this is not the contradiction, but why should we "reject" end users' needs? OSM-carto, which is what I'm more familiar with, tries to reach both these groups: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/CARTOGRAPHY.md#purposes -- "The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down" [A. Cohen] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] THIS is the kind of enthusiasm some would reject
Russ is a railfan. I am a railfan. We are a group of people for whom railroads hold a lot of interest and nostalgia. Being able to see locations of abandoned railways in OSM is very desirable for us. (Not to mention that some of them will eventually be converted to rail trails, and so their location is important from that aspect.) I guess we're asking that an exception to the "verifiable features only" rule be made for these features. Simply confining abandoned railroad features to OHM is not a good solution, because without being able to view them in the context of existing features, they lose a lot of their value. A long time ago someone decided that administrative boundaries would be granted an exception. We are also mapping cycle routes. Is it too much to ask for abandoned railroads to be granted an exception too? I know the classic argument against this is that it would open the floodgates for all kinds of other historic objects to be mapped, thereby cluttering the map. But are there really that many people that would clamor for feature type "x" to also be included? I've not heard anything on this mailing list from anyone advocating passionately for any other type of historic feature. One thing that differentiates abandoned railroads from other features is that they are few enough in number compared to other features that they don't add that many more elements to the map. All things considered, I wouldn't think that keeping abandoned railroads in OSM would cause that much harm. We cater to cyclists (of which I am one as well), why not railway enthusiasts? Mark Bradley ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Wikimedia Maps (beta)
Wikimedia is working with their own maps based on OSM data (currently still beta): https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Maps This style is quite simple (even less data than MapQuest Open) and I've heard it's based on OSM Bright. Interesting features: Starting with this tile: https://maps.wikimedia.org/osm-intl/10/511/340.png you can see JSON-formatted vector data for visible elements (unfortunately it means there's not too much of them): https://maps.wikimedia.org/osm-intl/10/511/340.json and also some higher-DPI versions: https://maps.wikimedia.org/osm-intl/10/511/3...@1.3x.png https://maps.wikimedia.org/osm-intl/10/511/3...@2x.png -- "The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down" [A. Cohen] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Buildings on abandoned railways (via Overpass)
On 14/09/15 02:23, John Eldredge wrote: > In the case of Nashville, Tennessee, an Interstate bypass, I-440, that > loops about one-third of the way around the city core, deliberately made > use of a no-longer-used railway right-of-way to reduce land purchase > costs. If anyone were to go back and map that railroad now, the entire > route would overlap the motorway. One wonders if in the bigger scheme of things such as global warming and pollution if that was really the best way of saving money ;) In the UK rail usages has been growing and lines are being reinstated, or brand new lines built demolishing or 'blighting' housing stock, and in some cases those houses are being demolished where they were build on the original abandoned routes since that is required to restore the links with what does currently remain. http://www.stratford-herald.com/33894-could-rail-line-idea-be-back-on-track.html is a current item on my own pet 'abandoned railway' ... and the preserved railway is fast approaching from he south ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
